Theories of Visual Rhetoric: Looking at the Human Genome

Mary Rosner University of Louisville

Abstract

For too long, journal articles and textbooks on scientific and technical discourse have adopted a positivistic approach to visuals. Unfortunately, this approach is problematic. It ignores that visuals are constructions that are products of a writer's interpretation with its own power-laden agenda. For example, in representing a tamed and dominated nature, visuals become instruments of patriarchy. Reading them responsibly requires that we uncover some of the values attached to the strategies of creating visuals and to the objects created. This article reviews the current approach taken by composition scholars, surveys richer interdisciplinary work on visuals, and—by using visuals connected with the Human Genome Project—models an analysis of visuals as rhetoric.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
2001-10-01
DOI
10.2190/bx7b-nvrj-kf3k-bybl
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (5)

  1. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

Cites in this index (3)

  1. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Rhetoric Society Quarterly
Also cites 11 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.2307/3177802
  2. 10.3138/E635-7827-1757-9T53
  3. 10.1007/BF02426838
  4. 10.1007/BF00177302
  5. 10.1177/030631285015001002
  6. 10.1007/BF00177300
  7. 10.1111/j.1527-2001.1995.tb01001.x
  8. 10.1525/ae.1992.19.1.02a00070
  9. 10.1016/0277-9536(92)90049-V
  10. 10.1056/NEJM199605023341812
  11. MacIlwain C. ‘Ambition and Impatience’ Blamed for Faud, Nature, pp. 6–7, November 7, 1996.
CrossRef global citation count: 14 View in citation network →