Creativeness, convention, modernization. The world is delving ever deeper into the new age of literature. No more does a student sit down to read a paperback book from front to back. Rather, now the students are becoming the teachers as scholarly multimedia and technology are becoming the model of academic works. As literature is evolving, the lines between what used to be and what could be are becoming increasingly ambiguous.
In their multimedia videos, both Kuhn’s The Components of Scholarly Multimedia and Wesch’s The Machine is Us/ing Us try to show what these lines are and where the barriers are between convention and innovation. After watching both of these videos, I am supposed to be analyzing them and explaining how they show conventional rhetorical principles and how they are innovative, scholarly works. Both of these videos are definitely trying to get some message across and they are trying to do it in a different and artistic way. I will analyze each one separately.
Wesch’s The Machine is Us/ing Us does a very good job on using multimedia in a creative and interesting way to get across a point that would have been received differently through any other media. This video, I thought, used rhetoric and the four principles of scholarly media to deliver a persuasive and grasping film. Students and teachers alike could use this video as both a writing model for future pieces of work, and to learn from the message it is trying to get out that the web and technology is starting to take over and become whom we are.
Alternately, Kuhn’s video, The Components of Scholarly Multimedia, tries to do this as well – present a unique message in an even more unique format. However, this video was a flop in my opinion. I did not think the message that was trying to be conveyed was ever truly presented in a way that could be fully understood, and I was trying to wrap my head around what was going on the whole time instead of actually looking into finding the deeper meaning. It was also very repetitive in the wrong areas and bored me as a viewer. I think that this video took the balance between convention and innovation and pushed the line a few steps too far.
Obviously, these two videos were trying to take serious subject matters in literature and present them in creative and different ways. While one video was successful in doing this, the other was not. We, as academic writers, can learn from them and take the good and the bad from each. Scholarly multimedia is the new trend that is sweeping the world. But do you think there is a line? Is there a point where the balance between creativity and convention gets thrown off? I have shared my opinion on this… What’s yours?