Multimodal Social Semiotics
Part One:
Signs and communication in all forms is based off of societal interactions and the resulting cultural demands. The division between society and culture is distinct in the way the authors use it, such that society is a collection of human interaction, whereas culture is the result of social action. Language itself also transcends the usual definition of writing, as we know well by this point in the term, but laying the foundation of society and of what language means and can include is necessary for understanding the following chapters. This concept connects as well to design, in that design rather relates to the idea of representation analyzed a bit later in the text, which, if design is taken to be the same as what we discussed last week, dictates the mode of representation and affects the overall interpretation.
The first half of the text makes important broad claims that are imperative to understanding what exactly they are talking about, such as that communication is always multimodal and that the “pace of technological change cannot possibly be mirrored by social institutions.” The latter explains why this theory is important to education and understanding multimodal social semiotics because technology has already far surpassed what social institutions can mimic and our understanding of communication and representation through these technologies and new signs has to start somewhere. The former point, that all communication is multimodal, is specifically important to this class, but also begins to point out how social factors influence the modes of our representation, making it multimodal because the outside influence of our societies have already altered the signs with which we work. The concept of interest is significantly necessary to the discussion of social semiotics as well, seeing as interest relates to design and influences the way in which we represent something and why we do it. It also works on the receiving end, the side of communication and interpretation, because it depends upon the interest of the receiver to turn a representation into communication.
Social semiotics in regard specifically to multimodality (although I suppose it always is if all communication is multimodal) gives meaning to each mode in a multimodal text, to the modes interacting with one another, and to the piece as a whole. The social signs that construct representations have meaning on multiple levels and every sign is newly made for the social situation it is being used in. Representation relies on interest of the communicator (say, me) and communication relies on reception and interpretation of interest (potentially becoming a prompt) on the end of the audience or recipient. The prompt in this sense is seemingly most important in regard to education, in which the interest of a student must be engaged and receptive to the representation of the teacher in order for a prompt to be registered within the interpreter. The final few points of note of the first section include the discussion of power, in that it influences the transparency and opacity of sign making, and how bodily communication, or signs which we receive and interpret from a three dimensional stand point, are still invaluable assets and necessary components to semiosis.
Part Two:
Considering my first multimodal text of the course (the composition process) in the terms of discourse, design, production, and distribution is decidedly tricky. In terms of discourse, I automatically made the multimodal text to reflect the highly connected culture in which I thrive, that being primarily the internet and somewhat relying on the knowledge that the interpreter of this text would know that particular Spongebob scene and who Markiplier is. Specific factors of discourse, such as my socioeconomic status and age, automatically played into the creation of the text and perhaps alienated some audiences from full comprehension. The design itself is simple as it consists solely of image and text, with the minor attempt at including audio through the link. The design relied heavily on my interest in representing my composition process to be as confusing to the audience as it is to me, while also incorporating popular pieces of media to influence understanding of who I am, seeing as this was a sort of introduction piece. Production was also fairly simple because I used a word doc and screenshots to complete the text. It turned my design concepts into a material vision that can be interacted with, such as someone could look up the YouTuber shown or type in the link to find the playlist referenced. Distribution of the text is thanks to Tumblr and the hashtags at the bottom that allow it to reach audiences outside of just our class.
The composition of this text was also done purely by me, which is interesting in regard to the importances the authors placed upon the collaborative process of moving from design to distribution. The only outside interaction that came into the creation of the multimodal text is from audience reactions and discourses that change interpretation of what they see.
Part Three:
As you can probably tell just by reading the second part, our current reading has already influenced my though process of composition. When I created my multimodal text, the interest of the representation was solely what I wanted to show, not what I wanted someone to get out of it. While I thought this was communication just because it could be read, I understand a bit better now that communication relies on the interest of the audience. The interpretation of the representation is just as important as my own interest in the matter because that is how it becomes communication and not just a sign with no meaning. It is also interesting to note now the influence that culture and society plays on the reception and creation of the text. It is clearly from a Western culture, yes, but the societal groups I participate in are obvious just from looking at the composition. This was not something I necessary intended because, while I did want to show a bit about myself in the beginning, I did not think how this would actually be interpreted and communicated to someone that most likely does not have the same interests as I do, complicating if communication was properly achieved or if I constructed a meaningless sign on the basis of representation without communication. Basically, to sum up, social semiotics influences communication and composition. For example, the multimodal texts I create would perhaps be drastically different if my social context was different in anyway, such as gender, economic status, location, age, etc.