Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Multimodality: A Social-Semiotic
Approach to Contemporary
Communication, by Gunther Kress
Timothy Oleksiak
a
University of Minnesota
Book Reviews
Multimodality: A Social-Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication,
by Gunther Kress. New York: Routledge, 2010. xiii 197 pp.
Multimodality is a provocative challenge to those of us who understand the
primary concerns of our field to be speech and writing. At its most simplistic,
Kresss work is an expansive account of how meaning is constructed. Kress argues
that his theory of multimodal social-semiotics accounts for the fact that all signs
in all modes are meaningful (59). Throughout his text, Kress makes a compelling
case for a more thoughtful consideration of how different modesspeech, writing,
gesture, color, 3D objects, moving pictures and so onrelate to each other in specific cultural contexts. Essentially, Kress argues for a more inclusive form of
communication, one that refuses to recognize writing, speech, or image as privileged modes. On this point specifically, Kress shares a theoretical space with scholars working within the relatively new field of Web 2.0 technology. The theory of
multimodal social-semiotics reveals that within the broad range of modal choices
available in a society, there is then the individuals decision to make choices to use
these modes rather than those in this environment for these reasons (76, emphasis
in original). Describing and analyzing these choices is the primary work of
multimodal social-semiotics.
Kresss early discussions of mode provide the important and necessary
scaffolding for his theory of multimodal texts. Here Kress believes that understanding the materiality of individual modes is significant because it places the
object of scholarly attention outside of abstract concepts like language and into
the embodied practices of communication. The problem Kress has with concepts
like language is that they are not a big enough receptacle for all the semiotic
stuff we felt sure we could pour into it (15). For Kress, language cannot
account for the modes of communication that fall outside of what is typically
included in theories of language. The drawback of these theories is that in some
sense both linguistics and pragmatics recognize the presence of other modesin
terms such as extra-linguistic, para-linguistic, non-verbal or in different kinds
of acknowledgement to features of context (59) that are in service of systems of
communication based on speech and text. In other words, previous linguistic and
social-semiotic theories relegate the majority of modes available to a position of
minimal importance.
ISSN 0277-3945 (print)/ISSN 1930-322X (online) # 2012 The Rhetoric Society of America
DOI: 10.1080/02773945.2012.682848
298
Book Reviews
Without devaluing writing and speech, Kress explores the potential individual
modes have for making meaning based on their different affordances. As Kress
explains, the material of sound has been used in nearly all human societies as
speech to realize meanings; these meanings differ from those afforded by the
materiality of marks on a surface in writing (104). Recognizing the materiality
of modes as embodied practices of communication allows one to theorize how
these modes relate to each other to create a meaningful text for audiences.
Kress believes that meaning cannot be discussed without a sense of the
shapethe organizationof the social environment in which it is produced
whether as hierarchy or network (146). The shape of multimodal texts is articulated through the concept of arrangement. The way in which, for example, speech
and gesture are placed alongside each other provides insight into how each mode
means both independently and as a multimodal text. Moreover, part of arrangement requires an examination of how a multimodal text is framed. The issue of
framing centers on understanding how the unique material affordances of a given
mode demand different material means for framing (151). For example, 3D
objects require a different set of material practices for understanding than writing.
In writing, the page and rules of paragraphing essentially bind the way the mode
communicates. The rules that apply to writing cannot simply apply to 3D objects
where paragraphing does not exist. As Kress notes, depending on the mode and
its affordances, relations and connections may have any number of forms
(156, emphasis in original). Therefore, the way in which arrangement is understood depends on the affordance of a given mode. Additionally, Kress suggests
that arrangements cohere and mean based on the specific cultures ideological
and ontological systems. The leftright, topdown arrangement of Western written texts is embedded within a culturally specific ideology. Color and gesture are
similarly dependent on culture. This focus on how distinct modes relate within a
cultural framework to form meaning makes Kresss work important for scholars
of rhetoric.
In a particularly lucid passage, Kress explains how the workings of an in-flight
safety demonstration illustrate how singular arrangements combine to create
ensembles. The flight attendants gestures and engagement with speech and 3D
objects are arranged in a specific order to create meaning for the passengers. This
demonstration accompanies a visual manual that provides instructions for what
to do in case of an emergency. The two distinct texts with their unique arrangements are orchestrated in a deliberate sequence that creates ensembles that take on
new meaning different from the meanings created by any one arrangement. In
terms more fitting to Kresss theory: Orchestrations and the resultant ensembles
can be organized in space and they can be organized in time, in sequence, in
process, in motion (162). The fact that we move in the world, for Kress, suggests
that our positioning in relation to texts is always changing. Given this changing
position, we notice differences in framing and selection. The sequencing and
Book Reviews
299
Timothy Oleksiak
University of Minnesota