Portraits act as signifiers of the status of the individuals they represent. Although it is important not to see portraits as mere reflections of social hierarchies, they can help us understand how specific levels of society were perceived at different periods of history. Through the gestures, dress, props, background, labelling, and other facets of a portrait, we are usually given either clear or oblique signals about whether the subject is rich or poor, powerful or subjugated, and whether they can be associated with a particular profession, class, club, or other group of people. Portraits can also affirm or challenge social hierarchies ( Shearer West, 2004 ). West in his book also shows how the portraits and power has been changed throughout…show more content… On the other side of the coin, it might be considered that he knew how to engage with rural people . Because, dressing is the first impression that in most cases make differences in different situation. But, Muhammad Yunus successful to set an impression thathe belongs to rural people in BD and he is one of them. Therefore, it doesn’t matter where he is , its became a unannounced trademerk for him. Though it seems very easy till now but as a fellow country man I can feel how much confidence one should have to wear this kind of dress and attend a “Nobel Prize Ceremony”. Normally, when things are set it seems very easy but Muhammad Yunus did this for long before he became a reknown social entrepreneur. On the other hand , Muhammad Yunus has another type of dressing which is not typical “Check” but mostly light colored dress with coat. Now the question comes, so he is not representing his concern “Grameen Check” anymore so what does it for? Well, in this case, I don’t know from where but I have an impression about this and I forgot where did herd this
