of the images. This may be why the images can be seen as more shocking than the.
sexually graphic images, because the viewer is forced to draw on their own.
subconscious for meaning. It is very possible that Mapplethorpe made a.
conscious decision to place these images in this context; therefore forcing the.
viewer to deal with their own veiled-erotica. "I think that the malign.
brilliance of his erotic pictures is present throughout, and nowhere more than.
in the portraits of flowers, impassive but somehow conspiring in their own.
corruptibility" (Ashley 1996).
Sometimes Mapplethorpe's subjects are linked, not by erotic relationship, but by.
shared erotic "destiny". Mapplethorpe finds the same voluptuous sensuality, for.
example-the same "erectness" - in both the flower and the penis. The way he.
photographs them confuses them: bulb becomes gland, skin becomes petal, and.
pollen becomes semen. Each flower, each penis has a serendipitous, tender.
magnificence. That the one recalls the other neutralizes the innate violence of.
sexuality. (Celant 1993).
If these images were to be viewed separately they would be iconic signs because.
there is no link that a code is needed to gain a deeper insight into the.
meaning. But once put in the context in which the images were viewed they.
become symbolic signs, which then can be decoded because the viewer is able to.
decipher the code from the images surrounding them. The symbolic signs are the.
flowers, which are standing in for the male sexual organs and or the desire for.
sex, which are then the signifiers. When viewing these images in this context.
the relevance of the images becomes more apparent as the viewer is now in.
possession of the codes that have been established throughout the exhibition and.
are now in the position to decode the flower images. The viewer draws on there.
own subconscious desires as to how much of a symbolic reference can be made, to.
aid in this discovery the surrounding images allude to that possibility.