I have never been taken through the history of language before. Reading "The Art of Immenmorability", was an eye opening experience in many ways. The distinction between textual and transcriptive and the role this played in the development of written language is new for me. I'm very interested in how this distinction resonates today with how our technology is encountering our use of language. I was caught by Bernstein's statement, "Writing tells us more than what it purports to tell". I don't think I've considered the importance of analyzing texts by its mode of telling just as well as the tale it tells. With this, I learned that language and cultural reproduction is about variance and morphing more than storing.
As far as what was hard or easy with this reading, I would say the difficulty in reading this is connected to my limited vocabulary. The time spent reading this text took much longer than I expected. It felt as though I was reading from my desktop dictionary for an amount of time comparable to reading the assignment.
Bernstein touched on one topic that I want to take with me throughout the rest of this class. He said, "…acknowledge the value of using a medium to do what can only be done in that medium". This is a big deal. So now I'm asking myself, what can only be done using kinetic type? What are the strongest aspects and advantages of animated writing? How can I implement these qualities into my work in a unique, concise, and original way?
I too spent far too long reading this article and absorbing less and less from it the more time I spent...
ReplyDeleteYou bring out some great highlights though. I ask myself the same questions that you bring up in the end of your post when I think about this class.
I agree with the "language" of this article being very dense, which takes a longer time to read and comprehend. I also thought it was interesting how he explained the history of language, even though he jumped around a bit.
ReplyDelete"Acknowledge the value of using a medium to do what can only be done in that medium."
ReplyDeleteThat caught my eye as well. Perhaps it's just my way of interpreting the class and the article, but I almost feel that the application of motion to the written word is actually pushing the boundaries of what a medium can do. Is the implication being made that kinetic writing is in itself a new medium and we just need to be careful of how we use it?
It's a head-scratcher.
I agree with both of the above comments. I know that I have not analyzed texts the same way that this author did either. Both the tale it tells and the mode its telling.
ReplyDeleteThe quote on acknowledging what can only be done in a specific medium was something that resonated with me as well.
ReplyDeleteI'm finding myself trying to take my printed work and simply make the letter jump and move rather that writing with the purpose of animation in mind.
I liked what you took from Bernstein's purposes of writing, writing as transformational rather than a method of storage.