Semiotics is a vital and key instrument in the analysis and understanding of performance, and the connotations surrounding it for a specific culture or social group. By amalgamating the works of separate theorists it is possible to prove this, as I will shortly proceed to do so. As is always the case when broaching the forum of semiotics, there are many varying and sometimes conflicting theories that place different emphasis on certain aspects of the "sign". By drawing from specific areas of these approaches, it becomes obvious, however, that semiotics is an inseparable and integral part of performance.
Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist who has been hailed the "founder not only of linguistics but also.semiotics"#, based his theory on a linguistic model that has been employed by most structuralists. The basic linguistic model, composed of "signifiers" and "signifieds", is an effective tool in approaching performance analytically. Saussure placed specific emphasis on the role of language as the most effective form of signification. Text, and the communication of it, is intrinsic to many theatrical genres, making the breakdown of the language used integral to understanding the meaning of performance as a whole. The concepts derived from the relationship between signs within a system highlight the intention of a performance, whilst specific individual signs give emphasis to particular themes and themes and points of focus. This unconscious acknowledgement of pre-ordained concepts gives the audience clarity when deciphering the meaning of the performance.
Visual signs also provide a different route into decoding performance. For example, the lighting of a particular scene enhances the sense of theatricality by engaging the audience on a deeper sensory level, whilst introducing further connotations for them. In a performance of "A Box of Bananas" at The Gate Theatre, Notting Hill, particular scenes were given a harsh blue wash, providing connotations of an unwelcoming, "cold" setting.