This image captures the discursive dimensions of the recent referendums in Taiwan, particularly the discourses surrounding LGBTQ issues. This image is at the meta scale of analysis.
This collage was simultaneously very pleasent and confusing to look at. The juxtaposition of images makes one question if they are looking at the same place at different times or different places at the same. This confusing then makes the observer focus on the place, Amazon Corp, while also displacing/destabilzing the observer. I would then disagree with the author that this image conjures an atemporality, and would rather state that this image confures a multitude of spatiotemporalities that work to complicate our hegemonic perspectives of linear time and stable localities. This collage is then successful in complicating our imaginaries of the Amazon Corps.
This image captues the discursive dimensions surrouding cisgender fragility and LGBTQ issues, especially since the signs the subjects are holding are quite insulting. The analysis, then, is on a meta level, focusing on discourses.
I really liked this image because it collapses physical space between two countries to show how ideologies and discourses flow beyond national boundaries. In terms of analysis, this image capture two level of analsyis: meta and meso as it displays both discourses and the actors involved.
These images convey a narrative, they are discursive. In terms of analysis, they are meta as they advance certain discourses about toxicity and toxic subjects.
Spatial (Puerto Rico) and discursive (about the hidden atrocities) dimensions are well captured in this image. I wonder if there is another way to highlight the different discourses in the U.S and Puerto Rico in this image. The red title on the lower right corner literally saids "ignoring toxicity," suggesting that these atrocities are not recognized by the public, but maybe there is a more visual and less textual way to convey that?
the massive wall dominates the image as it dominates the landscape as it dominates life. I said it's about being blocked; maybe that's the same as saying, it's about being dominated. I find the "figure #" in each image interesting - it's like it's from a scientific article, "see figure 1." what are they figures of? Domination? Art as toxic antidote? Grafitti as toxic cleanup? The device does allow me to say: only in figure 4 is there no blue.