Kansas City Art Institute / Fall 2008 / Senior Graphic Design Studio
10/17/08
prj cm: reading 1
Read "This means This..." pages 19-32 and post your reflection to the comments of this post. Find the photocopied reading on Tyler's reserve shelf in the library.
What I found in this reading is that through associating Good vs. Bad, we must first identify effective indicators in surveying index and symbol usage. There's a parallel that can be drawn from the DESTINATION and MESSAGE methods; The transmission between the two can easily be distorted regarding time periods and cultural perspective upon delivery. It's fascinating to imagine that these messages continue "living" once communicated to the reader. Every mark becomes subject to the approval of readers in the future.
I am pretty apathetic to this article and my initial reaction to it was so what? Everything that we hear or feel or see has to do with the context of the situation and the information and details you already know on that specific subject. I think that the page that resonated with me most though was the page of intention, the painting that the ape did. I always enjoy artist's work much better when I am educated on the thoughts behind the work. It makes looking at a solid blue canvas one hundred times better. Another practical aspect I found to this article was that often times people thing that I am being sarcastic because of the tone in my voice when I am not. I guess you have to know me in order to get that I am not trying to be an asshole, that I am trying to be nice.
After reading this I realize how much power designers have to persuade audience to associate things as good or bad taking an object, symbol, or familiar icon and given it a conflicting message. As the message travels from several audiences it is alter, using different characters or names to fit that particular audience setting.
In addition to what everyone has stated, I found this article to portray the obvious. That things will get misconstrued be it imagery, words, or both- that it's all about how "who is receiving the message is really receiving it." That the relationship between the reader and composer can either be unified or unresolved (good and bad) by unresolved I mean taken for as denotative message or in the connotative sense. I mean we get that as people in our everyday lives how text messages and emails can't convey always our emotions (hinting at the sarcasm Jessica mentioned) and an innocent statement can start a war.
For me, this reading just reemphasized the importance of clear communication– that sometimes, our original message gets lost or manipulated along the way, so the clarity of the message is crucial. I often find myself annoyed when I discover that a movie that seems really great from the trailers, turns out to be something completely different. It's not really the movie's fault, but it's the way the movie was marketed and advertised that led me to believe something else. The section that I found most fascinating was the page that talked about symbols and how what we perceive as the hazard sign now( or signs and symbols in general), might not have the same meaning in the future. For me, it find it interesting to trace back the origin of thesymbols used today. For example, today, many of us might consider the swastika as a negative symbol. But, for thousands of years before, it was considered as a positive mark- a symbol for life and good luck. So, I think that there is no way to ensure that something we create today will hold the same meaning tomorrow. In a way, the meaning of the things we create have no real permanence. They're relevant to the time and place that they're being used.
It is interesting to consider the way communication and messages can be misconstrued. How the same image or message can be interpreted differently or how a message or image can change based on the culture or time period. We as designers must take this in to consideration.
7 comments:
What I found in this reading is that through associating Good vs. Bad, we must first identify effective indicators in surveying index and symbol usage. There's a parallel that can be drawn from the DESTINATION and MESSAGE methods; The transmission between the two can easily be distorted regarding time periods and cultural perspective upon delivery. It's fascinating to imagine that these messages continue "living" once communicated to the reader. Every mark becomes subject to the approval of readers in the future.
I am pretty apathetic to this article and my initial reaction to it was so what? Everything that we hear or feel or see has to do with the context of the situation and the information and details you already know on that specific subject. I think that the page that resonated with me most though was the page of intention, the painting that the ape did. I always enjoy artist's work much better when I am educated on the thoughts behind the work. It makes looking at a solid blue canvas one hundred times better. Another practical aspect I found to this article was that often times people thing that I am being sarcastic because of the tone in my voice when I am not. I guess you have to know me in order to get that I am not trying to be an asshole, that I am trying to be nice.
Random thoughts
After reading this I realize how much power designers have to persuade audience to associate things as good or bad taking an object, symbol, or familiar icon and given it a conflicting message. As the message travels from several audiences it is alter, using different characters or names to fit that particular audience setting.
Jessica you last part is so true
In addition to what everyone has stated, I found this article to portray the obvious. That things will get misconstrued be it imagery, words, or both- that it's all about how "who is receiving the message is really receiving it." That the relationship between the reader and composer can either be unified or unresolved (good and bad) by unresolved I mean taken for as denotative message or in the connotative sense. I mean we get that as people in our everyday lives how text messages and emails can't convey always our emotions (hinting at the sarcasm Jessica mentioned) and an innocent statement can start a war.
For me, this reading just reemphasized the importance of clear communication– that sometimes, our original message gets lost or manipulated along the way, so the clarity of the message is crucial. I often find myself annoyed when I discover that a movie that seems really great from the trailers, turns out to be something completely different. It's not really the movie's fault, but it's the way the movie was marketed and advertised that led me to believe something else. The section that I found most fascinating was the page that talked about symbols and how what we perceive as the hazard sign now( or signs and symbols in general), might not have the same meaning in the future. For me, it find it interesting to trace back the origin of thesymbols used today. For example, today, many of us might consider the swastika as a negative symbol. But, for thousands of years before, it was considered as a positive mark- a symbol for life and good luck. So, I think that there is no way to ensure that something we create today will hold the same meaning tomorrow. In a way, the meaning of the things we create have no real permanence. They're relevant to the time and place that they're being used.
It is interesting to consider the way communication and messages can be misconstrued. How the same image or message can be interpreted differently or how a message or image can change based on the culture or time period. We as designers must take this in to consideration.
Post a Comment