McCloud

There's a distinct relationship between Locke's "mixed modes" (818) and McCloud's icons.
Most notably when thinking about words as icons.  Consider the image on page 28 of McCloud's deconstruction of icons.  We see the image of a man's face donning the image of an anatomical eye and then the word eye--but we understand that they both mean the same thing despite one of them having no place on a person's face.

I feel as if this illustrates the problem with language and emphasizes Locke's notion of the "arbitrary imposition of men" (817).  It many ways it both complicates and celebrates it. We assign signification arbitrarily as depicted in the image.  There's no reason to indicate that the anatomical 'eye' should be called 'eye'--e-y-e.  But at the same time...it is "e-y-e."  We've come to recognize it so therefore it has essence.  But our eyes are arguably very concrete--when we introduce "mixed modes" that gets slightly more complicated.  We cannot draw hope, yet we understand the implications behind it.  We can adapt symbols such as say...a dove...well I guess that's peace...I digress.  We'll just use a dove.  A dove can symbolize hope, and we understand the implications, yet there's no concrete evidence of hope because it's merely a concept.