Multimodal Discourse/ Remediation

my first impression upon completing this reading, was that multimodality allows for individualization and the ability to convey a message more effectively than in a monomodal form.

the overlapping functions of the four semiotic strata kress and van leeuwen define (discourse, design, production and distribution) brought to mind the dimensions of media from the turnley paper we read earlier this semester. it seems to me that without defining the discourse, design is impossible. and of course without the design, there is nothing to produce or distribute.

the discussion of provenance and experiential meaning potential interested me. inspiration and what springs forth from it is something i think about a lot. a few months ago i wrote a blog post about how sometimes i resent art because it makes everything seem inauthentic. i feel like everything is cliche and nothing is genuine because it is this endless cycle of provenance and experiential meaning creation. i received comments, and i have gone back and forth in my own mind, saying that it is okay and that is what art is for and that is just how the world works.

this, i think, ties into the reading by bolter and grusin from "Remediation." remediation is defined as the process of new media (specifically, in this case, digital media) defining themselves by borrowing from and/or repurposing old media. the reading also focuses on immediacy and hypermediacy. immediacy is the "perfection, or erasure, of the gap between the signifier and the signified, such that a representation is perceived to be a thing itself [via]." hypermediacy's goal is make the viewer aware of the medium/media in use.

essentially, the argument made in Remediation is that new media is necessarily derived from old media. and it can never escape that or hide it or transcend it. "Repurposing as remediation is both what is 'unique to digital worlds' and what denies the possibility of that uniqueness." This quote reminds me of my blog post about resentment for art. Because everything is derivative, nothing is pure. And i don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, but it can get me down on days i'm feeling particularly uncreative. i think the lesson to be taken away from this reading is that it's okay to build upon the past and make it better; make it your own.

so basically, the provenance of an old medium can lead to the experiential meaning potential of a new medium being realized and help to form the new medium until it takes on its own "personality," if you will.