Nascimento1

Khristian Nascimento
Werner
English Comp
23 Nov 15

Digital environments and how peoples arguments change based on audiences and environments

Both Rudolf Arnheim and David Bartholomae have differing views on writing and people
and how they interact. Arnheim believes symbols and abstractness are more effective than
writing plainly or using symbols or signs that directly portray what is intended. Bartholomae
believes that writing for your audience, and making sure your writing fits the audience is what is
more important. It is clear that both men would have differing views on certain aspects of the
argument. But I believe the biggest disagreement would be how peoples audiences change
depending on what kind of digital environment they are interacting in.
In the many digital environments we interact with in our lives. Almost all of them offer
an outlet to satiate the human desire of social interaction. Whether through text, online forums,
or video games. These environments are created for human interaction. Through text,
Bartholomae would argue the content of the text should be suited for the reader. Arnheims
beliefs would have us, instead, believe that the recipient of the text message does not matter, but
instead the content should be left slightly up to the reader. To add abstractness to the message,
the message would be abstract in nature. Here in this scenario I believe both ideas meld together.
The recipient will determine the abstractness of the text, or what symbols someone may add into

Nascimento2

it. A person sending a text coworker on an important matter would not go through the trouble of
using abstract language or even symbols. The recipient of the message requires that the message
be clean cut and to the point, no symbols, signs, or pictures. Although if the recipient of the text
had been a longtime friend or partner, then the message may be more colorful. Strewn with
symbols and enough abstractness for both people to understand the meaning, but still have to use
their imaginations to get to that conclusion.
Throughout all major digital environments audiences change. And the actions, and
reactions, of those in the environments change. In an online forum full of strangers arguing over
one issue over the other, only the comments with the best response to the audience in the
particular forum will be viewed. Here Bartholomaes views on Basic writers takes shape. We get
neither a technical discussion nor an academic discussion but a lesson on life (405The basic
writers, the less viewed in this environment. Are the ones who provide the lesson on life
instead of the academic or technical discussion that Bartholomae speaks of. To the audience in
these online forums a basic writers comments are ignored because they lack the substance they
search for. Although Arnheims use of signs could possibly be accepted here, the concrete clean
cut explanations or discussions are what are important to this audience. Instead building on one
main discussion rather than the thoughts of multiple people reacting to one piece of the
discussion.

Nascimento3

Online gaming can be filled of people from far reaching cultures, or from two houses
down from you. These small enviroments can bring any two people, or any groups of people
together. So many audiences vying for a higher place in the discussions being held or for the
rights to further their interests in the gaming world. This makes cause for very blurred lines in
the audience that your writing is focused at. Here anything being spoken of must follow
Arnheims words. it needs to reflect some of the complexity of form by which realistic works
depict the wealth of human experience (151). With all the audiences viewing your take on any
subject being discussed, or occurrence in the world of any game being played. Anything being
said must fall into the realm of abstractness. To be as abstract as possible so as many people from
as many different audiences may be able to view it and therefore react to it in a way that suits

Textingsymbols and
quick less
thought out
interaction

M
e
Professorslong well
thought out
responses

GamingQuick
descriptive
word usage

them. An experience in game is not described with 100% descriptiveness. You simply give the
bare minimum that will begin the chain reaction in the other persons brain to then interpret what
was said to them in an efficient, and personal way. This person may then be able to find use of
what was said, and use it in light of the audience they portray. This melting pot of audiences

Nascimento4

causes the intellectual, academic, or technical discussions that Bartholomae believes are the most
important in human reaction aside, and instead adopt Arnheims belief of abstractness to better
suit their quick and efficient in game lifestyles.
In Julian Dibbels article A Rape in Cyberspace he tells a story of a cyber rape
and how it affects the users in game and in real life. The whole virtual space of LambdaMOO
was words used to describe a specific visual of where someone was in its space. In this
environment of online gaming visuals were key. The audience valued descriptive and visual
language to describe the setting, characters, and interactions. I believe that in Video games we
would see Arheims use of symbols would be best suited. This environment is entirely visual,
symbolic. The people that converge in LambdaMOO are not people, but representations of
people. Mr Bungle was not a Bisquick-faced clown dressed in cum-stained harlequin garb
(Dibbel 1). He was instead, descriptive words used to symbolize just that. Video games are
abstract, and imaginative environments where the audience uses imagination to quickly and
efficiently fill gaps. Personally speaking over a video game with friends or other gamers is
something completely foreign to any of my relationships in real life. We speak in very quick fast
paced conversations and fill in the gaps in our heads. Naturally more symbolic usage of words
come out of this environment.
Varying on any given digital environment we as people would use many different forms
of communicating. Whether with quick and abstract responses, or with well thought through
academic compositions. The underlying factor of the effectiveness of communicating over one
way or another is based almost entirely on who the audience is, and throughout all digital
environments these audiences change drastically. I believe the formal thought through
communication brought up by Bartholomae would be less common than the abstract and concise

Nascimento5

use of language and symbols brought by with Arnheim, Dibbel, and Blair. I believe people dont
truly have full creative control over what is being said by them when truly everything people say
is dictated by who it is being said to. As if all compositions and spoken word are shackled to an
anchor that is an audience.

Word count:

Works cited
Arnheim, Rudolf. Pictures, Symbols, and Signs Visual Thinking (1969):
135-. Print

Bartholomae, David. Inventing the University An Anthology of Essays (

Dibbel, Julian a rape in cyberspace