SV: [Sigia-l] Findability is dead, Long live ummm... Meaning?

[Stig V Andersen DR-INTERAKTIV]

On 3/28/03 4:38 PM, "Jim Kauffman" <jkauff at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Reader-Response theory is not very useful, because it makes a common-sense
> notion academic.

George Olsen wrote:
> The various lit-crit theories over the last century have generally focused
> on one of these points, often to the exclusion of the others. As Jim says,
> lit-crit theorists seem to have a talent for making common-sense notion
> arcane. 

> BTW, this model is also pretty close to one used by family therapists to
> talk about interpersonal communications.

I disagree with Jim and George. As I read Stacy's post, she merely suggest
that it might be worth discussing, whether reader-response theory has
anything to offer the IA craft. If you reject a particular (or any) academic
approach that tries to understand what happens between the user and the
website just because "it makes a common-sense notion academic", the craft
will wither and become a workman's craft and never evolve.


 
Best regards
Stig Andersen
 
Danish Broadcasting Corporation
Senior Information Architect
(MA in Comparative Literature and Modern Culture)



-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: George Olsen [mailto:golsen.wlist at pobox.com] 
Sendt: 30. marts 2003 04:23
Til: sigia-l at asis.org
Emne: Re: [Sigia-l] Findability is dead, Long live ummm... Meaning?


 

To avoid a lengthy rehash of various literary theories, let me summarize
them as follows:

- Authors (in the broad sense) often, but not always, create their works
with an particular audience (persons) in mind.

- Authors often, but not always, choose their words carefully to convey
particular meanings. (As the Mark Twain saying goes, it's the difference
between "lightning" and "lightning bug.")  That said, authors inevitably
have a worldview that may consciously or unconsciously affect their work.

- The work itself can be observed separately from both the author's intent
and the audience's interpretation. Generally these observations aren't that
interesting -- it's stuff like word frequencies in a text, or that a C#
scale is used in a piece of music. But these characteristics have been used
to identify paintings based on brushstrokes and pigments, or to identify the
previously-anonymous author of "Primary Colors" by identifying a high
frequency of unique phrasings he used in that and other works.

- While the author may have a particular intent, audiences will make their
own interpretations. (This is the essence of "camp," for example, Ed Wood
thought he was making serious horror movies. Audiences laughed at their
ineptitude.) Incidentally, current brand strategy thinking recognizes that
no matter how much effort is spent on brand identity, ultimately brand is
defined in the eyes of the consumers.

- The audience's interpretation may be affected by who they believe the
author to be. Your reading of the "Baghdad Blogger" will undoubtedly differ
depending on whether you think he's a genuine Iraqi, a CIA psychological
operation, or just someone who enjoys spoofing the public.


George

------------
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
*Plain text, please; NO Attachments

ASIST IA 03 Summit: Making Connections
http://www.asist-events.org/IASummit2003/

Searchable list archive:   http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l