Visual Literacies: The Impact / Salience of Images vs. Words

In her chapter titled "Toward New Media Texts: Taking Up the Challenges of Visual Literacy," Cynthia Selfe discusses the discomfort many English teachers accustomed to tackling traditional print-based texts in the "traditional" way feel toward visual New Literacy texts:

Relatively few English teachers, however, feel as comfortable in approaching a visual text unless they have some training in art or design. Given this context, we remain unsure how to approach visual texts, how to explore them, how to understand them, and how to teach them. And we also feel less than competent about composing visual texts ourselves. (71)

Throughout this program so far, I feel as though I have learned enough to begin to consider how to engage at least the first part of Selfe's concerns; considering how to approach, explore, and teach visual / New Literacy texts. For example, after pairing what I've learned in the Center for Writing over the years with what we have discussed so far in the writing methods class, I feel as though a good way to approach, explore, and begin to teach / teach to New Literacy texts is to ask some of the same questions that apply to print-based texts such as:

• What is the "writer's" purpose / what are they trying to "do"?
  
• How / what elements of the piece are they using to do this?
• How does the "writer" organize these elements to support their purpose?
  
• What is the "writer's" audience?
  
• How / what elements of the piece tell us this? And so on.
  

However, here is where an enormous disconnect enters the equation at least for myself. With traditional print-based texts, I feel as though I am a "natural" at approaching, exploring, dissecting, understanding, AND finally re-creating the writer's elements / craft used in my own writing. In other words, when it comes to print-based texts, I feel completely comfortable with both teaching AND composing. However, the second part of this equation eludes me when considering visual New Literacy texts. Although I feel as though I can approach, explore, analyze, and teach visual New Literacy texts, I feel at a total loss for creating one of my own. Take what took me about 1 agonizing hour to create for this blog assignment (a mind-map illustrating the development of my own literacy) as an example:

Although I at least perceive that my visual mind map has a purpose and communicates some meaning(s) about my development as a literate person (from birth, a continuously developing combination of print, media, and education leading to my eventual drive to be a teacher myself), I would probably get a big fat "F" when it comes to the elements of visual impact and visual salience. As it sits, I feel as though my mind-map lacks any sense of visual impact / or salience. Although I feel as though I understand how to go about making things visually coherent and organized (the way I used arrows / structured the diagram in an upward trajectory to show the increasing complexity and development of my literacy through the various mediums of print, music, and the education system), the individual images that I picked, as well as the overall all image each creates when viewed holistically, are bland as hell. I feel ashamed when I compare my super bogus mind-map to a piece of visual text such as a scene from Art Spiegelman's Maus:

Just look at this one scene! The visual impact and salience are off of the charts. I feel as though there are more meanings in the single cell of this scene than all of the images in my super bogus mind-map put together. In short, a central concern that I'm trying to articulate throughout this posting is that I perceive the following disconnect: I understand the elements of print-based literacies (both the organization and emotional impact / salience of the words) AND can reproduce each myself; however, although I feel as though I understand the elements of visual New Literacies (again, both the organization and emotional impact / salience of the images), I can ONLY reproduce the organizational aspects of a visual piece. Again, take for example my mind-map; good organization, but absolutely no visual impact or salience, at least in my opinion.

Overall, this assignment really got me thinking back to my comment about the "square peg in a round hole" when it comes to using traditional print-based methods to teach New Literacies. It seems to me as though there are some carry over methods that help at least myself understand and perceive that I well be able to approach, explore, and at least teach / teach to visual New Literacies. However, there is a large piece that I feel doesn't carry over; the ability "write with" the same impact / salience in images that can be done in words. This piece seems like the missing link, at least for me, and it makes me wonder how this link can be filled in. Much like Selfe's concern, I feel as though because I have no training in art, design, and can't draw / manipulate digital drawing programs worth a damn, I have no clue where to begin with actually producing / creating / composing visual New Literacies. This discussion creates the following questions and concerns for me:

-Although we might be able to teach students how to approach, explore, and understand visual new literacy texts, how do we actually teach students to be producers of visual New Literacies?

-Or do students already know how to do this, and it is ourselves that need to be taught how to do this?

-How do can we close this gap between what appears to be our student's extreme comfort with producing visual New Literacy texts and our extreme discomfort with producing them?

-And finally, and perhaps most important to me, if we as educators can't actually reach the act of creation (the highest level of critical thinking) when it comes to visual New Literacies, what good are we as teachers of the medium? Is this not a disservice to our students?