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.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
TufteE., The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1983.
2.
BartonB. and BartonM., Simplicity in Visual Representation: A Semiotic Approach, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 1: 1, pp. 9–26, 1988.
3.
StaffordB., Good Looking: Essays on the Virtue of Images, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1996.
4.
OdellL. and PrellC. L., Rethinking Research on Composing: Arguments for a New Research Agenda, The Thomas R. Watson Conference on Rhetoric and Composition, Louisville, Kentucky, 1996.
5.
HamptonR., The Rhetorical and Metaphorical Nature of Graphics and Visual Schemata, Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 20: 4, pp. 345–356, Fall 1990.
6.
BartonB. and BartonM., Modes of Power in Technical and Professional Visuals, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 7: 1, pp. 138–162, 1993.
7.
BartonB. and BartonM., Ideology and the Map: Toward a Postmodern Visual Design Practice, in Professional Communication: The Social Perspective, BlylerN. and ThrallsC. (eds.), Sage, Newbury Park, California, pp. 49–78, 1993.
8.
HortonW., Pictures Please—Presenting Information Visually, in Techniques for Technical Communicators, BarnumC. M. and CarlinerS. (eds.), Macmillan, New York, pp. 187–218, 1993.
9.
BlicqR. and MorettoL., Technically-Write! (5th Edition), Prentice, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 1999.
10.
SimsB., Technical Writing for Readers and Writers, Houghton, Boston, 1998.
11.
MarkelM., Technical Communication: Situations and Strategies (5th Edition), St. Martin, New York, 1998.
12.
KillingsworthJ., Information in Action, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 1996.
13.
Van AslyneJ. S., Professional and Technical Writing Strategies: Communicating in Technology and Science (4th Edition), Prentice, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 1999.
14.
KostelnickC., Visual Rhetoric: A Reader-Oriented Approach to Graphics and Designs, The Technical Writing Teacher, 16: 1, pp. 77–88, Winter 1989.
15.
DraggaS., Evaluating Pictorial Illustrations, Technical Communication Quarterly, 1: 2, pp. 47–62, 1992.
16.
KostelnickC. and RobertsD., Designing Visual Language: Strategies for Professional Communicators, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 1998.
17.
MitchellW. T. J., Picture Theory, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1994.
18.
KressG. and van LeeuwenT., Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design, Routledge, London, 1996.
19.
MessarisP., Visual Literacy vs. Visual Manipulation, Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 11, pp. 181–203, 1994.
20.
PetcheskyR. P., Fetal Images: The Power of Visual Culture in the Politics of Reproduction, Feminist Studies, 13: 2, pp. 263–292, Summer 1987.
21.
BarryA. M. S., Visual Intelligence: Perception, Image, and Manipulation in Visual Communication, SUNY Press, Albany, 1997.
22.
RoseG., Feminism and Geography, University of Minneapolis Press, Minneapolis, 1993.
23.
HarleyJ. B., Maps, Knowledge, and Power, in The Iconography of Landscape, CosgroveD. and DanielsS. (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 277–312, 1988.
24.
MonmonierM., How to Lie with Maps, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1991.
WoodD. with FelsJ., The Power of Maps, Guilford, New York, 1992.
27.
LynchM., Science in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction: Moral and Epistemic Relations between Diagrams and Photographs, Biology and Philosophy, 6, pp. 205–226, April 1991.
LynchM., The Externalized Retina: Selection and Mathematization in the Visual Documentation of Objects in the Life Sciences, Human Sciences, 11, pp. 201–234, 1988.
30.
GilbertN. and MulkayM., Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists' Discourse, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984.
AdlerD. A., Senior Scientist, Biomolecular Informatics, ZymoGenetics & Affiliate Assistant Professor, Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Idiogram of G-Banded Chromosomes, Online posting: 30 April 2000. <http://www.pathology.washington.edu/Cytogallery/Index_links/cytoimages2.html> 22 Feb 2001.
34.
LawJ. and WhitakerJ., On the Art of Representation: Notes on the Politics of Visualisation, in Picturing Power, FyfeG. and LawJ. (eds.), Routledge, London, pp. 160–181, 1988.
35.
AmannK. and CetinaK. K., The Fixation of (Visual) Evidence, Human Studies, 11, pp. 133–169, 1988.
36.
LynchM., Discipline and the Material Form of Images: An Analysis of Scientific Visibility, Social Studies of Science, 15, pp. 37–66, 1985.
37.
LynchM. and WoolgarS., Introduction: Sociological Orientations to Representational Practice in Science, Human Studies, 11, pp. 99–116, 1988.
38.
LatourB., Visualisation and Cognition: Thinking with Eyes and Hands, in Knowledge and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Culture Past and Present, VI, KuklickH. and LongE. (eds.), JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut, pp. 1–40, 1986.
39.
GouldS. J., Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, Norton, New York, 1989.
40.
StarS. L., Power Technology and the Phenomenology of Conventions: On Being Allergic to Onions, in A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology, and Domination, LawJ. (ed.), Routledge, London, pp. 26–56, 1991.
41.
HandsmanR., Whose Art Was Found in Lepenski Vir? Gender Relations and Power in Archaeology, in Engendering Archaeology, GeroM. and ConkeyM. W. (eds.), Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 329–364, 1991.
42.
HarawayD., Mice into Wormholes, in Cyborgs & Citadels, DowneyG. L. and DumitJ. (eds), School of American Research, Santa Fe, New Mexico, pp. 209–243, 1997.
RosnerM. and JohnsonT. R., Telling Stories: Metaphors of the Human Genome Project, Hypatia, 10: 4, pp. 104–129, Fall 1995.
45.
Lexicon Genetics and DuPont Pharmaceuticals Enter into Mouse Functional Genomic Agreements, Online posting: News Release. 3 May 1991. <http://www.lexgen.com/DuPont.html> 19 August 1998.
46.
Lexicon Genetics Develops Mass Production of Knockout Mice for Functional Genomics. Online posting: News Release. 9 April 1998. <http://www.lexgen.com/about/press/press15.html> 3 May 1999.
47.
Innovative Germline Solutions: Programs in Homologous Recombination. Online posting: Lexicon Genetics home page. No date. <http://www.lexgen.com/ProductServices.html> 3 May 1999.
48.
MartinE., The End of the Body?American Ethnologist, 19, pp. 121–140, February 1992.
49.
PineJ. B.II, Mass Customization: The New Frontier in Business Competition, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, 1993.
50.
Ishimoto—vpL., Intellectual Property, Lexicon, Letter to the Author, December 31, 1998.
Genlink, Chromosome 7 Index Map of Microsatellite Markers, in Microsatellite Loci Place on the Chromosome 7 Linkage Map, HelmsC.DutchikJ.LeeM.LacyM.VeileR.BurgessA.HingA.LiewL.WangJ.GrzeschikK-H.WeissenbachJ.KuoW-L.GerkenS.WhiteR., and Donis-KellerH.. Online posting: Oct 1994, <http://www.genlink.wustl.edu/index_maps/chr7/index.html> 22 Feb 2001.
53.
FujimuraJ. and FortunM., Constructing Knowledge across Social Worlds, in Naked Science: Anthropological Inquiry into Boundaries, Power, and Knowledge, NaderL. (ed.), Routledge, New York, pp. 160–173, 1996.
54.
LippmanA., Led (Astray) by Genetic Maps: The Cartography of the Human Genome and Health Care, Social Science and Medicine, 35: 12, pp. 1469–1476, 1992.
55.
HubbardR. and LewontinR. C., Sounding Board: Pitfalls of Genetic Testing, New England Journal of Medicine334: 18, pp. 1192–1195, 2 May 1996.
NashJ. M., Riding the DNA Trail, Time, pp. 54–55, January 17, 1994.
58.
MacIlwainC., ‘Ambition and Impatience’ Blamed for Faud, Nature, pp. 6–7, November 7, 1996.
59.
AltmanL., Falsified Data Found in Gene Study, New York Times, p. Al2, October 30, 1996.
60.
HarawayD., Primate Visions: Gender, Race and Nature in the World of Modern Science, Routledge, New York, 1989.
61.
RosnerM., Plotting a Middle Ground: An Account of a Failed Science Story, in Essays in the Study of Scientific Discourse, BattalioJohn T. (ed.), Ablex, Stamford, Connecticut, pp. 37–51, 1998.
62.
RosnerM. and JohnsonT. R., Telling Stories: Metaphors of the Human Genome Project, Hypatia, 10: 4, 1995.
63.
RosnerM., Values in Doing Science and Writing Science: The Case of Barbara McClintock, Journal of Advanced Composition, 14: 2, 1994.
64.
RosnerM. and RhoadesG., Science, Gender, and The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm, in Understanding Scientific Prose, SelzerJ. (ed.), University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1993.
