Assignment 1 Post 3
“Order is firmly coded: the order of chapters, the order of pages, of lines and of the line.” G. Kress asks the question: “If order was fixed, as the order given by the author and naturalized by centuries of conventions of reading, then what was the reader’s task, and what or where was the reader’s freedom to act?” He answers by saying “[w]ords are (relatively) empty entities—in a semiotic account they are signifiers to be filled with meaning rather than signs full of meaning, and the task of the reader is to fill these relatively vacant entities with her or his meaning.” (Kress, 2005 p7). This could be compared to the role of teacher/student whereby students are the readers learning through their own acts of interpretation. The teacher is no longer the sage on the stage but provided the stability of order, the direction and guidance associated with the act of reading, comprehension with feedback responds.
But are words really empty? We pick our words when we speak or write. We
have choices and make decisions on the vocabulary we use because words do have their own associated meaning and function. And we expect the intended audience to be familiar with those same meanings and functions. “The still existing common sense is that meaning in language is clear and reliable by contrast, with image for instance, which, in that same commonsense, is not solid or clear (Kress, 2005 p8).” The image can be presented to have one clear interpretation. It really comes down to the abilities of the creator (whether writer or artist) and the mindset of the audience. Most like to complicate the message by including subliminal secondary messages – a different multimodal.
As for the power of the author and the power of the reader; each can make choices based on how amiable a relationship they desire from the other. There is nothing to stop the reader from reading the last chapter first if they so choose.
As for websites Kress states “[t]here is no pregiven, no clearly discernible reading path, either of the home page or of each individual page, or of the site as a whole (the issue of navigation, where maps are relatively unreliable). I would say there is order but not so regimented as immovable printed text,it is based on a need to know more. The site designer as author doesn’t presume to know which question the reader would like answered so with hypertext and other tools addresses multiple quests for timely information. There is more opportunity to mull over what information has been ingested when using print media but also more chances of losing the reader’s attention in hypertext material.
If readers are only tourists to websites, are they behaving as self-guided tour guides? If so, do the readers take in the complete resource with all the pertinent data; or do they visit only the top six busman’s stops on the tour in record time? Are they receiving all the information necessary to make knowledgeable opinions/decisions?
Kress would lead us to believe that in the act of interpretation… [w]ith depiction and with images the situation is different.” “Unlike words, depictions are full of meaning; they are always specific. So on the one hand there is a finite stock of words—vague, general, nearly empty of meaning; on the other hand there is an infinitely large potential of depictions—precise, specific, and full of meaning” (Kress, 2005 p15). What about misunderstanding, misinterpretation, multiple meanings dependent on the audience‘s interpretation? A finite stock of words? Are we not producing more new words each year? Are we not reinventing new meanings for existing words (example attaching slang meaning to common words)?
Kress asks another question: “Would the next generation of children actually be much more attuned to truth through the specificity of depiction rather than the vagueness of word?” (Kress, 2005 p 21). I ask: Could this result in the same if this scenario were to be reversed?
Kress, Gunter. (2005). “Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge and learning. Computers and Composition. 22(1), 5-22.
Words: 646
Thanks for your post. You raised a great point in response to Kress’ question regarding depiction of language and truth. All the overwhelming information, change in reading paths and layout of text we have today can sometimes be sources of vagueness that result in uncertainty. This kind of uncertainty largely has to do with the way we communicate or deliver ideas. Take media as an example, order plays a crucial role in shaping public consciousness; this involves what goes on the front page and what gets more coverage than others etc. Sometimes it can be dangerous to be a passive receiver of information in any sequence it’s delivered, without questioning why it’s presented in such ways. Furthermore, it’s our human nature that we take in and process information differently. We have all had established some kind of preconceived notions from which we act and react upon. These notions determine that we perceive some issues and questions in a certain way. As we learn, interact and communicate with others, however, we sometimes come to realize some of our pre-existing biases. As educators who continue to be learners, we should equip students with the “cognitive tools” to read critically, at the same time, create and secure a safe space for exchange of ideas by allowing different interpretations of text and information to be heard and shared.
Cheers,
Christy