discussion questions answer three

2. Do you interpret a passage differently depending on the typeface that is used? Do you take things more serious if they are written in typeface for extended reading?

The short answer is: Yes. Actually, to be honest though, the different typefaces do not affect me as much as the knowledge about what I'm reading. If I think that the reading is serious and boring topic, that is how I would treat the reading- in a serious and boring manner- and vice versa. Typefaces do matter, of course. For example, if it is written in Gothic characters, then I would probably treat it as less important than say, if it is written in Verdana (which is my favorite font, by the way). And for some reason, I'd treat Times New Roman as being more serious than Verdana. Or on a different spectrum, I'd treat Comic Sans as being used for something funny and satirical.

Going off on a tangent, I really wonder how each typeface affects the reader though (I mean, to what extent). Is it because some are more readable than others? Is it because it looks more "funny?" What defines how the reader perceives the kind of font he/she is reading?

Well, just something I had in mind.... this font-analysis thing is kind of interesting.

discussion questions reading three

1. Why does Wysocki need to have gazillion criterias for analyzing media (of texts)? (and write 1000-word-long reports about a single page)... Do you think that all of those pages/media put that much effort into analyzing its impact when designing them? (Think about it, those magazine companies have to generate HUNDREDS of pages a week...)

2. What is your favorite font style (typefaces) out of everything Wysocki has mentioned ? (script, gothic, postmodern, roman, modern, slab serif, egyptian, sans serif, etc)? Why?

3. "The pleasures of visual composition and rhetoric are many, and are of particular use when they help us see and consider how we have become and continue to be who we are." Do you agree or not? What kind of meaning do the "pleasures" (of visual composition and rhetoric) have for you?

stencil project!!!

First, I'll start off with explaining what I was trying to do... Orignially, I was thinking of doing "life's good as long as the leaves are green," but on the second thought, I had no idea how I was supposed to approach it- in addition, I realized that it would be so hard to try to cut out detailed parts with an exacto knife( although I used a really small one!).

So, I changed my idea to "life's all about arithmetic." The idea is, that people these days strive to add more to their possessions (add money), to lose(subtract!) body weight, divide time (to manage it better), and stop multiplying (reproduce). It was something that me and one of my closest friend liked to do- to do a series of "life is...." rants. There were so many of those we came up with/found on internet, and we eventually realized that every one of those were basically the same thing. But it just happened that there were a few of them we thought were legite, and this quote was one of them. Now, I don't talk to the friend anymore, because we had to come to different universities and because we had random arguments about nothing significant every other day. I don't think it is that relevant, but I thought I should say something about why I decided to choose this particular topic.

I thought I'd just come up with symbols that represent each of those pairs and pastel them onto the illustration board because it would be really hard to do just by cutting everything out on a gigantic paper (instead of cardboard, because I realized soon that the exacto knife I bought was a bit too small to be used on cardboards... refer to the picture above).

I was not trying to make fun of the society or trying to make a grandeur statement about life- it was just something I felt was true, and something I wanted people to know (Which is why people generally write graffitis in the first place).

I think that my design would be most suitable for somewhere in the streets where a lot of people pass by. Preferrably somewhere on the sidewalk, if possible.The reason being, that I am not really making any political or social statement- I'm just trying to make a statement about my view of life, which I believe is something everyone can relate to. It is aimed more towards average audiences so that they have something to may be think about when they are going to work, in a rush to get to their appointment, or vice versa. Somewhere like a dark alley or back street would not work, since the point of doing this was so that normal people can see. If it was something like cool graffiti that serves to provide artistic joy, then it would fit into those places, since those seem to typically be the place for those underground artists.

The "problem" that my illustration is supposed to address is that of people leading a normal, boring life. I just wanted to poke fun at the people having such busy life, so that they can think about deviating from those norm and may be entertain themselves with things other than earning for their living, losing weight, managing time, and vice versa. After all, we were not put here to live like machines- we have the right to explore the beauty of life and take advantage of them. Once in a while, I think, everyone should just put their work down and get away to France for a romantic vacation with his/her lover(s).

discussion question reading two answers

1. What do you think you would put out there as a message in graffiti?

Well, I would put out something really, really random, as I have nothing that I would like to share with the public. But of course I think the better question is whether I would write a graffiti in the first place. I have nothing to gain from doing so... and my reasoning:

1. I suck at drawing, so I am going to end up embarassing myself...

2. Even if I was good at drawing, it would take up quite a bit of time to paint a decent graffiti, and I rather be doing other productive(or at least remotely interesting) things during that time...

3. And even if I was good at drawing and I derived immense pleasure from graffiti-ing, I would be vandalizing public property most of the time, which is not very cool. I believe in the freedom of expression and I respect street art, but I believe grafitti-ing should be done within the limits that I do not limit other people's freedom to NOT get annoyed at looking at the graffitis....

And that's just about everything I wanted to say... yeah...

graffiti analysis

i found this on green and wright... in front of freestar bank... someone seemed to have spray-painted it on the wall.

actually, i'm not too sure what the graffiti is saying... it seems to be GIHFS, which is definitely something too complicated for me to understand. i don't think it has any significance whatsoever, apart from may be that whoever spray-painted it must've been gramatically challenged and frustrated, seeing how he/she is going around vandalizing public property.

discussion questions second reading

1. What are some of the common things in life that we overlook? Why is it important that we do not do so?

2. "Only language tries to tell us what we see. Language does not simply, or even actually, identify things. Rather, language itself raises the question of definition." What does the author mean by that language does not "identify" things? Do you agree/disagree?

3. "For us, language is full of culture and history, but it is also full of ambition and enigma." What is your opinion about characteristics of language and its landscape?

discussion questions first reading answers

from megan's blog

3. On page 48 Bolter talks about how the goal in Disney's Toy Story is to make the computer disappear and appear as human-like as possible. Does this suggest an acceptance by society of the concept of artificial intelligence?

I don't think it implies either case (accepting or rejecting artificial intelligence). I just think that the movie was just one of those that stimulates childish imaginations- when I was young, at least, I wished that my Lego blocks will come to life at certain point. Take example of just about any animation movie involving non-human objects- they're all human like, and they act human. It would not be so interesting if say, the animals only barked and meowed the entire movie (we just don't understand... hence talking animals). The point I'm getting at, is that Toy Story was just made that way for marketability(or comprehensibility, I suppose), but is not indicative of our attitude towards artificial intelligence (concept of).