The Syllabus, Part 2: Why Visual Literacy?

When I was in sixth grade my parents divorced. I remember laying sideways on the couch, the position of my body trying to keep up with the equally sideways news. A tear swam from my eye and across my nose like an eye patch.

And in the family television before me, powered off and silent, I saw my reflection. Like I was a character on the screen. And, as a long shot, maybe there was a crowded, dim room on the other side where attendees were understanding my solely from what they could see on my face.

This, in a way, represents the side of pathos visual literacy provides.

Roger Ebert (a name that will be featured frequently on the blog) coined the term ‘empathy machine,' and I don't think there is a phrase more accurate. These are movies. This is what they do. Everything we see between the frame is a unique perspective of the way of life. And you get to be a part of it, every time.

Visual literacy belongs to a sect of nonverbal communication. Words are not everyone's first, or even best, form of communication, and I do not believe that that is frequently honored. Why do you think I write this blog as I do? Somehow, the world we live in is hypocritical; both judgmental of social media contact and driven by the very thing.

Frankly, it is not fair. Pressures and anxiety pervade the air with more toxicity than environmental damage (I would like to think). When someone reaches out to me by message or any other various posting, or vice versa, I believe in a connection that transcends just the coined term "antisocial behavior." I believe nonverbal connection shares warmth and meaning, in moderation. If truth is better found in the written word or action, then so be it.

Why does this work? Because it is a sign, a representation. I am a major proponent in the belief that the words we say to each other are less consistent with what we mean than the things we do and the things we write with an organized mind. Therefore, nonverbal cues are more in common with signs and symbols.

And what else is film? The projections on the screen are absolutely riddled with signs and symbols. They take on so many shapes: the use of color to express mood, lighting and composition to pay homage to another auteur, even character actions and reactions to express a cultural thought. I could go on.

Essentially, film semiotics is a celebration of culture; how familiar images evoke a specific point of view. When we dig into a film, we’re looking for those deeper meanings. It is pleasurable, and it is enriching. To even better articulate this idea, here is a wonderful video about semiotics, using La La Land (2016) as its focal point.

On that note of celebration, that is also what film does: it creates space for diversity in how we 'do' life by ourselves or with others. Perhaps film is a little like training wheels. Maybe if we see something we don’t understand, and then wrestle with it for its runtime, we can better have an outward understanding of others.

I feel like I could go on and on about just what film does for others. Perhaps more, another time.

Rory