Eng. 335-01 Reflection #10. <\/p>\n
I connected more closely with Taryn Hubbard\u2019s piece this week over that of J.R. Carpenter\u2019s for a few different reasons. Carpenter\u2019s piece felt a little stale, and somewhat boring for me. yes, it was aesthetically pleasing and the animations that were incorporated were appropriately constructive to the pieces themselves, but I found them to be somewhat boring in regard to their artistic challenges. Hubbard\u2019s piece, however, came across as an interesting and unique take on utilizing code as a literal language rather than a collection of symbols for computing purposes. It is an interesting take on the use of symbols as language, as we as a society have come to accept certain level of association with symbols, to the point where we n longer need to \u201cread\u201d the symbols themselves, we just see them and understand them. A prime example is the symbol of ampersand, or &, as the word \u201cand\u201d. We are so ingrained with the meaning f the symbols that we begin to gorget the actual translations or names of the symbols themselves. Her use of the words for symbols such as < as \u201cless than\u201d bring a whole new connotation to the meaning of the symbols that may have been lost if she had stuck with the coding symbols themselves. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Eng. 335-01 Reflection #10. I connected more closely with Taryn Hubbard\u2019s piece this week over that of J.R. Carpenter\u2019s for a few different reasons. Carpenter\u2019s piece felt a little stale, and somewhat boring for me. yes, it was aesthetically pleasing and the animations that were incorporated were appropriately constructive to the pieces themselves, but I … <\/p>\n