As we're thinking about using images in scholarly writing, we need to think not only about how we're reading and understanding the images, but also how we're actually using them, and how scholars, other scholars are using them. So today we're going to talk about how to use images in scholarly writing. When you integrate visuals with words, you'll want to think about the choices that you'll make and the choices that others have made, about things like the following: the purpose. Is the image just kind of decorative, or to engage the reader more, or does it have kind of a central purpose that enhances or forwards or complicates, right; sometimes it can work against an argument, too. So, what is the purpose of the image within a particular text? You also want to make choices as a writer, or notice the choices others have made as a reader, with how much description is in the text about the image. So, does the image just kind of stand alone? Or, does the author describe what the image has in it? Explication is slightly different because what I mean by explication is: Is the author using the image in a service, or for some kind of purpose, in his or her argument? So, is it advancing, or is the author making an argument with that image? And then finally, matters of document design: just literally where in your article, or in an article or text, do you see the image? Is it on the left side, the right side? Is it central? Does it overlap with words? Where in the text does the image occur? As an example, I thought we would look at Colvin's placement of one of his images in the article that we are reading. There's another image underneath this, as you recall, but anyways, this first image is sort of near the top of his argument, and, to my recollection, I don't think Colvin actually describes this image or refers to it directly in the text. He might, and if he does—please correct me if I'm wrong, but anyways—there is a caption there, it's early. Presumably, I guess if you were a very busy reader—and people reading Fortune might be busy readers—you could probably get the gist of Colvin's argument by only looking at this image and then the subsequent image too. So for him, I think it's an alternative way of reaching out to a variety of readers to make sure that his argument is getting heard. This is the caption, and I wanted to just take you through some of the ways that this image is working in the service of Colvin's argument. So here we have Tiger Woods as a child, which is showing that he never stopped trying to improve—even as a three year old— that he was working very hard, that it wasn't just that he had this natural talent, that he didn't need to cultivate, but he spent time doing it. Presumably, he could have been playing, it looks like that's a soccer goal there. He could have been playing soccer instead, but he was choosing to work on his golf. It looks like he's choosing to work on the golf even though he's not at a very posh golf course, right? This isn't like golf camp that he went to, but this looks like, any space he could find to practice golf, he's practicing golf. And then of course, he's got this very concentrated expression on his face. He's doing follow through; he cares where the ball is going; he's focusing on it; he's thinking about it; he's already working on his form. So, these are all in support of the idea that, to become a great golfer, Tiger Woods had to practice for many hours. Now, some readers might look at this image and think well, that's true, but it also could be read in a slightly different way, right? Against the grain of what Colvin is using it for, and that's how images really in all arguments are. You can read it in different ways. But anyways, you could also say to yourself, “Well, but, I know some three year olds, and they don't spend their time practicing golf, so why is he practicing golf,” right? “Is it because he has some natural kind of interest or curiosity about it, that maybe other people don't have, and does that suggest some kind of natural talent? Or is it because he had family members, or teachers, or coaches who were saying to him, go out and practice for half an hour before you do something else?” So we don't know what the circumstances are, and you could read against the grain. But anyways, I think Colvin is trying to use this as a way of forwarding his argument.
