----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we started to talk about this blog post in class on Monday, the wheels begin to turn in my brain in relation to theories of embodiment and the notion of reciprocity in the relationships that are cultivated within digital spaces. In reference to my project, I began to consider ways in which our use of emojis or other visual communicative practices within SMS spaces offer up a great example of Farman's notion of reciprocity. Initially I think I got a little hung up on the "locative media" which hindered my ability to see the currency in Farman's theory for my project specifically (I'm not aware of any GPS or pinning capabilities in iMessage). However, once I got past that I started to think in relation to our conversation in class pertaining to tagging or pulling people into our locations through Mark's referral to the "@" symbol. In our conversations in class we talked about the notion of having students "act out" what that physical representation of being "tagged" or "pulled" in different spaces would look like, and the kind of visual rhetoric such attribution has on our sense of embodiment. For me, this was VERY interesting stuff.
I began to REALLY think about emoji's and their use, why we have them, what they do for us that text can't accomplish, etc. In juxtaposing this with the body, I came across the idea of adapting the methodology of my project to asking students to mirror the facial expression or physical representation of emojis. To consider this praxis I came across this AMAZING article by Buzzfeed titled "Human Emoji's Are Quietly Horrifying" (it looks as though I'm not the only one that's thought of this..). Although the article references a "physical" body representation of emoji's for a particular campaign to raise awareness on internet safety, the notion of emoji's taking on a "physical form" can have a lot of validity in understanding the different cultural uses of emoji's in different spaces while also considering Farman's notion of reciprocity and the "give and take" relationship that such interactions offer.
Within chapter one titled, "Embodiment and the Mobile Interface" Farman cautions against making concrete distinctions between the virtual and the real, stating "an experience of the virtual is always an experience of the virtual in conjunction with another concept such as the "actual"...the virtual is not the opposite of the real;instead it is a component of experiencing the real"(22). In reference to my project, I see a lot of validity in drawing the intersections of the virtual composing process and use of emoji's and exploring the reciprocity of the social relationship that is cultivated in the physical by its use. By asking students to experience these "emoji" expressions or actions with their bodies, perhaps we can begin to truly understand cultural variances, and have insightful discussions in the classroom centering around particular notions of rhetorical and varied discourse community use of such visual tools. As Farman notes, "and in the ways in which this space is augmented by virtuality infused from our interfaces, the terms cannot be used in isolation from one another. The realized or actualized is always implicated by the virtual (broadly defined) and such an implication is produced through embodied practices" (22). Other projects such as Fito Segrera's reveal a much bleaker perspective on the type of affordances that emoji's offer in regards to an emotional representation in digital spaces. According to the Huffington Post's article "Emoji Art Reveals the Dark Side of the Smiley Face" Segrera Even as the pieces celebrate the world’s love for emoji, many, like Segrera's, also showcase a darker, problematic side to the clapping hands and grinning cats. The emoji artworks, all smiles on the surface, underscore how little nuance exists in our digital conversations and how poorly technology captures the range of human emotion". By imploring a methodology that seeks to embody the visual practice of emoji's, I hope to employ Farman's notion of reciprocity to study the relationships students are cultivating through visual communicative practice and how these digital spaces have currency in real life relationships. I think considering Farman's argument that the actual and the virtual are interconnected help us to remember that these visual rhetorical tools still operate under the notion that they keep the human central in their objective, which is why I think these considerations and adaptations to my final project still have incredible merit in considering how my project is inherently a DH project by nature.
Lucy,
ReplyDeleteA trope that you seem to continue to refer back to in your work is this whole notion of "keeping the human at the center" of any project. I find this very interesting, engaging, and important in general, and I appreciate the role it has played here with your analysis of the larger implication of emoji use. Something that may or may not interest you is exploring the roots of emoji culture in Japanese cartoons and manga, particularly the racial connotations embedded in the use of exaggerated facial features. You're definitely onto something here with emojis and I'm excited to see where it all takes you in your work as a scholar and in your development of DTC pedagogies. Thank you so much for sharing.
Mark
Lucy,
ReplyDeleteSuch an interesting post! A few years ago, I became interested in how a semicolon and close parentheses came to replace text to indicate sarcasm or a joking tone. But with a more developed emoji culture, in which far more emotions can be communicated in a more detailed image, I'm curious how this has influenced students' use of words to communicate to the emotions they can quickly sum up in emojis. Have you found research that discusses student language usage in the past ten or so years, particularly in narrative settings where students really utilize pathos? Excellent post!
Lacy