Shipka’s Sound Engineering article

My Questions

1. How much credit should be given to sound engineers in their sonic alterations of content that was not originally theirs?  Does this go along with our discussion of different sound elements from last week?

2. The idea of playing off of others’ weaknesses stems from Shipka’s example of Val.  To what extent should a person create a message specifically geared as a response to someone else’s negativity?  How blatantly negative should you be with broadcast or broadband media?

3. Stemming off this question, how often should irony be utilized in message presentation?  Sometimes, the message can get lost if the audience doesn’t understand the facetious combination of different media elements.

My Responses to Others’ Questions

In response to Ariel’s question, I do agree with Val’s decision to test her audience in whatever way she feels comfortable.  It’s her creation – she’s the one providing the experience and trying to derive meaning.  If she wants the project to go over enthusiastically, great.  If not, that’s fine too.  Whether she meant to have a dry presentation or not, I praise her for being original.

Richard Question #1 Response: I think that the latter appears to be true.  Academia has been transferred via scholarly writings for a very long time now and I think that because it’s been effective in the past, people assume that it’s the most effective way in the future.  I think McCloud’s cartoon article was incredibly effective because he used a different medium to convey intelligent information.  Maybe it’s a sign of the times that we as humans need the pictures he provides, but I think the contrary and I think McCloud would, too.  It’s a very important topic because it takes both dogged willingness to learn about a topic before thoughtfully applying it to a real-world experience.

#2 Response: I think that in order to attain genius status it is important that a person is in some ways self-taught.  This encompasses ‘just playing around’ because the more a person dabbles with an enterprise and becomes familiar with it on his own term, the more he makes it his own.  Practice makes perfect in all cases because by first knowing about a topic, you can then effectively take on variations of the topic.

#3 Response: I enjoy both playing around and reading linear text because they both offer different ways of thinking about our topic.  Whereas an essay requires critical thinking in an attempt to form an argument, there is also a need for more creative exploration.  I think that this class has offered more of the latter so far.

On Multimodality: When I hear the word ‘sound’, my first associations with the noun are the words ‘freedom’ and ‘nature’.  I also really like the adjective because it reminds me of safety, confidence, and preparedness.  In attaining multimodal soundness, I hope to incorporate a number of different types of noun sound in a comprehensive way that produces an adjective soundness that is obvious to my audience.

My take on class discussion

The more we talked during the class, the more intrigued I became with the topic.  Hannah, I think you really led the discussion well because at first our class was kind of stuck in the doldrums.  After some prodding and a clear display of excitement for the topic, I think that you engaged us into inspired conversation.  We started getting into more philosophical topics such as engaging your senses, applying theory into practice, and also campy Southern folk.  There wasn’t enough time to thoroughly talk about these topics but I hope we revisit them later on!

Response to McCloud Reading

Scott McCloud’s book, Understanding Comics, is so effective because it is both entertaining and thought-provoking.  Both of these qualities stem from how the book is framed; he uses a cartoon depiction of himself to narrate how icons reflect their creators’ propensities for art, nature, and ideas.  The book requires words and pictures to argue that the most intelligent comics deliberately use both forms of expression.

I loved the reading because the “this is not a pipe” logic forces readers to re-think their observations.  I thought that the realm of the concept versus the realm of the senses poses many questions about the human experience and reality.

This is not an argument

After reading the article, I’ve formed a number of questions about icons and symbols:

1) Amplification through simplification is an interesting concept because it suggests that a real person can change his image when there is a fictional representation of him.  What does it say about a person when they are caricatured on television shows like The Simpsons or South Park?  Does that person lose/ gain legitimacy as a human entity because he gives consent to an image that takes away from his agency?  Does it depend upon what the caricature represents?

2) “If who I am matters less [because the author is represented by a cartoon], maybe what I say matters more.”  This idea is striking because it highlights how messages’ effectiveness depend upon how the message is presented in the particular medium.  Why does a less personal message make a less effective message, as the author suggests?

In response to Annie’s question, I do not think that images will replace words completely.  However, it’s obvious that commercialism and advertising have led to fewer words and more images.  These images do not explain very much about the product, but they are effective because they encite desireable emotions within consumers.  Nike shoe commercials, for example, can show a man jumping on top of a building or running faster than a rain cloud can catch up.  This says nothing about why Nike shoes are better than Adidas shoes — people want to be able to defy nature, though, and the commercial makes them believe that some white Nikes can help them do just that.  I don’t think words will be replaced completely because of their ability to say what images can not.  The thrill of imagining what’s described in a text provides a necessary piece that an image can not supply.