Are ya winnin’ son?

The way that young people consume media and news has changed drastically as a result of the internet. Memes have an incredible influence. Not only do they convey information but they also shape the humor and opinions of those who consume the memes. I end up first learning about global events through memes, checking real news sites later. Depending on what is made into a meme, they can show the political stances or important societal issues of the time. For the writing to be the most effective in a meme, it should be minimal yet fit the underlying format. Less text allows a meme to be read and understood quickly, maintaining that humorous element.

Some memes are made up of just words with no image. However, visual elements play an important role in the majority of popular meme formats.As with textual elements, they have to fit the format and relate to the text. Both visual and textual aspects are important to analyze in regards to meme creation. The format often has a specific tone and, combined with images or text, the meme should convey information in a humorous manner.

TikTok is redesigning memes. Now, memes can be just as much about the audio as they are the visual and textual elements. How do you think this will impact the study of memes in the future?

Interaction/Interactivity

In Ancient Rome, there were five key canons of classical rhetoric. One of these key canons, delivery, needs to be re-theorized for the digital age. When writing was written to be spoken, delivery obviously held rhetorical importance. Verbal and non-verbal cues played a major part in presentation, almost just as important as the words themselves. As writing is transformed to fit the internet age, delivery–with the absence of both verbal and nonverbal cues–needs to be reimagined. Porter argues that “digital delivery” should be viewed as rhetorical knowledge. Instead of giving up due to the lack of delivery, the concept should be adapted to fit the new way that audiences consume language. He presents a theoretical framework for digital delivery consisting of five key topics—Body/Identity, Distribution/Circulation, Access/Accessibility, Interaction, and Economics—and shows how each of these topics can function strategically and heuristically to guide digital writing.

Interaction/interactivity, refers to how users engage interfaces and each other in digital environments. While body/identity is a key topic routed in traditional Roman delivery, interaction/interactivity is routed in the modern digital age. According to Porter, the term “interaction” as a rhetorical topic pertains to how humans engage with computer interfaces in order to perform various actions and how humans engage other humans through digital spaces. There are endless possible ways that a user can engage with a digital space and that audiences can decide to consume. Because of this, writers in the digital age need to consider what kinds of designs will enable and encourage the kinds of audience interactions desired. This is what transforms the idea of interaction/interactivity into a rhetorical idea. Writers can choose to have more emphasis on the highly interactive forms of design that critically engage the audience and that even invite them to add to the information. This “critical engagement” can be done by commenting on a published post or co-producing content themselves. Digital information designed in ways that interest and engage audiences and encourage them to actively participate seem to be more effective than designs that position the audience as passive consumers of information.

Do you find yourself critically engaging with content like how Porter writes? Or do you prefer to be a passive consumer of content, liking and retweeting for example but never posting your own stuff?

The People Want Agency

With interactive text-based games like those mentioned in “Harvesting Interactive Fiction”, the narrative is the focus. There are no major visuals or audio, just words–and each and every word holds importance. This style of gaming is beneficial for players who want something story-driven. Everything is described using words, so the player creates their own image within their mind and spends more effort reading than engaging in actual gameplay. For virtual reality (VR), the world is presented to the player and they have to engage with it themselves. Any direction or description is usually auditory so as not to break the immersion. VR is the favorite of curious players. With novels, the descriptions are entirely text-based, which is similar to the text-based games. However, because it is a novel, the world building is a lot more extensive and there is a main character that is not the person reading. It is a story that can be just as intricate and compelling, but it is a story happening outside of the reader.

At the core, all fiction is trying to tell some sort of story. There are endless ways to do this, but the basis remains the same. Because of this, I believe that interactive fiction is applicable to many different types of media. The goal is to tell a story with choices. Multiple different platforms have accomplished this. There are already interactive text-games, movies, PC games, VR games, books, mobile games, and console games. You can even play interactive fiction games with smart-speakers, which makes the entire story audio-based. Creators continue to innovate and find new ways to incorporate interactive fiction in new ways. I used to think an interactive movie would be impossible, yet Black Mirror’s Bandersnatch proved me wrong.

If a game is interactive and has multiple different endings and storylines, does that make the game more valuable to you? Do you like having agency over the character’s actions or do you want to sit back and experience the predetermined plot?

Serif Better Watch Out

I played the “I Shot the Serif” game which focused on the ability to discern between serif typefaces and sans serif typefaces. I did really well at the game and was surprised at how fast I could pick out the serif typefaces, especially when there were 26 letters to look at. While I knew the different between serif and sans serif already, there were a few times with “I” specifically where I mistakenly thought that it was in a serif typeface. Because of this, I think that I did learn some new differences between the two typefaces and I got faster at telling the difference.

I tried some of the other games and, to be honest, they were boring or didn’t really teach me anything. “I Shot the Serif”, at least, did have some educational value while remaining a fast-paced and engaging game. I was having fun and learning–about typefaces of all things. This game, I believe, is a helpful addition. The style of progressively getting more difficult keeps it from getting repetitive and then the content becomes more challenging. Too many of them did feel less like a game and more like a slow assignment. However, that could just be my terribly short attention span coming into play.

We Stan Canva

I love Canva. Always have. As is with any Canva project I have done, I was able to complete my task fairly quickly and easy, coming out with a fairly professional looking ad. Working with the templates was nice, since it gave me a starting point from which to jump off of and customize to fit my personal tastes. When I use Canva for my job, I am given a template where I just plug new information and pictures into, making it nice and easy to generate monthly flyers that all compliment each other. Plus, I can easily generate my own QR codes and embedded links in a PDF. Sometimes I just don’t want to have to become an artist just to make a basic flyer or ad, and Canva is perfect for those instances.

I must say, however, it was definitely harder to break design rules using Canva than, say, using Pages. Canva doesn’t have as many options to let you go crazy-go stupid and, if they have a design that is nice and awful, it’s not free to use. I tried to make my bad design look as realistically terrible as possible. Instead of having a bunch of overly saturated images and a novel’s worth of text like with my deer disease flyer, for my ad using Canva, I had to mainly focus on nonsensical placements and little contrast. I probably could have dug deeper into the system and come out with an even worse ad, but something about Canva makes you just want to not put too much effort into piling on content.

Based on the readings and on personal experience, Canva is not great for large, multipage projects or projects that need to be unique. Large professional projects more sophisticated technology with options for little details. Because the designs are used by thousands of people and businesses, the logos and templates are seen everywhere. There are some templates people use so often, I know the poster was made on Canva the second I see it.

Have you had to use Canva for a job or other academic project before? Did you use a template then, or did you free-hand it?

“Baddie” Type 😩

When Nichols mentions “tactical type,” he refers to “bad type” when used for a specific reason in a non-traditional fashion. Using “tactical type” is manipulating the way that such “bad types” are viewed and the emotions they illicit and using them for the benefit of the author or designer. As an example, Nichols brings up the website from the beginning of the chapter: the atrocious-looking M.D. Global medical research site. Based on reflection, he said, he ended up seeing a lot of rhetorical thought being put into the website’s design regardless of whether or not he personally found it effective or appealing. The website is attempting to help make arrangements for a loved one’s remains and persuade people to allow strangers to experiment with those remains. Because it’s such a somber topic, the use of “friendly” typefaces and designs may help balance out the vibe of the website, despite those typefaces usually being considered “bad” or “unprofessional”.

With regards to my own approach to writing and design, I always steer clear from fonts with too much personality. I don’t like change and I like the safe route. I do think finding smart ways to use “bad type” is exciting. It feels like getting to be a kid again and using Papyrus or Zapfino at every change I got, but that doesn’t inherently mean it’s childish. There is substance to the rhetorical use of “tactical type” and I feel like the use of it can skillfully add to a design’s reception.

Have you strayed from the more fun “bad types” as you got older? If you did, how does that make you feel after reading the article?

Times New Roman is Valid

Maybe it’s because I’ve been indoctrinated as a result of having to use Times New Roman for academic assignments, but I think TNR is fine. Even when it came to the argument over Comic Sans I don’t feel any real strong feelings. To me, they’re just fonts. I’ve never felt any particular strong emotion towards or against TNR but I certainly don’t consider it “staring into the void”. It’s the default font for everything I do unless otherwise stated. Times New Roman is classic and I like classic things. Sometimes I find that I want something a little different and that’s when I turn to Helvetica or Baskerville. But I do not find anything inherently wrong with Times New Roman or its extended use. Times New Roman defines every letter and is easy to read. However, Baskerville can sometimes be a little too skinny and the italic letters can run into each other. Times New Roman has its prominent place in typography for a reason. There’s no need to try and fix what isn’t broke.

For my Mini Analysis and Proposal I will probably use Helvetica just because I am not a big fan of change, so I’ll go for the next best accepted font that has a familiar sense of professionalism. Helvetica may be a bit overrated in the eyes of many, but if I have to change from Times New Roman than I guess Helvetica is the next best thing. I don’t need a font with too much personality that’s overly distinctive for a school assignment, and I like my assignments to look as if they go together. I save visually appealing fonts for personal projects. I’d choose Baskerville but it’s on Butterick’s C list (can’t imagine why) so I’d rather take the safe option of choosing a font from the A list.

Do you have a font you like to use that you were surprised to find in a lower category on Butterick’s list? Do fonts evoke emotion in you at all?

Nobody is Born With a Style or a Voice

In Steal like an Artist, Kleon defines “good” stealing as copying, imitating, and emulating multiple people or techniques in order to learn from them and incorporate them into your own style. “Bad” stealing is plagiarism: directly copying a single work and then passing it off as one’s own. He states that the distinction lies with the intentions behind the theft, what credit is given, and the amount of sources that the work draws on. Good stealing has positive intentions, credit is given when due, and the work is drawn from many sources. Plagiarism–the bad stealing–has negative intentions, credit is not given, and everything is taken directly from a single source; that’s when you know you’ve crossed the line. Cheng also differentiates the good type of innovative copying and straight plagiarism. While plagiarism is objectively wrong and should not be done, the good kind of stealing is practically a necessity. What matters is authenticity, whether or not you make your work your own.

With writing, things up for grabs can be different rhetorical devices, themes, or stylistic choices. However, copying word-for-word or directly replicating a plot is considered plagiarism. In design, templates are up for grabs, certain images, fonts, etc. Plagiarism would be copying a design so bad that it’s obvious to the public that a design was directly stolen instead of designed to mimic a known style in the profession. Because of this, I think it’s more accepted or easier to “steal well” in design. Design is more limited and is subject to more objective rules. You can use endless words to create an endless amount of stories but you can only do so much to make a flyer or a movie poster. This gives people more understanding when it comes to imitating others’ design work.

How are your judgements different when you read a story that feels like a discount version of another versus looking at a design that is so obviously stolen from something or someone else? Which one are you more lax with?

Now This Is It 👌🏻

This is some of the most fun I’ve had on an assignment in a while. I never realized how fun it could be to make something so overwhelmingly bad. It was especially fun making this flyer in particular because I’ve worked with KY Fish & Wildlife before. Every time I made something worse I was like “oh yeah, now this is it.” The rules I specifically broke were centering everything, having too many fonts, and having a busy background. I wanted to go for the “evil zombie deer” look so I tried to make it as chaotic as possible. I used seven different fonts and the worst colors for reading on the background. I even made the lines between the text shorter to make it extra hard to read. The text is centered and even split up in one section by the KY Fish & Wildlife logo. Once section of text has bullet points for no reason. I warped and oversaturated both the background and the logo but I left the Bambis alone.

I definitely think the problems with my flyer are mostly perceptual. The aesthetic and the time period of the design really have nothing to do with the issues of the design. The problem lies with the basic elements of the flyer: it’s incredibly hard to read, there is little contrast, the proximity is unorganized, and there is almost no similarity between the elements.

I feel like the sin of having a busy background has changed over time. Early advertisements were very ornate and almost had more of a focus on the detailed art in the background. Designs now favor simplicity with basic backgrounds that accentuates the information more. Since this has changed in the past, it is very likely that it may change again. There’s also the sin of avoiding warped or naked photos. Warped photos may never be in style, but naked photos are sometimes more aesthetically pleasing than photos with defined lines or boarders because they flow better with the rest of the design.

Is anyone else having trouble explaining perceptual issues? Like, talking about cultural problems is way easier than evaluating perceptual problems? Am I the only one whose brain goes blank when asked to discuss them?

How Am I Still Here?

For my memoir cover, I wanted to do something more simplistic with a small color pallet since covers like that have always stood out to me. I used Pages to make my cover since I have a Mac and I knew that I wanted a simple design consisting of few elements, so a more detailed program wasn’t really necessary. The focal point of the cover is the pink pills, making up the main part of the image.

The contrast is clear among the blue background and the white and pink test and picture elements. There’s a lot of negative space being used in the cover, which I feel accentuates the content that is there. I wanted to tie the text in with the image by using colors that were already there. I put the byline in pink instead of white to carry the pink throughout more of the image and because pink is my favorite color, so it’s a subtle nod to that. I used the tagline on the left to create balance in the design. The title is center as well as the pill bottle, then the tagline and byline and left and right aligned respectfully. I put a shadow on all of the text to match the shadows within the image, creating a sense of unity.

As you can tell, I did not include a picture of myself on the cover. It occurred to me that a cover with a picture of the subject feels “classier” while a cover without one feels more “modern”. Does the absence of a picture of the memoir’s subject make a difference to you? How can this feeling be explained in concrete descriptions?