Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Dimensions of Viz Rhet eye in digital code (Methodologies for studying…
Dimensions of Viz Rhet
Pedagogies for Visual Literacy
Norman
: Emotion, not just reason, factors into usability of an object and should be accounted for in design.
Helmers & Hill
help us see that we must teach visuals as rhetorical.
Porter & Sullivan
's study of consistency in page design in student evaluations of a case student "Max" to examine how students learn the difference between helpful and non-helpful repetition.
To fully and critically analyze an image, you must examine three sites: production, the image itself and audiencing. Within each of those sites are three modalities: Technology, compositionality, and social (
Rose
)
Information and Knowledge Visualization. The ways we represent knowledge through diagrams.
Concept Mapping (
Novak and Canas
).
Studies to prove that visual representation improves cognition.
Arnheim
examines how children depict their world visually as they develop.
Wysocki
claims that when we teach writing, we usually teach images as separate from the the words and put them in a supportive context. However, she asserts that visual aspects of texts are idea and assertion and that they are doing the work of content and information.
Pathway to New Materialism
Atzmon
asserts that design artifacts are inherently rhetorical in that they "generate and proliferate cultural belief systems." She proves that design elements (like color, lines, etc...) are meaning-making symbols--not merely decorative elements.
The visual-material spectrum, as introduced by
Propen
, asks us to understand rhetoric as embodied. She applies Carole Blair's theory of embodied rhetoric with Foucault's theory of heterotopias to understand visual-material objects/spaces.
Blair's
5 questions to gauge what counts as text: (1) what is the significance of the text's material existence? (2) What are the apparatuses and degrees of durability as displayed by the text? (3) What are the text's modes or possibilities of reproduction or preservation? (4) What does the text do to (or with, or against) other texts? (5) How does the text act on people? (Blair, p. 30)
Buchanan
claims that Aristotle's rhetoric was not strictly one of words, but of thought that found
embodiment
through words
(p. 31).
Allen-Robertson
examines the material nature (specifically of the hard drive) as agentic, helping to ensure that materiality doesn't forget to include digital media.
Gries
' methodology of iconographic tracking tracks the visual image through its circulation and distribution, accounting for materiality.
Sheridan
asks us to recognize 3-D objects as rhetorical.
Malafouris
notes that “thingness” and “mindness” are ontologically fluid states. We must reject Cartesian duality to fully understand things in relation.
Allen-Robertson's
examination of the materiality of digital media (the hard drive, the phonograph, magnetic tape and optical media).
Major Misconceptions of the visual
Misconception:
The visual is supplementary/ancillary to the linguistic/textual.
Wysocki
challenges this with CD-ROM examples where the visual arrangement adds substantial meaning.
Atzmon
also challenges this misconception with a more materialistic bent.
Misconception
: the image is weak, rudimentary, illiterate. By contrast,
Rose
describes the theory of
ocularcentrism
. Maybe the visual is central, not ancillary.
Misconception
: the visual artifact has no inherent meaning. Furthermore, "visual theories do not begin with the assumption that language is paradigmatic for meaning" (
Mitchell
).
Misconception:
that design is a fixed and determined subject matter.
Buchanan
directly contradicts this to say design is both created and discovered, inherently rhetorical.**
Misconception:
The image doesn't merely reflect meaning elsewhere, We must look at what images DO, not just how they look (
Pinnery
, 2004).
Misconception
: some information is neutral. Even timetables are rhetorical (
Kinross
) and typeface (
__
) and digital interfaces are highly rhetorical (
Arola
). No image is innocent of ideology (
Rose
)
Methodologies
for studying visual artifacts.
Three criteria for a critical methodology: (1) take images seriously, (2) consider the social conditions and effects of visual objects, and (3) be reflective of you (the critic) are looking (
Rose
).
Discourse Analysis (
__
). Foucault: discourse is a form of discipline and power. Keywords: intertextuality, representation,
Newton
applies
McLuhan and Power'
s Tetrad to depict a more ecologically-minded approach to analyzing a visual.
Kostelnick
's Usability Method.
Foss
' Visual Rhetorical Analysis as method
Semiotics as method of analysis (
Moriarty
). Key words: sign, signification, abduction, connotation. Key figures: Saussure, Peirce, Berger.
Narrative Method of analysis (
Barbatsis
). Expanding concept of narrative to include pictorial symbols.
Aesthetic method of analysis (
Zettle
), applied to film or moving images. Examines 5 elements: lights and color, two-dimensional space, three-dimensional space, time-motion, and sound.
Norman
's principles of design (affordances, constraints, signals, feedback) and emotional design (visceral, behavioral, reflective) as method.
Cultural Studies Theory for Visual analysis (
O'Donnell
). Images must be analyzed in context, accounts for many meanings (power, polysemy, articulation, encoding/decoding)
Iconology.
Gries
' Iconographic Tracking as method.
Newton'
s Visual Ethics Theory. Visual ethics is "the study of how images and imaging affect the ways we think, feel, behave, and create, use and interpret meaning, for good or bad" (pg. 433).
Methods are “an aspect of a mode of inquiry, consisting of more or less tightly couples constellation of strategies for dealing systematically with phenomena as objects of study, according to a tradition and its accountabilities” (
Phelps,
qtd. by
Gries
, pg. 333).
Methods of diffractive reading of data. Diffraction is an ontological and methodological phenomena (
Haraway, Barad,
__
__
Bozalek & Zembylas
apply diffraction as methodology to educational research.
Rose's
three aspects (modaities): technological, compositional, and social. All three apply to all three sites: production, image, audiencing.
Visual Rhetoric and Design
Don Norman's
Emotional Design.
Williamson's
Visual Design Narrative.
Buchanan's
rhetoric, humanism and design
Atzmon's
eloquence of design artifacts
Visual Rhetoric & the Digital
Arola
examines how significant the digital interfaces structure out rhetorical options.
Allen-Robertson's
materiality of digital media.
Berger's
ways of seeing separate from place (in the recreation of images made possible by the camera). Meaning is transmittable and altered by the context of reproduction.
Theory Undergirding Visual Rhetoric
Foucault's
Panopticon: sight, being seen (and hiding from sight) is a form of discipline and exertion of power.
Barthes
.
Peircean
Semiotics
Gerard Genette's
Intertextuality
refers to "all that sets the text in a relationship, whether obvious or concealed, with other texts" (p. 14).
Paratextuality
: presence of of material around the primary text.
Metatextuality
moves outward to critical relationships between texts.
Hypertextuality
indicates dependence between texts.
Architextuality
refers to that which is the result of paratextuality (library classification letters).
Representational v. Non-representational theories: Representational: See
Stuart Hall
. For Non-representational, see
Gilles Deleuze
describes an affective theory of visual artifacts in
Rose
's introduction.
Warnings of ocularcentrism: or, the idea that Westerners primarily interact with the world through the visual (
Rose
)
Ethics of studying the visual (
Newton
) help us see how the visual can make visible (or render invisible) particular subjects.
Text and Technology: the technologies that change how we see and what we are capable of perceiving (
Berger
).
Conceptual Metaphor Theory (
Lakoff and Johnson
): our conceptual system plays a central role in our realities.
Ortiz et al.
study on how the brain processes visual metaphors.
Ziemkiewicz and Kosara
: there may be advantages to introducing novel metaphors that provide new perspcctives to solve problems.
Carroll
"Visual Metaphor"
Visual Rhetoric as Argument (J. Anthony
Blair
). Visual arguments are not distinct from verbal, nor radically different. Always propositional.
Birdsell and Groarke
add: visual often makes verbal more clear. Visual argument must account for (a) identify internal elements of visual, (b) understand contexts of interpretation, (c) establish consistency of interpretation, and (d) chart changes in visual perspectives over time (
Birdsell and Groarke
).
The Pictorial Turn:
Mitchell
notes that we've moved far beyond the linguistic turn.
Debord's
spectacle depicts artifacts of sight as distractions from what is real.
Hall's
Encoding/Decoding
Intertextuality (summarized by
Helmers and Hill)
:
Deleuze
shifts visual theories in that vision is seen as much corporeal as cultural.
Barad's
concept of diffraction as an onto-epistemology (
Kaiser and Theile
)
Definitions of Visual Rhetoric
Kinross'
definition of rhetoric to include timetables: “the art of directed communication—directed, that is, both internally to organize the material communication and externally to persuade and audience” (pg. 21).
Mitchell
: the pictorial turn as a postmodern concept is a "postlinguistic, postsemiotic rediscovery of the picture as a complex interplay between visuality, apparatus, institutions, discourse, bodies and figurality" (p. 16).
My early definition of visual rhetoric:
The meaningful employment of communicative cues that are consumed and produced visually, often to enact change, subject to all the complex rhetorical negotiation found in myriad modes.
Dan added:
"the art of using visuals to communicate a message. Includes a focus on the full spectrum of the communicative act with an awareness of the biases and power structures inherent in visual choices."
Visual theories assume this: meaning can exist without alphabetic language (
Mitchell
).
Foss
: Visual Rhetoric means both a visual object or artifact (created product for communication)and perspective on the study of visual data (focuses on symbolic processes by which images perform communication).
The difference between a visual object and visual rhetoric is a product of 3 factors: symbolic action, human intervention, and presence of an audience (
Foss
).
