Showing posts with label images. Show all posts
Showing posts with label images. Show all posts
Sunday, April 20, 2014
About life down this hill
Life in itself
Is nothing,
An empty cup, a flight of uncarpeted stairs.
It is not enough that yearly, down this hill,
April
Comes like an idiot, babbling and strewing flowers.
From "Spring," by Edna St. Vincent Millay
Labels:
Edna St. Vincent Millay,
Flowers,
images,
outdoors,
photography,
pictures,
poem,
poetry,
Saturday,
seasons,
spring,
visual rhetoric
Friday, December 27, 2013
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
but not now
Labels:
camera,
digital,
images,
meaningless,
night,
nothing,
photography,
photos,
pictures,
pointlessness,
weekends
Saturday, February 02, 2013
sometimes, but today here's pictures
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Thursday, January 05, 2012
The substance of style

The larger discussion here is about image--Santorum's self-image, the image he has of his perspective supporter, and the self-image of that supporter. The Santorum staff's enthusiasm for the sweater is not entirely in jest; the sweater vest is indicative of their message and target audience.
As the last standing hardline social conservative in the field, Santorum appeals to swaths of mature voters ("grandfathers") and strict disciplinarians ("football coaches")--disciplinarians in the sense that these people emphasize self-discipline as key to one's ability to support oneself and manage life's affairs. This is the person who most heartily nods in agreement while reading the Forbes article "If I Were A Poor Black Kid"; his appreciation for discipline shows in his brand of faith, his military support, his politics, and many of his habits and much of his work. The "football coach" conjures many other qualities and values attributable to Santorum's perspective supporter.
But what about the other candidates' images?:
Mr. Santorum’s rivals are biased toward sleeves. Mitt Romney likes his crisply pressed oxford shirts, often under a blazer. Ron Paul is partial to suits, albeit ill-fitting ones. And Michele Bachmann, who has said her fashion icons are Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis and Audrey Hepburn, is almost always carefully turned out ...

Besides being one of the few options left to a man his age, Ron Paul's suits reflect his own desire to be taken seriously. Afterall, what else is a suit but a man hoping to be taken seriously? Ditto for Michele Bachmann, more or less, although I vaguely recall reading she wore only dresses or skirts at public appearances which, if so, would communicate a traditional brand of femininity, a servile sort as opposed to the "bossy" pant suits of Hillary Clinton.
Thinking back to Barack Obama's campaign, seems like he adopted several looks, even allowing/releasing photos of his basketball practice. Perhaps he welcomed being seen in a variety of ways, sending the message that he is a dynamic (young) candidate.
Labels:
Barack Obama,
campaign,
clothes,
communication,
criticism,
election,
fashion,
images,
media,
Michele Bachmann,
Mitt Romney,
news,
politics,
Rick Santorum,
Ron Paul,
style,
visual rhetoric
Sunday, December 25, 2011
(pictures) Mesquite tree
Labels:
art,
camera,
criticism,
digital media,
images,
photography,
photos,
pictures
Sunday, December 04, 2011
Pictures of sorts
Labels:
art,
Fall,
images,
photograpy,
pictures,
Rainer Maria Rilke,
weather,
Winter
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Few things on the case R. J. Reynolds et al v. United States Food and Drug Administration
A district court just ruled on whether the FDA can force cigarette companies to publish graphic anti-smoking images on packs. The Judge, Richard J. Leon, gives a failed rhetorical analysis in his opinion:
Anyways, I hope this case goes to the Supreme Court. How do you warn people about a product that, if used as intended, will almost certainly lead to addiction and quite likely a slow, painful death. (And, more to the Government's unspoken point, the resulting deaths exact a heavy cost on taxpayers every year.)
Which of the following are purely factual and uncontroversial information?:
The Judge ruled in favor of tobacco companies by preserving the status quo and the cigarette package's text warning that smokers routinely ignore now. I don't fault his decision (in fact, I tend to agree), but I do hate his remaining faithful to the ideation of a "purely factual and uncontroversial information"--a quote originating from Zauderer, describing a concept that has been around forever: A pure observation language. Such a language will never be, and can never be.Unfortunately for the Government, the evidence here overwhelmingly suggests that the Rule's graphic-image requirements are not the type of purely factual and uncontroversial disclosures that are reviewable under this less stringent standard. Indeed, the fact alone that some of the graphic images here appear to be cartoons, and others appear to be digitally enhanced or manipulated, would seem to contravene the very definition of "purely factual." That the images were unquestionably designed to evoke emotion - or, at the very least, that their efficacy was measured by their "salience," which the FDA defines in large part as a viewer's emotional reaction, see CompI. ~ 58 (citing 76 Fed. Reg. at 36,638-36,639) - further undercuts the Government's argument that the images are purely factual and not controversial, see, e.g., Defs.' Opp'n at 22-29. Moreover, it is abundantly clear from viewing these images that the emotional response they were crafted to induce is calculated to provoke the viewer to quit, or never to start, smoking: an objective wholly apart from disseminating purely factual and uncontroversial information. 18 Thus, while the line between the constitutionally permissible dissemination of factual information and the impermissible expropriation of a company's advertising space for Government advocacy can be frustratingly blurry, 19 here - where these emotion-provoking images are coupled with text extolling consumers to call the phone number "1-800-QUIT" - the line seems quite clear. --Memorandum Opinion, 11/07/2011, R. J. Reynolds et al v. United States Food and Drug Administration
Anyways, I hope this case goes to the Supreme Court. How do you warn people about a product that, if used as intended, will almost certainly lead to addiction and quite likely a slow, painful death. (And, more to the Government's unspoken point, the resulting deaths exact a heavy cost on taxpayers every year.)
Which of the following are purely factual and uncontroversial information?:
- Cigarettes cause cancer and death
- Leaving for work today may result in your dying in an accident
- Orange juice contains vitamin C
- Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Saturday, August 06, 2011
Worried traders

If the market stayed down, the story is serious as it addresses 401Ks and whatnot. In this case an appropriate image might depict those who are very wealthy and doing well during the recession so that they can be the spectacle instead of the struggling waitress or homeless former federal worker.
Labels:
economy,
images,
market,
media,
politics,
power,
representation,
rhetoric,
self-representation,
spectacle,
visual,
visual rhetoric
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)