Design Studies: Damn Cowboys

Today, Jonathan delivered us a rather interesting lecture on Visual Literacy. I say rather interesting, as I&ED got a playground ripping for approaching the latest task during the seminars as I&ED students, which, I thought, is reasonable given we are. If you had a pet that was acting suspiciously like something it was not, you would take it to the vet.

Kittens acting like fainting goats although, is acceptable - due to their entertainment factor.

I however, am neither a fainting goat or anything other than an I&ED student. So I act like one.

It was pointed out by Frances that we did in fact cover the basic points on the group mind map task during Seminar 2 with Hamid. Go Team IED! It's like Twilight, but with less glitter.

I'm kidding, I would quit if that was remotely true. Eugh.

So anyway, IED digs aside, a few interesting things were brought up. I remember as a child watching Western movies and thinking they were mean. Now, "mean" is not a particularly good word in terms of critiquing a film however even at a young age I did think it was inappropriate to convey the Indian party as the "baddies". Those bad American Indian guys who attack you, and you've got to shoot them because they are bad news - it's a matter of survival really. Not really. When you actually think about it, it's the white cowboys that invaded someone elses land and took over who are the bad side. It happens time and time again. South Africa is another example - farmers taking over the land, turfing the native residents out and staking at is theirs. Stick a flag on it - 'cause thats ownership. In reality it doesn't work like that - it doesn't mean anything. The U.S.A. don't own the moon and neither does anybody who comes along and claims anything to be theirs with no sense of purchase.

My favourite film that my Dad exposed me to as a child is Mel Brooks' "Blazing Saddles", because it points out and ridicules the preposterous claims of the Cowboy and Indian movies. In Blazing Saddles, they have a black Sheriff, and the white men managing the building of the railway line sing cotton picking songs:

Jonathan went on to explain how it is what you are exposed to regularly as a child that helps influence, shape and condition you into your adult beliefs. Women's thoughts are a good example at showing this; growing up to become house wives, dreaming of white weddings, looking after the children, and generally not pursuing an academic career. Lady bird books were used to illustrate this idealism of the 2 point 4 child household, with Daddy resting after coming home from work. This was rarely true when these were published - and far from the truth in most households today. The idea of what a home should be being publicised, and then thrusted into children's faces at school is actually more damaging as children will come to question why they are not the same as the pictures in their books. It is understandable most seek to provide their children with a regular person to care for them, but it does not always have to be solely a mothers job. A father is more than capable, or anybody else for that matter - so long as the care figure is consistent - so as not to make the child feel that they are being bounced from person to person, thus being less damaging.

So what was actually being discussed here? Visual Literacy as Jonathan put it, is not images, but what we in fact see in the image. Interpretation. The lady bird books were a good example of showing how people were lead to believe that these were normal situations, when in fact, it was just a picture. Cowboy and Indian movies are nothing more than a fictional story intended for entertainment, however people are lead to believe the cowboy is the side to root for - therefore conveying and causing an opinion. It is amazing what you can convey and therefore get people to believe in purely via the exploitation of  the image.

I'm sure Adobe agree fully with the above - you too can exploit those around you via imagery for only [£932.95]!