Visual Education

Paul Messaris
Annenberg School for Communication
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

There are at least two good reasons to be skeptical about claims that young people acquire significant visual skills through mere exposure to television or other visual media. To begin with, one should not take for granted that a preference for visual entertainment is necessarily accompanied by superior understanding of visual information. When MTV was still a novelty, it was often remarked that young viewers seemed to be much more comfortable with MTV-style editing in videos or commercials than were older viewers. And yet, tests of viewers’ comprehension of various editing styles suggested that young people performed significantly better with more conventionally paced material -- and, when confronted with faster editing, they did not always do as well as the older population (Messaris, 1997).

What is more important, though, is that one cannot assume that the consumption of visual images leads to any notable improvement in a person’s creative abilities in the visual realm. This is one of several ways in which visual literacy differs radically from competence in written language. Learning to read usually goes hand in hand with learning to write. But becoming fluent in the consumption of images typically takes place without any concomitant experience in their production. No matter how many thousands of hours a person may have logged in front of the TV screen, skill in the actual production of meaningful images does not come readily to the novice. Of course, anyone can press a button on a point-and-shoot camera or a video camcorder. The ability to make full use of the expressive conventions of visual media is another matter.

If we want young people to make the best use of the opportunities offered by visual media, there is indeed much that our educational system can do. In particular, it seems clear that education in visual-media production should be a major focus of a more visually oriented curriculum. What are the intellectual consequences of such an education, and what are its broader implications for a student’s cognitive development? We will address these questions by examining some examples from a feature-length movie made by college students. Produced in my Visual Communication Laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania, this comedy-thriller, titled Grad-School B-Movie, was shot and edited by students who had not had any previous film-making experience. The points made below are illustrated with images taken directly from the movie.

Thinking in Pictures

One of the most important things that novice film makers need to learn is to go beyond the literal content of images. The meaning of an image is not just a matter of the people or places that appear in it, or the action that it depicts. How those people or places or actions are portrayed -- in close-up or long shot, in balanced or asymmetrical compositions, in high-key or low-key lighting, etc. -- are essential ingredients of the creation of visual meaning.

As Rudolf Arnheim (1969) argued in his pioneering study of visual intelligence, to learn to think in pictures is to learn how to use these ingredients effectively as elements of one’s overall message. Among inexperienced film or video makers there is a very strong tendency to compose every image as if it were a snapshot. If there is a single person in the image, he or she is framed dead center; if there are two people, they are framed symmetrically and at equal distances from the viewer. It can be argued that this type of composition is based on the way in which people tend to orient themselves toward one another in real life. However, as a quick glance at almost any professionally produced movie or TV show will demonstrate, this is not the way most images are framed by professional directors and cinematographers.

An example from Grad-School B-Movie illustrates this difference. In the scene, Natasha, one of the movie’s three female protagonists, is talking to her officemate, Elsa. As the scene progresses, Natasha learns that she has made a mistake that may have serious consequences. When this scene was rehearsed, the two women were placed at equal distances from the camera, and Natasha, who is working at her computer at the beginning of the scene, was facing away from the viewer (Image 1). However, in the scene as it appears in the movie, this composition was altered radically. Natasha, who was now shown working on a laptop, was placed much closer to the viewer, facing forward rather than backward (Image 2). Although the dialogue remained exactly the same in both cases, the visual composition in the final filmed version produced a fairly substantial shift in emphasis. The fact that Natasha’s image is now much larger highlights her status as the principal character and focuses the viewer’s attention on her reactions. These two ingredients -- image size and orientation -- were also used, together with color, to underscore Natasha’s plight at the end of the scene. As Natasha realizes her mistake, Elsa moves forward and casually sits on the edge of her desk, facing away from the viewer and blocking much of the image with her body (Image 3). Natasha’s face is confined to a small section of the frame, between the black laptop and Elsa’s black-clad figure -- graphic representations of the fact that Natasha may have stepped into a trap. Back to menu

Image 1 Image 2 Image 3

Spatial Intelligence

Although the acquisition of visual literacy is valuable in and of itself, it is worth noting that the intellectual benefits of a visual education often extend beyond the realm of visual media as such. As students become more fluent in creating and combining images, they also develop certain broader mental aptitudes that these activities bring into play. This connection between visual creativity and general cognition has been explored extensively in the well-known work of Howard Gardner (1983), who used the term “spatial intelligence” as an encompassing label for the kinds of mental skills that are cultivated by working in visual media.

Spatial intelligence is the process of forming mental representations of three-dimensional reality as a basis for understanding one’s environment and interacting with it effectively. It is a type of intelligence crucial for success in professions such as architecture or carpentry, but it is also a vital ingredient of any person’s everyday physical activities. What role does it play in visual media?

An example from Grad-School B-Movie illustrates one of the most common situations in which film makers are called upon to exercise their spatial intelligence. This scene begins romantically, as a young woman and her boyfriend take a leisurely stroll across a college campus, ending up at a secluded lakeside. However, as the scene progresses, a sinister note obtrudes, and it eventually becomes clear that the couple is being followed by a mysterious woman who had been spying on them earlier in the movie.

Because of scheduling difficulties, this scene had to be filmed on two occasions: one shoot was devoted mainly to the mystery woman, the other to the romantic couple. Consequently, in the final edit it was impossible to show all three characters together in a single shot. Instead, an illusion of coherent space, time, and action had to be created through editing -- a task required for any scene involving more than one shot but made specially complex in this case by the absence of group shots and the fact that the filming took place in different locations.

In dealing with such situations, film makers can draw on a variety of devices for linking one shot to another and to the scene as a whole. In the first shot in our example, we see the young woman and her boyfriend standing by the lake, looking pensively at the tranquil scene that surrounds them. Our view of the couple is from the side, and the camera is hand-held, making the image somewhat shaky (Image 4). To an experienced film viewer, the sudden appearance of a shaky, hand-held shot in a scene in which all previous shots are smooth (the camera had been mounted on a tripod) serves as a fairly clear visual cue. It signifies that this is a “subjective” shot -- it represents the point of view of a character inside the world of the movie. In other words, this shot tells the viewer that someone is watching. Consequently, when shot number 2, a close-up of a woman, appears on the screen, the viewer is already primed to assume that this is the person who is looking at the couple (Image 5). This assumption is reinforced by the woman’s off-screen glance, which serves as a further link between the two shots, placing both the woman and the couple in the same space and time frame, even though she and they do not appear together in either shot. Next we get a close-up view of the couple from the front (Image 6). They are both looking off-screen, in different directions. Here the experienced viewer should automatically make a spatial connection between the orientation of these looks and the spatial layout that was implied by the first two shots, leading to the conclusion that the younger woman has caught a glimpse of the mystery woman off to the side. This conclusion is also suggested, of course, by the hint of a troubled expression on the actress’s face. Therefore, when the mystery woman appears again in a subsequent shot, looking straight into the camera, the viewer can infer that this is another subjective shot, this time from the younger woman’s perspective (Image 7).

Image 4 Image 5 Image 6 Image 7

This kind of connection between shots should happen spontaneously, without much conscious reflection, in the minds of experienced viewers. However, making sure such connections work properly requires considerable planning on the part of film makers and editors, and there is good evidence that this part of the film-making process can bring about an enhancement of students’ spatial intelligence. In research on the relationship between film-production experience and cognitive skills, it is editing in particular that appears to lead to the most substantial gains in spatial intelligence (Tidhar, 1984).

Back to menu

Analogical Thinking

In his discussion of spatial intelligence, Gardner (1983) also makes reference to the intellectual activity of “analogical thinking,” which he subsumes under spatial intelligence but which is, in certain respects, the broader of the terms. Analogical thinking is the ability to discern similarities between superficially disparate aspects of reality and to derive insight from those similarities. It is often claimed that analogical thinking is the basis of scientific creativity.

Analogical connections are also a pervasive feature of visual media. When a film maker uses a close-up to enhance the dramatic impact of an image, she or he is relying on an analogical connection between visual size and emotional significance. When an editor speeds up a scene’s cutting rate to make it more exciting, she or he is drawing on an analogical connection between fast pace and visceral impact. Low versus high angles, dark versus bright lighting, slow versus fast camera movement -- these and many other visual conventions are examples of visual analogies.

Analogical constructions are also a key feature of visual montage in film making, the creation of metaphorical meaning through the juxtaposition of two or more shots. This kind of analogy can be seen in a final example from Grad-School B-Movie. In this scene, a woman is being double-crossed by a business associate. As this is going on, her boyfriend is starting a relationship with another woman. The simultaneity and parallelism between these two events is dramatized in the editing transition from one scene to the next. In the first scene, we see a close-up of the woman as she confronts the businessman in his office (Image 8). The main source of light in the room is a window behind the woman’s back (not shown in the close-up). It is late in the day, and the light that comes through this window falls on the opposite wall and on the man’s face, where, filtered through venetian blinds, it creates a pattern of bright and dark (Image 9). As the confrontation between the woman and the man comes to a climax, we suddenly cut to another location, where we find a second woman preparing to meet the first woman’s boyfriend. The two scenes are unfolding at the same time, and the light effects in the second scene are similar to those in the first. Woman number 2 faces the window, just as the businessman did, and she, too, is illuminated by the rays of the setting sun, refracted into contrasting stripes as they pass through the window’s venetian blinds (Image 10). The menacing connotations of this type of lighting should be especially evident to viewers familiar with the conventions of film noir, but the more important objective of this editing transition is to underscore the equivalence between the two predatory individuals who appear on either side of the edit. In short, this is a straightforward example of a visual analogy employed as a means of emphasizing a conceptual analogy. Back to menu

Image 8 Image 9 Image 10

Implications for Visual Literacy

Visual education should be active.

Students should learn to create visual meaning, not just to consume it. The kinds of visual connections we have just examined probably come rather easily to experienced viewers. However, the ability to create such connections -- to put visual images together in ways that make sense and are compelling to a viewer -- does not come so easily. It is a form of knowledge that must be learned, and the necessary learning cannot take place purely, or even largely, through second-hand instruction. Current efforts to teach visual literacy in the form of critical viewing skills are certainly valuable and worth continuing -- but most young people need much more experience than they currently get in the use of visual images as means of expression, communication, and exploration.

In the course of learning to communicate through images, students need to move beyond the use of visual media as simple “windows on reality.”

Because images can appear to be mere copies of everyday visual reality, inexperienced creators of visual media often take it for granted that all they need to do is replicate their everyday visual experiences. More seasoned creators realize that the media’s “reality” is usually a highly artificial construct, resulting from extensive manipulation of visual conventions.

However, it would be a mistake to assume that the most important goal of a visual education is the acquisition of these conventions by themselves. Rather, what counts most is the development of the mental skills that make it possible to use visual conventions effectively. In the examples discussed earlier, we examined two, related categories of mental skills that have been associated with visual communication: spatial intelligence and analogical thinking.

Learning these skills can be considered the core objective of an actively oriented visual curriculum.

In other words, one could say that visual education should aim to enhance students’ aptitudes for spatial and analogical thinking (as well as other cognitive abilities related to visual media), so as to make them better able to make active use of the conventions of visual communication. But there is also another side to this view of visual education. As noted earlier, there is evidence that the mental skills acquired through such activities as film editing carry over into other realms of experience. In becoming “visually literate,” a person may also become more adept at other cognitive tasks that are less directly related to visual media. Although visual literacy is surely valuable for its own sake, its potential broader ramifications lend additional urgency to the argument for visual education.

Back to menu

References

Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Back

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Back (1st citation) | (2nd citation)

Messaris, P. (1997). Visual persuasion: The role of images in advertising. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Back

Messaris, P. (2001). Visual culture. In J. Lull (Ed.), Culture in the communication age (pp. 179-192). London: Routledge.
Back

Tidhar, C. (1984). Children communicating in cinematic codes: Effects on cognitive skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(5), 957-965.
Back

To print this article, click anywhere on the main text; then use your browser's print command.

Citation: Messaris, P. (2001, February). New Literacies in Action: Visual education. Reading Online, 4(7). Available: http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/lit_index.asp?HREF=/newliteracies/action/messaris/index.html

Reading Online, www.readingonline.org
Posted February 2001
© 2001 International Reading Association, Inc.   ISSN 1096-1232