Breaking the Rules
The above depiction is called ‘Vispo’ or visual poetry. It is an art form in which a collage of text, images and symbols convey the intended message. It remediated what was known as concrete poetry, which was composed entirely of typographic elements. Vispo is much less text-intensive (if text is present at all). A more detailed description can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_poetry.
As with visual poetry versus concrete poetry, digital text is being remediated by the image. Bolter (2001) and Kress (2005) each theorize on how emerging technologies are contributing to the creation of new literacies and how the focus of presenting information has transformed from a content/text driven approach to one that exploits images for meaning construction. Essentially, this represents a remediation of text-based digital media to one in which images are playing an increasingly important role. This shift further empowers designers to “break the rules” and to experiment with new forms of expression.
Both Bolter (2001) and Kress (2005) speak highly of the visual nature of newspapers and magazines. The front page of a newspaper appears “hypertextual”; it contains stories, images and “links” to other stories that appear within the paper itself. In an attempt to appeal to the reader’s senses, the newspaper no longer just transmits verbal information, but also provides an attractive visual experience that elicits responses appropriate to the connected story or article. Bolter (2001) articulates that “what is happening is a readjustment of the ratio between text and image in various forms of print” (23%). This new approach to information transmission can also be applied to the computer screen, “uniting the verbal and the pictorial, the screen constitutes a visual unit that depends on but also attempts to surpass the typography of the printed page” (Bolter, 2001, 31%). Kress (2005) further asserts that the image (mode) and the screen (medium) will be the dominant vehicles for knowledge presentation and construction.
As in Bolter (2001), digital technology remediated printed works by adding value but otherwise leaving positive qualities of the medium intact. Sequential/linear writing with specific and determined entry and leaving points were still a respected characteristic and convention of writing. However, in an age where images can be reproduced with ease and respect for other ways of knowing and understanding grows, entry and leaving points are no longer valued and delivering relevant information to the user “just in time” and proactively seems to hold far more value than the traditional ways of writing/reading. Kress (2005) posits that images can potentially produce understanding more quickly and with more context than a textual description.
As in Kress (2005), this shift represents a change in power – in written text, the author controls the sequence, the reading path, and the knowledge that is to be produced. In a visual environment, the shift of control of these elements is at the hands of the reader/viewer and she or he is required to make decisions appropriate to their life-world. Viewers’ actions are driven by their interest or need as pertaining to their own reality. Meaning making is entirely personal and not necessarily as intended by the creator. Given the larger changes to our global economy, Kress (2005) believes this adjustment is consistent with the increasing demand for immediacy and transparency (Bolter, 2001).
These changes alter the way we think, a theory that goes back to the transition from oral to written cultures studied by Ong (1982) and McLuhan (1964). It further alters the way we process information. The focus of visual data mining shifts from simply acquiring information to personally transforming knowledge and constructing learning (Kress, 2005). This makes the experience more relevant and interactive for the reader/viewer.
Concern regarding oversimplification is not unfounded. Kress (2005) states, “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.” (p. 15) Prose can be unclear; but can also be mindfully crafted to be literal. Imagery can be semiotically precise; but can also be ambiguous. This so-called dichotomy is not absolute; and simply offers a perspective for discussion and appraisal.
A visual depiction, in the absence of other cues, will leave individual viewers with little support in meaning-making. Viewers are likely to construct different narratives than intended by the designer. A balance of word and image must be struck to ensure that the message is conveyed and received accurately. The balance is definitely redefined (Bolter, 2001) to include more visual elements, but both contribute to a more exact transmission.
Visual elements are certain to affect the meaning that is extracted from a digital experience. Breaking the rules of tradition and convention means charting new territory in the digital world. Carefully fashioned digital experiences combine the affordances of text with the appeal of the visual; relinquishing control to the reader/viewer for a customizable and engaging transformation.
References
Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kress, G. (2005). Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge and learning. Computers and Composition, 22(1), 5-22.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: the Extensions of Man. MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from: http://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/mcluhan.mediummessage.pdf.
Ong, W. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen.
Hi Janet,
Your article is very insightful and brings forward the very relevant question the impact of the positioning of online information as a means of engaging the user. The placement of content goes so far as to dictate the type of behaviours the content creators have intended that the user follows in experiencing the content. I would comment on Bolter’s claim regarding the immediacy and transparency which is a byproduct of the customization which enhanced user interaction precludes. While the interactive space does foster additional opportunities in developing the user’s experience in a more personalized (i.e. intimate) way, I am finding a trend for this personalization to be harnessed by content owners to funnel activity along certain avenues that actually discourages transparency. A trend some years ago in print newspapers was to include pages that would appear to be news articles but in fact were paid advertisements. It was fairly easy to discover them as they did not use the same font, color, or other characteristics of the parent publication. The online space has made this practice even more widespread; visit any online new site and you’ll find sections which look like they contain articles, but in fact are paid advertising, sometimes going so far as to transport you to another site entirely. Judging by the proliferation of these, I would assume they are successful. Their success is in no small part due to the the fact that these articles are tagged to your viewing preferences as captured by cookies and other tracker means. Each user now receives a series of ads disguised as stories that has been especially curated for them. This has the interesting effect of actually limiting your choices as the user finds it increasingly difficult to distinguish between genuine and fabricated. Its an intriguing example of how this phenomenon of increase transparency and intimacy is turned to another’s advantage.
Just my thoughts for now.
Best Wishes
Maxim
Thanks for your response, Maxim.
Unfortunately, although to perhaps to you or me those advertisements are not transparent, to the less-experienced or naive they might seem a legitimate part of the newspaper. I am fairly certain my students would have difficulty discerning what is an article versus what is an advertisement.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. It really bothers me when I might look at something at home on my computer with facebook logged in, and find when I go to work that the ads are remembered and featured on that computer. Somehow, just being logged in to facebook seems to keep some sort of search memory.
As long as we are aware and conscious of their manipulation, we can thwart their efforts. But for those that are perhaps more gullible, this becomes rather dangerous.
Thanks!
Breaking the rules: Spritz
I saw the title of your post about making meaning out of text and hypertext and I had to contribute my thoughts on a new app / extension that I have been using for about a month now called Spritz http://spritzinc.com/
Spritz changes the way that text is presented to your eye. Simply put Spritz is a speed-reading tool. You highlight a body of text and activate the extension. Spritz pulls up each word in the text and provides your eye with a highlighted letter to focus on.
Their explanation of why it is so effective describes that by eliminating the ‘saccades’, or eye movement between words, the brain can suck in the words very, very quickly. I have to admit that it does work very well and I have been able to comprehend and retain paragraphs ‘Spritzed’ at 800 words per minute. I was able to increase my words per minute very quickly and found that engaging in Spritzing was as consuming as reading is in general.
The only factor that that I have found annoying is it does not handle numbers and some punctuation very well. For example, the text “(e.g. 7,8 &9)” would be broken up in an awkward manner and when that happens is can be quite disruptive in the midst of the rapid flow of words.
I find I am using it more and more when surfing the web, and it has proven very useful for consuming some of the longer articles we have been asked to read in ETEC.
I would be very interested in having this feature built-in to my e-reader, but I am sure that Amazon is working on their own proprietary way of presenting words in the most efficient manner possible.
Thanks, Mike. Will definitely check Spritz out! It sounds pretty interesting.
Wow – Excellent posting on the intersection of the visual with text.
Your reference to concrete poetry, which I’ve always referred to as shape poetry, reminded me of writers such as e.e. cummings and Lewis Carroll who have used a contour of text to augment its meaning. By choosing a contour for words and lettering, the visual as a whole is able to bring added depth to the texts’ segments and parts i.e. letters, words and phrases. This shaping and framing of the text is highly symbolic of the whole.
As I have grazed through the rip.mix.feed assignments as well as the multimodal presentations, it is wonderfully evident that the intersection of text and image accentuates meaning and is highly effectively. To imagine the assignments and presentations with just one of the elements, by taking away either the text or the visual and leaving the other, one can clearly sense the impression that both design elements imbue. Bolter describes this complementing of text and visual as a “unified character of the electronic space” (2001, 30%); the purpose of the text and image is blurred as the two “belong to the same space … [and] cross over” (2001, 30%) in space, role and meaning. It can be a vibrant complementing of the other.
As the “breakout of the visual” permeates Web 2.0 and social media, I do wonder about the effects of this.
Is it possible to have too much visual?
Are we robbing ourselves from the opportunity to think and to imagine the visual because we have chosen to inundate ourselves with images online and through other media venues. Do we allow for the visual to determine the meaning for the us or do we take time to pause and to look away in order to provide a space for our own mind web to visualize and in turn conceptualize the meaning for ourselves?
Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hi Jessica…
You brought up some interesting points in your response. I remember e.e. cummings as well.
As to your question about having too much visual…well…everything in moderation I suppose. Interestingly enough, however, I read some work of neuroscientists who suggested that reading is an entirely unnatural act for us. Perhaps those neuroscientists would think that acquiring information from a visual may be more of a natural act for our brains? In any event, Ong and others believe that we have achieved a higher level of intelligence by “inventing” reading/writing, so certainly “going” back to a world where we relied solely on the visual might take us a step backwards? Hard to know. Certainly I am intrigued by the learning that a visual can offer that would enhance our learning and knowledge-creation process.
Thanks!