Definitions of Visual Rhetoric
Foss states that “the term, visual rhetoric, has two meanings in the discipline of rhetoric. It is used to mean both a visual object or artifact and a perspective on the study of visual data. In the first sense, visual rhetoric is a product individuals create as they use visual symbols for the purpose of communicating” (304). “Three characteristics appear to define artifacts or products conceptualized as visual rhetoric: They must be symbolic, involve human intervention, and be presented to an audience for the purpose of communicating…Visual rhetoric is symbolic action in that the relationship it designates between image and referent is arbitrary, in contrast to a sign, where a natural relationship exists between the sign and the object to which it is connected. Visual rhetoric also involves human action of some kind in that the creation of an image involves the conscious decision to communicate as well as conscious choices about the strategies to employ in areas such as color, form, medium, and size. In its address to an audience, visual rhetoric is also communicative” (304-5).
“In the second, it is a perspective scholars apply that focuses on the symbolic processes by which visual artifacts perform communication” (304). Scholars looks for meaning in the artifact and study its impact on lay viewers rather than experts.
Areas of focus for visual rhetoric
Foss explains that “rhetorical scholars tend to study visual objects with a focus on one of three areas—nature, function, or evaluation. In this pillar of the framework for studies of visual rhetoric, nature deals with the [present and suggested] components, qualities, and characteristics of visual artifacts; function concerns the communicative effects of visual rhetoric on audiences [function is not synonymous with purpose as scholars, according to Foss, believe the artifact states completely independent of authorial intention]; and evaluation is the process of assessing visual artifacts” (307).
Approaches to the rhetorical study of visual artifacts
“Some scholars deductively apply rhetorical theories and constructs to visual symbols to investigate questions about rhetoric and to contribute to existing rhetorical theories generated from the study of discourse. A second approach involves an inductive investigation of visual artifacts designed to highlight features of the artifacts themselves as a means to generate rhetorical theory that is expanded to include the visual” (311). Because the deductive method assumes that visual and verbal modes are not different and the inductive method assumes that visual symbols have distinct characteristics, Foss supports the inductive method over the deductive.