Modes are things which are culturally allowing us to make meanings and allow us to get away from generalization and vagueness in any given language. Modes can each do different things and help set up a meaning and it is up to the user of the mode to use a specific mode for a specific meaning. This said the reader and/or viewer of the mode also plays a part in experiencing the meaning through their own perception.
Balancing modules and modes to correlate to a certain order also appeals to the eye of the viewer. with each mode comes a different meaning and modes can be either text, pictures, moving images, and much more. From this the term multi-modality arises. This means using many different types of modes in one composition of work to extend your meaning to the viewer. Many times this is more appealing to the human eye. Kress explains that modes are "socially" used to have meaning. I believe this means that modes are different types of ways to give meaning to something in particular but not make it boring by todays social standards.
Wysock happily agrees with Kress on the "encouragement for rhetorical focuses in teaching". However, with modes there are pieces that are here and now in space and parts that are from the past. So the question Wysock asks is what is unavailable when we look at modes in correlation with time and space. An example is the one Wysock uses to explain how in the past writing did not always portray itself with spaces that create singular words. In fact the idea of spacing out the vocabulary to create words by words was simply developed over time to create a simple outlook for the reader. One point that really catches my eye is the fact that both speak about how the reader and viewer of the work creates the perception on what is actually being talked about.
No comments:
Post a Comment