Monday, April 9, 2007
Arguably, A Visual Argument
I stole this idea from a thread on Somethingawful. If you don't recognize the face, that's Hillary Clinton (standing in for Laura Palmer). If you don't recognize the film, it's David Lynch's prequel to the Twin Peaks series -- Fire Walk With Me. It may defeat the purpose of a visual "argument" to talk about it, but I'm going to anyway. Something about the current presidential race gives me a heightened feeling of "unreality" -- an almost uncanny sense of the silliness and absurdity of systems of political representation. Watching one of Hillary's press conferences the other day, I went through a series of stages, moving from a feeling of "unreality" to visceral boredom to mild nausea during the course of about 15 minutes. The struck postures, the talking points, the photo ops, the mad promises . . . it was all too much, and at the same time too little -- like a surfeit of nothingness. I kept thinking how these insane promises would change depending on the audience addressed, how the professional politician changes tactics and agendas from town to town, scrambling for universal acceptance. I noticed with fear and trembling the awkward smiles aimed at various cameras, the forced hugging, the intentionally chosen and carefully arranged "multicultural" entourage. The ephemeral quality of the discourse reminded me of the digital phenomenon of "viral" media -- images, videos, texts that proliferate across the internet overnight like some kind of cannibal bacteria. The idea for the above image came from such a "viral" source: superimposed Hillaries showed up all over the place after Somethingawful started a thread based on an unflattering image of Ms. Clinton. So I decided the form fit my purpose for this assignment. The Lynch film reinforces the sense of the unreal (especially since it is a kind of "remake" of noticeably lower quality than the original series), and the image itself is a symptom of a viral phenomenon that has already peaked and started to die off. It is a kind of two-dimensional monument to the ephemeral and the absurd -- a fitting image of contemporary politics, I would say.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Tim, your visual argument is great. I wonder, of course, as to whether all the nuance of your explanation would be picked up on, which is the problem, and the challenge, of such an activity. For example, while your explanation makes clear to us that you're focusing on the surreality of the overall presidential race, the inclusion of only Hillary in the visual initially made me think it was just about her. At first, I took it as an attack on Hillary, but then, considering the character she's replaced is Laura Palmer, I wondered if she was supposed to be looked at as a victim, someone for us to sympathize with. But, even then, as with your own explanation, the viewer would have to know something about Twin Peaks in order to get any meaning from it. I'm not saying this to tear down your visual-- I still think it is brilliant and a lot better than anything I was thinking of-- but just to point out how visual arguments can be so easily misread.
Yeah, I thought about including a cadre of familiar heads, poised around the border but decided against it. I also thought about using a more discrete and obvious form of visual argumentation -- like a chain of signs that would be difficult to "misinterpret." But this seems more like a pictographic argument than a visual one. It seems like the possibility of ambiguity and openness is one of the consequences of the visual argument -- especially when it's not accompanied by textual explanation. One could argue, I suppose, that the same is true of textual argument -- that the language always escapes the intentions of the author, moving into areas of signification that were entirely unexpected. But somehow this seems to be magnified by the visual.
Tim,
This is a great visual argument. I guess my question is: how on earth can I help my students to do this kind of thing when I'm utterly incapable of it myself?
Okay, I'll bite. I'll second Leta and announce I don't know how to do this either. I mean, what program do you use? How does one avoid copyright problems? Do I have to learn to compose visuals on computers in order to teach in tomorrow's world? If that's the case, I want a class in grad school that will help me out.
So is John McCain BOB?
John McCain is definitely BOB.
Regarding Leta and Claire's responses, I learned what little I know by tinkering around with a . . . how shall I say? . . . "borrowed" copy of Photoshop CS. The software is actually insanely expensive (sometimes $500+), so the class barrier is definitely a concern when it comes to digital image editing. There are, however, cheap alternatives -- there's always collage, which can be done with just glue, scissors and magazines. Regarding Leta's concern about being "utterly incapable" of formulating visual arguments, one can always consider stealing (like all mature poets and criminals). One could present various pre-made visual arguments and just work from those (there's plenty of material already out there). One doesn't have to be able to write a poem to discuss poetry, or to write great fiction to discuss Joyce.
The university actually has a "software anywhere" agreement or contract (or something like that) so you can legally "borrow" a lot of the high-price software from (yes) anywhere on campus. I don't have the link or information of how to do that right now, but someone from IAT presented on this at the grad school orientation (see, it *was* useful!). I can bring the info to class if I can find it.
There's also a completely free open source image editing program out there--if only I knew the name. Daniel Anderson, who will be on campus next week, uses it, so we can ask him.
Found this handy little list of open source editing software:
Vector Editing (i.e. Illustrator, Corel Draw)
Inkscape, http://www.inkscape.org/
Sodipodi, http://www.sodipodi.com/
DrawPlus4, http://www.freeserifsoftware.com/software/DrawPlus/
Pixel Editing (i.e. Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro)
The Gimp, http://www.gimp.org/
GimpShop, http://www.gimpshop.net/
3d Editing
Blender 3D, http://www.blender3d.org/
POV Ray, http://www.povray.org/
Anim8or, http://www.anim8or.com/
Fractals
Apophysis, http://www.apophysis.org/
Fractint, http://spanky.triumf.ca/www/fractint/fractint.html
Tierazon, http://home.houston.rr.com/fergusonsc/Tierazon-v29/
Post a Comment