The diagrams chapter in Lupton and Phillips' book, Graphic Design: The New Basics blew me away. When I think of diagrams, graphs, and charts, I think of simple pie graphs, bar graphs, and even line graphs that depict numbers (money, amounts of people, etc.). I never thought that topics such as these could be so effectively diagrammed, and though some of the diagrams are extremely complex, none of them are impossible to analyze and comprehend. One of the most interesting diagrams in the chapter, to me, is the example on page 208 that, "visualizes complex relationships surrounding worldwide terrorist groups."
I have spent so much time learning about utilizing text to support my opinions, views, and arguments, that I never spent any time thinking about ways that visuals can be used to achieve the same means. In the past, I have skipped over side bars and graphs in newspapers and magazines, but I am going to pay a lot more attention to those visual aids now. I am starting to see just how important visuals are in aiding our comprehension, and the differences between reading something versus seeing it. For example, if a student told me he/she does all of the activities listed on the diagram on page 204 every day, I would be surprised--but seeing the chaos and the sheer volume within the graph illustrates the point much better than telling me orally would.
Additionally, some of these diagrams don't even strike me as being a diagram. For example, the diagrams on page 198, 205, and 210-11 look, at first glance, to be merely works of art. If I passed by them while browsing a magazine, I may have regarded them as such and not taken the time to analyze the intricate diagram within the image. Seeing this type of diagram will certainly make me more aware in the future to keep an eye out for graphic representations of this nature.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Response to Chapter 2, Practices of Looking
According to Sturken and Cartwright in chapter 2 of Practices of Looking, interpellation is a term that describes, "the way that images and media texts seem to call out to us, catching our attention" (50). The authors go on to say that, for this interpellation to be effective, "the viewer must implicitly understand himself or herself as being a member of a social group that shares codes and conventions through which the image becomes meaningful...to be interpellated by an image, then, is to know that the image is meant for me to understand, even if I feel my understanding is unique or goes against the grain of a meaning that seems to have been intended" (50).
When reading about interpellation, the first thing that came to mind was a project I did in my Rhetorical Theory and Applications course. I found several ads for food products in women's beauty magazines and compared them to one another, and one of the most intriguing was an ad for chewing gum as a meal substitute. As a woman, I was interpellated by this ad--it immediately affected me and spoke to me, but not in the way the marketers had hoped it would. Being a "woman" means belonging to a culture, and the stereotypical roles of this culture include: being desirable, being prized for our beauty over our intellect, being thin, and being health-conscious. These are all roles that society has taught women to try to abide by, so seeing an ad where next to nothing is advertised as a meal, the thought the advertisers wanted me to think was, "Great! Where can I buy some?" but instead I was disgusted that such a thing would be suggested to me. A stick of 5 calorie chewing gum should not be a meal substitute, so instead of wanting to buy this product, I was interpellated not to buy this product.
The visual shows an unrealistically attractive woman in an office setting, dressed in flashy clothes that are not work friendly, attacking a giant donut with a chair. The ad's text says, "survive a snack attack," and, "fight back with Trident Splash." This all implies that women will be more attractive, thinner, better dressed, and thus more desirable, if they choose to chew Trident rather than eat a meal. It also implies that women should not and cannot eat donuts, or anything similar. Other viewers of this ad may have been interpellated to buy the gum because they may have thought, when seeing the fierce female model in the ad, "That could be me!" However, I was interpellated in a completely different way. This is an example of the many ways someone can be interpellated by one advertisement, even though I would put myself and someone who was interpellated in another way in the same group, or "culture," as myself.
When reading about interpellation, the first thing that came to mind was a project I did in my Rhetorical Theory and Applications course. I found several ads for food products in women's beauty magazines and compared them to one another, and one of the most intriguing was an ad for chewing gum as a meal substitute. As a woman, I was interpellated by this ad--it immediately affected me and spoke to me, but not in the way the marketers had hoped it would. Being a "woman" means belonging to a culture, and the stereotypical roles of this culture include: being desirable, being prized for our beauty over our intellect, being thin, and being health-conscious. These are all roles that society has taught women to try to abide by, so seeing an ad where next to nothing is advertised as a meal, the thought the advertisers wanted me to think was, "Great! Where can I buy some?" but instead I was disgusted that such a thing would be suggested to me. A stick of 5 calorie chewing gum should not be a meal substitute, so instead of wanting to buy this product, I was interpellated not to buy this product.
The visual shows an unrealistically attractive woman in an office setting, dressed in flashy clothes that are not work friendly, attacking a giant donut with a chair. The ad's text says, "survive a snack attack," and, "fight back with Trident Splash." This all implies that women will be more attractive, thinner, better dressed, and thus more desirable, if they choose to chew Trident rather than eat a meal. It also implies that women should not and cannot eat donuts, or anything similar. Other viewers of this ad may have been interpellated to buy the gum because they may have thought, when seeing the fierce female model in the ad, "That could be me!" However, I was interpellated in a completely different way. This is an example of the many ways someone can be interpellated by one advertisement, even though I would put myself and someone who was interpellated in another way in the same group, or "culture," as myself.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
What Is Visible Rhetoric?
What is Visible Rhetoric?
I have taken rhetoric courses in the past, and my understanding of rhetoric is that its main component is analysis. In my Rhetorical Theory and Applications course, we analyzed several aspects of the media, including TV commercials, print ads, memos, newsletters, and newspaper articles, among other things. We focused mainly on textual analysis, but I realize now the importance of the visual component--even in something as simple as a newspaper article, the layout can change the ways we think and perceive. Even in my course on technical writing, visuals were brought to the forefront, and we were taught to have a critical eye of the societal expectations implied via the visuals our brains absorb daily.
In Visible Rhetoric, I am hoping to gain a better understanding of the ways visuals enhance our perception of our surroundings. I hope to delve into topics such as gender studies, and I hope to learn about visible rhetoric in video games and TV commercials. Though these are my major interests in visible rhetoric, I am open to expanding my knowledge of what fits under the umbrella of "Visible Rhetoric." There are probably several aspects that haven't even crossed my mind just yet. This is a course I am very interested in, and one that I know will provide knowledge to carry to other courses and eventually, my career.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
