My emblem for visibility is a mirror. With a mirror, you can see yourself reflected back. You are presented with a visual image. However, before you look in a mirror in the morning, you can describe how you feel in words, and how you think you might look. Then, when you see the image of yourself, you can adjust your words – the image might support your words, or might differ drastically from them. Another way of doing it, though, would be to just wake up and look in the mirror, without giving any thought to how you might appear. You see yourself and because of what you see, you describe it in related words. It lends to the question of whether you think about something and then actually see it, or if you see something and then find the words to describe it.
The idea of a mirror is also interesting because the images we see alter our perceptions and words. What would life be like without mirrors? Would we just rely on words? Would we base how we feel about ourselves and how others might feel about us based off of our thoughts, not necessarily our appearance? Would we find other ways to create images – see other people’s reactions to things we say or do? Do mirrors really matter? Or does inner image matter more? The neat thing about a mirror is that it literally takes an inner image and can make it outwardly appear. If you feel sad, you can see it reflected back at you in a mirror. However, if you use words to say you are happy, you can influence your reflection, or your image. But, whichever one you utilize first, holds a sort of weight – if you look sad, you might feel sadder. However if you tell yourself you are happy, then it will probably show on your face.
The idea of the mirror – this reflection of outer image and inner thought – is much like the E-lit piece which shows the outline of a tree, with the words describing it within its interior. We have the image portrayed to the world, and then the meaning behind it. Or maybe we have the meaning within and how that is reflected back into the world. Likewise, with the movie, we have a character who may feel a certain emotion because the author dictates him to feel this, or we may have a character that takes on a sort of life of his own and urges the author to describe him in a specific manner. With The New Yorker, we have an image that reflects a certain meaning, and we are asked to find the meaning that best encompasses the image. In all these cases, there is a sort of reflectivity of thought to image or image to thought. There is transference of focus; however, the meaning ultimately remains the same.