July 31st, 2010
“Each mode forces me into making certain kinds of commitments about meaning, intended or not. The choice of mode has profound effects on meaning…” (111).
Kress, Gunther. “Reading Images: Multimodality, Representation and New Media.” Information Design Journal & Document Design 12 2 (2004): 110-19.
In this 2004 article, continues his discussion of multimodality and representation (addressed in my last post). He presents his discussion from he perspective of semiotics and specifically from that of multimodality, “which deals with all he means we have for making meaning–the modes of representation–and considers their specific way of configuring the world” (110). Read the rest of this entry »
July 30th, 2010
Bearne, Eve. “Interview with Gunther Kress.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 26 3 (2005): 287-99.
In this 2005 interview, Eve Bearne from the University of Cambridge, UK discusses multimodality and new media with Gunther Kress, a Professor at University of London and expert on the topic. She grounds this discussion in Kress’s statement that language-based practices, influenced by developments in digital technology are creating some new social relations and are giving way to a “new communications landscape” that is inherently multimodal. Furthermore, these changes reshape social practices and views relating to literacy.
What is Literacy? Read the rest of this entry »
June 22nd, 2010
O’Donnell, J. J. (2000). Avatars of the word: From papyrus to cyberspace: Harvard University Press.
In this chapter, O’Donnell discusses the instability and, in some ways (un)reliability, of the written word in both printed and electronic form. The printed format is generally a far cry more consistent than the pre-Gutenberg manuscript format. However, upon closer examination, there exists a possibility for much inconsistency and even access ephemerality. “It is surprising what variations can occur between one printed edition of the same book and another…” (44). Read the rest of this entry »
June 20th, 2010
Based on a question I found in Hayles’ book originally posed by a professor (Gregory Bateson) to his graduate students, I queried “Is a blind man’s cane part of the man?” on my Facebook page. This launched one of the longer conversations I’ve had on FB, the culmination of which is worth repurposing into a post. As Socrates would see it, it was a rubbing together of minds through dialogue lead to a spark of illumination. So, here is an essay of my perspective on the matter formulated due to, and based on, that conversation with special thanks to Ronda W., Duglas K, Amanda B., Mark C., Lisa C-S, Cris B, Michael S., and Kim E.
This question stems from my reading this week of Hayles’ “How We Became Posthuman.” From my perception, the cane is part of the man. It is merely one example in the discussion that all tools are extensions of ourselves (a point I’ve touched on in last week’s blog posts on McLuhan and Hayles). The cane operates as part of the man’s body, it acts as an extension of his hand, being part of his working perception of the world (perception of the working world?). Read the rest of this entry »
November 11th, 2008
I was recently introduced to 12 seconds. It is another online video site. However, with this one, you only get 12 seconds to say what you need to say. At first thought, this might seem a questionable format, as there is little one can say in a mere 12 seconds. However, Read the rest of this entry »
