Nascimento1

Khristian Nascimento
Werner
English Comp
23 Nov 15

Digital environments and how peoples arguments change based on audiences and environments

Both Rudolf Arnheim and David Bartholomae have differing views on writing and people
and how they interact. Arnheim believes symbols and abstractness are more effective than
writing plainly or using symbols or signs that directly portray what is intended. Bartholomae
believes that writing for your audience, and making sure your writing fits the audience is what is
more important. It is clear that both men would have differing views on certain aspects of the
argument. But I believe the biggest disagreement would be how peoples audiences change
depending on what kind of digital environment they are interacting in.
In the many digital environments we interact with in our lives. Almost all of them offer
an outlet to satiate the human desire of social interaction. Whether through text, online forums,
or video games. These environments are created for human interaction. Through text,
Bartholomae would argue the content of the text should be suited for the reader. Arnheims
beliefs would have us, instead, believe that the recipient of the text message does not matter, but
instead the content should be left slightly up to the reader. To add abstractness to the message,
make the person think of what is being said rather than tell them in an exact manner. Here in this
scenario I believe both ideas meld together. The recipient will determine the abstractness of the

Nascimento2

text, or what symbols someone may add into it. A person sending a text to a coworker on an
important matter would not go through the trouble of using abstract language or even symbols.
The recipient of the message requires that the message be clean cut and to the point, no symbols,
signs, or pictures. Although if the recipient of the text had been a longtime friend or partner, then
the message may be more colorful. Strewn with symbols and enough abstractness for both
people to understand the meaning, but still have to use their imaginations to get to that

Nascimento3

conclusion.

Least
abstra
ct
Emails
with
teache
rs

Online
forums and
texting
Most Abstract
Video games

Nascimento4

Throughout all major digital environments audiences change. And the actions, and
reactions, of those in the environments change. In an online forum full of strangers arguing over
one issue over the other, only the comments with the best response to the audience in the
particular forum will be viewed. Here Bartholomaes views on Basic writers takes shape. We get
neither a technical discussion nor an academic discussion but a lesson on life (Bartholomae
405). The basic writers, the less viewed in this environment. Are the ones who provide the
lesson on life instead of the academic or technical discussion that Bartholomae speaks of. To
the audience in these online forums a basic writers comments are ignored because they lack the
substance they search for. Although Arnheims use of signs could possibly be accepted here, the
concrete clean cut explanations or discussions are what are important to this audience. Instead

Textingsymbols and
quick less
thought out
interaction

M
e
Professorslong well
thought out
responses

GamingQuick
descriptive
word usage

building on one main discussion rather than the thoughts of multiple people reacting to one piece
of the discussion.
Just as forums are full of broad audiences, so are online games. Online gaming can be
filled of people from far reaching cultures, or from two houses down from each person. These

Nascimento5

small environments can bring any two people, or any groups of people together. So many
audiences vying for a higher place in the discussions being held or for the rights to further their
interests in the gaming world. This makes cause for very blurred lines in the audience that your
writing is focused at. Here anything being spoken of must follow Arnheims words. it needs to
reflect some of the complexity of form by which realistic works depict the wealth of human
experience (151). With all the audiences viewing your take on any subject being discussed, or
occurrence in the world of any game being played. Anything being said must fall into the realm
of abstractness. To be as abstract as possible so as many people from as many different audiences
may be able to view it and therefore react to it in a way that suits them, and therefore leaves a
personal and lasting thought. An experience in game is not described with 100% descriptiveness.
You simply give the bare minimum that will begin the chain reaction in the other persons brain
to then interpret what was said to them in an efficient, and personal way. This person may then
be able to find use of what was said, and use it it in a way that suits them in a personal way. This
melting pot of audiences causes the intellectual, academic, or technical discussions that
Bartholomae believes are the most important in human reaction aside, and instead adopt
Arnheims belief of abstractness to better suit their quick and efficient in game lifestyles.
In digital environments a visual can work just as well as a well thought out clean
argument. As Mary E. Hocks says in her article Understanding Visual Rhetoric in Digital
Writing Environments. media requires a complex relationship between verbal and visual
meanings (630). Here the mixture of images or symbols and text can further focus what is being
said and easier to understand. A correct use of a visual to strengthen an argument can mean more
and reach more people than almost any textual argument someone could make. Visuals, any
pictures, symbols, and signs not only makes us think, but make us feel. In Anthony Blairs article

Nascimento6

The Possibility and Actuality of Visual Arguments he uses the example This steak tastes like
show leather (25). When the steak is compared to shoe leather our minds instantly imagine the
taste and feeling of eating shoe leather, and therefore the steak must not be that good. One small
visual causes people to imagine the taste. The abstractness that comes from the use of visual
languages causes people to use imaginations to reach the conclusion they do. Because of this
people are able to reach larger and more audiences than someone who speaks in a one tone and
ne meaning way. Things that can be interpreted in different personal ways last longer and find
meaning in different ways. To this day people still interpret Shakespeare in varying ways.
In Julian Dibbels article A Rape in Cyberspace he tells a story of a cyber rape
and how it affects the users in game and in real life. The whole virtual space of LambdaMOO
was words used to describe a specific visual of where someone was in its space. In this
environment of online gaming visuals were key. The audience valued descriptive and visual
language to describe the setting, characters, and interactions. I believe that in Video games we
would see Arheims use of symbols would be best suited. This environment is entirely visual,
symbolic. The people that converge in LambdaMOO are not people, but representations of
people. Mr Bungle was not a Bisquick-faced clown dressed in cum-stained harlequin garb
(Dibbel 1). He was instead, descriptive words used to symbolize just that. Video games are
abstract, and imaginative environments where the audience uses imagination to quickly and
efficiently fill gaps. Personally speaking over a video game with friends or other gamers is
something completely foreign to any of my relationships in real life. We speak in very quick fast
paced conversations and fill in the gaps in our heads. Naturally more symbolic usage of words
come out of this environment.

Nascimento7

Varying on any given digital environment we as people would use many different forms of
communicating. Whether with quick and abstract responses, or with well thought through
academic compositions. The underlying factor of the effectiveness of communicating over one
way or another is based almost entirely on who the audience is, and throughout all digital
environments these audiences change drastically. I believe the formal thought through
communication brought up by Bartholomae would be less common than the abstract and concise
use of language and symbols brought by with Arnheim and Dibbel. I believe people dont truly
have full creative control over what is being said by them when truly everything people say is
dictated by who it is being said to. As if all compositions and spoken word are shackled to an
anchor that is an audience.

Word Count: 1,374

Works cited
Arnheim, Rudolf. Visual Thinking. Berkeley: U of California, 1969. Print.
Bartholomae, David. Writing on the Margins: Essays on Composition and Teaching. Boston:
Bedford/St. Martins, 2005. Print.
Dibbel, Julian a rape in cyberspace My Tiny Life.
1993. Web. 30 Nov. 2015
Hocks, Mary E. "Understanding Visual Rhetoric in Digital Writing Environments." College
Composition and Communication 54.4 (2003): 629. Web.

Nascimento8

Blair, J. Anthony. "The Possibility and Actuality of Visual Arguments." Argumentation Library
Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation (2011): 205-23. Web.

Nascimento9

Nascimento10