Act II Data­base Aes­thet­ics
—Project: Group-Curating (components)

» Project Page (in-progress)
→ cre­ate & update Par­tic­i­pa­tion Log — tem­plate page

 

M 20-Oct                Read/Discuss: Cramer, “Post-Digital Aes­thet­ics” e-permanent   
  — also see video lec­ture below

» Focus/Discuss (con­tin­ued top­ics):   dis­ci­pli­nary con­ven­tions, dis­course com­mu­ni­ties, rhetor­i­cal aware­ness
 
— sites shown in class:
• Colos­sal (“art, design, and visual culture”)
• Hyper­al­ler­gic (“Sen­si­tive to Art & its Discontents”)

 
 
W 22-Oct                Activ­ity: Rhetor­i­cal Analy­sis warm-up (Due S 25-Oct)

» Read/Use: Excerpted/Compiled guides — PDF
 
→ Addi­tional ques­tions for web­site analy­sis below
 
» Project com­po­nent: prompt

 

• Prepa­ra­tion: choose & view/examine a visual arts web­site (pro­fes­sional pub­li­ca­tion)
  like Colos­sal & Hyper­al­ler­gic — post exam­ple sug­ges­tions in com­ments below (e.g. sources of cura­tion con­tent thus far?)

 

excerpts from Short Guide to Writ­ing About Art (Bar­net)

 
» Blog Entry: Rhet. Analy­sis warm-up (first-take: notes on 2–3 categories/aspects)
 

 
F 24-Oct                  Focus: Group curat­ing materials/examples

• Con­tin­ued dis­cus­sion: Net­work Rhetoric, new con­ven­tions, analysis

 
 
Due (S 25-Oct) Rhetor­i­cal Analysis (Assign­ment Prompt)

• 10 points; 500–700 words (of analy­sis ideas, omit­ting process)

• optional: include media, for instance screen-capture image
  (rec­om­mended for any unique design ele­ment, or fea­ture that might be inef­fi­cient to describe in text)

 
 

Art­Fo­rum– Flo­rian Cramer Post Dig­i­tal Aes­thet­ics from Nancy Mauro-Flude on Vimeo.

 

 

---

 
 

Rhetor­i­cal Analy­sis: Web-based Pub­li­ca­tion (Pro­fes­sional or Scholarly)

• 10 points; due S 25-Oct
• 500–700 words (of analy­sis ideas, omit­ting process)
• optional: include media, for instance screen-capture image
  (rec­om­mended for any unique design ele­ment, or fea­ture that might be inef­fi­cient to describe in text)

 
Goal: Extend rhetor­i­cal knowl­edge and gen­er­ate insights about dis­course com­mu­ni­ties, specif­i­cally a visual arts dis­ci­pline evi­dent and main­tained through con­ven­tions of com­mu­ni­ca­tion — like your prac­tice of curat­ing with the group’s “edi­to­r­ial vision” (schol­arly and/or professional)

 
Task: Exam­ine a Web-based “pub­li­ca­tion” pro­fes­sional and/or schol­arly, con­sid­er­ing the rhetor­i­cal aspects demon­strated, dis­played, and sug­gested.
Present the results of your analy­sis using effec­tive and effi­cient prose, with crit­i­cal ideas sup­ported by spe­cific exam­ples; avoid sum­mary, descrip­tion, and gen­er­al­iza­tion in favor of pre­sent­ing your insights.
 
The main ques­tion for this exer­cise con­cerns audi­ence — imag­ined, con­structed, sug­gested, actual — (“dis­course com­mu­ni­ties”) and the con­nec­tion to dis­ci­pli­nary con­ven­tions that you rec­og­nize.
You might also con­sider, con­nect, and address any aspects of the rhetor­i­cal sit­u­a­tion tra­di­tion­ally defined:
— Con­text, Pur­pose, Tim­ing, “Sender/Receiver,” Media, Deliv­ery, Means/Methods (Style? Genre?), Mes­sage, Mode(s)
 
From your obser­va­tions and insights about the pub­li­ca­tion ana­lyzed, work with induc­tive rea­son­ing toward a con­clu­sion about con­ven­tions of the field evi­dent and implied, as well as the rela­tion to audi­ence (imagined/envisioned) and/or com­mu­ni­ca­tion of scholarly/professional dis­course — par­tic­u­larly in net­worked media ecol­ogy. (The con­clu­sion can be brief and spec­u­la­tive, and it should go beyond the rhetor­i­cal analy­sis — pre­sent­ing what you’ve learned from this exer­cise.)
 
— Review guide/questions from “warm-up” class activ­i­ties & prompts
 
 
 

---

 

Warm-up Activ­ity: Medi­ated Com­mu­ni­ca­tion Analysis

(Ques­tions con­sid­er­ing Rhetoric + Design)

— Con­sider the fol­low­ing ques­tions for gen­er­at­ing ideas spe­cific to the website/platform you choose for your Rhetor­i­cal Analy­sis
(not to answer in your response):
• Who uses this plat­form and for what pur­poses? (“official”/stated pur­pose? com­mon uses?)
  What other impor­tant fac­tors sur­round the audience’s use of it?
• What types of com­mu­ni­ca­tion does the appli­ca­tion enable, enhance, or limit?
• What enhance­ments or lim­i­ta­tions result from the design or tech­ni­cal aspects, such as default set­tings and/or tem­plate? (What is pos­si­ble or pre­cluded by these settings?)
• What forms or gen­res of writ­ing from pre­vi­ous his­tor­i­cal eras appear in the com­mu­ni­ca­tion? (Or, how do the present forms uniquely dif­fer from pre­vi­ous types?)
  What ele­ments of com­po­si­tion does the appli­ca­tion employ in order to facil­i­tate this communication?
• How does the appli­ca­tion employ prop­er­ties unique to dig­i­tal media or to Website/Internet?
  What func­tions / effects of these appear within com­mu­ni­ca­tion exchange or participation?