On Blogging

Usually, I'd be doing all of these blogs at the last second. But, I didn't for this class. I made two posts each week (except for the first week I think...) and it's been fun and easy. I'll admit, it did entertain me to see most of the class panicking and complaining. Blogging became very habitual and you've probably noticed that they are pretty casual and perhaps even too short (and they certainly weren't very visual), but they were simply my musings on this very interesting subject of Visual Rhetoric. This is my last post and I wanted to say I really liked the class. Perhaps I've been more invested in the art aspect but I have learned a lot about design and have enjoyed the 3 hours spent each week. I know I'm really quiet and may seem to be a slacker sometimes but I am really glad that this class is a requirement for the Publishing Major, because I would've missed out on a great class just because I was uninterested in it.

On Visual Culture in the Future

Only after reading the chapter on the globalization of visual culture have I realized that it really has been a recent thing for the "visual medium" to be the preferred medium of the world. This I think is from the creation of the internet/television. Everything is on a screen now: computers, television, and even cellphones have a very interactive screen (if not two). Even the way we listen to music, from Walkman to CD Player to iPod. The iPod has a screen, it provides something to be looked at just like the rest of our recent innovations. Also, I've noticed people preference of moving images to still images. Like movies to comic books or the fact that animated items are considered more techniclogically advanced. In the future, I won't be surprised to see billboards on the highway that are just big 30 second commercials. People like pictures over words, colored over black/white, and the moving over the still. The term visual culture would probably cease to exist as everything will be accompanied by visuals.

On My Final Project Again....

I've decided to word paint an image of New York City at the moment of the terrorist attacks on 9-11-2001. The big issue right now is whether I should create each item (Statue of Liberty, Twin Towers, Airplane, City Skyline) inside Microsoft Word and moving them together into Photoshop or should I Photoshop all items to get the best outline at the cost of words getting cut off. I don't quite know. Another issue is about how big I want this to be, and the more I think about it, I think I would like the picture to be larger than the regular 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper so that I can fit everthing I want at a readable size (probably at least 12 point font) without being crowded (I would really like a lot of white space for some unknown reason). Furthermore I can't decide if I actually want just white space or if I should textualize everything, including the sky and the water that would've been left alone. And one more item to consider, I don't really know what font I want to use and that'll probably make a lot of difference. Thus, I need to get just about everything planned and thought out before I begin... I doubt I'll have time to go back and fix things whenver I want to.

On Scientific Images

After reading chapter 8 from the Practices of Looking, I've really gained a new perspective on pictures as evidence. Having read earlier chapters from PL which discussed photographs never being able to be the "truth", this chapter shouldn't have came as that much of a surprise. But now I do see how people believe any image that's under the label "scientific." Thus, visual evidence isn't necessarily all that true. Like the video tapes of Rodney King's beating being used as a tool for prosecution as well as the defense. It is possible then, that almost everything can be false. I've never seen rare birds of paradise or Mars or my spleen except for the occasional picture or on Discovery Channel, so there is no confirmation for me of whether these things exist or not except for word of the expertise over and over again. Just because there's a picture, it doesn't mean it's real, especially with camera tricks or technology nowadays. But this thought can go a long way, after all, is the screen I'm typing these characters into really real as well?

On the Final Project

Form poetry is what I'd like to do. And with the skills I've picked up from this semester and the wonderful Adobe CS3 suite that is available in the classroom and in my roommate's Mac, I think I can do this and take it to an extreme. This idea is plausible, but the key issue right now on figuring out what exactly I have in mind. There are some stories and some poetry of mine that could be made into a painting, but it's difficult to say which would be the most successful or even useful. Meanwhile, there are various images I would like to "paint" but to do this would seem to take up a lot of text that might not be very legible after it's all done. Also, do I want my words to work by themselves and be coherent and readable? Or do I want something more abstract, making things more difficult to read and perhaps making the piece nontraditionally read? For example, I can take Van Gogh's Starry Night, and illustrate it with words: making the moon an actual moon composed of the words moon against the sky that is actually the word sky repeated over and over again and so on. Similarly, I can find different images and make them out of the words they are then combine them into one. Like making a tree out of the word tree (via Type Masking) and inserting it into a desert made up of the word desert. I don't really know, but I'll have to figure it out soon enough.

On Graphic Design Again

I really can't get over how impressive the work presented in Lupton's and Phillips' book is. The sky-building alphabet seems to be just so ingenious and it must've been fun to create it... walking around town looking up into to the sky, trying to match English letters. And according to the captions, these are work from MFA students, which makes me wonder where will all these talented graphic designers be in a few years? I've always appreciated visual art, but I'm not into it enough to know if the art here would be displayed at a museum or something. I do know that artists typically make little money while everyone is always looking for graphic designers. So is this capitalistic society taking these artists to better paying jobs involving big corporations and forcing them to do the "fun" things on the side? I wouldn't be surprised if this is true, because it is definitely true for writers as it is impossible to live off of your creation even if it is ingenious.

On Making Flyers

Honestly, I hate flyers. I haven't really seen one I liked or one that moved me to do something or caught my attention enough that I remember it now. Thus, it is really difficult for me to think of how to design module 6 for maximum efficiency. If I were to put myself into a young Latino's point of view, just pondering life after high school, I don't know how much influence a flyer can have on me. If I saw an attractive flyer in the hallway informing me on the department of English at ISU, would I really be so easily influenced? Unless the flyer is incredibly creative and effective, I'm thinking the answer is no. I just don't really know how to make ISU and its English Department look attractive and be informative at the same time. But I'll figure something out by next Wednesday.

On Socially Responsible Design

It is interesting that a document can be considered socially responsible. But, if we look at the big picture, shouldn't everything we create be socially responsible? Whenever I write, be it an essay, a poem, or a work of fiction, I am always thinking about its purpose. Especially for a piece that has an audience, there needs to be a bigger social purpose in the writing. Often, I think this is forgotten, and Rock makes a really good argument that we need to be more aware. So perhaps when we write a bestselling 500 page book we should definitely make sure the book is socially responsible enough to compensate for all the trees getting made into paper.

On Magic

After seeing the mentalist last night, as well as numerous magic shows both live and televised, I'm skeptical on all things "magical" including Paul Draper's mind reading. I feel that it was him just using visual cues to "read" someone. With the exception of maybe 3 males, all the subjects and volunteers he selected were young white females. Perhaps he's sexist and racist, but I think these are the people he feels most confident in reading because he "struggled" with many of the male mind readings. Also, I think a lot of tricks were just completely based off of research on human reactions/behaviors. For example, by making a sign that the third chair would be empty in the seating assignment trick, he has effectively cut the probability of him being wrong by half as he can count from the left or right to name the empty seat the 3rd (2nd) chair. If they don't sit in the correct formation right away, he has a handful of speech tools to convince them to move. Similarly, thinking up a particular flower has a good probability of being the same as how many flowers does the common person know anyways besides roses, daisies, tulips, and sunflowers? The big red curtains might have had an effect on half the room guessing red too, not to mention red is a primary color and is the first color of the color spectrum.

On Postmodernism

Last semester I took Dr. McLaughlin's Postmodernism literature class so this week's reading was a lot of review. Something I learned though was on how similar Modernism was to Postmodernism. Concentrated on postmodernity, I hadn't really grasped what modernity was. It is also interesting how abstract these concepts are and even now, if I were to be asked to define one or the other, it'd be at least a paragraph long to explain the terms. It is even more interesting that to define the term postmodern is essentially against everything postmoderism stands for. And on a similar thought, I feel that the label of something being postmodern is used way too often. I feel that it's become the categorization of things undefinable which is not only ironic but almost hypocritical. If we were to be true to the theories behind Postmodernity, the word "postmodern" would cease to exist.

On Photoshop Fun

My roommate designs book covers for his father as a part time job and it has really made him a pro in Photoshop. He has made some pretty awesome facebook profiles with this talent such as him shaking hands with President Nixon or hugging a giant wombat. And with what little I've done today on Photoshop, I've become very interested in Photoshop as an art form. I'm neither a good graphic designer nor a good photographer, but I suspect that if one were to acquire both set of skills he/she could do phenomenal things. I'm sure there are many artists out there who already do this but there is no one that I know of that is a famous "Photoshop" artist. I feel that those who are good at it not only have a small audience to view their work but they are also poorly paid. From my limited experience, it sounds like graphic design as an art is a fairly small field as those concerned with graphic design are more interested in completing projects that they are being paid to do rather than making artistic statements with their creative work.

On Hollywood Arabs

After watching the video on how Arabs have been terribly misrepresented in Hollywood I'm starting to notice many trends for other races of people as well. Working off stereotypes, just as the "terrorist" is always an Arab, Asians are quite often depicted as several distinct characters. Young Asian men are typically martial artists or a computer whiz. Young Asian women are typically martial artists and/or sexual objects or seductresses. Older Asians are portrayed as people of wisdom or as owners of small restaurants/shops with a loud mouth. These racial stereotypes certainly aren't as terrible as those associated with blacks and Arabs, but they are nonetheless giving the public wrong generalizations. I definitely agree with bell hooks that racism as a visual rhetoric must be made aware and stopped.

On Module 4 Brainstorming

I am working on coming up with an argument for my Module 4. So far I have the subject, video game violence as art. One direction I can take this is to research on why it is so satisfying to violent kill or destroy things, especially for men, in the form of a video game. Do we, somewhat pervertedly, like graphic violence and gore for the sake of violence and gore? Or do we like violence and gore that is done well graphically? Another direction is in the type of violence we are presented. Do video gamers like realistic violence (blood splatter, dismemberment)? Probably yes. But how realistic do we want it? Do we really want the "bad guys" screaming, "please don't kill me!" and hold a very realistic expression of fear and pain just as we put a bullet in their head? Do we kill because we like the kill? Or is it just a fun challenge, and when we realize we've come too close to killing does it becomes a moral hazard? What about the recent developement of stylized violence (comical death, exaggerated humans/creatures, unrealistic death)? Is this a way of putting distance between the act of murder and gaming? Lastly, a third direction I can take is on the subject of violence in video games itself. Has our triggerhappy, violent society made us so eager to love death and destruction as our form of entertainment? Or is the violent visual rhetoric of video games something our dark human nature looks for?

On Branding Readings

After reading the articles on branding, a few interesting thoughts came to mind. One, I think it's interesting that branding, a monster born from and raised by anything capitalistic, exists in this capitalistic society that emphasizes individuality and independence. On the one hand, free market works off the assumption that every party will act in their own best interest and keep things functioning in good competition with each other. On the other hand, branding represents the merging of our identities. Certainly not in conflict with each other, I just find it intriguing that two opposing ideologies coexist so nicely. Another thought came as a response to "Bitch Skateboards" in Japan as a popular brand despite how sexist and offensive its name and logo are. I think it is terrifying that we are willing to follow pop culture so blindly and passionately. Why is it that the name makes so much of a difference? We are essentially putting faith in a couple of trademarked words.

On black in Disney

I found the presentation on the use of black/darkness in villainy in Disney animation very fascinating. To see all the evil characters in my favorite childhood stories displaying such similar characteristics and traits makes me wonder about the colors used in present day animated baddies. Upon thinking about this, there really isn't anymore villains shrouded in menacing black and purple... in fact, there really aren't any hardcore villains I can think of off the top of my head. But perhaps the black in villains has been omitted due to a reverse visual rhetoric. Recognizing that their past evil characters share the black wardrobe thing in common, perhaps Disney/Pixar have gone the other direction in order to either conceal the villain (Toy Story 2 comes to mind) or simply break away from the masterplots that they have most definitely overused (Treasure Planet anyone?)

Also, it'll be interesting to see what "villain" character may be present in Disney's The Princess and the Frog, set to be released this winter. This film will not only feature a return to their classic musical 2-D animation style but also the first African-American princess. Set in New Orleans, I'm assuming that there'll be a majority of black characters, thus diverging from Disney's typical pale white demographic. And I can only wonder if this villain (if there is a villain...) will be classically treated to the color black or not.

On Commodity Fetishism

Though we didn't get to discuss too much of chapter 6 in class, I was very intrigued by the commodity fetishism section. I realized just how true it is that the capitalistic mass production of items erases the curiosity of all background information on the item as we are simply concerned with the acquisition and ownership of the item instead. Certainly Nike sweatshops were the first thing that came to mind when I read the definition of the term but before its discussion in the book a paragraph later. But just sitting here typing on my laptop, I eyes are wandering all over my desk thinking about where everything came from and how they were made. The picture frame, the speakers, the pencils and pens, the desk itself, the chair I sit on, the clothes I wear this very minute... Probably like the majority of America, I am a victim of the commodity fetishism engraved into us by our visual culture. Never do I wonder where the materials originate, I am strictly concerned with their function and existence as mine.

On Orange

My module 3 is involved with the color orange and its association with processes. And having done so much research on it, I've come to really like the color, not that I ever had anything against it. I've always thought of myself as a blue guy, calm and pensive and etc... but I do have a more outgoing side and can be fairly friendly and energetic, orangish, you might say. So, perhaps my personality is made up of these complimentary colors, which kinda makes sense. I'm curious then, if this may be true for other people as well. I'm not a pro in color psychology, but I do have a ying/yang theory that I've grown to believe as a part of my Chinese culture. Basically, it deals with the idea that everything is composed of opposites, and one needs a proper balance of both extremes in order to function. For example, the Chinese have categorized foods into ying food and yang food (don't ask me which is which... I'm not too traditional) and if you eat too much of one or the other, then your health will suffer. The remedy would then be to eat more of the other food item. So, perhaps this applies in color psychology as well. Blue, the extremely calm and soothing color, is the exact opposite of orange, an color defined by its instability and energy. With blue and orange rapidly becoming my favorite colors, maybe I have found out how to visually(colorfully) represent my personality, and hopefully it's as healthy it's supposed to be.

On Color Usability

Upon further thought on the use of colors and usability of certain technology, I thought about how true it was for electronics. For nearly everything, a little green light indicates everything is on and working, orange means standby, and red means something terrible. I wonder how this came to be. I know that street lights have similar implications with the green go and red stop. I guess also that green often means yes while red means no. This is definitely true in most countries too from the extent of my travels. Thus, I am curious as to why the world has come to these conclusions.

On the Luscher Color Test

Quite frighteningly, this test was fairly accurate on describing my personality based on the color sequences I chose. I am curious to see how the order one chooses a series of colors can determine why they are peaceful and potentially insecure. I put a few friends through the test too, and most of the results were accurate as well (some results were vehemently denied). I wonder if the test is accurate to people of other cultures since I and my friends are terribly American.

However, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%BCscher_color_test

seems to argue that the test isn't very accurate, though there seems to be a lack of citations throughout the wikipedia article. Supposedly, the color choices measure personality traits that are out of our consciousness, which is terrifying, and I wonder how Max Luscher designed his test to do this. My test results indicated that I am sensitive, desire peace, seek happy relationships, fear disappointment, and strive for artistic growth. I'd say this is true. But the test also claims that I'm needy, find myself easily misunderstood, and all around dissatisfied. To this, I will vehemently deny it.

On Color

After reading Lupton and Phillips's color chapter and their discussion on the effects certain patterns and combinations of colors have on people, I began to wonder if it is our cultural perceptions that determine what looks good and what doesn't. For example, Persian carpets. Some of us love 'em (including Persians). And some of us hate them (including some Persians too). There are color combinations that most of the world dislikes (personally, certain 80's themes) but meanwhile, someone else appreciates (somebody out there likes 80's colors I assume). So my question is: are there perhaps genetically programmed patterns/combinations for us humans to like or dislike? Or is everything absolutely subjective and we like things based on trends and utter personal preference?

On Making My Own Fonts

After our class discussion yesterday on professional text designers who make awesome fonts for a living, I remembered my days as a child where I would doodle for hours and attempt to make my own distinct font as well. I remember that my reasoning for having my own font was just so I could have an unique and cool signature when I grew up and became famous. Whether it was on a baseball or the back of a napkin, people would recognize my name because of how amazing it appeared. It was a search for originality that I had given up on because I would simply tire of it due to the inefficiency of writing a cool-looking text (a single letter could take up to a couple minutes of reworking until I thought it looked perfect) or because I thought it was impossible for my creation to be original enough. Thus, I am jealous of the people who are just making texts out there, doing something I did as a child and somehow living off of it.

On Thinking with Type

After reading our assigned pages, I was intrigued by the idea that are nearly an infinite amount of letter types to be created. Especially after researching downloadable texts and our class discussion yesterday, I realized the importance of having various texts to choose from. Since grade school till now, teachers and professors have always required me to use 12 point Times New Romans for everything I ever wrote. I guess I came to like it as well and use Times whenever I write anything (poetry/prose/letters/etc.) But now, I would like to experiment with other fonts when I do some sort of creative work. I've been taught to let the content speak for itself and use a standard font (Times, Courier New) for readability and formality. But after reading these chapters on letters and texts, I think the exploration of font, done correctly, could definitely add to the meaning/effect of a creative work.

Module 1

Well, after seeing Janae's turkey egg cultural identity map, I couldn't help compare it to my simple 8 1/2 by 11 sheet of 9 images I had found on Google. In fact, it seemed that most of my classmates put in a lot more effort in this project than I did, going high tech or old school to craft their identities neatly and uniquely. Perhaps this says a lot about my personality: a preference for simplicity and ease, a bad case of laziness, and a greater concern for functionality over aesthetics. And maybe that's okay sometimes, but I will definitely push myself a little more for the upcoming projects.

Graphic Design

I won't deny the fact that I like books with pictures/images/illustrations. This allowed me to really enjoy reading Graphic Design this past week as page by page it had stunning and fascinating images while having minimal text. It wows me that there are so many designers capable of creating such art while conveying simple information efficiently. I had already completed my cultural identity map before I read that chapter on diagrams, needless to say, it made me feel incredibly untalented. I'm fairly sure I'll never be able to be a decent graphic designer, but I'm fairly certain I'll always enjoy this book and all the graphic design lessons it will teach me.

On Making Buttons

Buttons as a form of visual rhetoric has led me to consider all sorts of clothing as visual rhetoric as well. Whether it be wearing political colors, wearing your favorite football teams jersey, or even wearing pajamas, one is always making a statement of sorts by what they wear. Most often, I feel, the clothes one wears has the purpose of social acceptance. In a formal occasion, such as a wedding or a high-class restaurant, we wear suits and dresses. In informal moments, with friends, we wear jeans and t-shirts. For the minority that defy this pattern, they are usually the poor, the crazy, and the ones who are definitely trying to make a point. Like the nudists, the choice to not wear anything is a visual message to others that they either don't care about normality or they want attention.

Our clothing is definitely a means of visual rhetoric, whether we know it or not. Since it is obviously the way we want to be seen or not seen.

Reading Response on the Practices of Looking

From the reading, I found the concept of images as representation especially fascinating. Rene Magritte's painting of a pipe followed by the text "This is not a pipe" I think is quite genius. Furthermore, the relates to "the myth of photographic truth" as images (and even exact pictures) will never simply show the object as is. There is always a purpose behind each image, to in one way or another, manipulate the reality. There is always the separation of the paint, the lens, or some sort of medium between the actual truth and the truth that is being told.

As a creative writer, I find this idea of representation to be very applicable. In whatever I write, there is a purpose, and to best fulfil that purpose, I'd do whatever I need to, even if the genre is nonfiction. Afterall, who's to say what is true and not true if one thing signifies another and another and another?

What is Visual Rhetoric?

Visual Rhetoric can be defined as the art of persuasion through the use of images.

Firstly, I think that visual/visible rhetoric is a form of communication as the creator is using the creation to say something to an audience. This leads to visual rhetoric being art as it is an expression from one to influence, manipulate, or affect another (this definition of art is my own from what I've learned through history as well as my own claim to being an artist). Thus, in my opinion, art and persuasion almost always go hand in hand, but especially in the case of visual rhetoric. As discussed in class, rhetoric = persuasion. Though one usually thinks of language or words initially when rhetoric is mentioned, in visual rhetoric, the use of images as rhetorical tools is key. By images I mean anything that can be seen: pictures, graphics, text, color, shapes, and all sorts of design.

I know this definition of visual rhetoric seems really loose, but I would like to argue that all art can be seen as visual rhetoric including literature and music (perhaps through the use of imagery). But for this class, visual rhetoric will deal with art that is literally visual and art that is specifically on persuasion.