Re: [xmca] Re: literacy? and its meanings

[mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

Sure, I can agree with all of that, Jay.
For the blind literacy is not visual.
For those who cannot decode KILL THE DEVILS, there is not problem seeing
the squiggles. I have taught decoding visual advertisements, written an
article
on print and film, and like to think that I at least sort of understand a
tad
of the contemporary discourse (chatter?) about post-print literacies.

Are you proposing that without print literacy we would have pencilin or
quantum mechanics?

Regressive in so cal.
mike

But where I get off the train is

>
> I am sure that some people have thought about dumping Print Literacy in
> favor of more modern literacies. I once reviewed an actually rather
> brilliant book by Mihai Nadin called the Civilization of Illiteracy (by
> which he meant what I would call Post-Literacy), and the argument was that
> we were already post-literate in that it is really the wide range of
> semiotic literacies of all kinds that matters today, and within that print
> is just one component part and no longer The Literacy as it may have been in
> earlier times.
>
> I also once contributed to a book about media literacies in a
> "post-typographical" world, the editors choice of term, by which they meant
> something similar. And one of my most influential articles presents the
> basic thesis that scientific discourse was never a purely verbal-textual
> discourse, but by the nature of its objects of study, was always essentially
> multi-modal (verbal-visual-mathematical at least). The key idea here is that
> "print" (i.e. verbal text) cannot stand alone; that to get the meaning, you
> need to integrate across the modalities (language, image, mathematics).
>
> Now maybe print never did really stand on its own. Jim Gee has argued for
> example that in making meaning with purely verbal text we still envision
> images and run little "movies" in our heads in the process of disambiguating
> meanings and contextualizing what we are "reading". But I think we know that
> historically there was a period when Print tried to stand on its own, and
> that claims have been made for a long time, and very successfully, that it
> can and even should stand on its own. Personally, I think that Gee is mostly
> right in principle, contextualizing linguistic meaning does generally
> involve some nonlinguistic meaning resources, present or imagined, but that
> some kinds of very abstract discourse rely mostly on other texts for their
> contextualization, trying to create a closed world of linguistic meaning.
> Unfortunately, I also believe that the resulting discourses become un-moored
> from experiential reality and even from the virtual reality of imagined
> worlds.
>
> As I wrote before, every time I've tried to get a useful and believable
> definition of literacy, starting from print literacy, I've found myself
> winding up with something pan-semiotic. That doesn't mean that analytically
> separable semiotic resource systems, like language, and technologies, like
> "printed" verbal text (on Kindle or on kindling) don't have their own
> specialized functional affordances which are not easily substituted by those
> of other modalities. The "mot juste", the synthetic diagram, the
> mathematical-algebraic derivation, the engaging narrative ... they are all
> irreplaceable resources as far as I'm concerned.
>
> But none of them are also the last word in doing what they do. Defined
> functionally, I think we more generally find that multimodal solutions to
> functional tasks can work better and are often already, implicitly at work
> in what appear to be mono-modal works.
>
> JAY.
>
> PS. I agree that there is no clear-cut distinction among knowledge
> literacies and semiotic resource literacies, because knowledge is itself a
> resource in meaning-making (productive and interpretive), and even moreso,
> when we consider intertextual systems as resources, or narratives as
> resources. I once wrote a piece about this which no one seemed to
> understand, and I am not sure I understood it either. It involves
> re-conceptualizing knowledge as more like a discursive resource, and
> re-conceptualizing semiotic resource systems so that they can be more
> syntagmatic rather than, as canonically, primarily or exclusively
> paradigmatic.  It may be our intuitive sense of this that leads us to the
> metaphorical range we have for the term "literacy".
>
>
>
> Jay Lemke
> Professor (Adjunct, 2009-2010)
> Educational Studies
> University of Michigan
> Ann Arbor, MI 48109
> www.umich.edu/~jaylemke <http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke>
>
> Visiting Scholar
> Laboratory for Comparative Human Communication
> University of California -- San Diego
> La Jolla, CA
> USA 92093
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 22, 2009, at 4:56 PM, mike cole wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the comments, Larry. My comment was that LCHC had
> > a near-death experience. Its past, but with UC experiencing its own
> > near-death experience, no harm in practicing "nearer my lord to thee--
> > catchy tune. I see that Steve G has posted a 25 year old account of the
> lab
> > up to that time. Incomplete and audience-driven as that account was, some
> > relevant material-- thanks for pointing it out, Steve. There is also, at
> the
> > lchc publications link on the home page, a bunch of collective articles
> over
> > the year. New one coming along about now.
> >
> > About literacy and narrative and interpretation. I guess there are just a
> > whole lot of views of how to think about this issue. For example, in
> Liberia
> > the elder men had a special form of discourse,
> > meant, so far as i understand, to mystify others, signal their own
> > power and perhaps assess the quality of the palm wine. I suppose one
> could
> > say that they were literate in deep Kpelle. For sure, becoming literate
> in
> > English had its downside; few of those I knew at the time died of
> "natural"
> > causes, unless we want to count genocide as a natural cause among humans.
> >
> > I would be interested if anyone would like to defend the idea that its
> time
> > to jettison print literacy. What the heck, now that we have computer
> > literacy and film literacy and health literacy and financial literacy and
> > xmca literacy, why bother with fusty old print?
> >
> >
> > Myself, i have this really arcane idea that the symbolic resources of
> print
> > literacy and numeracy, you know, written records and musical notations
> and
> > that old stuff, have some properties that just might be foundational to
> > Youtube and twitter (maybe the latter is just parasitic). But, since, as
> > Latour has noted, we never have been modern, hard to be sure. May all we
> > need to be able to do is talk the talk. The walk will come courtesy of
> > Rupert Murdoch?
> >
> > Sure enough to think about.
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > mike
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Larry Purss <lpurss@shaw.ca> wrote:
> >
> >>     Mike
> >> Your framework is very helpful so we can talk to each other about
> literacy.
> >> The ability to read and write is the most common meaning to understand
> >> literacy.
> >> The concept of literacy as learning particular discourses or subjects is
> >> certainly the way postmodernism is framing literacy.
> >>
> >> I am also curious how these various conceptions of literacy are specific
> >> instances of Bruner's fundamental notions of narrative structures as one
> of
> >> the ways we mediate actions/interpretations through codes
> >> Your example in the phylogeny article where Japanese mothers refocus the
> >> triadic communication of self, other, object to re-orient towards
> (m)other
> >> while American mothers re-orient triadic communication towards the
> object I
> >> believe has profound implications for the narrative stories we compose
> and
> >> the psychological sense of self and intrapsychic experience of inner and
> >> outer as cultural constructions.
> >> If we don't want to conflate this form of interpretive activity with
> >> literacy we can recognize that the more particular types of  subject
> >> discourses are examples of the more abstract term narratives (as Bruner
> uses
> >> the term)
> >> Is Bruner's use of the term narrative similar to the notion of
> hermeneutics
> >> as fundamentally an interpretive act?
> >>
> >> Mike
> >> I also want to draw attention to the term "meso" as an intermediate term
> >> between micro and macro.  I consider architecture to be a particular and
> >> profound example of human artifacts which express human
> >> ideality (Bruner's "Possible Worlds")  When you mention that LCHC is on
> life
> >> support I wonder and reflect (I love the term "reverie") on how LCHC has
> >> evolved for the last 40 years and that architecture as shared space (or
> >> place) was foundational to its existence..  Architecture is a
> >> crystallization of reverie, artifacts, and social relations.  To
> understand
> >> the historical impact of LCHC at the meso level is central to reflecting
> on
> >> next steps.
> >> I don't know the politics of how LCHC was created and was able to
> continue
> >> throughout the following decades.  I also don't know the current forces
> >> aligned against the vision of LCHC.  However I personally believe the
> >> narrative power of LCHC and the impact it has had on pedagogy,
> psychology,
> >> communications, anthropology, cultural studies and other literate
> discourses
> >> is profound and can be articulated.  As an alternative narrative in the
> >> current cultural wars it may be possible to project this vision into the
> >> mass media and for LCHC to be recognized as a center of excellence as
> >> Obama searches for new models.
> >>
> >> Looking to the future and ways to support the continuity of LCHC I
> wonder
> >> if there is a continued need for reverie and considerations of action
> not at
> >> the individual level but rather at the meso level of architecture and
> >> location in space (place). I think about how other people who have a
> shared
> >> vision construct places (ie institutes) and then I think of how many
> >> people are promoting a relational paradigm shift.   I do
> >> wonder if  alternative narratives can emerge from private reverie and be
> >> located in shared spaces (places) at the meso level.  It is the level of
> >> intermediate community (Robert Nisbet) where cultural leverage can be
> >> applied AND SUSTAINED.
> >>  LCHC is living proof of this, as is CHAT which is in virtual shared
> >> space.  Ideality when shared and acted upon to create architecture which
> is
> >> inhabited has the power to counter reactionary narratives.
> >>
> >> I get inspiration for this view of the possible worlds created from
> >> narrative from a book called "Common Fire:  Leading Lives of Commitment
> in a
> >> Complex World" by L. Daloz, C. Keen, J. Keen, and S. Parks. (1996)  It
> is an
> >> anthology of the biographies of  inspired people acting on their visions
> to
> >> try to create a "new Commons" in a complex world.
> >> Larry
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> >> Date: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 7:01 am
> >> Subject: Re: [xmca] Fwd: Visual literacy? Surf an art museum - Lifestyle
> -
> >> SignOnSanDiego.com
> >> To: "Duvall, Emily" <emily@uidaho.edu>
> >> Cc: "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >>
> >>> Fuller references, Emily? It would be helpful.
> >>>
> >>> In general, in discussing this topic, I find it helpful to keep
> >>> in mind
> >>> three inter-twined conceptions of literacy in discussion of it
> >>> that lead to
> >>> confusion:
> >>> 1. the quality or state of being literate, esp. the ability to
> >>> read and
> >>> write.  2. possession of education: to question someone's
> >>> literacy.  3. a
> >>> person's knowledge of a particular subject or field: to acquire
> >>> computerliteracy.
> >>>
> >>> To me what is significant is the (perhaps necessary, see Larry's
> >>> remarks)conflation of being able to mediate
> >>> action/interpretation through a code
> >>> like kanji and knowledge about some topic.
> >>>
> >>> Forgetting this issue leads to people speaking past each other
> >>> with respect
> >>> to, e.g. computer literacy.
> >>> mike
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Duvall, Emily
> >>> <emily@uidaho.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> One of the more interesting experiences I have had is when I was
> >>>> preparing to teach a course on Visual/ Critical Literacy:
> >>> Using Picture
> >>>> Books, Comics, Graphic Novels, Anime, and Film in the
> >>> Classroom. I sat
> >>>> down with vol 1 of Bone and began to read. I ignored the
> >>> pictures and
> >>>> read the text. Zipping along, I realized (a) I didn't know
> >>> what was
> >>>> going on, and (b) I was bored. I went back and spent time with the
> >>>> entire text and am now thoroughly addicted. It really depends
> >>> on the way
> >>>> the pictures are used... in tandem, as conjoined text; as the front
> >>>> runner (as in children's writing where the pictures are the
> >>> important> aspect a story); or an add-in (as in children's later
> >>> writing when
> >>>> pictures illustrate, but don't really tell us much... they
> >>> fill up time
> >>>> in a classroom... "go back and illustrate"). Some texts, like The
> >>>> Invention of Hugo Cabret, weave words and pictures and you
> >>> need to read
> >>>> them both.
> >>>> I highly recommend Molly Bang's theoretical work (sorry if I am
> >>>> repeating anything already said, I'm jumping in)to really dig deeply
> >>>> into the pictures; her children's books are interesting as
> >>> well. Anthony
> >>>> Browne has some pretty amazing children's books...they are
> >>> edgy and
> >>>> post-modern at times.
> >>>>
> >>>> Meanwhile I have a doc student who is working on financial
> >>> literacy...> there are some fundamental elements of a literacy
> >>> that ring across
> >>>> domains it seems... like discourse, eh?
> >>>> ~em
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-
> >>> bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]> On Behalf Of mike cole
> >>>> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 5:05 PM
> >>>> To: Jenna McWilliams
> >>>> Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Fwd: Visual literacy? Surf an art museum -
> >>> Lifestyle> - SignOnSanDiego.com
> >>>>
> >>>> No doubt, Jenna.  And forms like Youtube allow for users
> >>> to be producers
> >>>> in
> >>>> a big way. But I see no need to knock museums and
> >>>> the pleasures of "reading" paintings that have endured over a
> >>> long time!
> >>>> (The cost can be pretty steep these days though).
> >>>>
> >>>> The "learning to see" theme runs through a lot of CHAT-related
> >>> work, and
> >>>> seems an endless source of insights.
> >>>>
> >>>> One way I find that i can learn a lot about paintings is by doing
> >>>> jig-saw
> >>>> puzzles. Jackson Pollock seemed a total fraud to me until i
> >>> had, with
> >>>> lots
> >>>> of friendly gossipy help, done a quite complex puzzle of one
> >>> of his big
> >>>> canvases. Now jig-saw puzzles require their own
> >>>> form of visual literacy, but what was amazing (a Klimpt also
> >>> provided a
> >>>> similar experience) was that I actually began to see nuances
> >>> in the
> >>>> paintings that i had simply never seen before. And once seen, the
> >>>> ability to
> >>>> see more deeply, at least for the given painting (after all
> >>>> generalization
> >>>> of the skill is a huge undertaking!)
> >>>> it sticks with you along with the belief of the possibility
> >>> that, say,
> >>>> a Russian 18th century icon may contain the potential for visual
> >>>> experiences
> >>>> that my naive eye, loving the combination of colors and
> >>> shapes, could
> >>>> not
> >>>> see.
> >>>>
> >>>> I hear what you are saying that I am seeing.
> >>>> :-)
> >>>> mike
> >>>>
> >>>> PS. Have you met Etienne Pelaprat, a great grad student here at
> >>>> UCSD, formerly in cogsci but completing degree in Comm, who
> >>> has moved to
> >>>> your fair city? If not, you should. He is rumored to be the sometime
> >>>> savior
> >>>> of xmca through his technical skills.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Jenna McWilliams
> >>>> <jenmcwil@umail.iu.edu>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Mike, you write:
> >>>>> "I managed a D+ in my one obligatory art producing class in
> >>> college (a
> >>>> work
> >>>>> later exhibited, by some really odd
> >>>>> error, in a show of student art which makes one wonder at the
> >>>> judgments
> >>>>> involved on either side of the
> >>>>> process!). I am a hopeless plastic arts producer. But not entirely
> >>>>> illiterate as a reader, finder of meanings."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's fair enough to argue that reading and writing are not
> >>> equivalent> forms
> >>>>> of literacy. But in this crazy multimodal culture of ours, where
> >>>> reading and
> >>>>> writing both require adeptness with design proficiencies (remember
> >>>> that even
> >>>>> the text we read on the screen is a digital product--the
> >>> 'translation'> of
> >>>>> code into a specifically designed visual format that we can
> >>>> interpret), what
> >>>>> we call "visual literacy" is increasingly an essential
> >>> component of
> >>>> BOTH
> >>>>> reading and writing. Visual literacy goes far beyond what we
> >>> learned> in art
> >>>>> class--the color wheel and all that.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In fact, it seems a little strange to link visual literacy to
> >>>> museumgoing.
> >>>>> I bombed art class right along with the best of them, and
> >>> success in
> >>>> art
> >>>>> class still wouldn't have prepared me to engage in the sorts of
> >>>>> communications platforms that have become the most
> >>> significant message
> >>>>> delivery systems. Indeed, design and visual literacy (or
> >>> whatever you
> >>>> want
> >>>>> to call them) skills are so embedded in communication
> >>> platforms that I
> >>>> find
> >>>>> myself making design decisions without a thought (as when I
> >>>> re-formatted the
> >>>>> chunk I quoted from the previous email in this thread,
> >>> because when I
> >>>> pasted
> >>>>> it in the line breaks got all funky--distracting for the
> >>> reader!). I
> >>>> don't
> >>>>> know if the fact that visual literacy (or whatever you want
> >>> to call
> >>>> it) is
> >>>>> embedded within reading and writing literacy practices
> >>> strengthens or
> >>>> weaken
> >>>>> the case for calling it a form of literacy; I only know that
> >>> it's both
> >>>>> important and different enough from reading and writing
> >>> skills to
> >>>> deserve
> >>>>> its own label, if only so we know how to talk about it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> visually,
> >>>>> jenna
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ~~
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jenna McWilliams
> >>>>> Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University
> >>>>> ~
> >>>>> http://jennamcwilliams.blogspot.com
> >>>>> http://remediatingassessment.blogspot.com
> >>>>> ~
> >>>>> jenmcwil@indiana.edu
> >>>>> jennamcjenna@gmail.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Dec 21, 2009, at 7:06 PM, mike cole wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The addition of production to definitions of literacy
> >>> is always a
> >>>> good
> >>>>>> move
> >>>>>> in my view, Jay. Reading is not equivalent to writing. In
> >>> the case of
> >>>>>> visual
> >>>>>> literacy and museum art, it seems like what is being
> >>> referred to is
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> reading half. At least i hope so. I managed a D+ in my one
> >>> obligatory> art
> >>>>>> producing class in college (a work later exhibited, by some
> >>> really> odd
> >>>>>> error, in a show of student art which makes one wonder at the
> >>>> judgments
> >>>>>> involved on either side of the
> >>>>>> process!). I am a hopeless plastic arts producer. But not
> >>> entirely> >> illiterate as a reader, finder of meanings.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> There is, a few blocks from you apartment, a show at the SD
> >>> Museum of
> >>>>>> Contemporary Art by Tera Donavan. I think you will find it as
> >>>> fascinating
> >>>>>> as
> >>>>>> I did. I plan to take the family during their visit.
> >>> Donovan take
> >>>> everyday
> >>>>>> objects (tar paper, straws, cups, and more) and creates
> >>> installations> with
> >>>>>> thousand of only one object aggregated in the most
> >>> fantastic ways.
> >>>> She
> >>>>>> states her goal as wanting to explore the properties of
> >>> objects seens
> >>>> as
> >>>>>> parts of very large populations rather than as individual
> >>> objects.> The
> >>>>>> effects she achieves are mind boggling with the play of
> >>> light and
> >>>> texture
> >>>>>> over surface sufficient to reorder our perceptions in ways
> >>> we could
> >>>> never
> >>>>>> anticipate.Again, art as tertiary artifact, re-admired.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Since you have written more on time scales, I'll stay away
> >>> from the
> >>>> topic
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>> general; we have agreed too often here to warrant repitition.
> >>>>>> But quite specifically, our work in creating the "Fifth
> >>> Dimension"> was to
> >>>>>> be
> >>>>>> able to study changes in a pre-pared system of activity
> >>> over a long
> >>>> time
> >>>>>> period (from inception to death) at several scales of time.
> >>> The idea
> >>>> was
> >>>>>> part of our interest in the failure of "successful" educational
> >>>>>> innovations
> >>>>>> to be sustained-- how did they die and why and how did their
> >>>> implementers
> >>>>>> enter in to and respond to the process. Still wrestling with
> >>>> analysis--
> >>>>>> lots
> >>>>>> of 5thD's were born and died but others keep being born.
> >>> Some are,
> >>>> today,
> >>>>>> strikingly like their originals in the 1980's, others have
> >>> morphed so
> >>>> that
> >>>>>> only a few features remain. The children participants, who
> >>> are almost
> >>>>>> impossible to track over time are now adults -- i sometime
> >>> encounter> one
> >>>>>> at
> >>>>>> ucsd. The college participants are parents I sometimes hear
> >>> from. All
> >>>>>> recorded in their fieldnotes written at the time. I have
> >>> some money
> >>>> salted
> >>>>>> away so that "when it dies" (or if i can manage to retire before
> >>>> doing so
> >>>>>> myself) I will have the full range of instances documented
> >>> and a lot
> >>>> of
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> data in digital form,
> >>>>>> so that I can look at that object from both ends of its
> >>> history. A
> >>>>>> preliminary report is in the book, *The Fifth Dimension*.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As to LCHC, that is another matter. It seems to me a
> >>> certainty that
> >>>> it
> >>>>>> will
> >>>>>> die. It had a near-death experience a couple of years ago.
> >>> As a way
> >>>> of at
> >>>>>> least marking its passing, a number of former and current
> >>> members of
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> lab
> >>>>>> are in the process of creating a book that traces its
> >>> origins and the
> >>>> many
> >>>>>> offspring it has generated. THAT collective narrative I
> >>> hope to live
> >>>> long
> >>>>>> enough to see come into being.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Now if Yuan or anyone would like to see LCHC live,
> >>> proposals for how
> >>>> to
> >>>>>> arrange that would of course be seriously entertained, and
> >>> perhaps> maybe
> >>>>>> even entertaining! I thought I saw a nibble at
> >>> collaboration on
> >>>> making
> >>>>>> XMCA
> >>>>>> a more powerful medium the other day, but it turned out to
> >>> be a
> >>>> mirage.
> >>>>>> So
> >>>>>> for now, we keep on keeping on.
> >>>>>> mike
> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Jay Lemke
> >>> <jaylemke@umich.edu>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks for the link, Mike. Was nice to see someone in the mass
> >>>> media,
> >>>>>>> affiliated with a newspaper no less, arguing for critical visual
> >>>> literacy
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> protect us from advertising!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Of course that is an old idea in visual education circles,
> >>> and it
> >>>> can
> >>>>>>> build
> >>>>>>> on the widespread folk-skepticism toward advertising.
> >>> Unfortunately> the
> >>>>>>> more
> >>>>>>> pernicious effects in ads are probably at subtler levels
> >>> than what
> >>>> basic
> >>>>>>> visual literacy skills can foreground.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "The ability to find meaning in images" is the definition
> >>> of visual
> >>>>>>> literacy used. That seems a little too basic. I think
> >>> everyone finds
> >>>>>>> meaning
> >>>>>>> in images, with or without any literacy education. Maybe
> >>> there is an
> >>>>>>> implied
> >>>>>>> emphasis on FIND, in the sense of digging below the
> >>> surface/obvious,> >>> which
> >>>>>>> would be better. But more recent ideas in the field put more
> >>>> emphasis on
> >>>>>>> visual production relative to interpretation, so I'd
> >>> probably go
> >>>> with a
> >>>>>>> definition more like "the skills of making meaning with visual
> >>>> resources,
> >>>>>>> for your own purposes", and include in that the meaning-
> >>> making we do
> >>>> with
> >>>>>>> others' images by way of interpretation, critique, etc.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Have you ever noticed that when anyone, docent, tourguide,
> >>> or just
> >>>> me,
> >>>>>>> speaks authoritatively about a painting in a museum, that many
> >>>> bystanders
> >>>>>>> seem to become interested in listening? People generally
> >>> seem to
> >>>> believe
> >>>>>>> that art images, at least, require some professional
> >>> interpretation> or
> >>>>>>> benefit from having specialist knowledge (esp.
> >>> historical). People
> >>>> also
> >>>>>>> seem
> >>>>>>> to enjoy visual interpretation more than textual. Textual
> >>>> interpretation
> >>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>> seen as superfluous, even obstructing to enjoyment of the
> >>> work. No
> >>>> one
> >>>>>>> really reads literary criticism, or book reviews beyond
> >>> the "it's
> >>>> good"
> >>>>>>> part. But people are fascinated by the exegesis of visual
> >>> works. The
> >>>> is
> >>>>>>> one
> >>>>>>> basis for the popularity of the DaVinci Code and similar popular
> >>>> works.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> And there is not a word about visual interpretation skills
> >>> in our
> >>>>>>> standard
> >>>>>>> curricula (meaning as practiced in schools, there are some
> >>> nods in
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>> official standards).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> JAY.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Jay Lemke
> >>>>>>> Professor (Adjunct, 2009-2010)
> >>>>>>> Educational Studies
> >>>>>>> University of Michigan
> >>>>>>> Ann Arbor, MI 48109
> >>>>>>> www.umich.edu/~jaylemke <http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke> <
> http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke>
> >>> <http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke> <
> >>>> http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke> <
> >>>>>>> http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejaylemke>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Visiting Scholar
> >>>>>>> Laboratory for Comparative Human Communication
> >>>>>>> University of California -- San Diego
> >>>>>>> La Jolla, CA
> >>>>>>> USA 92093
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> xmca mailing list
> >>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> xmca mailing list
> >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca