In 1982, Ira Glass, known for creating and hosting the public radio show "This American Life," graduated from Brown University with a degree in a field called Semiotics. Upon receiving his diploma, Glass's father handed him a newspaper classified ad that read: “Corporate office seeks semiotics grad for high paying position.” Glass found the joke to be silly, reflecting a lack of understanding. He stated, “My religion was semiotics,” emphasizing how it shaped his identity during a time when he felt lost.

Glass wasn't alone in associating his identity with semiotics. From its inception as a small program in 1974 to becoming a full-fledged Department of Modern Culture and Media in 1996, Brown University's semiotics program produced a notable group of alumni. Figures such as Pulitzer Prize-winning author Jeffrey Eugenides, Academy Award-nominated filmmaker Todd Haynes, acclaimed indie producer Christine Vachon, and pop-science writer Steven Johnson all walked the halls of Adams House, a modest building on the edge of Brown's Providence campus. Under the guidance of a distinguished English professor, this academic discipline emerged, causing concern among some parents while leading others to success.

If one were to shout "semiotics" today, the likely response would be, "What does that mean?" This inquiry reflects the essence of semiotics—the study of meaning itself, exploring how words and images acquire significance.

Ferdinand de Saussure introduced the term "semiology" during his influential lectures at the University of Geneva from 1906 to 1911. He proposed that words do not carry inherent meanings but rather act as "signifiers" linked to various interpretations of the "signified" concept. This interplay results in a "sign" that represents something beyond itself. Saussure viewed the analysis of signs as a valuable scientific endeavor, helping to unravel how humans convert sensory input into language and abstract ideas.

However, semiotics extends beyond the mere analysis of signs; it considers the "codes" or languages within which these signs operate, forming the foundation for larger narratives. In the 1960s, a group of thinkers emerged, suggesting that narratives could be "decoded" to uncover elements that provide psychological enjoyment.

These scholars soon discovered a political dimension to their findings. They argued that the pleasure derived from narratives catered to the bourgeois class, and deconstructing these codes could serve to challenge the societal influence of this class. Roland Barthes, author of the influential book "Mythologies," articulated this notion, expressing a desire to scientifically critique the myths perpetuated by the bourgeoisie through culture.

The arrival of Robert Scholes, a prominent English professor, at Brown in the late 1960s played a crucial role in establishing this discipline. His participation in a semiotics conference in Paris, alongside the publication of his co-authored book "The Nature of Narrative," set the stage for a new era of academic inquiry at Brown. Scholes envisioned an English department that transcended traditional literature to embrace cinema, which led him to recruit Michael Silverman, a film scholar eager to explore ideological constructs within artistic pleasure.

Despite limited resources, Scholes and Silverman initiated film screenings as part of the English curriculum. The student body quickly embraced this opportunity, with early semiotics graduates like Tim Forbes, son of billionaire Malcolm Forbes, financially supporting these events, which attracted large audiences throughout the week.

By 1974, Scholes successfully established a formal semiotics program, choosing the term "semiotics" for its relative ambiguity. He and Silverman aptly titled their introductory film course "Semiotics 66: Introduction to Cinematic Coding and Narrativity," aiming for a name that suggested complexity. All assignments were to be written on a single page with no margins, graded on a scale of 1 to 9.

This intriguing yet daunting major soon garnered a cult following. While semiotics was part of a broader syllabus of contemporary literary and film theory, the term "Brown semiotics" began to symbolize a distinct identity—one characterized by black attire, European cigarettes, and a particular attitude.

Ira Glass described semiotics as a profound lens for understanding societal structures. The program fostered an atmosphere of creative freedom, where students engaged with cutting-edge material and shared a sense of intellectual excitement. Christine Vachon, a producer known for "Boys Don’t Cry," noted the fertile environment where innovative ideas flourished.

Students felt empowered by their newfound understanding, likening it to possessing magical lenses that revealed hidden truths. Silverman emphasized the importance of incorporating creative practice into the curriculum, ensuring that theory was connected to tangible artistic endeavors. A filmmaking component was introduced in the late 1970s, taught by experimental filmmaker Leslie Thornton, although theory remained the program's cornerstone.

Despite its popularity, semiotics faced challenges. The program's goal of interrogating bourgeois pleasure paradoxically created its own form of elitism, with some viewing it as an exclusive puzzle for affluent students. Saussure posited that language's meaning relies on a shared code among individuals, yet Brown's semiotics became a closed system, further complicated by new theorists who critiqued the language itself.

These developments incited tension within the English department, which was rooted in traditional academia. The new wave of semiotics was perceived as a threat by established faculty members. Concurrently, external scrutiny intensified, with critical articles in major publications highlighting the perceived absurdity of semiotics. This backlash jeopardized funding for the Center for Modern Culture and Media and placed the future of the semiotics program in jeopardy.

However, as critics intensified their scrutiny, early graduates of the program began to make significant contributions in their fields. Their ability to decode narratives equipped them to reinterpret cultural elements, creating memorable moments in contemporary society.

Many graduates faced a struggle to reconcile their semiotic education with their creative pursuits. For instance, Rick Moody grappled with the relevance of his semiotic knowledge while in Columbia's writing program, while Steven Johnson noted a tendency to write in a style reminiscent of translation. Glass wrestled with transforming abstract theoretical concepts into practical radio content, a process that took years.

Despite these challenges, the influence of their semiotic training permeated mainstream culture. Elements of their education manifested in the works of notable figures like Jeffrey Eugenides and Todd Haynes, as well as the narrative style of "This American Life." The cultural landscape evolved to embrace a heightened awareness of underlying messages in media, as articulated by Vachon.

The semiotics program has evolved significantly since its inception. In 1992, Tim Forbes provided substantial funding to establish the Malcolm S. Forbes Center for Research in Culture and Media Studies, enhancing its legitimacy. Current students perceive themselves as part of an established discipline rather than pioneers in a nascent field.

For the early graduates, their relationship with practice has been complex, yet they continue to recognize the foundational role that semiotics played in their success. "Honestly," Glass reflects, "I wouldn’t have my job now without it."

This article originally appeared in the Boston Globe Ideas section on May 16, 2004, titled "The Semio-grads."