Dank Memes and Cold Plums

I think the writing of a meme is important and understated. Of course, it has to be understandable, but it also needs to be short enough that people will read it instead of thinking “I didn’t log on social media to read a book.” It also kind of provides the punchline to the joke; without it, we (as meme consumers) don’t really know what we’re supposed to think.

The visual, on the other hand, kind of demonstrates how we’re supposed to react. It goes hand-in-hand with the text to make the joke. The picture also makes the meme immediately recognizable if you’re scrolling through social media quickly. So, if you saw a particular kind of meme and thought it was funny, you’d likely stop the next time you saw that kind of meme. Overall, it’s important that they make sense together to make it clear what the point is and what the intended reaction is. Just like any type of rhetoric, the audience also has to be considered. Some memes apply to a wide audience, while some are very specific to certain fandoms, political beliefs, etc. I think the power of memes is underrated because it really does shape opinions during a quick scroll on social media.

Do you think memes that appeal to a wide audience or a specific audience are more successful?

Roman Delivery

In Roman times, delivery was all about the “oral and bodily aspects of an oral speech or performance” (); it mainly referred to elements still associated with theater productions, which I used to do in high school. It’s all about how you use your voice and body to get points across. That includes obvious things like speaking audibly but also projection. how you say words. conscious gestures that you make, and the emotional impact of your delivery. I expected the article to argue that technology played the biggest part in delivery being “lost” but I don’t think that’s what he’s exactly saying. He seems to believe that treating the concepts of delivery as one set-in-stone set of rules rather than adaptable concepts is what degrades it; while that is done in technological settings, it’s definitely not exclusive.

Economics is all about the purpose of the audience and writer. It relates to monetary value but is more about social/emotional value that writers put into a piece which makes the audience “buy into” it. Porter argues that this relates to digital delivery because you constantly need to question the motivations behind online presences; a prime example of this is questioning why people post the content they do on social media. Is it because they want to make friends? Or seem progressive? Or disagree with their families? These motives play into the reliability of the author and affect reasons that “consumers” have for reading a piece.

We consider this concept of author’s purpose/reliability and writing for a specific audience every day. I’d say one of the most prominent ways I’ve had to do this was when writing a grant application in Dr. Rice’s Grant Writing class. It’s all about thinking ahead of how your audience will react and influencing them to give you the money you want.

Have you had a class or experience where writing for an audience was particularly important? If so, what was it?

The Beauty of Choice

I think interactive fiction and things like virtual reality games are two different medias that have the same goal in mind but go about achieving that goal in different ways. Both are meant to make you feel like you are in the world, but IF focuses more on emotion and mental commitment while things like VR specifically focus on physical interaction. You can’t literally look around you in an IF game and see the world as if it was reality, so words and choice options are very important.

Personally, I used to love those “choose your adventure” books. Nothing gave me more joy than hurriedly flipping to page 36 to see what happened next and after completing one story ending, I would go through and see the others. I have also been known to become emotionally invested in video games that offer a lot of choices (especially regarding interactions with characters) like Dragon Age or Skyrim. I think these demonstrate the same concept as the IF games; you make choices that your character (as extension of yourself) faces the consequences of and you are given just enough information to try to make that choice. Though it’s obviously just a game, I think most people take those decisions really seriously because you become so invested.

I think the physical type of interaction that VR games rely on is useful, but I think being emotionally and mentally invested comes from much more than that; it comes from the narrative and the text and that’s what makes you actually care about the story, world, and characters.

Have you tried any VR games and if so, what did you think about them? Do you think that’s the norm to strive for going forward?

I’m a Canva Fan

Personally, I really enjoy Canva. I think it has a wide enough variety of templates that you can definitely find one to suit your needs without being too basic. The templates are also so much easier to manipulate than ones on Word; I easily moved the text box around, changed the font/colors, and added more text than the template had without wanting to actually scream. I don’t find them restricting because they’re so easy to change; it’s more of a place to start, and then you change it as you need to.

I found it a little harder to break the rules on Canva. Since it is a template, it’s obviously meant to look good, so you have to work a little to make it look bad. At first, I only knew how to change the font and colors and off-center the text box. I figured out how to add background effects and “cute” stickers, so that made it a lot worse. I had to be very purposeful, though, to make it look bad. It’s much harder to screw up with you’re using a template (that already has specific background, outline, fonts, etc.) than it is when you’re starting from scratch. 

I think the main situation when you wouldn’t want to use Canva is when you need to use unique graphics and elements, because Canva only allows for prebuilt icons, stickers, and other design elements. In a different program, you can create whatever you need to. It also mentions that Canva wouldn’t be good for a large, multi-page design with very specific details. Finally, as with any template-based design, they do become repetitive because everyone uses them. The bottom line is if you need a quick design tool for a smaller business, Canva is your guy. However, steer away if you are constantly designing large documents with unique elements.

Do you feel more comfortable using Canva or your design program of choice? Which would you be more likely to use again in the future?

I Can’t Unsee That

I played the game Can’t Unsee and got a silver medal—yay me. It focused a lot on the small details of design; sometimes, I couldn’t even pinpoint exactly what the difference was between the two until after I clicked on one and then I really couldn’t unsee it. It also demonstrated how sometimes even extremely small details can have a huge impact on the overall effect of the design, especially if it is something (like Facebook) that we see often and internally recognize.

I got a 6880 on the game and I was so irritated when I missed one because it seemed so obvious afterwards. It did teach me to pay attention to small details, but it didn’t really teach why those details mattered; some were “right” and some were wrong, but why does the font of the “Search” text in a search box matter? Is it only because we are used to seeing a certain font or is there more to it? It didn’t really explain that.

I think games like this are fun to practice some concepts, but I do think they lose some educational value. Like I said, it did help me pinpoint small details and what the differences were but not exactly why it mattered. I think for a lot of these games, the “why it matters” gets lost in translation a little.

Tactical Type

“Tactical type” is essentially using certain typefaces that are generally perceived in certain ways (elegant, direct, friendly, etc.) to subtly impart meaning to text for a certain situation. This may be to subvert preconceived notions about the publisher; for example, a business may use a more “friendly” type like Comic Sans to avoid seeming too stuffy and uptight. The example of the church bulletin from the reading, with its mixture of fonts and features, also demonstrates this concept by seeming more human and relatable, something a church would of course want to portray. Nichols also mention that at first glance, the website of M.D. Global was absolutely ridiculous, and I thought the same thing. But he goes on to say that it is trying to “balance the somber formality of grief with the optimistic potential for one’s life to…make a positive difference” (Nichols 55) and that makes a lot of sense. So, tactical type can also be used to navigate tricky waters and balance two very different emotions/rhetorical situations.

In my opinion, there is something comforting about sticking to the more basic and unproblematic typefaces like Helvetica, but I also like the idea that I can use other typefaces that I like without getting a slap on the wrist. For example, I love the American Typewriter font but it’s just not something you see very often. Now, I feel like every font kind of has its appropriate situation and message, so maybe I can sneak that one in somewhere. 

Honestly, though, I still don’t like Comic Sans. I just don’t like looking at it.

What do you think about American Typewriter? What kind of situations do you think it could work in?

Don’t Force Me to Use TNR

I don’t have any particular negative feelings about Times New Roman. I do think it’s basic, but not in a bad way. It’s like your favorite pair of pants you can always come back to because they always fit; TNR just works and isn’t typically questioned because we’ve seen it so many times. The only time I have an issue with TNR is when people force me to use it! I have never understood assignment guidelines that are like: 11.5 font size, Times New Roman, blink twice and hop on one foot before submitting. The thing is, you only ever see a font specification on assignments with TNR… why? This just irks me. I do find it smaller and more difficult to read than some other larger and more widely-spread fonts, but it’s not like I start to read something and think “STUPID TNR”. Font isn’t something that stands out to me a lot unless it’s something wildly informal or weird, like Bauhaus 93 or whatever that one is that’s just symbols.

Anyway, for the Mini Analysis and Proposal assignment, I used a favorite of mine: Helvetica Neue. I have always liked this font because although it only expands the length of the document a little, somehow it looks so much bigger than something like TNR. I find it just the right mix of blocky and curvy, but it’s not too risky. It’s a little more pleasing to look at that TNR, but it isn’t too crazy, and it’s really easy to read in my opinion. Maybe I’m just basic because I know Helvetica Neue is still a commonly used font, but I just like it!

Why do you think some teachers specifically require TNR? Is it in the name of consistency, thinking TNR is the academic standard, or something else?

Absorb and Adapt

The authors separate “stealing” from blatant plagiarism in some fairly obvious ways. Kleon makes a chart with the central ideas that intent and adaptation separate plagiarism from good design stealing. In other words, if you look at one particular product and copy it with the intent of claiming it as your own to profit in some way, that’s bad stealing. On the other hand, if you look at a variety of products that you admire and try to pinpoint successful things to use yourself and you give credit where credit is due, that’s a natural way of absorbing and adapting concepts. I would say the primary way to know you’ve crossed the line is if there is no sense of “you” in the product; if you can’t tell the difference between your work and the original author’s… oops. You be plagiarizin’.

In my opinion, the lines between good and bad stealing are more clear in writing, but that may be simply because I have more exposure to the writing world. After all, we’ve been getting plagiarism sermons for years and years. Further, it’s pretty easy to tell if you’ve plagiarized by comparing your work and your written source because it’s literally there in black and white. I also think it’s easier to recognize that the writing styles and ideas we’ve developed up to this point in time have been influenced by others. That’s literally the entire point of our English education so far. Design, though, is less obvious to me primarily because the concepts are more abstract and moldable. For example, say I see a design with a red square in it and man, I love that red square. So I put a red square in my design, but I make it bigger and add a different border. At this point, my red square is something completely different than the original one, but is it now my own or did I just steal the concept of the original red square and masquerade it a little? I’m not sure.

How do you think people would react to a book called Steal Like A Writer? I feel like something like this would always have negative connotations and the point would just not come across the same way.

Don’t be the plagiarism Easter Bunny.

Kill It With Fire

This got real bad real fast. My eyeballs are screaming.

I would say the problems with mine are definitely more perceptual rather than cultural. I focused on sins 9, 3, and 1, with a little dash of 7 for pizazz. The busy background of red-tinged deer faces totally distracts from everything else happening. Also, since all of the colors except black have similar tones, the text is difficult to distinguish from the background. As a result, there isn’t enough contrast, making it illegible. It also confuses the visual path; I don’t know about you, but all I’m looking at are all the different deer eyes.

I also changed the fonts of random parts of text with no rhyme or reason. *insert evil laughter* In total, there are about 10 different fonts in this one page. Some of these fonts have the wrong tone, like the cursive in the bottom left, and some are simply difficult to see because they aren’t big enough. This is also creating “visual overload and clutter” (37) and further demolishes any sense of a visual hierarchy.

Finally, I chose to center-align everything because just to be a little passive-aggressive. Some text boxes are wider than others so absolutely nothing lines up, which is really tiring to the eyes. They have to jump around to try to read everything. and my eyeballs don’t like that kind of exercise. Overall, I think all of these would be sins regardless of the particular circumstances because they make the document impossible to view and comprehend.

The main “sin” that stuck out to me as not being a big deal is number 13, justified rivers. I feel like these occur sometimes and we probably never notice it unless we’re looking for it. Sometimes they may be necessary to create straight edges of the text box, which is sometimes more important than slightly wider spaces. Overall, I think this is could cease being considered a sin because it’s so easily ignorable.

Are there any present common design elements that you view as a personal sin? For example, I hate websites that have too many animations in an attempt to be “interactive”.

Life in the Holler

Though I have a Mac, I have never enjoyed using Pages as a word processor; however, I decided to use it for this and now feel like it has a purpose besides taking up space on my computer.

When making my book cover, the main thing I kept in mind was contrast. I wanted to make sure my text was visible against the background that has a lot of colors and shades in it, so I used white text to make sure it stood out. On the title words, I included a shadow behind them to make them stand out even more from the subtitle and author information. I used the same font for all of the text, but make the title bold and the letters spaced further apart from each other, again to add contrast from the rest of the text. I chose to center-align my text because the busiest part of the picture is in the center of the page, so it made everything feel balanced and easy to follow.

In terms of proximity, I wanted the subtitle to be close enough to the title so that it is obvious it is a continuation of the title, but I didn’t want it to seem like one long title. I put some space between “Life in the Holler” and “The Story of…” to distinguish the two parts, and make sure the two lines of “The Story of…” were close enough together so it was clear they are related.

I also took great care in choosing a text; I wanted one that was very soft and basic-looking (as opposed to some fancier, more professional fonts) to demonstrate simple life in the country. It would be very confusing to have a book that’s clearly very informal and about country life with fancy cursive text.

When making this cover, I struggled to decide between using a picture of me that also demonstrated the “farm” direction, or just a background picture like this one. How do you feel about memoirs and autobiographies having a picture of the subject on the front–preferred or no?