DOCUMENT RESUME

'ED 380 087 IR 017 008

AUTHOR Metallinos, NikosTITLE Approaches to Visual Communication Media Criticism

and Their Application to Television Genres.PUB DATE [95]

NOTE 21p.; In: Imagery and Visual Literacy: SelectedReadings from the Annual Conference of theInternational Visual Literacy Association (26th,Tempe, Arizona, October 12-16, 1994); see IR 016977.

PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) Speeches/ConferencePapers (150)

EDRS PRICE MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Communication (Thought Transfer); *Criticism;

Evaluation Methods; *Film Criticism; ForeignCountries; Graphic Arts; Literature Reviews; *MassMedia; *Television Viewing; Theories; Visual Arts;Visual Literacy

IDENTIFIERS *Visual Communication

ABSTRACTSeveral schools of thought regarding media criticism,

derived from diverse disciplines and literary sources, have emergedduring the last decade. To examine their application to the visualcommunication media arts such as film and television, this paper: (1)

reviews the literature of media criticism; (2) discusses variousapproaches to visual communication media criticism; and (3) providesexamples of the application of existing visual communicationapproaches to criticism. Discussion includes parameters of visualcommunication media arts, critical approach versus critical method,and selection of criteria for the evaluation of visual communicationmedia arts. The following critical approaches and their applicationsare examined: journalistic; historical; sociological; rhetorical;narrative; cultural; semiological; psychological; ideological; genre;producer's; and visual literacy. It is suggested that the developmentof visual media criticism is directly related to and depends upon thedevelopment of verified theories of the various visual communicationmedia arts. (Contains 74 references.) (MAS)

*****************i.A;,**************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made* from the original document. *

***********************************************************************

Approaches to Visual CommunicationMedia Criticism and Their

Application to Television Genres

U S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOtke of Educational Research and improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

O This document nes been reproduced asWaived Iron the person or otoemzettonorigmatrng .1

O Mmor Clanges have been made (0 improvereproduction ouatity

Points of view or opinions stated in !Ns docu-ment do not necossaniy represent OficialOEM position or policy

r--

0

Nikos Metallinos

Abstract

Several schools of thought regardingmedia criticism have emerged during thelast decade derived from diversedisciplines and literary sources. Toexamine their application to the visualcommunication media arts such as film andtelevision genres, this paper (a) reviewsthe literature of media criticism, (b)discusses various approaches to visualcommunication media criticism, and (c)provides examples of the application ofexisting visual communication mediaapproaches to criticism. This papersuggests that the development of visualcommunication media criticism is directlyrelated to and depends upon thedevelopment of verified theories of thevarious visual communication media arts.

Introduction

Whereas literary sources referring tocriticism of the arts and literature areplentiful and easily found, researchfindings that refer to critical methods ofvisual arts in general, and visualcommunication media arts in particular, aredisproportionately limited. Literarycriticism methods that analyze, evaluate,and interpret such forms as poetry, essays,novels, chronicles, etc., and fine artscriticism that evaluates such conventionalart forms as painting, architecture, theater,film, music, sculpture, etc., are alreadyestablished as unique academic discourses;they are eadily available and widely

-PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

Alice Walker

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

publicized because these fields are foundedon repeatedly verified theories. On theother hand, the noticeable shortage ofgenuine visual communication media artscritical methodologies is due to the lack ofscientific theories that support theirfoundation across the board. Whereas it istrue that such visual communication mediaarts as photography, theater, and film, forexample, are based on verified theories, asacademic disciplines such new visualcommunication media arts as television,holography, computer graphics, etc., lackempirical research findings in support ofthe constructs of their basic theories.Consequently, the development of anacademic discourse such as the study ofthe visual ct mmunication media arts isdirectly related to, and influenced by, thedevelopment of critical methodologies thatanalyze them. Could the opposite be true?

This paper argues that thedevelopment of genuine criticalmethodologies for the evaluation of thevarious genres of visual communicationmedia arts will contribute, decisively,towards the development of scientificallysound theories governing the field of studyknown as visual communication mediaarts. It suggests that by reviewing theexisting methods of art criticism ingeneral, and examining the criticalmethodologies scatterel in such areas ascommunication, mass media, massculture, popular arts, etc., we could endup with those standards of criticism thatare most applicable and most appropriate

IVLA - 281

for the evaluation of the various productsof visual communication media. Suchevaluation standards could become theconstructs from which the major theoriesof the field could be developed since themain objective of critical inquiry is tocreate the standards for the evaluation ofan art form. These standards become theindependent variables in the verification oftheories stemming from experimentalresearch methodologies in those cases inwhich such empirical research is lacking.This is precisely the purpose of theempirical research methodology known asdescriptive, or critical.

In support of the argument that thedevelopment of genuine criticalmethodologies will, retrospectively,contribute towards the development of thefield of study known as visualcommunication media arts, we must firstexamine briefly what constitutes this field,we must then define and discuss the use ofthe term's approaches (as opposed togenuine critical methods) and, finally, weneed to review the areas from which thestandards for the evaluation of visualcommunication media art forms must bedrawn. After that brief introduction wecan examine the various approaches tovisual communication media arts criticismand their application to various televisiongenres.

The Parameters of VisualCommunication Media Arts

What constitutes the field of visualcommunication media arts? Collectively,the media of painting, photography, film,television, holojraphy, computer imagery,and multimedia cs-nstitute the field ofvisual communication media arts.Cartoons, drawings, photographs,frescoes, icons, film and televisionprograms, holograms, video games, someforeis of advertising and some material onthe internet arc visual communicationmedia products, objects, or events that arcseen or seen and heard. They arc visualimages or pictures with either apparent orimplied motion and sounds. Their mainpurpose is to communicate messages either

symbolically (i.e.,, the dove conveyingpeace), or as representations of objects orevents (i.e., a photograph of a person), oras abstract forms of an object or event(i.e., a cartoon or a drawing of a :ree).They are the products of media thatemploy their own instruments, materials,and techniques in the construction of thearts, events, or objects.

As a field of study, the visualcommunication media arts embrace suchrelated disciplines as visual and auditoryperception, communication, sociology,media technologies, art criticism,psychology, visual anthropology, and ahost of others. It is mostly concerned withpictures and the ways that they arestructured and delivered to communicateconcepts, emotions, thoughts, and soforth. The total communicative effect ofthe visual media arts often depends on theskill, knowledge, inspiration, andsensibility of the media artist. In short, itrelies on the artistic merits of the mediaproduct and this is of paramountimportance to the visual communicationmedia field of study.

Critical Approach Versus CriticalMethod

Why use the term approach, asopposed to critical methods? The termapproach is preferred for the followingreasons: (a) An approach is traditional inthat it originates from a known, and oiler,well established, school of thought,whereas a method is a technique by whichthe critical process is achieved after themedium and its products have beenaccepted. (b) An approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism placesthe emphasis of the critical inquiry on acrucial aspect (mostly on the message orcontent), whereas a method of criticism ofthe visual communication media artsconsiders the medium as well as theaudience. (c) Whereas an approach isbasically built on reasoning and inferencesto develop its argumentation (linearprocess), the true critical method is an in-depth or vertical process resulting from thediverse arguments on production,

IVLA 282 3

audience, and ideological factors, all ofk.hich are necessary for the effective

analysis and evaluation of visualcommunication media products. In short,it is the approach to visual communicationmedia art criticism that generates themethod and not the other way around. Assoon as visual communication media artforms (i.e., documentaries or westerns)create their genuine critical methodologies,they are bound to be considered unique artforms encompassing their own artisticelements and appreciated for their ownaesthetic merits.

Selection of Criteria forthe Evaluation of VisualCommunication Media Arts

Where are the standards for theevaluation of visual communication mediaarts to be found? A meaningful discussionof what constitutes the standards for theevaluation of a particular film or televisionprogram must start first with theexplanation and understanding of thegeneric terms media, media products,communication media programs, visualmedia arts, to mention only the mostcommonly used terms in media criticism.The responsible critic and/or evaluator ofsuch commonly produced visualcommunication media art forms as filmand television programs should obtaincomplete background information of theseterms in all their ramifications. Theliterature is plentiful and the varioussources are easily accessible. Therefore,only the basic concepts of these terms willbe reviewed here as they relate to thecreation of the standards for visualcommunication media criticism.

It is known that the term media refersto channels that convey messages for massaudience, as well as to the primaryelectronic channels that mediatecommunication in other contexts (Scodari& Thorpe, 1992). Television, as one ofthe most prominent visual communicationmedia, is a mass audience orientedmedium, mediating messages to vast,diversified, and heterogeneous audiences.This factor is crucial for the development

of television criticism as a visualcommunication medium.

Media Products such as films andtelevision shows are the artifacts producedby the media of film and television. Thethreefold process of production,transmission, and presentation of thevisual communication media programsinvolves a network of institutions andpeople that the critics must consider. Forexample, the production process oftelevision programs involves theestablishment of powerful corporatetelevision networks and media institutionswith people working in the business,technology, or creative areas of themedium. Knowledge and understandingof the production units and the laws thatgovern them as institutions are necessarystandards in media criticism. Thetransmission process of televisionprograms arranges the means by whichthey reach the audience such as regularbroadcasting, cable, close circuit, and paytelevision, and direct satellite broadcasting.This, in turn, decides the nature of theparticular program in relationship to itsintended audience. This is anotherimportant standard that the media criticmust consider. The presentation processof the televised program is yet another keyfactor in media criticism. It decides thescheduling of the particular program that,in turn, determines the type of programpresented.

The generic term communicationmedia, in the context of the presentdiscussion, refers to the ultimate functionof all media, and particularly the visualcommunication medium of television tomediate or communicate messages to avast audience. The communicativepurpose of the medium, therefore, isunquestionable. The fact that all visualcommunication media, and particularlytelevision, are exposed to a great numberof obstacles that hinder the communicationprocess needs to be emphasized. From thevast literature in the field we have learnedthat tr,e communication flow can breakdo' ,n in any stage of the process. Forexample, it could be that the cause of the

IVLA - 283 4

breakdown occurred in the sender, themessage area, in cases in which the issuesmediated are not clear, cohesive, orinteresting. It could be that the images, thepictures, technologically and artistically,are not faithful, clear, or truthfulrepresentations of the intended message inwhich case it is the medium that causes thebreakdown of the communication act.Perhaps the audience, at the receiving endof the continuum was not ready or capableof translating and comprehending themediated message and remained,therefore, unmotivated by the program.This motivation, translated incommunication media terms as feedback,is another crucial factor involved in thecommunication process that may cause itsbreakdown. In the case of televisionwatching, the feedback is indirect andcommunicated by the switching of thechannels, anger, disappointment, ordiscomfort of the viewers. The variousstages and areas in which thecommunication breakdown could occur areindicated in the visual communicationmedia model. We call the breakdown noiseinterference that can occur in any of thefeatures shown in the model below. Itusually occurs in the transmission andreception stages and for this reason noisehas been placed between the generated

ENCODER

M1

FILM/TV/IMAGESGENERATED

visual Inessage, the channel, the receiver,and the feedback areas (see Figure 1).

The popular visual communicationmedia of film and television consist, forthe most part, of images that move and areenhanced with audio, three elements thatare unique to these two media andconstitute the bases for the criticalevaluation of the programs they produce.Visual images tell the story. Depending onthe way that they are presented on thescreens (e.g., as long shots, mediumshots, close-ups and zoom-ins), and thesequence they follow (e.g., cuts,dissolves, fades), pictures constitute thenarrative aspect of the show. Obviously,the visual communication media programcritics, particularly.of film and television,should be aware of both the technologyand the artistry involved in the creation ofthe images of the program. The narratedtext (script), along with various othernatural or added sounds, support thevisual images to tell the story; they assistin the development of the characters, helpto establish the atmosphere of theprogram, and enhance the moodunderlining the program. Naturally, thevisual communication media critics musthave knowledge of script writing, story

COMMON INTEREST

ffe

,01 MEANING N,,

I tt %r t

0 CHANNEL '

NOISE

DECODER

(BEHAVIORAL CHANGES-BEYOND THE MESSAGE

',CHANNEL- FEEDBACK/

MEANING/

COMMON INTEREST

Figure 1. Visual Communication Media Model

DECODER

M2FILM/TVIMAGES

RECEIVED

ENCODER

(BEHAVIORAL CHANGE-S)

1VLA - 284 r

and character development, the functionsperformed by various sounds as well astheir technology and artistry in theproduction of the program. Finally, themotion of the images that creates the 3enseof liveliness and reality on the screen andprovides depth to the pictures is yetanother factor that visual communicationcritics must acknowledge. Critics mustexplain how motion helps to create,technologically and artistically, theprogram and they must be able to commenton the importance of motion in theperception, recognition, and artisticsuccess of the film or television program.In summary, this brief review of (a) theparameters of the field of visualcommunication media arts, (b) thedistinction between critical methodologyand approach to criticism, and (c) the areasfrom which the standards for criticismmust be drawn, provides the necessarybackground for the discussion of theapproaches to visual communication mediaarts criticism that follows.

Criticism Approachesand Their Application

As stated earlier, the mostrepresentative media of the field of studyknown as visual communication media artsare film and television, and between thesetwo media the most popular, the mostwidely used, and the most powerful istelevision. Therefore, it demands greaterattention, a closer look at the products itproduces, and better consideration as anart form. Since television theorists andresearchers have not yet managed toorganize its numerous constructs so thatthe concise theories that support themedium can be formalized, thedevelopment of appropriate criticalmethodologies might be the way to closethe gap.

From the traditional studies of thearts, communication, mass media, populararts, public or pop arts, variousapproaches to television criticism haveemerged. Although not fully developed,one can find in today's literature a varietyof sources discussing television critical

techniques, inquiries, reviews, reports,commentaries, few of which are generictelevision critical methods, as describedearlier.

The serious efforts during the lastfifty years of a considerable number oftelevision scholars, media critics,observers, communicators, media analystssuch as Adler and Cater (1975); Cater andAdler (1975), Cawelti (1971, 1976),Crombeck (1984), Fiskie (1987), Fiskieand Hartley (1978), Hadas (1962),McLuhan (1964), Newcomb (1974,1987), Rybacki and Rybacki (1991),Scodari and Thorpe (1992), Seldes (1956,1961), Shayon (1962, 1971), Smith(1980), Vande Berg and Wenner (1991),and many others, have resulted in theformation of a plethora of criticalapproaches to television programs that arereviewed below. The variety ofapproaches and . their numerousapplications to existing televisionprograms suggest that unless the emphasisshifts from its present linear or contentoriented practice to a more appropriate forthe medium's idiosyncrasies vertical one,television criticism as an academicdiscourse will not be achieved. Theconsideration of the television program asa visual communication medium art formthat is analyzed, evaluated, and interpretedon the basis of its artistic or aesthetic meritis what genuine television criticism oughtto be (Zettl, 1978). Therefore, we canpresently talk about existing approaches totelevision criticism but we are not yetready to talk about fully developedtelevision criticism as we do in film andtheater criticism. Well established ascritical methods in literature, the arts, andmore specifically in such visualcommunication media arts as theater andfilm, the reviewed critical approacheslisted below and their application to thevarious television genres derive theirorigins from literary and art criticism andthey are: (1) the Journalistic Approach, (2)the Sociological Approach, (3) theHistorical Approach, (4) the RhetoricalApproach, (5) the Semio logical Approach,(6) the Cultural Study Approach, (7) theGenre Approach, (8) the Producer's

IVLA - 285 6

Approach, (9) the Narrative Approach,(10) the Ideological Approach, (11) thePsychological Approach, and (12) theVisual Literacy Approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism.

The Journalistic Approach

This is the oldest approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism but ithas found its wider application totelevision criticism as reviews,commentaries, reports, opinions, andshort essays on various kinds of televisionprograms. The major characteristics of thejournalistic approach to visualcommunication media arts in general, andto television in particular, are as follows:(a) They are not traditional literarycritiques but mostly subjective opinions,individual views, and personal commentsof media writers; (b) They are tailored forand addressed to the mass readers ofmagazines and newspapers written mostlyto entertain rather than to inform; (c) Theyare mostly concerned with the sociologicalissues of the program and seldom refer tothe medium and its artistic potentials.

Examples of various kinds ofjournalistic approaches to televisioncriticism can be found in such popularNorth American newspapers andmagazines as Me New York Times, TheWashington Post, The Saturday Review,The Los Angeles Times, The Globe andMail, The New Yort-Pr, TV Guide,Variety, Newsweek, and Time magazines,to mention only those where knownjournalists write television critiques.

Although the overall contributions ofjournalists to the development of televisionas a unique medium turned out to bepositive, antagonism and competition(mostly during the early years) of printmedia and electronic media hindered thedevelopment of television as an art form(Himmelstein, 1981). The journalisticapproach to television criticism leaves outkey elements of critical inquiry that arecrucial for the development of televisioncriticism as a responsible academicdiscourse.

A striking example of howjournalistic writing does not meet thestandards of critical inquiry is MorrisWolfe's (1985) book Jolts: The TVWasteland and the Canadian Oasis. Wolfe(1985), a Canadian journalistic televisioncritic, has attempted to analyze the contentof American and Canadian televisiongenres, across the board, resulting in aseries of unsupported opinions strictlybased on the social context of populartelevision programs of the two countries(Metallinos, 1991).

In their discussion of journalisticform of writing on television criticism,Vande Berg and Wenner (1991) suggestthat: ". . . journalistic news, gossip,opinions, columns, and reviews ofprograms are not television criticism" (p!18). Furthermore, they indicate that thefeatures of journalistic writing such asaudience, style, vocabulary, length,proofs, all fall short in their attempt tofully describe, evaluate, and interpret thetelevision programs (Vande Berg &Wenner, 1991). The critical questionsmost typical to the journalistic approach totelevision criticism can be drawn fromvarious areas of journalistic criticismwhich, according to Vande Berg andWenner (1991) are: (a) personality or stargossip, mostly found in TV Guide andtabloids, (b) industry news updatescommonly found in Channels ofCommunication, Broadcasting Magazine,Videography, Video Systems, (c)previews, mostly found in such popularmagazines and newspapers as TV Guide,The Soap Opera Digest, Variety, Time,Newsweek, and (d) opinion essays,commonly found in The New York Times,Channels of Communication, The NewYorker.

Although the journalistic approach tovisual communication media arts criticismis here to stay, its application does notsubstantially contribute toward thedevelopment of the media as art forms andparticularly to "academic televisioncriticism" ( Vandc Berg & Wenner, 1991,p. 23; Bywater & Sobchack, 1989).

IVLA - 286 7

The Historical Approach

The Historical Approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism isamong the older approaches and centers onthe historical events that caused thedevelopment of the particular visualcommunication media art forms. Thebases of criticism of the arts are drawnfrom history, the discipline that studiessystematically past events that effectnations, arts, and sciences. The varioushistorical circumstances that help the artforms to be developed, along with thecultural institutions of the society, are theareas from which the standards for theevaluation of the historical approach tovisual communication media arts aredrawn.

From the existing literary sourcesthat acknowledge the historical approach tovisual communication media arts criticism,discuss its objectives, and underline itsfunction, there are three that need to becited here because each one gives a uniqueperspective to the historical approach tomedia efiticisrn.

Bywater and Sobchack (1989)believe that the functions performed by thehistorical approach to film criticism, whichcan be extended to all visualcon nunication media' art forms, are todescribe them in their historical context, toanalyze them in terms of their aesthetic,economic, and social efforts, and toevaluate them in terms of their historicalimpact. These functions are mostapplicable to film, for which these authorssuggest that:

. . . the historical approach to filmcriticism is always marked by hecontext of history both the generalhistory of the world from the timethe first films were made until now,and also the specific history of themovies as a business, astechnological achievement, as artisticartifact. Those using a historicalapproach when assessing filmsattempt to understand how filmshave happened in time. (p. 139)

Scodari and Thorpe (1992) recognizethe importance of the historical approach tovisual communication media arts criticism,and suggest that this approach is closelyrelated to social criticism because allhistorical events occur within a socialcontext. They theorize that:

The social/historical track is one thatexamines critical objects from theperspective of how they mightcontribute to the comprehension ofourselves and our society. In thisinstance, the critic might examine thechanges or benchmarks that haveoccurred over a period of time thehistorical events that can bedocumented as part of this network'sculture, particularly as they mightreflect the larger culture. (p. 18)

Vande Berg and Wenner (1991)acknowledge the importance of thehistorical approach to television criticism,discuss its various functions, andunderline its domains. They maintain that:

Historical criticism describes andanalyzes television texts within theirhistorical contexts. Historicalanalyses attempt to assess the roles.that technological, economic,political, legal, regulatory, andaesthetic factors have played in thecreation, reception, and impact oftelevision texts in a particularsociety. Historical analyses, then,examine the intersection ofproducers, texts, and society. p.

31)

From the comments provided by

these three sources the followingsuggestions emerge: (a) The is aneminent and unavoidable connectionbetween historical and sociologicalapproaches to visual communication mediaarts criticism which makes the task of theart critic more demanding. (b) Therelationship of the historical approach withthat of the sociological is considered alimitation, rather than an advantage assome television scholars have alsosuggested (Cheserbo, 1987; Marc, 1984;

IVLA - 287

Williams, 1992, etc.). (c) This approachto visual communication media criticism isnot only one of the older ones, it is alsoone of the most fundamental for thed_velopment of visual communicationmedia arts criticism, and for their entirefield of study.

The historical critics ask suchhistorically oriented questions as: Howhave the generic, artistic, aesthetic, or eveneconomic developments of a film or atelevision program changed over time?From the various television genres inexistence, such programs as the Civil War,the World at War, are better suited to acritical inquiry of the historical approach.However, any popular television program(including children's television programsor cartoons) can be evaluated in terms ofevolutionary changes (Williams, 1991).

The Sociological Approach

This approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism isamong the older, most traditional, andwidely used approaches. It derives itsorigin from the social sciences and artscriticism, which examine them through theframework of social relations and socialfunctions. It centers on the various socialissues, rules, relationships, andprocedures contained in the film andtelevision scripts and interprets the socialeffects of the programs on the viewer. Inits broader adaptation and usage, thesociological approach to televisioncriticism considers television programs,particularly the popular ones in prime time(such as situation comedies and detectivestories), to be the catalysts of thesocialization process and the ones thatinfluence the social, occupational,economic, and a host of other types ofbehavioral occurrences of the individualviewers (Berger, 1982; McLuhan &Powers, 1989; Mc Quail, 1969; Sklar,1980).

The sociological critics of thepopular visual communication media artsof film and television draw their standardsof criticism from the chances that take

place in society and explain howinstitutions are effected by the programs.The sociological critics' concerns also liein classes, status, and races. Theyexamine the creation of stereotypes andlifestyles as the result of people's exposureto these media programs. It is the concernof the sociological critic of visualcommunication media arts to point out towhat extent the arts express society's basicideologies and the degree to which theseart forms gratify the needs and wants ofthe citizens.

The sociological approach to visualcommunication media arts of film andtelevision is a respected approach tocriticism. It helps to predict the coverteffects the program's content has on theviewers. It stimulates the creation ofserious and effective public debates. Thisapproach to criticism, however, is limitedfor the following reasons: (a) It centers itsefforts primarily on issues that concernsociety and its institutions, stripping thecontent to its bare minimum by placing theemphasis on content factors rather thanmedia related constructs. Undoubtedly,this helps the development of theories ofmass communication meuia (DeFleur &Ball-Rokeach, 1975), but does notcontribute directly toward the developmentof generic visual communication mediaarts criticism. (b) The role of the mediumas an art form which shapes the mediatedmessage is often left out of the sociologicalapproach that is heavily content oriented.Critical studies in mass communicationmedia suggest that this overemphasis oncontent and descriptive analyses ofsociological issues in film and televisionprogramming has helped to maintain thetradition of message rather than a mediumoriented critical analysis (Avery & Eason,1991). (c) It down-plays the role of thevisual communication media products asart forms with artistic merits and aestheticpotentials. Sociological critics are notinterested in the development of the mediaproducts as art forms capable ofexpressing emotions and feelings. Rather,they see them as social signifiers andcultural commentary.

IVLA - 288 9

The critics of the sociologicalapproach to visual communication mediaarts ask such questions as: What are theunderlying sociological (and other)reasons that make a film or a televisionprogram so popular? What were the socialinfluences of the program on its viewers?Such popular films as Top Gun and primetime television sitcoms as The Bill CosbyShow can be effectively analyzed andevaluated with the sociological approach tovisual communication media arts criticism,among others.

The Rhetorical Approach

This approach to art criticism derivesfrom the ancient Greek philosophersProtagoras and Aristotle who developedrhetoric as an art form in public speaking.Through the centuries it has been modifiedand reformed and has been used by manycritics of the media arts including speech,storytelling, film, and television (Rybacki& Rybacki, 1991). It is the mostconventional of art criticism and the mostdescriptive because it draws its standardsfrom such traditional rhetorical schemata,or techniques of persuasion, as ethos (orethical consideration), pathos (ortruthfulness of the argumentation), andlogos (or narrative standards), regardlessof the art and the medium that carries it.The rhetorical approach considers all theprotagonists involved in the acts ofcreating, transforming, and responding tothe art such as the sender, the medium,and the audience.

The wide application of the rhetoricalapproach to visual communication mediaarts criticism, and primarily to televisionprograms, is rather recent and it comesfrom the works of speech communicationand media scholars starting with KennethBurke (1950) :nd Karlyn Campbell (1972)and continued with the works of Foss(1989), Medhurst and Benson (1984),Smith (1980), Farrell (1989), etc. Criticalstudies that examine how media messagesare structured to influence audiencesbelong to the rhetorical critical approach.The persuasive role of the mediated eventis another major concern of this approach

to criticism, and it is for this reason thatthe critics look for those particular aspectsof the program that exert the greatestpersuasive power on their audiences.

A s all network televisioncommercials indicate, their ultimatesuccess is due to their excessive use andpersuasive techniques. Application,therefore, of this approach to televisioncriticism is very useful as it identifies thehidden intentions (the persuasiveobjectives) of the program. A rhetoricalanalysis of a television documentary, forexample, might reveal the persuasive,subjective, and biased intentions of theproducers that, otherwise, will passunnoticed.

The rhetorical approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism is bothuseful and effective for the followingreasons: (a) It draws its criteria for theanalysis, evaluation, and interpretation ofmedia programs from the structuralanalysis of their texts, and from the waysby which the visual media mediate andpresent the events, the messages. (b) It isapplicable to all visual communicationmedia art forms, and primarily embracesall television program formats fromcommercials to documentaries. (c) Morethan any other critical approach, therhetorical comes close to an academiccritical discourse, recognized and acceptedby all scholars seriously concerned withthe development of visual communicationmedia arts criticism in general, andtelevision in particular (Rybacki &Rybacki, 1991).

The critics of the rhetorical approachask such questions as: What persuasivemeans were used in the science seriesCosmos? In what ways have the texts'structures of the films The Third Man orCitizen Kane influenced their spectatorsEvidently, this approach to criticism can beapplied to a variety of visualcommunication media products suchmusic shows (Morse, 1991), politicaldebates (Mumby & Spitzak, 1991), andgame shows (Williams & Rigby, 1991).

IVLA - 289

10

The Narrative Approach

The origins of the narrative approachto art criticism are found in Aristotle'sPoetics in which the three known forms ofpoetry--epic, dramatic, and lyricarereviewed and the main differences betweenepic and dramatic narrations (or plots) areexamined (Fergusson, 1961). It hasmaintained its presence in. literature and artcriticism, mostly under the auspices ofrhetorical criticism and has arrived in itspresent form, revitalized, defined, andacknowledged as a unique approach tovisual communication media art productsby such proponents as Fisher (1987),Chatman (1978), Deming (1985), Lewis(1987), Smith (1988), and Martin (1986),all of whom acknowledge its rightfulapplication in visual communication mediaarts forms, particularly in film andtelevision.

The central concern of the narrativeapproach to visual communication mediaarts criticism is the analysis, evaluation,and interpretation of the story of theprograms as it is narrated by the text,visuals, and sounds. Since the variousnarrative elements that constitute theprogram's storytelling can be drawn frommyths, social situations, political figures,dramatic heroes, and a plethora of othercircumstances, this approach to criticism iscollectively called narrative to incorporatesuch other critical approaches found in theliterature of criticism as mythical method(Vande Berg & Wenner, 1991, p. 32),dramatistic criticism, and aestheticcriticism (Scodari & Thorpe, 1992).

The goals of the narrative approachto criticism are to reaffirm the existingideas and images and to revitalize,reinforce, and purify them (Fisher, 1987).Being a byproduct of the rhetoricalapproach, the narrative approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism usesthe rhetorical structure of discourse andstorytelling to evaluate the media product.It looks at the ways the story is told andexamines the characters involved in theaction, the setting in which the actionoccurred, the signs used, the archetypal

models of the society and a host of othersimilar elements from which the standardsfor analysis are drawn.

According to Vande Berg andWenner (1991), the critics of the narrativeapproach, to extract the appropriatestandards for their evaluations, ask thesequestions:

What world view cultural orarchetypal models of social identity,values, actions, and structuring isaffirmed, in the narrative? Whatabstract ideas, values, roles, andbeliefs are presented as good or evil,heroic or villainous, or natural orunnatural in this narrative? Whatother opposing characters, settings,and actions are present? In whatother environment or past forms hasthis story been presented? (p. 32)

Like its predecessor, rhetoric, thenarrative approach to visualcommunication media products applies toalmost all genres of film and televisionprograms. However, its overemphasis onthe textual analysis of the program, itsgeneral look at the television program'splot, character, and symbolism, and theperpetual absence of any meaningfuldiscussion of the production elements ofthe programs, are some of the majordrawbacks of this approach to criticism asit is used today by television analysts.

The Cultural Approach

Developed as a means to explain theimpact of visual communication mediaproducts in creating popular culture, thecultural approach to criticism examines thecreation and distribution of meaning incontemporary society. The critics of thisapproach draw the standards for theevaluations on the observed trends and

)vements such as the civil rights, anti-nuclear, and environmental issues found insuch mass communication media as film,television, music books, magazines, andnewspapers. And, among its foundersand proponents arc Allen (1987), Carey(1988), Davies, Farrell, and Mathews

IVI,A - 290 11

(1982), Fiskie (1987), Hall (1982),Rybacki & Rybacki (1991), and Steward,Smith, and Penton (1984).

There is a general agreement amongthe proponents of the cultural approach tomedia arts criticism that it is widelyspread, covers several other disciplinesand areas of study, and that this approachis most applicable to film and televisionprograms of all genres. For example,Scodari and Thorpe (1992) generally agreeon the wide application of the culturalstudies approach to media criticism and onits wide spread to other disciplines andexplain that:

Cultural studies is a broadframework for interpreted researchwith roots in fields such asanthropology and literature [Carey;Fiskie; Hall]. It considers all typesof discourse, artifacts, myths, andrituals as texts, through which ashared culture is created, modified,and transformed [Carey, 41-43]. (p.48)

So do Vande Berg and Wenner(1991) who point out the numerous otherareas covered under the bioader umbrella( cultural approach to media criticism andstate that:

This approach assumes thatideology, economic structures, andculture are inseparable. This criticalperspective is rooted in acombination of neo-Marxist political-economic theory, structuralism andsemiotics, and Freudianpsychoanalytical theory. Thisapproach examines class, race, andgender issues in television programsby invoking ideology, hegemony,and discourse as central criticalconstructs. (p. 27)

The wide range and application ofthis critical approach to visualcommunication media arts of all genres isalso confirmed by Rybacki and Rybacki(1991) who argue that:

Cultural approaches to criticism aremost organic methods ofcommunication criticism becausethey do not depend on a singletheory base. Because there are somany possibilities for doing culturalcriticism, no single approach can beidentified as the cultural approach.(p. 132)

It is, therefore, evident that thisapproach to criticism is one of the mostappropriate and most applicable to thevisual communication media arts. Itgathers evaluative judgments from avariety of academic disciplines, theories,and cultural movements that strengthen theanalysis. It covers a vast number of issues(e.g., political, economic, social,ideological, and cultural) found in all filmand television genres today. Finally, thisapproach to criticism considers equally thesignificance of the message and theimportance of the medium in shaping themessage, a concept based on McLuhan's(1964) thesis that the medium is themessage, and establishes that the culturalstudies approach is most appropriate andmost applicable to visual communicationmedia arts criticism.

The cultural studies critic challengesthe socio-cultural, political, and other suchmovements, and asks such questions as:What are the various ideological forces thatproduced these movements? How doesthe movement (such as the civil rights,feminism, or neo-nazism) influence theviewers? How do the media techniquesemployed assist in delivering the message?Examples of the application of thisapproach to film and television criticismare found in narrative films such asSaturday Night Fever (Bywater &Sobchack, 1989) and in television such asThe Late Night Talk Shows (Buxton,1991), and TV Quiz Show.- (Fiskic,1991).

The Semiological Approach

The basic premise of thesemiological approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism is that

IVLA - 291 12

the more we understand the signs systemof our culture the more readily we perceivetheir meaning in society. It originates insemiotics, the scientific study of signs andexamines how the laws and conditionsunder which signs and symbols (includingwords) assume their meaning. It is purelya scientific approach to visualcommunication media arts criticismbecause its main concern is thedevelopment of knowledge about languageto increase its influences in scientific aswell as artistic works. Since all art formsare symbolic, the semiological approach tovisual communication media arts criticismis fundamental for the development ofcriticism of the particular visualcommunication media arts.

Developed first in film studies as alanguage of cinema (Metz, 1974), thesemiological approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism looksat the ways by which the programs' texts(the scripts) are created (Silverman, 1983).It examines the program's structure anddiscusses its effectiveness, orshortcomings, to communicate theintended meanings. The standards,therefore, for this approach to criticism arethe codes, metaphors, signs, and thesyntagmatic structures of the programs, allof which derive their origins from theacademic discourses known asstructuralism and semiotics. The symbolicrepresentation of meaning inherent in thefilm or television pictures is analyzed bythe semiological approach which VandeBerg and Wenner (1991) classify asmetacritical approaches due to its dualorigin from structuralism and semiotics.

Although its application in filmstudies and criticism is both extensive andeffective, when it is tried by televisioncritics the semiological approach turns outto be limited and ineffective for thefollowing reasons: (a) The developmentof the fictional film scripts exceeds, by far,the development of fictional televisionscripts. Thereto! e, the creation of thelanguage or text of the commonly foundtelevision programs can not be readilyachieved by a semiotic analysis which

requires well written, carefully thought-out, and linguistically structured scripts.(b) The lack of conventional iconic,indexical, and symbolic signs--in the vastland of television programming--does not,as yet, permit the use of semiotics toevaluate them, as it is easily possible withthe conventional and well established signsand codes of the medium of film. (c) Theacross the board low quality of televisionprograms, particularly network televisionprograms, destined to entertain themasses, do not warrant, at this time,evaluation standards as complex,scientific, and sophisticated as thoseproposed by the semiological approach.An indication, perhaps, that television hasmatured as an art form, will be when suchan approach is widely adopted andcommonly used by television critics.

The visual communication media artscritics who use the semiological approachdeveloped their argumentation on suchquestions as What is the ideology behindthe use of black and white, instead ofcolor, in this film, or television program?.What is the basic cinematic, or televisionlanguage of the particular film or televisionprogram, and how does it work? Amongthe various film and television genres mostsuitable to a semiological criticism couldbe Fellini's film Arnarcord or the televisionprogram Ihirtysomething (Porter, 1991).

The Psychological Approach

The psychological impact of the artson individuals and their institutions wasfirst pointed out by Plato in The Republicand Aristotle in The Poetics; later on it wasestablished by the father of psychologyand the founder of psychoanalysisSigmund Freud (1856-1939) and itcontinued with Freud's pupils andfollowers, Carl Jung (1875-1961), AlfredAdler (1870-1937), Otto Rank (1884-1939), and Abraham Maslow (1954), tomention only those directly related to thepresent discussion. The powerful impactof the arts on individuals and societyalarmed, early on, the philosophers andthe thinkers of the western world whogenerated the ethical and the aesthetic

IVLA - 292

13

approaches to art criticism.

Stemming from the behavioralsciences, the psychological approach tovisual communication media arts criticismassumes different forms such aspsychoanalysis (concerned with theemotional state of the individual), socialpsychology (concerning the relationship ofthe individual with society), theMaslowean or motivational psychology(that centers on the basic human needs,wants, and desires the arts fulfill invarious degrees), and the Jungianpsychoanalysis, (which equates films asdreams), perceptual psychology (whichrefers to receiving and organizing sensorydata), cognitive psychology (which refersto the de codification of perceived data).The basic factors that concern all forms ofpsychological approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism areemotions, feelings, learning abilities,perception, motivation, cognition, needsand desires, memory, thinking, intuition,and sensation. These, and a great numberof other similar factors constitute both theconstructs upon which the variouspsychological theories are built, and thestandards for the evaluation of the visualcommunication media arts criticism.

In the case of film and televisioncriticism, the critics of the psychologicalapproach focus their attention on theprogram's effects on their viewers causedby such additional psychological factors aspersuasion, change of attitude, morality,and artistic appeal. Since any of thesefactors can be found in almost all film andtelevision genres, the psychological criticsrely on the behavior, the attitudes, and theactions of the characters to develop thearguments for their analyses.Consequently, those programs that havestrong characters, well structured plots,with emphasis on the emotionalinvolvement of the viewers, are moresuitable to psychological approach tovisual communication media arts criticism.For example, films like Citizen Kane byOrson Wells and Psycho by AlfredHitchcock, or television programs likeMagnum, P.I. (Flitterman, 1985 and LA

Law (Parry-Giles & Trandt, 1991) arebetter analyzed by the psychologicalapproach to criticism. The questions thecritics of this approach ask are: Whatmotivated the unusual behavior of theprotagonist of the film? How do thepersonalities of the characters in thetelevision programs contribute towardstheir popularity and consequently theireconomic success?

Whereas the psychological approachto art criticism is one of the oldest and it iswidely used in film criticism, thisapproach is only sporadically used intelevision program analyses. One wouldhave expected, for example, that the so-called Jungian psychological analysis(successfully adopted by film) which,according to Rybacki & Rybacki (1991):"...offers a system for analyzing andevaluating the way a succession of imagesinvolve an audience and draw perceptua.,effective, and cognitive responses fromthem" (p. 139), would have been alsoadopted by television analysts who arecognizant of the approach and its effectiveapplication to film. Some explanations forthe delay of the wider application of thisapproach to criticism by television criticsare: (a) the lack of specific knowledge ofthe field of psychology and psychologicalcriticism, by the present critics oftelevision programming, (b) the Freudianpsychoanalysis of the unidimensional, andoften shallow, characters of the greatmajority of regular television programssuch as soap operas, situation comedies,dramas, etc:, do not appeal to televisionanalysts who seem to be preoccupied withthe role of the medium as an institution in amass society, rather than its potentials asan art form, (c) the behavioral schools ofthought that have been embraced by visualcommunication media arts criticism, suchas the Freudian, the Jungian, theMaslowean, and such additionalapproaches to criticism as semiological,dramatic, cultural, aesthetic, etc., are allclosely related to the psychologicalapproach. Consequently, they confuserather than assist and hinder rather thancontribute towards the development of anautonomous psychological approach to

IVLA - 29314

television criticism.

The Ideological Approach

The Ideological Approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism is arather recent approach adopted by mediacritics who analyze the visualcommunication media products, film andtelevision programs on the bases of theirphilosophical, anthropological, political,economic, sociological contexts orideologies. Since the contents of thevarious film and television genres arenumerous and diversified, the ideologicalapproach to criticism seems to be servingall sorts of film and television programs, atask that is demanding and therefore notalways successfully performed.

Built on the ideology inherent in thevisual media program's texts, thisapproach draws its standards to performits critical task from a variety of issuessuch as (a) neo-Marxist's ideology (withemphasis on hegemony of media insociety), (b) hermeneutic ideology (withemphasis on exegesis, or interpretation ofthe issues in the programs' texts), (c)structuralistic ideology (which concernsitself with the anthropological andphilosophical codes inherent in the film ortelevision programs), (d) gender ideology(which deals with the treatment of gendermostly in feminist programs), (e) dialogicideology (which refers to the dialogicconflict that exist in the text of theprogram), and (f) discourse ideology(which refers to the social and ideologicaldimensions of the language of the texts),(Vande Berg & Wenner, 1991).

Some scholars believe that theideological approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism ispurely theoretical. It is a modernisticcritical strategy that founds its applicationin such additional discourses assemiology, structuralism, Marxism,feminism, and neo-Freudism. When usedby film critics, the ideological approach'sfunctions arc to "Describe and analyzefilm's properties; attempt to find theessential aspects of the medium and its

relation to culture; seek answer to thebasic question: What is Cinema?"(Bywater & Sobchack, p. 162). Whenused by media critics, the ideologicalapproach to criticism, according toRybacki and Rybacki (1991),"...emphasizes the truth standard ofevaluation, judging i hetorical acts by adefinition of truth that is derived from thetenets of a particular ideology" (p. 148).These two concepts alone confirm howdiversified, multi-leveled, and, therefore,demanding, this approach is.

Although the literary sources onmedia criticism consider each of theideologies mentioned above to constitute aunique critical methodology, the verynature of this approach suggests that this isan ambition on the part of these scholarsthat cannot be documented. Theshortcomings of the ideological approachto visual communication media artscriticism are as follows: (a) It issubjective and biased in its practicebecause: "Ideological critics tend toassume that the truth has been revealed tothem, and they may become disciples ofthis truth" (Rybacki & Rybacki, 1991, p.149). (b) These various ideologies arereadily applicable to literacy and to artcriticism, including film, but cannot applysuccessfully to television programs-particularly to commercial televisionprogramming--since the texts are lackingthe depth stemming from such ideologiesand issues. (c) None of the aboveideologies concern themselves with theproduction aspects, the artisticconventions, and the aesthetic merits of theparticular te!evision program which needssuch analysis the most.

The critical questions asked by theideological approach to visualcommunication media arts are, forexample: How have the historical,political, social, feminist, and othermovements influenced the culture, themedia, and their subsequentprogramming? Examples of film andtelevision genres mostly suitable toideological criticism are such politicallyoriented movies as Lawrence of Arabia,

IVLA - 294

15

and Dr. Zhivago, and television programssuch as Abraham Lincoln and the CivilWar.

The Genre Approach

The successful development ofscientific theories in film studies owe agreat deal to the genre approach constructsupon which film theories 7 ere built. Thesame is true of the development of the artsand literature. Consequently, televisionstudies can gain considerably from theapplication of the genre approach tocriticism that is one of the best suitedapproaches for the analysis of the medium.

The genre approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism isdefined as the inquiry, analysis, andinterpr on of film and televisionprograms whose formats bare the samesimilarities, have the same centralcharacteristic, assume the same purposesand objectives. The evaluative standardsformed for the analysis and interpretationof various film and television genres arederived from the structural similaritiesfound in each format, from thecomparisons of the program's texts, and,generally, from the identification of thecommon elements of each program such asthe westerns, science fiction, adventuremovies, soap operas, children's programs,situation comedies, action, horror, anddrama programs.

The advantages offered by thisapproach to television criticism in general,and to television studies in particular, areas follows: (a) Categorizing andclassifying the great variety of televisionprograms that are created and broadcastedyearly, helps the television genre critic tolook more closely at the sharedconventions of the programs which oftenarc indicators of trends, movements,changes, that take place in society. (b)Searching for commonalities amongtelevision programs the genre approachcritic provides valuable information on themotives, beliefs, and objectives of theindustry and the producer and/or directorwho created the program. (c) This

approach to visual communication mediacriticism is intertextual in its nature. Itsanalysis of one text is often based on and itmakes reference to another. When itapplies to television programs it offersreliable, and much needed, information onthe scripts as a production variable of thetelevision medium.

The critical questions in the film andtelevision programs most suitable to thegenre approach to criticism are: How dothe John Wayne westerns differ fromthose of Clint Eastwood? What do suchadventure television programs asMoonlighting have in common with suchaction programs as Miami Vice?

The Producer's Approach

This approach to visualcommunication media arts criticism isfirmly established, developed, andrecognized in film studies and criticismknown as the auteurist approach. It isbased on the fact that major film directorssuch as Alfred Hitchcock, Orson Wells,Frederica Fellini, and Ingmar Bergmanhave created a series of films that bear thesignature of the director's unique approachand artistry. It is closely related to thegenre approach in that the same authorsand/or directors have produced films withsimilar themes and characteristics likeHitchcock's mystery film or John P.Ford's westerns.

This approach to criticism isapplicable to television where we findcommon in theme and character programsproduced or created by persons whoimpose their own style such as NormanLear's and James Brook's spin-offs insituation comedies (Newcomb & Alley,1983), or the producers of the law andcourtroom series in American networktelevision programming. This approachnot only is applicable, but it is one of themost successful and widely used bytoday's television commentators,reviewers, and analysts.

Bywater and Sobchack (1989)suggest that the ultimate functions of the

IVLA - 295

16

author, producer, and/or director approachto film criticism are to: "Identify theperson most responsible for the creation ofthe film, usually the director; describe andevaluate the work in terms of uniquenessor consistency, style, or excellence ofcrItsmanship. ." (p. 51). By doing so,th' critics provide invaluable informationab gut the film's objectives and artistry.Co:teeming the purpose of the producer'sapproach to television criticism, VandeBerg and Wenner (1991) believe that thisapproach goes beyond the semantic andsyntactic analysis of the similarities of thetexts of the television genre--a taskperformed by the genre approach oftelevision criticism. It extends its purposeto "...identify the formal stylistic andthematic signature of a single creator artist

the director, the producer, the writer, thewriter-producer" (p. 31). This, however,suggests that the producer's approach tomedia criticism must look for suchadditional traits as personality, politicalideology, social involvement, artisticcompetencies, and educational backgroundof the producer of the program. This taskis demanding and few visualcommunication media analysts are willingto undertake it, particularly today'stelevision analysts, journalists andreporters of events who write, mainly toimpress and entertain their readers.

The application of the producer'sapproach to film and television criticismhas major advantages over the otherapproaches discussed so far and offers agreat service towards the development offilm and television studies, some of whichare the following: (a) It provides whatBywater and Sobchack (1989) call: ". . .amajor source of insight into a large groupof single artist's creative production" (p.77). This collection of information has theadvantage that it centralizes informationand makes it accessible for further film andtelevision studies. (b) The producersand/or authors of the media productscritical approach is paradigmatic orexemplary in that it exposes the varioustraits, the good and the bad ones, of theproducer, something that brings close. theproduct, as an art form, with its prod Jeer,

as an artist. (c) It provides standards forthe analysis of the program, which aredrawn heavily from production variablessuch as producer's and/or director's styleand techniques of lighting, shooting orframing style, usage of sounds, andediting. These variables, then, easilybecome the constructs of film andtelevision production theories.

The critics of the producer'sapproach to visual communication mediaarts criticism ask these basic questions:What are the unique traits of the producerof the film La Dolce Vita or the televisionprogram All in the Family? Does theproducer and/or director usually favorcertain lighting, framing, editing, or audiotechniques unconventional to otherproducers and/or directors? Examples offilm and network television programs thatare most suitable for the producer'sapproach to visual communication mediaarts criticism are the films The Birds andPsycho (Alfred Hitchcock) and thetelevision programs The Mary TylerMoore Show and Rhoda (created by JamesBrooks).

The Visual Literacy ApproachThe Visual Literacy approach to film

and television criticism has its origins insuch traditional approaches to criticism ashumanistic aesthetics (Bywater &Sobchack, 1989), visual arts aesthetics(Arnheim, 1969; Dondis, 1973), andmedia arts aesthetics (D'Agostino, 1985;Zettl, 1990). It examines the principlesgoverning the visual communication mediaarts such as film and television programsand deals, primarily, with the developmentof a language--and consequently thebuilding of a body of literature--withwhich individuals can communicate anddiscuss signs, symbols, images, pictureswith sounds and motion, etc. (Debes &Williams, 1978, 1970; Dondis, 1973).Individuals who learn to read andunderstand visual images, who are able tocommunicate with visual images, or thosewho have developed the ability to searchfor and evaluate visual information inmedia arts products, are considered

IVLA - 296

17

visually literate.

The visual communication media artscritics draw their value judgments from avariety of visual literacy related constructs.The most prominent among them are lightand color, depth and size, framing,focusing, zooming, dissolving, cutting,editing, sounds, and motion rate of visualelements (Baggaley, Ferguson, & Brooks,1980; D'Agostino, 985; Metallinos,1973, 1985; Zettl, 1978).

The heavy emphasis on (a) thesynthesis of visual images, (b) the detailedanalysis of the visual image's productiontechniques, and (c) the consideration of theperceptual, cognitive, and aestheticvariables involved in the study of film andtelevision media, all constitute the maincharacteristics of the visual literacyapproach to media criticism. This approachbrings the critique closer to what we havetermed the vertical approach, mostappropriate and most desirable for t1,-analysis of visual communication mediarts rather than the commonly practiced, inexistence today, journalistic approach thatwe have termed the horizontal approach tofilm and television media, mostinappropriate for the study of visualcommunication media arts, and particularlytelevision.

The analysts of the visual literacyapproach to film and television criticismask questions that cover all the areas ofconcern such as the message or content,the medium or form, and the audience ormessage's reception and impact upon itsreceivers. For example, in the film byFellini, 8 1/2, or in Hitchcock's Psycho,the visual literacy critic will ask: In whatways did the filming techniques of theseshows enhance the viewers suspense andincrease their attention? Whereas in thetelevision programs L.A. Law and Lawand Order, the most suitable questionwould be: How did the construction of theset, assist the videotaping of theseprograms and create their faithful andrealistic courtroom atmosphere?

The advantages of this approach are

obvious, and the contribution to thedevelopment of suitable theories of thestudy of television criticism and aestheticsare warranted, as it is attested to by thefilms critics that employ this approach(Bywater & Sobchack, 1989).

Summary and Conclusions

The first part of this paper reviewedthe literary sources referring to visualcommunication media arts criticism andunderlined the standards for the evaluationof the visual communication art formmostly produced by film and television.The second part introduced, discussed,and exemplified the various approaches tovisual communication media arts criticism,particularly television, such as thejournalistic, the sociological, the historical,the rhetorical, the semiological, thecultural, the genre, the producer's, thenarrative, the ideological, thepsychological, and the visual literacy.From the proceeding discussions thefollowing general conclusions are drawn:

1. The lack of genuine criticalmethodologies in visual communicationmedia arts--particularly television--is astrong indication of the absence ofscientific theories that govern the rapidlyemerging new visual communicationmedia products, such as computerizedtelevision, holographic, three-dimensional,high definition television images, andmultimedia. (Metallinos, 1990a, 1990b,1987).

2. This gap can be narrowed by thecreation of academically accepted criticalapproaches to the above visualcommunication media forms. Suchapproaches should stem from welldeveloped fields of study as indicated inthe discussion of the approaches above,and they should be the common practice intelevision critical analyses.

3 . Although the orthodox procedurein the development of art criticism is tobase the analysis on existing theories, theestablishment of critical standards for theevaluation of the newly emerged visual

IVLA - 29718

communication media art products couldresult in the formation of constructs onwhich these theories could be built. Anapproach, rather than a method, seems tobe a more appropriate procedure to followto achieve this goal.

A more rigorous, systematic, andselective application of the appropriateapproach to visual communication mediacriticism, to the suitable media products,warrants the development of visualcommunication media programs in generaland television in particular, as genuineartistic forms.

References

Adler, R., & Cater, D. (Eds.). (1975). Televisionas aculturalforce. New York: Praeger.

Allen, R. C. (1987). Channels of discourse:Television and contemporary criticism.Chappell Hill, NC: University of CarolinaPress.

Arnheini, R. (1969). Art and visual perception.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Avery, R. K., & Eason, D. (Eds.). (1991).Critical perspectives on media and society.New York: The Guilford Press.

Baggaley, J., Ferguson, M., & Brooks, F.(1980). Psychology of the TV image. NewYork: Praeger.

Berger, A. A. (1982). Media analysis techniques.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Burke, K. (1950). A rhetoric of motives. NewYork: Prentice House.

Buxton, R. A. (1991). The late night talkshows: Humor in fringe television. In L. R.Vande Berg & L. A. Wenner (Eds.), Televisioncriticism: Approaches and applications (pp.411-424). New York: Longman.

Bywater, T., & Sobchack, T. (1989). Anintroduction to film criticism: Major criticalapproaches to narrative film. New York:Longman.

Campbell, K. K. (1972). Critiques ofcontemporary rhetoric. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth.

Carey, J. (1988). Communication as culture:Essays on media and society. Boston, MA:Unwin Hyman.

Cater, D. & Adler, R. (Eds.). (1975). Televisionas a social force: New approaches to televisioncriticism. New York: Praeger Press.

Cawelti, J. (1976). Adventure, mystery, andromance. Chicago, IL: University of ChicagoPress.

Cawelti, J. (1971). The six-gun mystique.Bowling Green, OH: Popular Press.

Chatman, S. (1978). Story and discourse narrativestructure in fiction and film. Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press.

Cheserbo, J. W. (1987). Communication valuesand popular television series: A four yearassignment. In H. Newcomb (Ed.), Television:The critical view (4th ed.), (pp. 17-51). NewYork: Oxford University Press.

Crombeck, B. E. (1984). Writing televisioncriticism. (Modules in Mass Communication).Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates.

D'Agostino, P. (1985). (Ed.). Transmission:Theory and Practice for a new televisionaesthetic. New York: Tanam Press.

Davies, R. A., Farrell, J. M., & Mathews, S. S.(1982). The dream world of film: A Jungianperspective of cinematic communication.Western Journal of Speech, 46, 326-343.

Debes, J. L., & Williams, C. M. (1978).Provocative papers #1: Visual literacylanguaging andlearning. Rochester, NY: TheInternational Visual Literacy Association.

Debes, J. L, & Williams, C. M. (Eds.). (1970).Proceedings of the first national conference onvisual literacy. New York: Pittman.

DeFleur, M., & Ball-Rokeach, S. (1975).Theories of mass communication (3rd ed.).New York: David Mckay.

Deming, C. J. (1985). Hill Street Blues asnarrative. Critical Studies in MassCommunication, 2, 1-22.

19IVLA - 298

Dondis, D. (1973). A primer of visual literacy.Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.

Farrell, T. B. (1989). Media rhetoric as socialdrama: The winter Olympics of 1984. CriticalStudies in Mass Communication, 6, 158-182.

Fergusson, F. (1961). Aristotle's poetics (Trans.S. H. Butcher). New York: Hill & Wang.

Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human communicationnarration: Towards a philosophy of reason,value, and action. Columbia, SC: Universityof Southern Carolina Press.

Fiskie, J. (1991). The discourse of TV quizshows, or school ± luck = success 1- sex. InL. R. Vande Berg & L. A. Wenner (Eds.),Television criticism: Approaches ordapplications (pp. 445-462). New York:Longman.

Fiskie, J. (1987). Television culture. London,England: Metheum.

Fiskie, J., & Hartley, J. (1978). Readingtelevision. London, England: Metheum.

Flitterman, S. (1985). Thinks and whiskers: Thefascination of Magnum, P.I. Screen, 26, 42-58.

Foss, K. ( 1 989). Rhetorical ,:riticism:Exploration and practice. Prospect Heights,IL: Waveland Press.

Hadas, M. (1962). Climates of criticism. In R.L. Shayon (Ed.), The eighth art (pp. 15-23).New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Hall, S. (1982). The rediscovery of 'ideology':Return of the repressed in media studies. In M.Gurevitch, T. Bennett, J. Currun, & J.Woollacott (Eds.), Culture society and themedia (pp. 56-90).

Himmelstein, H. (1981). On the small screen:New approaches in television and videocriticism. New York: Praeger.

1.cwis, W. F. (1987). Telling America's story:Narrative form and the Reagan presidency.Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73, 280-302.

Marc, I). (1984). Demographic vistas: Televisionin American culture. Philadelphia, PA:University of Pennsylvania Press.

20

Martin, W. (1986). Recent theories of narrative.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality.New York: Harper & Brothers.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: Theextensions of man. New York: Signet Books.

McLuhan, M., & Powers, B. (1989). The globalvillage: Transformations in world life and themedia in the 21st century. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

MeQuail, D. (1969). Towards a sociology ofmass communication. London, England:Collier-MacMillan.

Medhurst, M. J., & Benson, T. W. (Eds.).(1984). Rhetorical dimensions in media: Acritical case book. Dubuque, IA:Kendal /Hunt.

Metallinos, N. (1991). Review: Jolts: The TVwasteland and the Canadian oasis b.,' M. Wolfe.Canadian Journal of Communication, 16, 316-318.

Metallinos, N., (1990a). High definitiontelevision: New perceptual, cognitive, andaesthetic factors. Canadian Journal ofEducational Technology, 20, 121-129.

Metallinos, N. (1990b). Three-dimensionalvideo: Perceptual and aesthetic drawbacks. InH. Thwaites (Ed.), Three-Dimensional MediaTechnology: Proceedings of the 1989International Conference (pp. 131 -144).Montreal, Canada: The 3-13 Media TechnologyResearch and Information Center.

Metallinos, N. (1987). Computerized television:New developments in television productiontechniques. Journal of Verbal-VisualLanguaging, 7, 21-32.

Metallinos, N. (1985). Empirical studies oftelevision composition. In J. R. Dominick &J. E. Fletcher (Eds.), Broadcasting ResearchMethods (pp. 297-311). Boston, MA: Allyn& Bacon.

Metallinos, N. (1973). Criteria for.the evaluationof the performing arts. Interchange, 13,11-18.

Metz, C. (1974). Film language: A semiotics ofthe cinema. Trans. Michael Taylor. New

IVLA - 299

York: Oxford University Press.

Morse, M. (1991). Post synchronizing rockmusic and television. In L. R. Vande Berg &L. A. Wenner (Eds.), Television criticism:Approaches and applications (pp. 289-310).New York: Longman.

Mumby, D. K., & Spitzak, C. (1991). Ideologyand television news: A metamorphic analysisof political stories. In L. R. Vande Berg & L.A. Wenner (Eds.), Television criticism:Approaches and applications (pp. 313-330)New York: Longman.

Newcomb, H., & Alley, R. S. (1983). Theproducer's medium: Conversations withcreators of America TV. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Newcomb, H. (1987). Television: The criticalview (4th ed.). New York: Oxford UniversityPress.

Newcomb, H. (1974). TV: The most popularan. Garden City, NY: Doubleday/AnchorBooks.

Parry-Giles, T., & Trandt, P. (1991). Thedepiction of television courtroom drama: Adialogic criticism of L.A. Law. In L. R.Vande Berg & L. A. Wenner (Eds.), Televisioncriticism: Approaches and applications (pp.143-159). New York: Longman.

Porter, M. J. (1991). Two approaches to readingtelevision characters: A study ofThirtysomething. In L. R. Vande Berg & L.A. Wenner (Eds.), Television criticism:Approaches and applications (pp. 129-142).New York: Longman.

Rybacki, K., & Rybacki, D. (1991).Communication criticism: Approaches aregenres. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Scodari, C., & Thorpe, J. M. (1992). Mediacriticism: Journeys in interpretation.Dubuque, IA: Kendal/Hunt.

Seldes, G. (1961). The great audience.York: Viking Press.

Seldes, G. (1956). The public arts.Simon & Schuster.

New

New York:

Shayon, R. L. (1971). Open to criticism.

Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Shayon, R. L. (1962). The eighth art. NewYork: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Silverman, K. (1983). The subject of semiotics.New York: Oxford University Press.

Sklar, R. (1980). Prime-Time America: Life onand behind the television screen. New York:Oxford University Press.

Smith, L. D. (1988). Narrative styles in networkcoverage of the 1984 nominating conventions.Western Journal of Speech Communication,46, 326-343.

Smith, R. R. (1980). Beyond the wasteland:The criticism of broadcasting (rev. ed.).Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Readingand Communication and the SpeechCommunication Association.

Steward, C. J., Smith, C. A., & Denton, R. E.(1984). Persuasion and social movements.Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

Vande Berg, L. R., & Wenner, L. A. (1991).Television criticism: Approaches andapplications. New York: Longman.

Williams, M. R., & Rigby, E. D. (1991). Thenon-discursive rhetoric of television: Spinningthe wheel with Pat and Vanna. In L. R. VandeBerg & L. A. Wenner (Eds.), Televisioncriticism: Approaches and applications (pp.463-479). New York: Longman.

Williams, S. (1991). Bugs Bunny meets h-man:A historical comparison of values in Americancartoon. In L. R. Vande Berg & L. A. Wenner(Eds.), Television criticism: Approaches andapplications (pp. 201 -219). New York:Longman.

Wolfe, M. (1985). Jolts: The TV wasteland andthe Canadian oasis. Toronto, Ontario, Canada:James Lorimar & Co.

Zettl, !I. (1990). Sight, sound, motion: Appliedmediaaesthetics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

'lett], II. (1978). The language of television: Thelanguage of television criticism. Paperpresented at the annual conference of theBroadcast Education Association, Washington,DC.

21IVLA - 300