2. While listening to this week’s video and going through the readings,
I came up with 5 possibilities for a 6th dominant theme of visual
rhetoric:
(Creating) Community
A Bat-Signal for the Masses
Identity
Education
Inevitability
3. I didn’t end up going with the Bat-Signal theme (shame I know),
but here’s an example of what I mean.
Propaganda? Sure. But it’s also visual rhetoric targeted to fire up the
people.
4. I felt that there were strings tied to each of these themes, but by far
the strongest and most personally relevant was the theme of
“Identity.”
Our readings touched on the intersection of visual rhetoric and
identity in several different ways; let’s take a look at some of them:
5. If, like Wysocki posits in “The Multiple Media of Texts<,” the
“visual elements and arrangements of a text perform persuasive
work” (p2) and the “visual aspects of text are (therefore) to be
understood< in terms of social context” (p3), then the visual
rhetoric of the texts we create present a persuasive argument to a
social context, and in the choices me make towards this end we are
presenting an argument of our identity—perhaps consciously but
perhaps not.
6. Here we can see this kind of socially-embedded argumentation using visual
rhetoric in action. This is almost nothing but an attempt to project a specific
identity.
7. All of the textual/visual elements she reviews—typeface, shapes,
choice of media, etc—once chosen send a message about the author
to the audience, they carry a (accurate or not) sense of the
personality, the identity, behind the text.
When Wysocki suggests that we can use visual rhetoric to persuade
readers that “your composition is serious” (p30), I see part of that
job as using visual rhetoric to persuade readers that you are serious.
8. On the website 4chan, stories in “greentext” evoke a particular method
and mindset of storytelling (typically a serious, personal story), and
although it’s used to troll as we can see (just like everything else), it’s a
great example of creating identity in text through visual rhetoric.
9. On a completely different tact, Craig Stroupe’s “Visualizing
English” piece shows us how visual rhetoric has become a
battlefield of identity for English Studies itself, a “battlefield
between the values associated with verbal and visual codes” (p2).
Many of this week’s pieces touch on the historical subjugation of the
visual by English and Composition Studies, but Stroupe does an
excellent job of capturing the tension created and suggesting how
English can re-craft its identity as including the visual, and that
indeed the “long-standing ideology of elaboration,” if refocused
upon, can mend the artificial stratifications therein.
10. I haven’t really had any exposure to the English department here, but
if it’s anything like at Elon, there is no greater a contentious divide then
between the identity of “English” and “Rhetoric & Writing.” And
looking at the difference between the Google image searches of
“michigan state rhetoric and writing” and “michigan state english,” I
think it’s safe to say the two departments are visually different in
several ways.
11. In fact, in saying that “to pursue such a course would thus lead
English to address its internal inequalities< and to recognize the
mystified status of the privileged genres, discourse, and cultural
narratives” (p3) it seems to me that he advocates for the inclusion of
visual rhetoric as a way to repair, refine, and improve the identity of
English Studies as a whole.
12. Another couple connections come our way by the virtue of Selfe²’s
“The Poilitics of Interface.” In their concern over how “teachers of
English that use computers” (p481) might be a part of systematic
domination and marginalization practices, they come to discuss
computer interfaces as “linguistic contact zones” (p842).
Most certainly this and other pieces from this week prove the
inherently and intensely visual-rhetorical nature of interfaces, and
in doing so they show how interfaces assume an identity of the
user, and more importantly that this assumption can begin to
influence the identity of the user.
As Selfe² explains, even the term “desktop,” “*constructs+ virtual
reality, by association, in terms of corporate culture and the values
of professionalism” (p486).
13. How much has the way I’ve used and understood computers, how much
has the work and play I’ve done with them since 1998 been influenced by
the corporate nature of the design that I never even thought about until
this week?
14. Having joined forces with Jasken,
Wysocki takes this conflux of visual
rhetoric and identity a few steps further
in “What Should be an Unforgettable
Face<” They lay it out pretty explicitly,
saying “Interfaces are about the relations
we construct with each other—how we
perceive and try to shape each other<”
(p33).
15. When Thomas Barker “asked teachers to
consider the broader contexts in which
their software would be functioning”
(p33), he is asking them to take the
identity of users into account—he is
saying that the visual rhetoric of
interfaces is and must be linked to
identity.
16. I still don’t fully understand it, but as solid as I felt the pedagogy of this
tool was, as much potential as I felt it had, there was an obvious disconnect
between the interface of Eli Review and the identity of my students. It
could have been inherent in the tool, in how I construct the interface of my
reviews, but either way it’s an example of visual rhetoric and interfaces
clashing with expectations and identity
17. They also speak again to the notion of
visual-rhetoric/interfaces impacting users’
identities in discussing how expectations
of synchronous discussion software in
one online classroom pushed Mexican-
American students to hide their
identity—to even believe that such self-
representation might be harmful—
interface impacting identity.
18. Arola’s discussion in “The Rise of Web 2.0” shows
evidence of users wrestling with the intersection of
visual rhetoric and identity when she reviews the
visual rhetoric agency of social networking
platforms. Since the underlying visual rhetoric of
each platform’s design is so static, users select their
platform (instead of designing it) as a way to
present a specific identity.
19. How strong are the rebellions every time Facebook changes it’s basic
design? I think it’s especially obvious in how facebook allowed users to
not switch to Timeline that identity is at play here in the design, why
else would there be such a strong backlash, such a strong commitment
to the previous interface?
20. Especially during the years when MySpace, Facebook, and other
platforms were in more direct competition, which platform(s) you
chose most certainly sent a message about what kind of person you
were, and each platform came along with a hefty load of rhetorical
baggage. MySpace is actually a wonderful example of how being
involved with design work—with visual rhetoric work—is in-and-
of-itself an identity marker.
21. The fact that there were and still are companies like this, selling custom
myspace and other social network designs, shows just how much weight is
placed upon the projection of identity that can be created even within the
relatively small changes you can make to the basic template of these sites.
22. I can clearly remember my best friend’s sister gaining an identity as
the cool, independent, alternative, artsy, etc. girl in school because
she could construct and implement MySpace designs—her
knowledge of visual rhetoric tools alone was enough to project this
complex identity to her peers.
23. She keeps up the same image with her profile pictures on Facebook.
Could you get any more “artsy” than this shot? I think not. But here’s the
kicker, there is so many people attempting to project this identity, that
even though she’s the real deal, many people assume it’s put-on, an false
mask of identity for the internet.
24. Patricia Sullivan’s self-explanatory focus in “Practicing safe
visual rhetoric on the World Wide Web” touches on issues of
identity particularly strongly when taking about advice given
to PhD students on the job market, and all of the visual
rhetoric choices they have to make that are so very impactful
on the identity they project to perspective employers.
25. The process of creating this space, most definitely the most visually-
rhetorical product I’ve ever worked on, was a grueling experience that
saw me bouncing hard back and forth between “safe” design choices
and my desire to display a truer sense of my identity. I’m still not happy
with it, and part of the reason I took this class was because I hoped to
gain skills and understandings that can help me break through the
barrier of “safety.”
26. Visual rhetoric skill comes into play here as a major marker of
identity in the academic world, as evidenced by Sullivan’s concern
that “increased involvement” in design could lead to a sameness of
identity among job-seekers, or worse an assumed identity of
visual/digital rhetoric savvy that could get them into trouble.
Certainly at MSU I have seen the huge impact that the presence, or
lack, of visual/digital rhetoric skills/focus makes on the identity of
professors and students here, and how conscious they are about it.
27. One last example comes from Williams “Part 2” where he concludes
that visual/digital rhetoric knowledge and ability can be highly
empowering, by helping to change students’ sense of identity
further down the spectrum towards “expert” (133).
I see this as an incredibly important aspect of visual rhetoric for my
own work—in helping my students to understand visual rhetoric
understandings and tools, they can gain a confidence and ability to
shape and project the identity they desire, giving them the agency
that is at the heart of my pedagogy.
28. The very medium of this assignment is an example of the intersection between
visual rhetoric and identity. I had every intention of composing this presentation in
Prezi because I want to evolve my identity as a tech-savvy scholar, because my time
at MSU has shown me how important visual rhetoric skills utilizing technology can
be towards constructing a professional identity that is valued amongst the academic
community, and how useful it might be towards my future success.
I’ve often been worried about how much visual/digital rhetoric skills can make an
impact in how work my work is seen, in that the amount of work I put into a project
can be marred by the quality of how I present it. I’ve started to realize that if I wish
to project the identity of a hard working, deep thinking scholar, I need to spread my
work more evenly between the content and the presentation
Unfortunately, I’ve been really sick and in and out of the ER and doctor’s offices the
past week, and so such a change will have to wait for another day.
