Thursday's Class

For some reason, Thursday's class has really stood out to me. I now have a better understanding of Nakamura's text and claims, and I can see how they play out in the "real" world. I revise my comments to some extent because I obviously was a bit confused (though I didn't know it).

But what really stands out to me from class is the idea of continued effect. I believed in interpreting and analyzing visuals before I got here; that hasn't changed. I had even articulated reasons why it was important to do so. My reasons -- which I felt were just as good as any others -- were that analyzing and interpreting visuals, especially those we encounter every day (cereal boxes, magazine covers, logos, etc), helped us/me gain insight into the role that vision plays into our consciousness. If we are more aware of our relationship to objects and our everyday practices, we will be better for it.

Now, though, I have an even better reason (and a more articulate one!): the continued effect. If we don't analyze, interpret, or otherwise think about visuals we encounter, we do let them pass over us, and the effect multiplies every day. Some of us choose to discuss them, while others do not; some of us choose venues where we can become active, while some do not have this choice. The worst part is, those without the choice may not even know it.

Is this a hopeful message? Yes. It highlights for me yet another reason to keep teaching; and emphasizes how we must teach visuals/visual literacy in composition. At the very least, it offers space for inquiry, encounter, and possibly more active viewers.