Week 2: Art + Language: Abstraction of Expression
Readings:
1) McCloud, Scott. Chapter Two: “The Vocabulary of Comics.” Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. New York: HarperPerennial, 1994.
2) Karl, Herb. “The Image is Not the Thing.” Images in Language, Media, and Mind. Ed. Roy Fox. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English, 1994.
Thoughts while reading:
1) Love this. Totally stealing to help me try to teach my kiddos about abstraction, economy and communicating a message. Will have to also reference during the appropriation lesson. Maybe not ALL of it since it gets a little lofty towards the end. Might be a little too much for them. This would also be awesome to share with my teachers.
2) Notes as I go...
Reading about the image-thing principle, I am acutely aware that I am horrible at separating myself from the images in advertising. I am so susceptible to suggestion, mostly when it comes to food. So much so that my husband pokes fun. And maybe its because I am an artist, and a huge fan of storytelling, I find it disconcerting to think of watching programs or reading with a barrier up separating myself from the people, events, places, and emotions depicted. That is what makes them enjoyable to me. To be lost in the action is the magical part of those art forms. However, I am able to distinguish the difference between performance and real life (I can't help but think IRL here!) But I guess what Karl is saying is that if you are unable to make that distinction, you will be held "hostage to deep emotional reactions that inhibit reason." That inability to tell the difference is the trouble.
And I keep reading and see my opinion made in Karl's next point with his reference to Dwight Burton and the power of an art form "lies in its capacity to kindle an "imaginative entry," where the reader literally surrenders his/her imagination." Right on! That's what I'm talking about! Although then goes on to say that the artist's intent is not to seduce, but rather to delight, to instruct, or to heal. Hmmm. I wonder what seduction would look like, because in my mind that is some artists' intent. Maybe I need to look at the semantics of the definition of 'seduction' - "Attract (someone) to a belief or into a course of action that is inadvisable or foolhardy." Ok, that inadvisable or foolhardy part got me. I was just thinking of the attraction part. I think art forms definitely do that part. They make things looks attractive and appealing for sure. That's why everyone in my suburb looks like a schlub in comparison to the television suburbia!
WHAT?! Stone's JFK is thought of as documentary?! Crazy Kids! Although I do prefer myself some historical fiction... :)
CONTEXT - too true. gotta know the situation. the haps. the lowdown. the skinny. "Images do not occur in isolation." (We talked about this with Muddy, right? What was that thing called....hmm...image lexicons? That doesn't seem quite right - somewhere between that and mind mapping. I'll have to keep thinking.)
[I will never read the name Carl Jung the same way again after watching that movie 'A Dangerous Method'. Good example I guess of that image-thing principle and my hostage mind. I think I may, however, have Stockholm Syndrome in this regard.]
This article would be great to have my teachers read in preparation for changing curriculum to include 'the gaze' and visual literacy. It encompasses and breaks down some good things we should also be teaching our HS students. I wonder how they would read this or if it would be way over their heads.
I keep thinking about the reactions to the movie by 'word people' and 'picture people'. I didn't like the way he sort of stigmatized the picture processing people. sounded like there was a little bit of judgment in the way those people reacted to the images. Although, I may just be reading into things.
It does seem important to learn to be able to read images in such a way that allows someone to recognize when they are being carried away by an emotional reaction to something, but I also wonder if that will lift a veil so to speak and take away some of the enjoyment these art forms are supposed to provoke. We all need escape. How can we sharpen the mind without dulling the senses?
1) Love this. Totally stealing to help me try to teach my kiddos about abstraction, economy and communicating a message. Will have to also reference during the appropriation lesson. Maybe not ALL of it since it gets a little lofty towards the end. Might be a little too much for them. This would also be awesome to share with my teachers.
2) Notes as I go...
"Incidentally, the implications of the typographic mind for education are momentous and obvious. If, as a civilization, we choose to prize the qualities Postman associates with a typographic mind - conceptual thought, deductive and sequential reasoning, a sense of order and purpose, an abhorance of contradiction, a generous capacity for detachment and objectivity, and a tolerance for deferred gratification - then all we have to do is teach and promote from the earliest days of a child's life a value for the printed page and the act of writing."Reading this (and about the typographic mind) I am having trouble discerning what makes it so different from the visual (not sure what to call it since i haven't gotten that far yet. Perhaps he will further divide the types of mind into different classifications) mind. When I read this, I am struck that in today's world (keeping in mind this was written in 1994 - a completely different world in terms of technology abundance, use, exposure, etc.) this could easily be associated with artistic creation and appreciation, perhaps extending to our visual culture and media. I wonder if this will be a dichotomy or if the classifications will be further divided. The last statement,
"Becoming literate, therefore, is not only a prerequisite for survival in a world of print; it is the basis for a way of perceiving - of thinking about and acting upon the world."I could easily think this is terms of being visually literate: "Becoming visually literate, therefore, is not only a prerequisite for survival in a world of images; it is the basis for a way of perceiving - of thinking about and acting upon the world." Easily being a part of a manifesto or call to creative arms for our current time and place.
Reading about the image-thing principle, I am acutely aware that I am horrible at separating myself from the images in advertising. I am so susceptible to suggestion, mostly when it comes to food. So much so that my husband pokes fun. And maybe its because I am an artist, and a huge fan of storytelling, I find it disconcerting to think of watching programs or reading with a barrier up separating myself from the people, events, places, and emotions depicted. That is what makes them enjoyable to me. To be lost in the action is the magical part of those art forms. However, I am able to distinguish the difference between performance and real life (I can't help but think IRL here!) But I guess what Karl is saying is that if you are unable to make that distinction, you will be held "hostage to deep emotional reactions that inhibit reason." That inability to tell the difference is the trouble.
And I keep reading and see my opinion made in Karl's next point with his reference to Dwight Burton and the power of an art form "lies in its capacity to kindle an "imaginative entry," where the reader literally surrenders his/her imagination." Right on! That's what I'm talking about! Although then goes on to say that the artist's intent is not to seduce, but rather to delight, to instruct, or to heal. Hmmm. I wonder what seduction would look like, because in my mind that is some artists' intent. Maybe I need to look at the semantics of the definition of 'seduction' - "Attract (someone) to a belief or into a course of action that is inadvisable or foolhardy." Ok, that inadvisable or foolhardy part got me. I was just thinking of the attraction part. I think art forms definitely do that part. They make things looks attractive and appealing for sure. That's why everyone in my suburb looks like a schlub in comparison to the television suburbia!
WHAT?! Stone's JFK is thought of as documentary?! Crazy Kids! Although I do prefer myself some historical fiction... :)
CONTEXT - too true. gotta know the situation. the haps. the lowdown. the skinny. "Images do not occur in isolation." (We talked about this with Muddy, right? What was that thing called....hmm...image lexicons? That doesn't seem quite right - somewhere between that and mind mapping. I'll have to keep thinking.)
[I will never read the name Carl Jung the same way again after watching that movie 'A Dangerous Method'. Good example I guess of that image-thing principle and my hostage mind. I think I may, however, have Stockholm Syndrome in this regard.]
This article would be great to have my teachers read in preparation for changing curriculum to include 'the gaze' and visual literacy. It encompasses and breaks down some good things we should also be teaching our HS students. I wonder how they would read this or if it would be way over their heads.
I keep thinking about the reactions to the movie by 'word people' and 'picture people'. I didn't like the way he sort of stigmatized the picture processing people. sounded like there was a little bit of judgment in the way those people reacted to the images. Although, I may just be reading into things.
It does seem important to learn to be able to read images in such a way that allows someone to recognize when they are being carried away by an emotional reaction to something, but I also wonder if that will lift a veil so to speak and take away some of the enjoyment these art forms are supposed to provoke. We all need escape. How can we sharpen the mind without dulling the senses?
Discussion Board Assignment:
In the spirit of McCloud, I want you to find and post an illustration of a character from a visual text, ranging anywhere on the ladder of abstraction spectrum. Genres to consider: cartoons, comic books, video games, children’s books, Pixar films, Charles Schwab commercials, etc.
Once posted, please “deconstruct” the image in regard to its use of abstraction. Why did its designer utilize the chosen aesthetic level? Consider McCloud’s discussion of cartooning and Karl’s prevailing principles of general semantics as they relate to your chosen text.
Thoughts about what to do...
Mack's original Kabuki illustration
Miyazaki's My Neighbor Totoro
Warner Bros. Batman: The Animated Series.
ooh, maybe a Saul Bass illustration
or the Mad Men Man - YES! That's it!
Deconstructing the Falling Man from Mad Men.
I'm not sure I really have a good handle on the vertical to the pinnacle, the retinal edge. Especially in relation to the conceptual edge. I'm having a hard time disconnecting the conceptual idea from the visual of an image. Especially in this case. Maybe that's the point with these types of abstractions though. My knowledge of the context is affecting the way I now see this image. The more the stories grow and add context, the more I am seeing in this symbol of a man. I can not help but let my experiences and perceptions of the characters, events, and time period it evokes influence the way I am seeing the meaning in this image. I wonder if I hadn't been able to pick my own image, but rather was assigned one that I was unfamiliar with how I would see it on McCloud's Picture Plane Triangle (what is that officially called again?).
So here is my attempt. I believe that the Falling Man would be fairly high towards the pinnacle of the picture plane - Maybe about 1/2 to 2/3 away from the bottom, and close to the language border. The image has no interior details, no definition of facial features. We only see a silhouette defining the outline of a man of particular height, demeanor, and coif. We can tell he is wearing a suit, but with out detail of color, pattern or texture. All this lends itself to the viewer's ability to place themself into this body, this psyche, and viscerally experience the existential crisis that every man might find himself facing in changing times - literally interpreted as falling, a feeling of being out of control. This is exemplified in the somewhat abstracted, but markedly less so than the falling man, back ground as he falls from a particularly high window. The background being less abstracted puts us in a particular time period that we can then put ourselves in as the falling man. Learning more context gives the figure more content and then offers more examples of turbulence and change. The ending image of the figure not falling, but in actuality sitting on a couch, gives the impression that it was all metaphorical and occuring within - ergo an internal struggle within that anyone may be able to relate to as opposed to the dramatic and dark action of committing suicide.
In the spirit of McCloud, I want you to find and post an illustration of a character from a visual text, ranging anywhere on the ladder of abstraction spectrum. Genres to consider: cartoons, comic books, video games, children’s books, Pixar films, Charles Schwab commercials, etc.
Once posted, please “deconstruct” the image in regard to its use of abstraction. Why did its designer utilize the chosen aesthetic level? Consider McCloud’s discussion of cartooning and Karl’s prevailing principles of general semantics as they relate to your chosen text.
Thoughts about what to do...
Mack's original Kabuki illustration
Miyazaki's My Neighbor Totoro
Warner Bros. Batman: The Animated Series.
ooh, maybe a Saul Bass illustration
or the Mad Men Man - YES! That's it!
Deconstructing the Falling Man from Mad Men.
I'm not sure I really have a good handle on the vertical to the pinnacle, the retinal edge. Especially in relation to the conceptual edge. I'm having a hard time disconnecting the conceptual idea from the visual of an image. Especially in this case. Maybe that's the point with these types of abstractions though. My knowledge of the context is affecting the way I now see this image. The more the stories grow and add context, the more I am seeing in this symbol of a man. I can not help but let my experiences and perceptions of the characters, events, and time period it evokes influence the way I am seeing the meaning in this image. I wonder if I hadn't been able to pick my own image, but rather was assigned one that I was unfamiliar with how I would see it on McCloud's Picture Plane Triangle (what is that officially called again?).
So here is my attempt. I believe that the Falling Man would be fairly high towards the pinnacle of the picture plane - Maybe about 1/2 to 2/3 away from the bottom, and close to the language border. The image has no interior details, no definition of facial features. We only see a silhouette defining the outline of a man of particular height, demeanor, and coif. We can tell he is wearing a suit, but with out detail of color, pattern or texture. All this lends itself to the viewer's ability to place themself into this body, this psyche, and viscerally experience the existential crisis that every man might find himself facing in changing times - literally interpreted as falling, a feeling of being out of control. This is exemplified in the somewhat abstracted, but markedly less so than the falling man, back ground as he falls from a particularly high window. The background being less abstracted puts us in a particular time period that we can then put ourselves in as the falling man. Learning more context gives the figure more content and then offers more examples of turbulence and change. The ending image of the figure not falling, but in actuality sitting on a couch, gives the impression that it was all metaphorical and occuring within - ergo an internal struggle within that anyone may be able to relate to as opposed to the dramatic and dark action of committing suicide.
No comments:
Post a Comment