π΄π½πΆ π»π·π»πΈ | ππππππππ πΏπππ #πΌ: πππ πΏππ ππ ππ π ππππππ
In Birdsell and Groarke's article, there are two main arguments. First, in order to comprehend visual argument, there has to be a new approach. Within visual argument, there are three components which include immediate verbal context, immediate visual context, and overall visual culture. Immediate verbal and visual contexts provide the bigger picture (no pun intended), in which the context of a certain image is emphasized to develop underlying significance and meaning. Regarding visual culture, it collectively describes a subject, topic, or image as a whole. Which brings us to the second argument - visuals are no less ambiguous than words or verbal utterances. Next, in Kenney's article, his main argument is that the concept of symbolic perception explains how the use of symbolic images are applied to be perceived into an idea. An example of this is the image of Tank Man, the unidentified Chinese man who was infamous for blocking military tanks during the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. Joo et al's article presents information on a textual and visual platform, which is deployed across a range of mediums from traditional paper documents to modern electronic multimedia interfaces. Lastly, McCloud discusses how words and images can be used together to help convey a message while retaining its meaning. The author further explains that words take more time for the reader to depict the meaning because there is no other resemblance and the reader must perceive the meaning.
The chapter that I chose to analyze in Rose's Visual Methodologies is Chapter 1. Rose argues for a more critical approach to visual methodology, in which visual images impact culture and society when perceived through a certain lens. In order to fully comprehend visual images, Rose states that 1) images should be considered with deep and abstract thought, 2) one must consider the external conditions and effects that surround said visual, and 3) one must consider his or her own personal approach and behavior towards visuals. There are also several methods of visual analysis that this chapter generally covers which includes compositional interpretation, content analysis, semiology, and psychoanalysis.
A key idea that I believe is deriving from this week's readings is how much visual content we consume on a daily basis. In today's day and age, technology is used everywhere, everyday. Social media and the Internet are prevalent for displaying countless numbers of visual content, whether it is in the form of a photo or video. By applying compositional interpretation on the visuals used in these various types of platforms, it would only be appropriate in this context to view these images beyond the surface. In other words, content, color, expression, and organization would be considered to receive a clearer and deeper understanding of the meaning. "Interpretations of visual images broadly concur that there are three sites at which the meanings of an image are made: the site(s) of the production of an image, the site of the image itself, and the site(s) where it is seen by various audiences" (16). Therefore, visually driven society is one where visuals are understood to deliver an equally comprehending message as the verbal.
Questions to Consider & Discuss:
1. What is considered a technological component of an image?
2. Why is "audiencing" an integral part of visual persuasion?
Hi Christina,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post.
I like how you break down the three sites of meaning for the visual to the author's intention, the compositional modalities, and the audience interpretation. That actually helps with my question about where meaning is established. I had originally posed it as an either/or question, but it seems that's not deep enough! We have to go even to the image itself through our visual analysis.
As for your questions, I think the technological component comes from the production technique of the image as well as where the image ends up being displayed. As far as meaning is concerned, my take is that these are all parts of the site of the image but the author and audience can have some say in how/where the image is displayed.
"Audiencing" is such an interesting concept to me. Even though it kind of reeks of corporate advertising speech, but getting past that, I think it helps us think about what kind(s) of interpretation we invite with visuals. It also deflates the idea that visual texts are just straightforward containers of meaning. In other, words we need to look at those three sites that you mentioned as well.