How many people are actually visually literate?
This course we are currently taking emphasizes the importance of images. We all know the significance of Visual Literacy. However, the question I propose: Is Visual Literacy regarded as a societal priority. Meaning, do individuals actually recognize images and what they represent, or is it more of a superficial skill?
Pauwels (2008), seems to think it is the latter. Pauwels (2008) believes that individuals lack visual competencies, and it is necessary for language to accompany images in order to truly communicate their depth of meaning. Pauwels (2008) also does not believe that images are ‘universal’, as he states,
“It is often said that images (for still regarded as prime ex- ponents of the visual) – because of their close similarity with what they represent – are 'universally' understandable. This view is particularly persistent in relation to photographic images, as these are argued to be 'natural' reflections that require no further explanation. However, every process of representation implies a reduction and transformation of a considerable number of characteristics of the represented reality.” (p. 79).
With images, there is often time a cultural or historical context that is unknown to the viewer, therefore, the “ recognition of the represented elements by no means implies that one understands the meaning or the purpose of the image” (p. 79).
So what do you guys think? Do you agree with him? What does this mean for visual literacy? How does this impact our job as professionals?
Pauwels (2008) article is very interesting and definitely thought provoking. I recommend you read it. His article is much more explicit on his views on visual literacy, however the key quotations used in this blog posting were appropriate in setting up this issue.
The article is titled:
Visual Literacy and Visual Culture: Reflections on Developing More Varied and Explicit Visual Competencies.
Luc Pauwels
This is interesting Brad. I am a visually learner, so I often seek out explanations that provide a visual or image. When studying or learning about something new I do appreciate images accompanied by text. However, since I do learn better with images I tend to understand instructions or directions using just images. That being said, I DO think images are universally understood. I also believe that most people learn and understand things better when they have an image. Again, just my opinion. I don't know if I believe visual literacy is a priority. I am however, grateful that people, designers, workers, supervisors, etc. also utilize visual representations because if not, I would struggle.
ReplyDeleteTo reflect back on the comment about "superficial skill," I think that has something to do with the laziness of people in society. Due to the fast paced technology driven society we live in, many people would rather you just tell them what to do or how to do it instead of having to sit down and take the time to understand on their own. This is just from experience and I'm also unfortunately guilty of this!
I am not sure that visual literacy is a priority in today's culture but I don't think that it is a superficial skill either. I think there are certain visuals that people know like the back of their hand and understand it meaning quite well. For example, if you think about driving around town there are constant visuals that evoke feeling and meaning to people. We have all been drilled since we were young about the meaning of a stop sign and we all understand when you see McDonald's golden arches that you are near food. As far as advertisements go I think that the majority of the population are not as visually literate as they should be but I also think that is what gives the advertisers and designers an upper hand. They know how people think and how to persuade them through images to buy their products and it works.
ReplyDeleteWell, I am going to weigh in on this discussion. According to the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, visual literacy, is a competency that students need to acquire in order to be competitive in the workplace after graduating from high school. In addition, the American Society for Training and Development listed visual literacy and graphic design skills in several categories of competencies required for e-learning design, development, and management. If you are not able to analyze, critique, interpret, evaluate, and create visual representations of information, you will be unable to carry out many common tasks in the workplace - like making sense of graphs and metrics. If you have any doubt about the importance of visual information in the workplace, check out the work of Edward Tufte - http://www.edwardtufte.com
ReplyDeleteVisual literacy is more apparent than many realize I think and this article tries to make this clear. Having the visual skills is important as we are either 'producers' or 'consumers' of the visual media or literacy. For example, creating a document such as an essay still requires an amount of visually literate skill. Font, spacing, and placement of text all follow certain guidelines from MLA, APA, etc... However, these guidelines sill adhere in some sense to what we're learning about in class. The action principles all require this.
ReplyDeleteIn a broader sense of the more visual aspect of images and placement of design, we see it everyday, good and bad design. But how much do we notice? Most street signs are in Helvetica font. Why? It's most conducive to quick processing in our brains. When we see bad design such as a poor magazine cover, sign, label and so on, then we start to see how important visual literacy must be. As mostly consumers of the literacy it's important that the makers have the skills. But the consumers must also know how to read design because I think at some point we all will act as 'producers' of visual literacy at some point in our lives. Sometimes we may just not know it.
"Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art... It has no survival value; rather it is one of those things that give value to survival." C.S. Lewis
ReplyDeleteObviously, this discussion is not about friendship, but it is, at least partially, about art. Is visual literacy necessary? For the 33% of the population in this country with a college degree (and even fewer percentage with graduate degrees) answer is "probably." It depends on the job. For us in Ed Tech and AHRD, yes, absolutely. For the majority of the US population, maybe not. But how much more enriched are our lives because of it! As the quote above states, it gives meaning to the survival - however, it's a bit further up the hierarchy of needs.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Eric, in the sense that I think visual literacy is more apparent than many realize.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, I think visual literacy has a lot to do with culture. What an image represents for one culture may certainly be different for another. That is why it is important for designers to consider their target audience, and predict how the images will be interpreted by consumers to the best of their abilities. We all know this.
For consumers, I think many may not feel like visual literacy is a huge priority--but that is only because I think consumers take in visuals instinctively and naturally. Visual literacy is a part of everyday life--whether it be part of the workplace, in advertisements, etc.
Bradford's post raises an important set of questions about how one may understand or decode an image. While this post has produced a lively discussion, the article by Mr. Pauwels falls flat as an academic endeavor. As in one of my past lives I studied rhetorical theory at Ohio State and have many opinions about overlapping areas in visual communication and rhetoric, I was interested in reading this article. My interest was further piqued by the fact that Mr. Pauwels has an academic position at a large European institution-- I was sure he would have been steeped in the Structuralist and post-Structuralist theories stemming from and still prevalent in European higher education.
ReplyDeletePauwels seems only to pay lip service to these theories without really understanding that mid-century modern intellectuals have already developed frameworks to explain that with which Pauwels grapples-- "basic components of the concepts of visual literacy/competency"-- but for which he never provides a thorough exploration (Pauwels, 83).
For example on page 82 of his article, Pauwels seems to be edging toward a Marxist method for understanding the cultural capital of an image when he writes, "Visual cultural objects are not merely innocent reflections of cultural beliefs and values, but sometimes also emanations and tools of ideologies." In my opinion, this statement has some interesting implications about how one might analyze an image through a Marxist framework: How does the image represent cultural capital in society? Does it support or subvert the cultural hegemony? How does the production, proliferation and content of an image represent class structures and movement of capital in our society? Instead of exploring these interesting implications of his statement, Pauwels just seems to include that sentence out of some sort of obligation to recognize a Marxist perspective, as if his article would not be fashionable without such a reference.
I use this example only to point out the lack of academic rigor in the article; not to favor a strictly Marxist framework for interpreting images, although this framework does produce insight into representations of societal power structures in images.
I believe that much of the ground work for what Pauwels wants to do has already been laid by the Structuralist linguistic theories of Saussure and further explored by Roland Barthes in his post-Structuralist theories of semiotics. In brief, semiotics uses the concepts of the sign, signifier, signified and referent forms. As explored in Barthes' 'Camera Lucidia' and 'The Rhetoric of the Image' these concepts can be used to analyze an image as well as speech.
I think I will explore this topic in more detail in my main posting where I will propose a course entitled 'Visual Rhetoric.'
Matt