Our screens are not glowing pieces of paper. The digital document represents a logic of
understanding that is distinct from that of the printed page. This is the central point of Jones and Hafner’s
chapter of multimodality, the combination of different “modes” of expression to
form the documents we regularly interact with in the digital world. As the authors note, the web did used to be
little more than a collection of hyperlinked text files with the occasional
visitor counter and dancing baby GIF.
Today’s web is much more refined, and yet, there is a
spatial logic that seems to underline most sites’ visual layout. As Jones and Hafner explain, information on a
web site tends to move from given (what you knew you were getting into when you
clicked the link), on the left to new, yet-to-be-determined (fill in these
fields, dear visitor) on the right.
There’s also a movement from the ideal (what will I get from this site?)
at the top to the real (who copyrighted what?) at the bottom. There may also be some central object to draw
attention.
This arrangement seems to be governed by the Western
tradition of reading from left to right, and top to bottom. It’s interesting to note than Jones and
Hafner are English professors at City University of Hong Kong, situated in a
former British colony that’s now a semi-autonomous enclave of China. This made me wonder how widespread their idea
of a basic web layout really is. The
main web page of the South China Morning Post, Hong Kong’s largest English newspaper, certainly seems to conform. The paper’s title is on the top left, with a
search bar on the right. Moving down the
page, articles appear mostly on the left, with user-driven features like polls
on the right. At the bottom is the
boring stuff (FAQ, terms and conditions, contact info). What about the Oriental Daily News, the city’s largest Chinese paper? It’s striking that, even without understanding
the text, I can make informed guesses about what each section of the page is
because it does indeed conform to the same basic layout.
I found it funny reading Jones and Hafner’s insights on
digital visual design in blocks of text on a page accompanied by
black-and-white images of web sites.
There is, in fact, a companion site to the book. How is it laid out? The front page conforms largely to the
left-right, top-down aesthetic, though it’s a bit sparser than a Hong Kong
newspaper. The pages on individual chapters don’t look much different from Web 1.0 pages: bulleted text with
occasional images. They might link to an
infographic to prompt a student activity, but the visual media doesn't seem to
be integrated tightly into the pages any more than the usual hyperlink.
Maybe the publisher missed an opportunity by not fleshing
out the visual design of the site to a book on digital literacy. Maybe they just didn't think of investing
that much effort. It may also be that
spatial layout takes on the most importance in the first page a viewer
sees. As one delves deeper into a site,
the information (usually text) takes on a greater importance. Complex visual design creates a hook that
most book covers can’t, but it may be the content that determines how long a
visitor (or reader) sticks around.
Jones, Rodney H.,
and Christoph A. Hafner. Understanding
Digital Literacies: A Practical Introduction. London: Routledge, 2012.
I can't say how many times I have picked up a book because I thought the cover looked cool. Even now, the visual layouts that you point out in your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th paragraphs, are what draw me to certain websites and links and keep me there for hours at a time. I often read the back of the books to learn if the cover was really leading me into what could be a great novel. As in websites, I will read the information that is important to me and that will judge if I use the site more often or not.
ReplyDeleteI am using the digital copy of the book so I do not know what the actual book looks like, but I find the digital version easily accessible and a quick read. Jumping from page to page or chapter to page or to contents, it is amazing how quick and easy it is.
I had a hard time writing my own post about this chapter but have found yours to be very enlightening. I sometimes forget that although I can pick a book for it's cover, it is not always that easy or enjoyable for people in the digital age to do the same. I mean both with books and web sites, people will want to look around or read a chapter before they condemn or embrace it. So designing a website homepage or cover of a book is the first thing people will judge on, so make it good.
I'm guessing that one of the reasons that the book is not "interactive" in an enlightening way is that it is a scholarly book. It is written primarily for other academics and most scholarly books do not have color or other interactive type of elements. I picked this book, though, because it was deceptively simply. While easy to read, it packs in good information that has been making us think about our assumptions. Next week we'll be reading Heidegger, which is a much tougher read, but also written for scholars. It'll be interesting to see the difference in our responses.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNeil, I really appreciate the examples you include and how you've analyzed them. I have been trying to pay attention to not only websites, but also newspapers, magazine layouts, etc. just to get a better feel for how to design and if their these principles apply to different formats (and how). Also, it was clever of you to include the companion for the textbook.
ReplyDeleteI am interested in seeing how the standard of web design will continue to evolve over time, as it has changed massively just in the decade I have had access to it. The change to web 2.0 certainly founded the concepts of the ideal and real aspects of web design, but it is important to remember that the internet and its design are still in its infancy, and more ideas will continue to be tested and eventually become the online standard of design. Technology is also continuing to evolve and bring about new challenges as to how digital content must be laid out in order to be most effective to users. Google glass and the idea of augmented reality, implementing digital content into our direct field of vision, poses a large list of challenges for designers to develop new concepts of design in order make these technologies useful and efficient.
ReplyDelete