Visual Literacy

Part of my Junior theme dealt with the term "Visual Literacy". It's a lot like what Fallows, Finitzo, and Tragos were talking about on American Studies day. According to Wikipedia, visual literacy is "the ability to interpret, negotiate, and make meaning from information presented in the form of an image. Visual literacy is based on the idea that pictures can be “read” and that meaning can be communicated through a process of reading". For me, this applied to my JT because if photographs can be "read," what kind of restrictions should be put on them? Should they be censored in the same way a written work would be?

One of my interviewees, and a good friend of Mr. Tragos', has an excellent blog aimed at increasing visual literacy: nocaptionneeded.com. Please check it out, it's a great site that was founded after the publication of his book by the same title.

We already know that, for the most part, humans accept and retain knowledge best when presented visually. To interpret photographs critically is certainly much harder, but is also necessary. Thousands of photographs flood AP Images everyday, and we see many of them on TV or online, but it would take so much longer to analyze them that we often neglect them for quick headlines.

Take Nick Ut's iconic image, for example.  I could write an essay three times the length of my JT just on this grainy image. But for a quick "see-think-wonder," consider this: Ut was criticized for taking a photograph of a naked girl whose village was napalmed. But he helped the girl to a hospital, aiding the American soldier also pictured. This photo taken out of context could be so many things: An argument for the innocence of children to be censored from the mainstream media, arguments against pure pain, a suggestion that American soldiers really weren't doing anything in Vietnam (they look like they're ignoring the children).

If we were to really analyze the photographs that we see on the news, it would consume a lot of our time. But perhaps we might become more aware of what we saw and the bias of the photographer.

Since when is softball bad?

The Wall Street Journal recently published a photograph of Elena Kagan, Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, at age 17 playing softball.

The photograph is above. GLAAD (and SheWired.com) claim that the Wall Street Journal is suggesting that Kagan is a lesbian.

My dad and I had a conversation about this. He thinks that it's perfectly fine, maybe because when he grew up, guys would play softball. SheWired claims that "All women who play softball are lesbians. I happen to believe that sometimes the stereotypes fit". I think that it's inappropriate because it seems to suggest that she's immature, as softball is typically played by younger girls, and not played after high school.

But consider other photographs that other newspapers, like Chicago's very own Sun Times ran:

Perfect, right? Obama looking down at Kagan, approving, while Biden smiles and claps next to him. Very professional, and a good journalistic summary of what the situation was.

So why didn't the Wall Street Journal run this photograph?


Some think that it was blown completely out of proportion by GLAAD, and I agree. I don't think a claim can be made about her sexuality from the photograph, but I do think it was a poor choice, especially when there were other options.  The fact that she's playing softball highlights the fact that she's a woman, as softball is often considered the female version of baseball.

So what do you think? Was the Wall Street Journal wrong to have chosen this image?

Tokenism is Everywhere

Mr. Bolos argues that TV tokenism is prevalent in network dramas. But I think they apply to pretty much every non-reality TV show. Honestly, I think it is appropriate for a show to attempt to include people of color, but it's a little ridiculous that most shows feature white main characters with the buddy racial friend.

Consider the cast of Glee. For those unfamiliar, I got this photo from TVAddict.com. Honestly, I'm embarassed to watch the show even occasionally, but I mention it because its such a great example of Tokenism. Clockwise from upper right, it goes: Stereotypical white male dumb jock, loud Jewish girl, gay guy, popular white girl, popular Jewish boy, black overweight girl, boy in a wheel chair, and Asian wannabe-goth. The show aims to ridicule school stereotypes, but I feel like it promotes them: white kids date other white kids, and those with disabilities (Arnie) date those of color (Asian Tina).


There are other cast members not included--dumb blond cheerleader, Hispanic cheerleader, Asian male dancer, and another Asian guy. This gives a pretty reasonable representation though. And note how the white characters are in the most prominent position--the top and right.

One of my favorite lines from the show is something along the lines of gay boy and black girl saying, "she's black and I'm gay. We are culture." Is that appropriate for a show (on Fox) to say, even if it is a comedy?

The places you could go

It's about this time of year that I have a strange urge to drop everything and run away. I'm not talking about running away from home, but rather going anywhere, doing anything. Sunshine has a strange effect on me, especially when it filters through ferns or trees in my backyard, and when the wind blows through the leaves. It's not that spring coming to the North Shore isn't beautiful--it is-- rather, I would give anything to pack up my bags and get on a plane to someplace far away.

I started traveling when I was very young. I went to Paris, Nice, Avignon and Monaco at the age of six, when my kindergartner peers were first venturing out of state. I am the youngest of four, with three older brothers. My grandparents on my Mom's side traveled the globe--they went to Russia a few months after it was opened to Americans, Iran and Iraq before a hint of war, Indonesia where my great-aunt worked for the American Government as a member of the State Department. They were the sort of couple whose passports were renewed every few years--not because of expiration, but because they were filled up too quickly with stamps from foreign countries.

It seems that I have inherited this from them, even though genetics are out of the question (my mom was adopted). When I think about the two of them, I think of photographs of them on the Navajo reservation, standing at the Four Corners, or sitting cross legged on a pillow in Eastern Asia. It seems that the aged widower who looks at photographs of a younger man with his wife exists more solidly in photographs--perhaps another thing I have inherited from them, a visual memory like albums of photographs stacked to infinity.

Achieving the title of World Traveler is not easily done, and it certainly requires a strong financial security. But almost more importantly, to me, at least, is an open mindedness that begins at a young age. My memory includes German castles practically hidden by neglect, with rain soaked greenery. When I think of Italy, I think of driving through vineyards in Verona and enlisting a waiter to describe the dessert menu through interpretive dance.

Though I may have been too young to truly understand what I was seeing (Vienna without knowing a thing about World War 1, or Rome before knowing of the Ancient Romans), it has provided a backdrop for me of who I am, a treasure-trove of memories, and a beginner's knowledge of how the world works, and a mind left wide open when seeing things for the first time. But perhaps more importantly, my experiences have made me want to explore every inch of the Earth, and to revisit my memories of Central American rainforests and Italian piazzas.

Junior Theme 3

So I haven't been keeping up with my blogging, seeing as my junior theme is due monday. But as I was writing it, I thought of something interesting. Here's a quote from my paper:
Unlike fleeting television, where an image is played perhaps once per hour at most, internet users are in more control of what they see and how often they can see it. One can zoom in on images online, whereas with television, the network producers decide if they want to do a close-up. Also unlike television, photographs online are less likely to have been “fuzzed up” or distorted, because the discretion falls on the viewer (NPR 4-2004). Because there are more options for news seekers in modern day, visual literacy has expanded to a degree that was impossible during the Vietnam War.
Where do you get your news? The radio, TV, Perez Hilton? Do you consider yourself to be news-literate?