Week 3 summary

This week I‘ve been thinking about image and language. I think I’ve come to the ‘conclusion’ that medium is to message as pedagogy is to technology. You can’t say that any message is best transmitted by one single medium any more than you can say that one message can be successfully transmitted by any medium; this is not because ‘the medium is the message’ but because they enter into a mutual relationship before, during and after the transmission. The message–if we roll it back to a pre-inguistic thought or idea–must be translated into something before it can be understood by another person.

(And we wouldn’t want the alternative: Belcerebons)

I’ve also been aware that most of the media I post is ‘pop’ culture rather than…I guess, Culture Show culture. I suppose this is mostly because I’ve interpreted ‘digital cultures’ as referring to de facto culture, out of which springs artefacts rather than artefacts that attempt to ‘say something’ about culture. This is a tenuous distinction at best. And the real answer is probably that 1) I know a lot more about pop culture and 2) what I do know about culture culture is largely written down in my undergraduate notes in a box somewhere, unable to assist me in remembering who said, e.g. ‘linguistic structures enable complex thought’ and things like that.

Comments Off , ,
A word devoid of thought is a dead thing, and a thought unembodied in words remains a shadow.
Lev S. Vygotsky

Can you substitute ‘image’ in the latter clause? Would it be truer, as per Kress, if you did?


Tombstone Blues


Kress argues that image, theoretically anyway, is less constrained than language because there is a finite supply of words but infinite possibilities for image. This may explain why surreal and post-modern art has flourished while there are only a handful of examples of people who have had success with surreal language (although some, like James Joyce with his Ulysses, were contemporaries of the surreal artists…)



As this audio clip demonstrates, however, words might be finite but there are an infinite number of ways to put them together.

[PS Artistic statements in the form of silent audio players and images straying outside the post boundaries, or disappearing completely, are entirely intentional...]


1000 words

This image, which made the internet rounds recently accompanied by an entirely fictional story, is nonetheless a digitally cultural reminder that we interpret images as well as words. Symbols and signs are embedded in images just as they are in language, and the misconception that a picture is somehow more transparent than language–while this could be true in many contexts–is misleading if applied universally.

Comments Off , ,