How would a semiotic approach differ from a iconography approach, decoding a piece of visual art?

[Shisagi]

How would a semiotic approach differ from a iconography approach, decoding a piece of visual art?

[blc073]

Is this an assignment? 

[GhostsBeforeBreakfast]

If you can't answer that question you might be in the wrong field.

[password]

That's not a question to which you'll get a quick answer. Start off with some basic reading material on iconology (Gombrich, Panofsky etc.), then semiotics (Bel & Bryson, Mitchell, Lotman, Curtin). These authors let you dig deeper as they reference other works.

But if you're a grad student I'm gonna have to second GhostsBeforeBreakfast here. That's Interdisciplinary Approach To Art History 101.

[condivi]

I dare say the answer is not as straight forward as the previous posters make it out to be. Iconology is not really irreconcilable with a semiotic approach. Semiology is a massive discipline and in many respects encompasses iconology, as they are both concerned with the meaning, natural and constructed, of visual form. To answer this question, you'd need to say what understanding of semiotics you were working from.

[Apogeee]

On 5/30/2016 at 0:34 PM, Shisagi said:

How would a semiotic approach differ from a iconography approach, decoding a piece of visual art?

I think that you should consider reading some basic books in the field. 

[password]

Judging by the initial question, I'd still say the answer lies in a basic reading material. Without basic knowledge of semiotics and iconology there's no reason to be specific on the approach.