Berger and McCloud discussion

1. McCloud talks about the simplicity of a drawn character increasing how much we will identify with it. Do you think this applies in all cases?

2. If more realistic appearances objectify something, then how is it that we can recognize ourselves in a mirror? Is it merely by a matter of repetition that we come to see that reflection as ourselves, or is there something more? If we saw a face that mirrored our intended movements, wouldn't we identify with it, as well?

3. McCloud mentions how we say, when driving a car, "He hit me!" instead of making the distinction that the car was hit by another car. Is this a matter of identity, or simply a fluke in the English language?

From HK's blog:
2. Do you think that the authenticity of paintings really matter? The technology these days have developed so much that such things (I don't think) really matter anymore... The experience we get would be same whether we see original or the replica, pretty much (agree/disagree?)

My response:
HK, you have some good questions. At least, I like answering them.
I think the authenticity of a painting still applies as a matter of intended subject. If you're talking about a specific painting, and there happens to be a near perfect replica of it, the reason you are not talking about the replica because very specific details that might be referenced in the original could be slightly different in the replica (and will necessarily be different, even if we cannot tell by using our unaided senses). That might be an unlikely situation, but the fact is that the identity of the original really is different than the replica, both in history and physical composition, so referencing the replica would mean you would have to at least be aware of the original. Like Berger pointed out, a replica does not have the "sense of awe" and of being in the presence of "the only one" that the original will have (unless you only think you are standing in front of the original, but are dealing with a case of mistaken identity), but also the silence and static nature of it - it does not move - ever. I'll try not to go into a ridiculous amount of detail, but the authentic piece is important at least in its history, so that we can appreciate just what lead up to it. Without that history, the thing that we reference will have different connotations. That applies to referencing the piece, while on the other hand, actually being in the presence of "the original piece" only applies in the sense that the image exists in a particular setting: it might have a frame, it will have a specific size that is likely not apparent in a replica, it may have texture that can't be seen in the replica, and all the other things that can only be "replicated" for reference purposes will be present only in the original.

Discussion response

From HK's blog:
1. Why does Wysocki need to have gazillion criterias for analyzing media (of texts)? (and write 1000-word-long reports about a single page)... Do you think that all of those pages/media put that much effort into analyzing its impact when designing them? (Think about it, those magazine companies have to generate HUNDREDS of pages a week...)

My response:
Cool question. I agree that it would be ridiculously inefficient for businesses to run that kind of analysis of every single page, but I do think that there's a cultural setting to consider. I can only imagine that the journalists, editors, etc. have an education in (or at least resources to find) ways to evaluate the effectiveness of types of writing for specific ends. The research has been done and experience has provided "tried and true" examples of success, so I assume these businesses are more often simply making an appeal to what works and is immediately pleasing from experience, whether personal or vicarious, instead of doing an in-depth analysis.

Wysocki Discussion

1. Typefaces have changed through history and Wysocki gives the example of the blackletter fonts being used commonly until the Roman typefaces were used because they stand out and were meant to bring back a classical way of writing. Do you think the commonplace typefaces could go through another drastic change in the future? Under what circumstances?

2. Do you think that technology not only changes the way we write, but also what we write? If so, how?

3. Currently, people probably encounter engaging advertisements aimed at grabbing their attention on a daily basis. If these advertisements (with their color, and interesting fonts, etc.) are engaging, then would it be reasonable to bring the same techniques to academic writing?

Graffiti project

The graffiti project was to respond to a “problem” that we see in the world, whether real or imagined, through a piece of stencil art. What I ended up with is a stencil with a Crocs shoe and the word “OMEN” beneath it. My first intention with the project was to do something funny and something more serious. This is the funny option. It took longer than expected, so there will be no “serious” one. However, due to a bit of dumb luck, this project turned out much better than expected.

Initially, I just wanted to have a simple picture of something relatively unassuming, and then follow it with an ominous word that makes you question whether the thing really is so unassuming. This is kind of in the vein of the “OBEY” art (simple picture, ominous word with questionable meaning), but with a direction. Also, I didn’t pick “OMEN” because it looks like “OBEY” – it just worked out that way. It’s meant to be a statement on “social decline through fashion”. I just sort of made that up because it sounds ridiculous, but honestly, there is something behind it. The Crocs shoe has some stigma behind it as this awful looking thing in gaudy colors that no one should wear (this is more of a pop culture deal – I don’t really care what you put on your feet). And going off of that, it just so happens that people still buy them. Now, this is probably because they’re comfortable, but the fact that people can be so divided on piece of footwear says something about consumer culture. That one person can put something on their feet capable of summoning up the hatred of someone who doesn’t even know them tells us something about the values placed on fashion. And this tells us something about consumer culture.
Buying crap we don’t need and being adamant about whether we like it or not is essentially the problem I’m getting at. People are miserable and dying, everywhere, and not as a result of current politics - it's pretty much been happening for all of recorded time. And still we have people hating on Crocs. That’s what “OMEN” means here: the fact that this little shoe is so iconic and recognizable to the viewer and probably stirs up some strong feelings for or against it makes the shoe into an omen of a consumerist hierarchy of values. That would be a value system with principles of consumerism at the top. With this image, I’m not saying people need to stop thinking about fashion and go save the world, only that they should think about what they’re doing and what matters to them; question authority, the media and pop culture; live your life through your own means and try to make it something you can stand behind. Is your opinion on shoes something you want to base your life on?
And now, the dumb luck. I was just looking for a piece of scrap paper big enough to paint when I got to the pile of papers on my desk that I continually plan to recycle. Among these was the April 24, 2009 edition of the Socialist Worker newspaper. What better canvas for a statement on consumerism?

Response 6/22

From Dan's blog:
"if language is explicit, deceptive, etc, what happens when the language is not understood?"

My response:
In that case, we get into problems of identity and whether language is actually able to explicitly identify something, and if so, in what contexts it is reliable. When it is misunderstood, the person being addressed will make an association between the words and a meaning not intended by whoever is making the statement. Words function as symbols, so they can only attempt to signify a thing. As a result, it is up to the reader/listener to decipher the intended meaning, and they can only do this according to their own experiences and perception. But even in situations where an entire group speaks the same language, listeners can still make reasonable mistakes due to the flaws in language and their subjective understanding of it.

Hyperbolic Graff

I don't know that I would have imme-

diately called this graffiti, but I'm pretty sure it counts and I just had to share. Some of you may recognize this from the men's bathroom in the Blind Pig. Every wall has something on it, but I like this one in particular and it always gives me a chuckle. Though I'm not one to get into politics, this sounds to me like a "bleeding heart liberal" view blown out of proportion. I actually really like the "da" in the middle and the way it switches from caps to lower case (also using three different ways to write the letter "e") - this way it looks like it was written by an "uneducated" person or maybe even a homeless guy. That makes it even more interesting because it could be seen either as a cry for help or the self-deprecating humor of a dirty-minded derelict. But even if it was just written by a student or townie, it still fits in well with the Pig's aesthetic and doesn't really pose much of a threat as malicious vandalism.

This second one is I think just north of Green on Fifth Street. I'm going to leave the little bomb-guy alone and focus on the faces. The first time I saw this a couple years ago, I recognized the face of Richard D. James (as seen here on the album "...I Care Because You Do" and here as the children in the music video for "Come to Daddy"). I don't think of this as being anything besides someone trying to be cool and edgy by putting this guy's very distinct face on something for shock value and street cred. For what it's worth, his brand of electronic music can have shock value, too, so having his creepy face in unexpected places is actually kind of fitting for the artist.

From Crystal's blog:
"3. Marshall McLuhan thought of 'content' in any medium as always a representation of an older medium. For instance, print is the content of the telegraph. Do you agree or disagree? & What are your thoughts on repurposing (taking a property from one medium & reusing it in another)?"

My response:
It seems to me that new media will take the content from previous media and make it more accessible. It has been seen frequently nowadays that content from several previous media have come together into one that utilizes all of them in a way that borrows characteristics of each (for instance, the iPhone).
Repurposing, insofar as I've read about it, seems to be a necessary process in the advancement of media, since I'm tentatively defining this advancement as creatively applying previously unrelated content in new ways. Content, when it exists in different media, will therefore be interpreted through that media and will need to carry certain characteristics of that interpretation into its new incarnation in order to be familiar. That got convoluted at the end there, but I guess I'm saying content from a particular media will need to carry over aspects of its previous context, instead of just the content.

1. Since "immediacy" has the same root word as "hypermediacy", what can we then say about the way we commonly use the word "immediate"? It seems an interesting question, consideringwhat it has come to mean, possibly in spite of its origin.

2. Is it necessarily true that an advancement in media would bring attention to itself in the way Bolter writes about it?

3. Bolter points out that computer graphics experts try to make their 3d models "photorealistic". What are some other instances where one media has attempted to emulate another?

My name is Aaron. I’m from a small farm town in northern Illinois. I’m a philosophy major and this summer I hope to finish a minor in informatics. I don’t like this mac keyboard because the keys stick. I thought macs were all about being user-friendly. C’est la vie. I can usually be found doing one of the following: aimlessly wandering the internets, finding/listening to music, playing a pc game (presently Team Fortress 2 or Diablo 2), running around with friends or hanging out at the Blind Pig. I’m also taking two other classes this summer, one of which is online. The other begins on July 13th, and also starts at 1pm Monday through Thursday.

Webcomics
minus
garfield minus garfield
xkcd

Other ways to waste your time
random wiki
my youtube profile: providing an archive of cool videos