image/text

I don't see anything wrong with an interactive novel.
Personally, I loved Cathy's Book. I thought the pieces of evidence that came with the book only helped to enrich the experience of reading it- instead of imagining the pictures, the notes, the websites, and the voicemails, we were given them to look at for ourselves. We could draw our own conclusions, and then test them out by reading the book.
Even though there was some disappointment- I didn't imagine Victor looked the way he did in the photo we had to piece together- overall, the evidence helped make the story more real for me, and I found myself treating it as more of an experience, more interactive, than other fictional novels I've read, where everything is left to the imagination.  read more »

In response to both Jennilee and Keyla's blogs, I must also agree that Alice's Adventures in Wonderland is a magnificent representation about the discussions we have in class.

Throughout the story, the relationship between image and text are constantly changing. As both have previously stated, Carroll worked closely with Tenniel to create a symbiotic relationship between the text and the images. I would describe this book as having an image/text relationship at some moments, an image-text relationship at other moments, and every so often an imagetext relationship.

For example, due to the close working relationship between the author and artist, the images and text are co-dependent. We read the episode of the caterpillar and see the episode in cartoon form on the same page.  read more »

Brand logos are probably the most evident examples of imagetext at work. Elements of text (language, words, names, letters) and elements of image (color, shape, visual structure) become co-dependent and create a new, instantly recognizable hybrid form, and ultimately, the logo itself becomes a standalone product, capable of manipulation while still retaining recognizability. Google, for example, changes its logo somewhat during important events. A snowman might adorn one of the O's during Christmas season, or a turkey and a cornucopia might decorate the G and E, for example. Since the basic elements of the Google logo (font, structure, color) remain the same, our minds still process the input as a play on the original logo, rather than an entirely new logo altogether. The most fundamental elements of imagetext persist.  read more »

So during class this week I found myself thinking of comic books for examples of image-text and typography. More specifically, I found myself thinking about Neil Gaiman's Sandman. For those who have never read it, I offer a link of a scan of one of the pages.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v88/sonokitsunekono/Comic%20Scans/del1...  read more »

In class today we looked at the board and there was an example of how image and text can clash. I think it said something like, “capital letter a” and “lower-case letter A”. There was also an example of a large capital letter B, with the words, “this is not a B”. I don’t think I need to explain much more, you guys were in the same class I was. But, these exercises did make me think of a science project that my next door neighbor was doing back in High School. Just a quick summary: he took a poster board and but 30 colored squares on them; in the squares he wrote the name of a color that did not correspond with the actual color of the square. So, for example, he would have a blue square and he would write the word “green in the middle. The point of the exercise was to see how fast a person could correctly name all the colors of the squares without being thrown off by the word written in the middle. Surprisingly this was a very hard task. Your brain would see the color or the square but would instead say the word you saw, not the right color. Our discussion of image/text made me think of this exercise.  read more »

Although I was a bit confused in the beginning, I found Mitchell's arguments about the image/text relation very interesting once I got acquainted with the material. The most thought-provoking point he raised for me was the relationship between images and text when referred to as imagetext. I had never before thought of the similarities between the two because I'd always regarded them as separate mediums of expression. After reading Mitchell, however, I realized that images and text are inextricably linked. I know he doesn't explicitly state which theory is best, but of the options given (image/text, image-text, and imagetext), I think imagetext is the most appropriate. Mitchell brings up the point that both images and text feature each other intrinsically in their purest form. A novel filled with text cannot help but evoke certain images with its language and descriptions. The very point of metaphors and other figures of speech is to illustrate a point by painting a vivid picture. The pictorial elements conjured up in the minds of readers are a direct manifestation of the presence of image in text, especially when coupled with the visual elements of typography.  read more »

As a photowriter, I find myself highly intrigued by Mitchell's article--I've been attempting to research the image/text relationship for the past year or so because I myself create works that juxtapose text and image. I dislike the stratification of the two disciplines--the "sense that verbal and visual media are to be seen as distinct, separate, and parallel shperes that converge only at some higher level of abstraction" (Mitchell 85 [coursepack 24]). While the use of text is permissable and even vaguely encouraged in the art world, it is seen as an outsider by most members of the community. They view written word as an add-on; yet once it is involved in a work, it becomes critical in some (usually) abstract fashion. It is a "novel...detail" that gets everyone excited and concerned--artificially so (Mitchell 86). Image/text is a cause for chatter, for discussion that circles only the supporting role of the text.  read more »

I find it rather odd that there are no pictures to accompany W.J.T. Mitchell's "Beyond Comparison: Picture, Text, and Method." For an essay on the interconnectivity of images and text, it seems to be quite limited in its presentation. In the description of Sunset Boulevard, Mitchell demonstrates how a primarily visual work can be supplemented by and (to an extent) converted into an almost entirely textual form, but there is no complementary visual illustration of a text-based work, such as Chatman's diagrams of narrative theory. Mitchell does not even provide stills from the film, so those of us who have not seen it depend on his words to form our mental image of the scenes.

Mitchell's words seem to be arguing that images and text can and should be studied in relation to one another, but the essay doesn't look like it is terribly concerned with visual media. The cost of printing a image is significantly greater than that of printing text, and a low-quality image would likely do more harm than good to the argument, but by restricting the essay to text, Mitchell seems to have devalued pictures, thereby undermining half of his thesis.

"The claim that all media are mixed media, all arts composite arts, may actually sound like common sense to a generation raised on MTV" (Mitchell 107 [Coursepack 35]).

Yes, it does sound like common sense to me. But, no, it's not because of MTV. I know that Mitchell probably meant no offense by that comment -- it was probably just an attempt to connect with humor or popular culture, but I really think that more credit should be given to my generation and our culture that goes beyond MTV. I like Mitchell and definitely agree with his comments in "Beyond Comparison." I guess, first of all, I just wanted to expand on his comment.  read more »