Group items tagged

your space. You're free to write whatever the hell you want in it. But, don't be surprised when people call you on your shitty behavior and poor manners. Because on livejournal, your space gets incorporated into my space. That is, afterall, what its all about.

More interestingly, she claims that the "still-images of actions" are also indexical, because they only show a part of a broader temporal whole action.

First of all, in the semiotics of C.S. Peirce, indexicality is a means through which reference is garnered via causation or indication. For example, an index finger that points to something doesn't mean that thing, it indicates the thing has meaning. The finger is just saying "for the real meaning look over there." Also, if I saw a footprint in the sand, it indexes the person who once walked there, because of the causation stepping there created.

in How to Draw..., Lee and Buscema's advice is to use the maximally intense points of that sequence — the ends and beginnings of the action marked "best" or "not bad." These sections of the action seem more representative of the action than the medial parts. In semiotic terms, they would index the overall action better than the parts in the middle, which are less representative of the overall action. Research seems to have borne out their intuition.

In McCloud's Understanding Comics he proposed his theory of "cartoon identification" that cartoony* images are "identified" with better than realistic images. This study (pdf) tested McCloud's theory by using behavioral measures of a 7-point rating and EEG measures of the brain's electrical activity.

They take these results to be support for McCloud's theory of identification that indeed, cartoony images do invoke greater empathy from a reader than realistic images.