Adobe Animate WordPress Embed

There are a range of different options for embedding Adobe Animate files into WordPress, each of which is appropriate for different purposes.

Video embed

The simplest is embedding a video file exported from Animate as mp4 and
uploaded directly to WordPress through the media library and embedded into a Gutenberg video block. This has the best image and animation quality and the native video WordPress video player has its own play controls, screen enlarge and sound controls. Additional styling can be done through custom CSS (I need to work out how to do this). But there is no interactivity.

iFrame embed

To get interactivity it is necessary to publish the .fla file as html canvas into a folder. Then upload the folder via the server webspace into the wp-content folder and get a URL. For the version below the code entered into the code editor was:

This has the advantage of giving interactivity directly on screen, but has no enlarge function. The styling may shift somewhat and the animation is a bit choppy.

See also this tutorial I had to adapt to the new WordPress.

How to integrate Animate Files into WordPress

Interactive image link embed

A better option – having uploaded the folder and obtained a URL – is to upload a poster image as gif or jpg and embed this an an image block, then in the image link dialogue in wordpress copy the URL address. This then brings up the interactive animation in full screen, with better image quality and playback.

Message and Meaning: Communication Theory

Communication theory in graphic design is concerned with the process by which designers design and send encoded messages for particular audiences and the contextual factors influencing that process. Different theories have emphasised and elaborated on different elements.

The following interactive animation gives a summary overview of key points.

Click on the image to bring up the interactive animation file and then click on the text.
Based on my notes from: Davis, M., (2012) Graphic Design Theory, London: Thames and Hudson.

Meaning and message

Audience: cognitive design context

Sources

Davis, M., (2012) Graphic Design Theory, London: Thames and Hudson.

This means that? post-structuralist semiotics

Semiotics is the study of signs and symbols in the process of production and communication of meaning (my definition). It includes the study of signs and sign processes, indication, designation, likeness, analogy, allegory, metonymy, metaphor, symbolism, signification, and communication. Some influences have been drawn from phenomenological analysis, cognitive psychology, structuralist, and cognitivist linguistics, and visual anthropology and sociology.

Apart from being a branch of linguistics, semiotics also studies non-linguistic sign systems. The term ‘semiotics’ refers particularly to discussions in the United States where semiotics has been prevalent in discussions of Communication Theory, behavioural science and cybernetics. In Europe the term ‘semiology’ is common, referring to discussions around cultural meanings of signs in everyday life and political discourse, particularly in post-structuralist questioning of modernism, capitalism and universal meanings following the political upheavals in 1968.

Pictorial semiotics

Pictorial semiotics focuses on the properties of pictures in a general sense, and on how the artistic conventions of images can be interpreted through pictorial codes. Pictorial codes are the way in which viewers of pictorial representations seem automatically to decipher the artistic conventions of images by being unconsciously familiar with them.

Semiotics provides a technical language to describe how images are coded and decoded. Amongst other concepts semiotics uses connotation and denotation as a way of describing actual and intended meanings:

  • Denotation describes the obvious, literal things in an image.
  • Connotation describes the associations we have with that image. These associations are determined by our social, economic and personal perspectives.

Meanings also reside in visual dynamics:

  • which images are chosen and what they stand for
  • connotation of different types of line, shape, colour and texture
  • where images are placed and the hierarchy of relationships between each of the signs. Placing something at the front or top of an image will create a different meaning from placing something at the back or bottom.

According to Swedish semiotician Göran Sonesson in (1988). “Methods and Models in Pictorial Semiotics” (1988 pp. 2–98.) pictures can be analysed by three models:

  1. narrative model, which concentrates on the relationship between pictures and time in a chronological manner as in a comic strip;
  2. rhetoric model, which compares pictures with different devices as in a metaphor;
  3. laokoon (or laocoon) model, which considers the limits and constraints of pictorial expressions by comparing textual mediums that use time with visual mediums that use space

Key questions for this research include:

  • how far is it possible to create pictorial symbols to communicate complex concepts and deep meanings, without needing text? what are the limitations, if any? can anyone do this?
  • relationship between individual creation and use of symbols ‘parole’ and public symbol systems ‘langue’ and ‘codes’ – how widely are the former understood and when and how do they become ‘langue’.
  • how far and in what ways might ‘hegemony’ by dominant groups restrict creativity of others to create their own symbols and meanings?

Resources

  • Barthes, R., (1967 (French 1964)) Elements of Semiology, New York: Hill and Wang.
  • Barthes, R., (2009 (French 1957)) Mythologies, London: Vintage Books.
  • Barthes, R., (2010 (French 1967)) The Fashion System, London: Vintage Books.
  • Barthes, R., (1977) Image Music Text, London: Fontana Press.
  • Barthes, R., (2000 (French 1980)) Camera Lucida, London: Vintage Books.
  • Cobley, P. & Jansz, L., (2010) Introducing Semiotics: A graphic guide, London: Icon Books Ltd.
  • Collins, J. & Mayblin, B., (2011) Introducing Derrida: A graphic guide, London: Icon Books Ltd.
  • Downs, S., (2012) The Graphic Communication Handbook, London, New York: Routledge.
  • Guiraud, P., (1975 (French 1971)) Semiology, London: Routledge.
  • Hall, S., (2012) This Means This, That Means That: a user’s guide to semiotics, London: Laurence King Publishing.
  • Horrocks, C. & Jevtic, Z., (2011) Introducing Baudrillard: A graphic guide, London: Icon Books.
  • Thody, P. & Piero, (2013) Introducing Barthes: A graphic guide, London: Icon Books Ltd.

To get: Sonesson, Göran (1988). “Methods and Models in Pictorial Semiotics”

Also link to literature on linguistics and creative thinking/creativity.

Whose voice? Translation Theory

‘Foreignizing translation’ vs ‘abusive fidelity’?

Venuti (!!full ref)

How does one write about or represent another culture in one’s own language and terms without those very terms and conceptions altering that which is being represented? How do one’s conceptual notions color what one see and reports?

Niranjan (!!full ref)

The Western scholar/translator can partially access the subaltern condition, not through what is specifically said…but by reading that which is not said – reading the gaps, the silences, and the contradictions symptomatically…it is necessary to ‘unlearn’ in order to allow the mute [sic] to speak

Spivak (!!full ref)
Translation Theory Overview Diagram
Translation theory overview

Translation theory is concerned with the processes of ‘carrying over’ meanings from one ‘text’ in one form or language to another ‘text’ in another form or language. (my definition). It borrows concepts and approaches from a range of disciplines including: comparative literature, computer science, history,  linguistics,  philology,  philosophy,  semiotics, and terminology.

Texts may take many forms: spoken, written, visual, digital, musical and the ‘carrying over’ may be within or between these forms, or even ‘updating’ within the same form. Translation theory is concerned with issues such as:

  • analysis of source texts and meanings eg is there only one or many meanings in a text? how can meaning be derived?
  • analysis of target text and audience understandings of meaning eg how far does the purpose and audience require adaptation and change in the final form?
  • the nature of ‘equivalence’ and role of the translator in transforming source texts into target texts eg are translators ‘faithful messengers’ or also creative authors of the target text?

Of particular relevance for empowerment and participatory approaches are linkages that have been made between translation theory and post-colonial and subaltern theory by authors such as Tejaswini Niranjan and Gayatri Spivak. They are concerned particularly with:

  • power relations between translators, those producing the source texts and those consuming the target texts: which voices and texts are chosen for translation? can the translator (Western or post-colonial academics in the global South) really understand and translate the voices of ‘oppressed’ and ‘subaltern’ marginalised from dominant cultures? is the role of the translator to replace one ‘word’ in the source text with another ‘formally equivalent’ word in the target text as the risk of either ‘abusive fidelity’ or ‘exotic stereotypical foreignization’? or is the role to be creative in producing texts that ‘free, transform and multiply meaning’ (Quebec feminists ref?!?)
Translation theory questions
Translation Theory : visual research questions

Sources

  • Mahasweta Devi (Author), & Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (Translator) (1995) Imaginary Maps, London, New York: Routledge.
  • Gentzler, E., (2001) Contemporary Translation Theories, Clevedon, Buffalo, Toronto, Sydney: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
  • Morton, S., (2003) Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, London, New York: Routledge.
  • Munday, J., (2012) Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Application, London, New York: Routledge.
  • Niranjana, T., (1992) Siting Translation: History, post-structuralism and the colonial context, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford: University of California Press.
  • Schulte, R. & Biguenet, J. (eds.) (1992) Theories of Translation: An Anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida, Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.
  • Spivak, G. C., (1990) The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues, New York, London: Routledge.
  • Spivak, G. C., (1998) In Other Worlds, London, New York: Routledge.

Bricolage Approach

‘Bricolage’ comes from the French ‘bricoler’ which means ‘creatively using materials left over from other projects to construct new artefacts’ (Rogers, 2012 P1). It is an approach to theoretical and qualitative methodological enquiry based on the understandings that:

  • reality is complex and multidimensional, particularly social reality. It and therefore cannot be adequately understood through any one pre-determined theoretical framework.
  • all research is political: knowledge and power are intimately linked so the only way to gain rigour and depth of understanding is to include the perspectives of those normally excluded from ‘dominant knowledge construction’.
  • research methodologies therefore need to be eclectic, non-linear and emergent, bringing together multiple and potentially competing voices. Linking back to the meaning of ‘bricolage’ in visual research this includes working with cheap local materials and in multiple styles, particularly those that can facilitate inclusion of people normally marginalised by gender, race, class and other dimensions of inequality.

Sources

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) (1999) The SAGE Handbook of qualitative research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Phillimore, J., Humphries, R., Klaas, F. & Knecht, M.,(2016) Bricolage: potential as a conceptual tool for understanding access to welfare in superdiverse neighbourhoods. IRIS Working Paper. Birmingham: Birmingham University. https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-social-sciences/social-policy/iris/2016/working-paper-series/IRiS-WP-14-2016UPWEB3.pdf

Rogers, M.,(2012) Contextualising Theories and Practices of Bricolage Research. The Qualitative Report, 17, 1-17.
University of New Brunswick, matt.rogers@unb.ca: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1704&context=tqr

Wibberley, C.(2012) Getting to Grips with Bricolage: A Personal Account. The Qualitative Report, 17, 1-8. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1760&context=tqr

Wibberley, C. (2017) Bricolage Research Methods. In E. A. Glasper & C. Rees (Eds.), Health Care Research: at a glance. Ch 52 pp106-1071. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307888252_Bricolage_Research_Methods


Empowerment concepts

!! to be updated From: http://www.gamechangenetwork.info/GAMEchangeVision/WomensEmpowerment.html

Some definitions

‘The process through which those who are currently disadvantaged achieve equal rights, resources and power’

“Empowerment is like obscenity; you have trouble defining it but you know it when you see it” (Rappaport 1986)

“I like the term empowerment because no one has defined it clearly as yet; so it gives as a breathing space to work it out in action terms before we have to pin ourselves down to what it means. I will continue using it until I am sure it does not describe what we’re doing.” (NGO worker quoted in Batliwala 1993)

KEY PRINCIPLES

Empowerment:

•  is concerned with increasing realisable and informed choices within a framework ofhuman rights and equality

•  inevitably involves challenging existing inequalities in power and resources

•  involves a combination of individual initiative and collective action

•  is a complex process which consists of interlinked and mutually reinforcingdimensions (economic, cultural, legal, political, psychological) and levels (e.g. individual, family, community, macro-level)

•  requires not only ‘self-help’ by those who are currently disadvantaged butchanges in those who are currently advantaged and addressing macro-level inequalities

Elements of a framework:

  • process of transformation in power relations
  • dimensions of inequalities where change is needed eg economic, social,political, legal
  • levels at which change is needed eg individual, household, communities, markets, national, international.