The analysis of digital rhetoric would mean nothing without considering factors influenced by visual rhetoric. For this, Douglas Eyman looks to concretize a definition for “Visual Rhetoric” § (49–51) in his book “Defining and Locating Digital Rhetoric.” Though no concrete definition is given, Eyman stipulates that visual rhetoric is essential and all-around digital rhetoric, and for that reason, authors need to use it to their favor effectively.
The semantics of visual rhetoric
Despite experts struggling to find a compact delineation of visual rhetoric, they have established certain aspects of its definition. Let’s go back to basics for a minute. If we know that rhetoric conveys meaning through a text to persuade the audience, then visual rhetoric should be the same thing but with images, right? Well, yes, but there’s more to it than that. Visual rhetoric not only conveys meaning and persuades the audience, but it also helps to make a text or presentation more efficient. For this, think of pie charts and graphs. They could share information on their own, but for the most part, they are accompanied by a text that further explains and analyzes the data shared on that particular graph. At the same time, the graph serves as a visual aid to help the audience better understand the information in a given text.
Visual rhetoric goes further…
Pie charts and graphs, though, only denote data. Still, Roland Barthe “asserts that images function both connotatively and denotatively and that the connotative signifiers form a rhetoric that serves as the signifying aspect of ideology.” But what do all those big words mean? It means that the message conveyed by an image it’s mostly determined by the audience’s literacy on that particular image. Therefore, authors and designers need to clearly understand who their audience is, or else the intended message will be lost in the abyss. It is for this that Barthe emphasizes the importance of having an outstanding balance between connotation and denotation so the “connotative powers do not exert unpredictable effects” on the audience. Here, think of a collage made out of scraps from magazines.
See the collage above. The collage wouldn’t have a clear meaning without the audience having a base background of what “Make it Elemental” is. Instead, each audience member will interpret the text’s message differently.
Now, let’s make it digital
We can apply it to the digital realm by grasping how visual rhetoric behaves generally. Mary Hocks connects visual and digital rhetoric, suggesting that “modern information technologies construct meaning as simultaneously verbal, visual, and interactive hybrids. Digital rhetoric simply assumes the use of visual rhetoric as well as other modalities.” On the other hand, I could argue that digital rhetoric nowadays would be nothing without visual rhetoric. This strong belief comes from the heavily visually dominated culture in which we live and the need for visual communication and elements to assist digital users.
You may have already internalized many of the techniques involved with visual communication and are unaware of the difference these make. Think of fonts, sizes, paragraphs, and even emojis for this! All of these represent different types of visual rhetoric. These are so simple and so commonly used that we don’t even pay attention to their meanings anymore. The thing is, these help us understand by separating titles from the text’s body, allowing us to follow the narration easily by giving us paragraph breaks, making it look “pretty” and eye-soothing, while also conveying emotions through emoticons.Visual rhetoric is all-around digital rhetoric. However, that does not signify it is universal. As a result, it is important that authors have a clear perception of their audience and the publishing platform. This will be crucial in how the audience consumes, analyzes, and interprets a text.
Leave a Reply