Year: 2010
Type: article
Abstract: Not surprisingly, in our media-saturated contemporary world, visual rhetoric, visual literacy, and visual fluency are all terms that have recently received a good deal of attention across fields. 1 Special issues of journals have been dedicated to addressing issues related to ''the visual'' (e.g., Computers and Composition, volume 18, numbers 1 and 2, 2002; Technical Communication Quarterly, volume 5, number 1, 2001; Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, volume 5, number 4, 2000; Enculturation: A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Culture, volume 3, number 2, 2001; Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, volume 8, number 3, 1993; Argumentation & Advocacy, volume 33, number 1, 1996).More and more college-level textbooks oriented toward the teaching of writing, specifically, include visual elements, and the producers of these textbooks heavily highlight these ''visual'' elements while marketing the texts (e.g., Everything's an Argument 4, Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz; The Call to Write, Trimbur; Convergences, Atwan; Picturing Texts, George, Palchik, Selfe, and Faigley; Reading Culture, George and Trimbur; Seeing & Writing, McQuade & McQuade).A variety of readers designed for students in fields not necessarily camped within the fields that have traditionally or typically taught visual texts (such as Popular Culture Studies, Film Studies, Media Studies, etc.) have emerged; often, these texts are geared toward students interested in studying ''visual culture'' and ''visual studies'' (e.g., Hall, Howells and Gill, Mirzoeff, Sturken and Cartwright, Walker and Chaplin).
Source: The Journal of Popular Culture
Institution: Michigan State University
Language: English
Subfield: Philosophy
Field: Arts and Humanities
Domain: Social Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W2140688113