Ch. 3 Hypertext and The Remediation of Print

http://prezi.com/ltd96tjbiajm/hypertext/

Observe: In this prezi, the ideas flow into each other one after the other, and are presented to the reader in a logical order that he or she can follow. However even though the ideas are presented in a logical sequence the physical action of moving from one idea to the next in the prezi is somewhat random, as is the size and orientation of the words. The prezi not only use quotes but also statements from the creators. This prezi also uses pictures and a video along with the written aspect.

Analyze: This prezi does not have a real argument to it, its main point is to explain the concept of hypertext to its viewer. The points addressed in the prezi explain what hypertext is as well as what it offers and how it is used. The presenters tried to argue that hypertext is a large improvement, being able to directly link one material to another.

Questions:

Where did this idea come from, as in what brought about the idea of connecting texts and ideas?

Can Hypertext worsen an argument by linking to an irrelevant piece of writing?

Along with Hypertext is there the risk that the reader continues to go from page to page and never returns to finish the original?

Is Hypertext a new thing, or just an easier way of doing something we had in the form of an index?

Does Hypertext change the way we write or does it just offer a new way to read?

Can it be said that this prezi is a form of hypertext, bringing you from media to media and idea to idea?

Blind Write

The following was typed without the use of a monitor:

            Every family has a storyteller, mine is no different. Although my mother would love to take the title, she is not, it is my brother Bill, the journalist, who takes this title for my family.Perhaps my brothers favorite story to tell is of a time when me an my brothers were younger. When we were kids the middle child of me and my two brothers, Patrick,  and my brother bill would fight, however pats tactics were a little different. As my brother will tell the story pat was thinking ahead, for on our deck, which was only a tep up, we had folding chairs which pat would throw at my brother billy’s knees. Bill will always blaim these instances for his bad knees and admit defeat to my pat. The way Bill tells story like these is with much emotion and humor and is something that has always affected how I myself write or tell stories. My brothers storytelling techniques have taught me  me how to use humor to drive a point or keep my listeners and readers interested in what is occasionally a boring subject.

Visual Argument On The Word Part

http://www.box.net/shared/hfuok2n9x5

            The existence of a visual argument is difficult to prove, however this was my goal when I created a project on a visual argument for the word part. In the project I attempted to argue the idea that everything is a part of something bigger. How I went about doing this was by first showing images that were purely isolated parts such as a slice of pizza, a car wheel, or one skyscraper in a skyline. These were my parts however I needed to show that they were all part of something bigger. To accomplish this I then took the pictures of the isolated parts and had the whole of the picture fade in around the, such as the pizza slice turning into a pizza, the wheel turning into the whole car, and the one skyscraper joined by others to make a city skyline.

            For an argument to exist it must be able to be rejected or accepted. In this project, the argument is that everything is a part of something bigger. In J. Anthony Blair’s article he expresses that “claims and reasons have to be propositional” meaning that you cannot simply present facts as an argument. In my project I believe that you can argue that the first set of pictures, what I call the parts, are not parts but whole things themselves although the presentation is trying to show that they are still a part of something bigger. For instance, it can be said that the example in the presentation of a lone skyscraper in a city skyline is simply that, a lone skyscraper. The presentation later shows that, the same skyscraper, is only one building out of many in the same picture. This is showing that although the argument exists that the first skyscraper is just a skyscraper it is also part of a bigger collection of buildings. So in the presentation there are two views that can be taken on each example, however the presentation is trying to make one of those views apparent as well as argue that view. I think that in this way my presentation meets Blair’s standards for an argument.

            One requirement for a visual argument is the argument itself and that it can be expressed. The argument in my project is that everything is a part of something bigger. The way that the project goes about showing this is that it takes the parts introduced in the first set of pictures, and in the second set of pictures transforms the one part into a whole of something else. The project clearly expresses this in the transformation of one part into the bigger picture. When the part transforms into the bigger picture it is showing how it contributes to the whole, and that that one part in needed. This is how the argument of everything being a part of a bigger picture is presented in the project.

            The project was not set up to be predictable, but rather to lead you to its point step by step, picture by picture. However once the viewer understands the pattern of how each part transformed into the whole picture it was taken out of then it becomes predictable. At this point you stop seeing each picture as just one part, but what it is part of. Once the viewer starts predicting the part as what it is part of then they are agreeing with the argument that everything is a part of something else, and they are now looking for what the images are a part of. The final transition of images is from a picture of a woman to a picture of earth, implying that each person is part of the earth. This final transition is attempting to bring the viewer to recognize a common idea that we are all part of a global community, so that the viewer see’s themselves as a part, as well as see what they are a part of. In doing this, the presentation feeds on the common idea that most are familiar with to personalize its point.

            In setting up my project, the organization of the pictures was crucial to my method of argument. As Gunther Kress said “Meaning… is attached ‘being first’ and to ‘being last’” which is something that held very true in the presentation of my argument. My project was structured to show isolated parts at first, and then show each of these parts fading into a whole of something bigger. However if I were to reverse the order in which I showed these two things, the whole picture fading into one part, the message that would become more prevalent is that every whole can be broken up into parts, as opposed to everything is a part of a bigger whole. This shows how important the arrangement of images is in a visual argument, the same pictures could be present but in a different order and that would change the message a viewer would get.

            The visual arguments that were presented in class all presented each respective point well. The combination of the pictures in each presentation as well as how they were set up helped to lead the audience to the point as well as provide evidence to it. However without the multiple pictures and structure of the presentations I do not believe that the arguments could have been present without a verbal explanation. So although a visual argument is not as powerful as a verbal argument, in which you can outline your exact points, the visual argument can still present evidence to lead the viewer to a conclusion in an argument. However even though a visual argument may not be able to pinpoint an exact argument, it can transfer a way of thinking, emotion, or felling that may not be present in black and white words on a page. A visual argument is a unique way of presenting a point however the clearest method of argument is still verbally, but if you put the two methods together than the argument can truly be powerful.

  

Bibliography

Blair, J. Anthony. “Argumentation and Advocacy”. River Falls: 1996

Kress, Gunther. “Literacy In The New Media Age”. New York: Routledge, 2003

Faster Than A Speeding Book

            The combination of the computer and the Internet has definitely changed the way in which we receive and create writing in many ways. However perhaps the greatest way that this combination has changed writing is the speed in which it can be distributed. Thanks to the Internet we can post a piece of writing and it will be available for viewing in only a matter of seconds by an enormous audience. In the case of printed or handwritten writing you only have one copy of the work and must find a way to distribute it to a large audience and then have it shipped out, a process that may take days, or months just to distribute the material. However with the Internet I can upload this post tonight and my mother, who is around three hundred miles away, can read it a few seconds later. Distribution of the written piece is not the only thing that the Internet speeds up however. Although things such as letters to the editor have existed for some time comments and criticism have never been able to be viewed so quickly as they are by using the Internet. The Internet allows for comments to be put up almost instantly. The speed of the Internet is a great improvement over the speed of printed text, allowing for ideas to be distributed faster, and for feedback to be received faster.

Chapter Two of Writing Spaces

            In Bolter’s Chapter on writing as technology he argues that every instance of writing in history has been technological. Bolter first builds his argument on the idea that the word technology comes from the Greek word techne, which means an art or craft. In this I believe Bolter is completely correct seeing as writing is not something that we are born to do, but a skill that we learn. However even past this idea Bolter uses the point that even a modern day pen is technology, making writing with pen and paper, something that we see as traditional, writing with technology. The pen is not a natural thing, but rather a mechanized device that we have created to make writing easier. The word processor can be seen in the same light of the pen, it is not natural; it is something that we as humans created to make writing simpler for ourselves. So in this sense it is not writing with technology that is new to us, but rather the form that the writing is in is the change, such as being on paper, or on a screen. The computer and Internet create a new medium in which we can receive and create writings, however the technological aspect of writing is nothing new to the history of the written word.

Don't Worry Billy, I'll Answer

In the last three stanzas, what motivated you to turn the speaker’s attention to him/herself?

            I think that turning the attention to the speaker was an effort at ridiculousness. In doing this it just discredits the style of this type of poetry and makes it laughable. By bringing the attention to the speaker Collins is further discrediting this style of writing that he is trying to put down.

Do you have something against metaphor or simply the over-the-top or ludicrous metaphor?

            I don not believe that Billy Collins has anything against metaphors as a hole, but that he has something against this style of using metaphors. Collins is targeting this one ideal for metaphors, comparing a beloved to something otherwise random. This style is something that when truly analyzed does not have much meaning when it comes down to the picture of metaphors and I think that is what Collins is saying.

Do you always read poems critically; if so why?

            I think that Billy Collins, as a poet, would read most poetry rather critically, both so that he may find errors and so that he can find ideas. I think in reading anything critically you don’t only find things you don’t like but also things you wouldn’t change and you can learn from what you think is good as well as get an idea because of someone else’s ideas. However I think it must also be important to find mistakes so that when writing your own pieces you do not make the same mistakes.

Sample U

            In sample u, part four it says that the predictability of images is key to a visual argument. However I disagree, I believe you may be able to get an even stronger point across if the audience is left confused at first. In presenting the argument through predictable pictures you are telling your audience your point, no different then writing the phrase down and giving it to them. If you first confuse the audience on the other hand, when your point does become clear it allows them to have arrived to it on their own, creating a kind of “oh” factor. I believe that this “oh” factor creates a greater understanding and agreement from the audience that cannot be produced by pure predictability.