WRITING ABOUT WHAT WE SEE: EKPHRASIS TODAY
Bilah Samping Artikel
Diterbitkan:
Dec 12, 2016
Isi Artikel Utama
Abstrak
Visual media presents us with an opportunity to enter into the written scholarly discussions about an understanding of the paradox that what is seen and what is written are different representation. In this paper I investigate the importance of audience today; I discuss how global communications via new media challenges traditional views of the concept of an audience. I look at how communication is now from one to many, from many to many and from one to one, and how this challenges the term ‘audience’ with ‘users’. This paper enters into the scholarly debate about how interactivity in new media places singular interpretive actions by individuals at its center rather than as the more traditionally peripheral audience. In doing so it suggests that existing audience theory can and should be extended in regard to new media audiences, players or users. This paper also discusses how audience theory remains apposite when it adapts and changes.
Keywords: visual media, audience, new media, audience theory
Rincian Artikel
##submission.howToCite##
Arnold, J. (2016). WRITING ABOUT WHAT WE SEE: EKPHRASIS TODAY. English Review: Journal of English Education, 5(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v5i1.384
Terbitan
Bagian
Articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Referensi
Bartch, S. & Elsner, J. (2007). Introduction: Eight ways of looking at an ekphrasis (eds). Classical Philology, 102(1), i-vi.
Barthes, R. (1977). Image, Music, Text. London: Fontana.
Buell, L. (2009). Writing for an endangered world: Literature, culture, and environment in the US and beyond. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Carpentier, N. (2011). Contextualizing author-audience convergences. Cultural Studies, 25(4-5), 517-533.
Cho, C.H., Phillips, J.R., Hageman, A.M., & Patten, D.M. (2009). Media richness, user trust, and perceptions of corporate social responsibility: An experimental investigation of visual web site disclosures. Accounting, Auditing, & Accountability Journal, 22(6), 933-952.
Cixous, H. (1988). Readings from the seminar of Helene Cixous. Writing Differences (Ed.). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Cover, R. (2004). New media theory: Electronic games, democracy and reconfiguring the author–audience relationship. Social Semiotics, 14(2), 173-191.
Cunningham, V. (2007). Why ekphrasis? Classical Philology, 102(1), 57-67.
Elsner, J. (2002). Introduction: The genres of ekphrasis. Ramus, 31(1-2), 1-18.
Elsner, J. (2010). Art History as Ekphrasis. Art History, 10-27.
Fivush, R. (2010). Speaking silence: The social construction of silence in autobiographical and cultural narratives. Memory, 18(2), 88-98.
Francis, J.A. (2009). Metal Maidens, Achilles' Shield, and Pandora: The beginnings of ekphrasis. American Journal of Philology, 130(1), 1-23.
Goldhill, S. (2007). What is ekphrasis for? Classical Philology, 102(1), 1-19.
Harrow, S. (2010). New ekphrastic poetics. French studies, 64(3), 255-264.
Heffernan, J. A. (2004). Museum of words: The poetics of ekphrasis from
Homer to Ashbery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hobbs, R. (2004). A review of school-based initiatives in media literacy education. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 42-59.
Hollingworth, A. (2005). The relationship between online visual representation of a scene and long-term scene memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 396.
Kavoori, A., & Chadha, K. (2009). The cultural turn in international communication. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 336-346.
McGilchrist, I. (2001). The master and his emissary. Yale University Press.
Mitchell, W. (1994). Ekphrasis and the other: Picture theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Livingstone, S. (2015). From mass to social media? Advancing accounts of social change. Social Media + Society, 1-3.
Lowenstein, D. (2003). The Sydney Morning Herald. May 22 News Review, p.2.
Pauly, N. (2003). Interpreting visual culture as cultural narratives in teacher education. Studies in Art Education, 44(3), 264-284.
Pop, D. (2010). Introduction: Representation and its relationships to reality and illusion. Ekphrasis, (1), 5-8.
Postman, N. (2005). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. New York: Penguin Books.
Turner, B.S. (2010). The new Blackwell companion to the sociology of religion (ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Ulmer, G. (1985). Applied Grammatology. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
Barthes, R. (1977). Image, Music, Text. London: Fontana.
Buell, L. (2009). Writing for an endangered world: Literature, culture, and environment in the US and beyond. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Carpentier, N. (2011). Contextualizing author-audience convergences. Cultural Studies, 25(4-5), 517-533.
Cho, C.H., Phillips, J.R., Hageman, A.M., & Patten, D.M. (2009). Media richness, user trust, and perceptions of corporate social responsibility: An experimental investigation of visual web site disclosures. Accounting, Auditing, & Accountability Journal, 22(6), 933-952.
Cixous, H. (1988). Readings from the seminar of Helene Cixous. Writing Differences (Ed.). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Cover, R. (2004). New media theory: Electronic games, democracy and reconfiguring the author–audience relationship. Social Semiotics, 14(2), 173-191.
Cunningham, V. (2007). Why ekphrasis? Classical Philology, 102(1), 57-67.
Elsner, J. (2002). Introduction: The genres of ekphrasis. Ramus, 31(1-2), 1-18.
Elsner, J. (2010). Art History as Ekphrasis. Art History, 10-27.
Fivush, R. (2010). Speaking silence: The social construction of silence in autobiographical and cultural narratives. Memory, 18(2), 88-98.
Francis, J.A. (2009). Metal Maidens, Achilles' Shield, and Pandora: The beginnings of ekphrasis. American Journal of Philology, 130(1), 1-23.
Goldhill, S. (2007). What is ekphrasis for? Classical Philology, 102(1), 1-19.
Harrow, S. (2010). New ekphrastic poetics. French studies, 64(3), 255-264.
Heffernan, J. A. (2004). Museum of words: The poetics of ekphrasis from
Homer to Ashbery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hobbs, R. (2004). A review of school-based initiatives in media literacy education. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 42-59.
Hollingworth, A. (2005). The relationship between online visual representation of a scene and long-term scene memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 396.
Kavoori, A., & Chadha, K. (2009). The cultural turn in international communication. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 336-346.
McGilchrist, I. (2001). The master and his emissary. Yale University Press.
Mitchell, W. (1994). Ekphrasis and the other: Picture theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Livingstone, S. (2015). From mass to social media? Advancing accounts of social change. Social Media + Society, 1-3.
Lowenstein, D. (2003). The Sydney Morning Herald. May 22 News Review, p.2.
Pauly, N. (2003). Interpreting visual culture as cultural narratives in teacher education. Studies in Art Education, 44(3), 264-284.
Pop, D. (2010). Introduction: Representation and its relationships to reality and illusion. Ekphrasis, (1), 5-8.
Postman, N. (2005). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. New York: Penguin Books.
Turner, B.S. (2010). The new Blackwell companion to the sociology of religion (ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Ulmer, G. (1985). Applied Grammatology. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.