Lably
Skip to content

Visual rhetoric

Communication through visual elements

  • 18 min read
  • 4 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Linguistics, Speech and Visual arts

Although visual rhetoric also involves typography and other texts, it concentrates mainly on the use of images or visual texts. Using images is central to visual rhetoric because these visuals help either form the case an image alone wants to convey or argue the point a writer formulates, in the case of a multimodal text that combines image and written text, for example. Visual rhetoric has gained greater notoriety as recent scholarly work has explored alternative media forms, including graphics, screen design, and other hybrid visual representations that do not privilege print culture and conventions. Also, visual rhetoric involves how writers arrange segments of a visual text on the page. In addition, visual rhetoric involves the selection of fonts, contrasting colors, and graphs, among other elements, to shape a visual rhetoric text. One vital component of visual rhetoric is analyzing the visual text. The interactional and commonly hybrid nature of cyberspaces that usually mixes print text and visual images enable some detachment of them as isolated constructs, and scholarship has claimed that especially in virtual spaces where print text and visuals are usually combined, there is no place either for emphasizing one mode over another. One way of analyzing a visual text is to look for its significant meaning.

Simply put, the meaning should be deeper than the literal sense that a visual text holds. One way to analyze a visual text is to dissect it so the viewer can understand its tenor. Viewers can break the text into smaller parts and share perspectives to reach its meaning. In analyzing a text that includes an image of the bald eagle, as the main body of the visual text, questions of representation and connotation come into play. Analyzing a text that includes a photo, painting, or even a cartoon of the bold eagle, along with written words, would bring to mind the conceptions of strength and freedom, rather than the conception of merely a bird.

This includes an understanding of the creative and rhetorical choices made with coloring, shaping, and object placement. The power of imagery, iconic photographs, for instance, can potentially generate actions in a global scale. Rhetorical choices carry great significance that surpass reinforcement of the written text. Each choice, font, color, or layout, represents a different message that the author wants to portray for the audience. Visual rhetoric emphasizes images as sensory expressions of cultural and contextual meaning, as opposed to purely aesthetic consideration. Analyzing visuals and their power to convey messages is central to incorporating visual rhetoric within the digital era, as nuances of choices regarding audience, purpose, and genre can be analyzed within a single frame, and the rationale behind designers' rhetorical choices can be revealed and analyzed by how the elements of visuals play out altogether. Visual rhetoric has been approached and applied in a variety of academic fields, including art history, linguistics, semiotics, cultural studies, business and technical communication, speech communication, and classical rhetoric. Visual rhetoric seeks to develop rhetorical theory in a way that is more comprehensive and inclusive with regard to images and their interpretations.

History and origin

The term rhetoric originated in ancient Greece, and its concept has been widely discussed for thousands of years. Sophists first coined the idea as an abstract term to help label the concept, while Aristotle more narrowly defined rhetoric as a message's potential to influence audiences. Linguists and other researchers often define rhetoric through the well-known five canons of rhetoric. Over time, this definition has evolved, expanded, and raised serious debate as new digital communication channels have developed.

In his book Elements of Criticism, rhetorician Lord Kames (also known as Henry Home) laid the groundwork for later rhetoricians by taking the controversial stance of including visual art in his theory of criticism. Kames argued many of the same points as other Enlightenment scholars—mainly that art was beneficial to the public—and worthy of note and praise—if it was encouraging a moral improvement of its audience.

In 1977, French theorist Roland Barthes brought to light a new way to evaluate other communication media, showing the relevance of traditional rhetorical theories to the still photographic medium. Barthes explained visual rhetoric generally as the implied and interpreted messages from the work, yet these bigger messages often extend beyond the initial superficial interpretation. Visual rhetoric uses a variety of tools to hook readers within its mediums (e.g. gifs). Although similar in nature, one striking difference between visual and classical rhetoric is the newfound outlook on Aristotle's original canons. Linda Scott created a newfound audience by constructing new cannons exclusive to visual rhetoric. Instead of closely monitoring the content, as with the initial five canons, Scott's focused on the visual medium's ability to invent and argument, arrangement of the item, and all coupled with a meaningful delivery of presentation. Since its inception, popular studies have appeared in academic publications discussing the role of visual rhetoric in many facets of human life, especially advertising.

The term emerged largely as an effort to set aside a certain area of study that would focus attention on specific rhetorical elements of visual media. Historically, the study of rhetoric has been geared toward linguistics. Visual symbols were deemed trivial and subservient and thus were largely ignored as part of a rhetorical argument. As a result, modern rhetorical theory developed with a significant exclusion of these visual symbols, ignoring the field of visual rhetoric as a separate area of study. Scholars of visual rhetoric analyze photographs, drawings, paintings, graphs and tables, interior design and architecture, sculpture, Internet images, and film. From a rhetorical perspective, the focus is on the contextual response rather than the aesthetic response. An aesthetic response is a viewer's direct perception of the sensory aspects of the visual, whereas with a rhetorical response, meaning is given to the visual. Every part of the artifact has significance in the message being conveyed; each line, each shading, each person has a purpose. As visual rhetoricians study images and symbols, their findings catalyze challenges to the linguistic meaning altogether, allowing a more holistic study of the rhetorical argument to emerge with the introduction of visual elements.

Sign in to keep reading

3 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Philosophy