Unfortunately next semester will be my last at Trinity, as I’ll be get my degree in marketing in the spring. Most of the classes I’ll be taking are common curriculum and electives for hours, because I have pretty much already met all the requirements for my business degree. After that, I plan on getting a masters in Kinesiology (I know, completely unrelated to marketing) and hopefully become a strength and conditioning coach for a sports team somewhere. Assuming the world doesn’t end, I’m hoping to either stay in Texas after graduation or move back to California.
I thought that the graphic design textbook was probably the most useful readings we were assigned dealing with aesthetics. While the ideas obviously related to a media class, I think that the 13 rules for proper print layout is also something that will be helpful for the rest of my life. Whether it be for presenting a report to my boss or just printing signs for a garage sale, knowing certain aspects of design such as avoiding rivers of white space and too much clutter will come in handy in many situations. The other reading that I found to be the most interesting was Bernard Dick’s film article. While the text itself was not particularly exciting, it is interesting to see the different types of transitions that are used in film after reading the article. Like Dr. Delwiche said at the beginning of the semester, it really is impossible to watch movies now without noticing things such as the shot pacing, match cuts, and the significance of close ups; now I often catch myself noticing how many different shots are used in even something as simple as a 30 second commercial.
I think the most interesting idea I took away from one of the theoretical readings was from our very first reading about cults. In reading Pratkanis’ work, it shocked me how the cults discussed in the articles are really nothing more than an extreme version of the groups we associate ourselves with. I always imagined cults as something so radical that I never understood how they could be formed, but the article made me realize that institutions such as churches follow the same pattern as cults. The other most interesting idea I enjoyed was Morrisson’s concept of “tulpas”. Although I still have a hard time seeing its application to real life, the concept really caught on for me when I wrote about Fight Club. In the movie, Brad Pitt’s character Tyler Durden is a perfect example of a tulpa, that was created purely in Edward Norton’s mind. To be honest, my least favorite reading was far and away Baudrillard’s work about simulacrae. Even after discussing it in class, I have no idea what he was talking about and I don’t really see how his theory could ever have any real world significance. Fortunately, I enjoyed most every other article we read over the course of the semester.
To me, the package from Johnny B. shows how the media we are exposed to can send a different message depending on how the different stimuli are connected. I interpreted the series of pictures to be similar to the Kuleshov effect in the sense that the captions to the pictures can completely change how one might view the image and series of images as a whole. How do we know that these captions actually match what was happening? Given different captions, the meanings of these photos might be completely different. After receiving this package, I would probably start wondering why we interpret everything we are exposed to in the way we do. What makes something right or wrong? Good or bad?