The differences in these two papers is tremendous. Even though both are asking us to analyze a piece of art that is sending a message to their viewer, the process is very different. When analyzing graffiti I felt I was doing more introspective work than when analyzing an advertisement. I felt as if there was no right or wrong way to interpret graffiti as long as it made me feel some sort of way. On the contrary, I feel like advertisements are so calculated that the message they are sending is specific and underlying. In addition to all of this, we went on a field trip to see graffiti, but I had to go looking for advertisements myself. The internet is filled with millions and millions of different print ads so the possibilities for my paper were endless and were not just going to jump out at me. Graffiti, on the other hand, spoke to me. I was drawn in by a certain mural and from then on I knew this was my muse for my paper. For this current essay, not only did we have to go looking for the advertisement, but we had to have more than one piece to analyze. This challenged us to find three pieces that all had some relation to each other that we could call on to be the topic of our paper.
One the pieces were chosen and I knew what I was writing about the process for each paper was rather similar. I started by outlining my thoughts, then aggressively typing, which came out to sound more like word vomit than an actual paper, to fill in this outline. Then I started to organize and revise and add until my paper was complete. I think it is interesting how the end products and processes are rather similar but the initial way of finding a topic to write about are so different.
No comments:
Post a Comment