Revolution Lullabye

June 11, 2009

Wysocki, The Multiple Media of Texts

Wysocki, Anne Frances. “The Multiple Media of Texts: How Onscreen and Paper Texts Incorporate Words, Images, and Other Media.” In What Writing Does and How It Does It. Eds. Bazerman and Prior. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004. 123-161.

Wysocki’s chapter addresses students and has three main parts: first, she lays out her basic argument for the visual, rhetorical nature of all texts, printed and onscreen; second, she introduces elements of visual texts that students can identify (typography, shapes, pictures, video, animation, and sound) and gives an outline about how a student might analyze a visual text; and third, she uses extended examples of visual textual analyses to argue that composing with images and visual features shouldn’t just anticipate and provide for easy audience reading. Rather, the visual nature and elements of onscreen and paper texts should be used rhetorically and deliberately to make points and challenge readers to consider the cultural and historical frameworks through which they read and interpret texts.

Quotable Quotes

move from making user-friendly, predictable texts that serve the audience’s purpose to “making visual and interactive compositions that ask audiences to question, first, how they came to have their expectations, and, then, the limitations and constraints of those expectations” (157).

learning to compose visually is “learning to observe well” (159).

Notable Notes

analysis: identify elements, name their relationships, and then expand to consider how those relationships and element connect to larger contexts and arguements

basic points: 1. all texts are visual in nature 2. a text’s visual nature gives a clue to its genre 3. a text’s visual components perform important rhetorical and persuasive work 4. cultural attitudes to visual elements change over time 5. choices in visual presentation have to be seen through cultural frameworks 6. composing a text means making deliberate choices for how to shape the page or screen to direct the audience. (123-126)

move from analyzing what’s on the page or screen to asking how that elicts readers’ responses, the cultural frames through which readers respond, why some texts are more accessible than others, the politics and economics of text production and circulation – who we are and who we will become

Advertisements

March 16, 2009

Wysocki, Seriously Visible

Wysocki, Anne Frances. “Seriously Visible.” In Eloquent Images: Word and Image in the Age of New Media. Eds. Mary E. Hocks and Michelle R. Kendrick. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003. 37-60.

Wysocki weaves together explorations of two popular circulating claims about new media and visual literacy: first, that hypertexts necessarily, by their structure, invite participation from the reader that results in a more active and engaged reading experience and second, that visuals are easily and automatically interpreted, thus not a medium for expressing a critical or complex argument. She demonstrates two visual hypertexts, Scrutiny in the Great Round and Throwing Apples at the Sun, and argues that these visual hypertexts are challenging and invite a diversity of pathways and interpretations. She also explores the political arguments (making students active citizens) made by proponents of hypertexts, showing that through her two examples, the composers of the piece were not interested in making active, independently-minded political readers, but instead, offering readers the chance to experience personal aesthetic pleasure. This opens up possibilities of new ways in which students and people might compose and design with words and images.

Quotable Quotes

The two examples “whose makers are attentive to the visual possbilities of the technologies they use but who argue against the possibilities and efficacy of liberal political engagement tied to interpretation” (44)

Sometimes “visual texts can be as pleasurably challenging as some word-full texts” (56)

“If we want our texts to be complex and to ask for interpretation, there is nothing inherent in ‘the visual’ or ‘the hypertextual’ demanding this or standing in our way – expect beliefs in some inherent simplicity of ‘the visual’ or complexity of ‘the hypertextual.’ If we want our students to value active engagment with texts and each other, we cannot expect that our texts will do that in and of themselves.” (57)

Notable Notes

need for pedagogy to teach students about complexity and interpreation, not just relying on the modes in which they compose. (57)

she argues against “the arguments that imply that visuals and hypertexts and multimedia must always accomplish the exact same things everywhere” (57)

a rich literature review of major hypertext and visual literacy theorists

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.