The ideas of pictorialization, informalization, emotivization, and dynamicization relate to other concepts we’ve explored in other readings. I found that pictorialization reminded me of the Cohn reading because the examples of the word “circular” going around in a circle shape or the word “help” vibrating to convey a sense of fear reminds me of conceptual metaphors. Specifically, the “circular” example is reminiscent of the english idiom of “going around in circles” and the “help” example is related to the english phrase of “trembling with fear”. Both examples seem to rely on familiarity with these phrases + external context.

Emotivization seems to be related to the Spiekermann reading, especially the part where he gives readers the opportunity to experience different typographies by changing the color of the reading’s type, or when it became light on dark type, or when the type changed dramatically. This experience helped me to understand more deeply how typeface changes what kinds of emotions and how messages are communicated. Additionally, the reading talked about how certain typefaces are instantly recognizable and association with a brand or activity, so this association could bring about instant nostalgia or connection to a certain emotion one might have about a brand/activity.

Informalization calls back to many of the concepts that Mccloud covered in the chapter where he presented the framework with Picture and Words on either side of a balance beam. Whether in comics or another area of design that involves both picture and words, the balance words and pictures as well as how they interact and work together really affect what information is being conveyed. For example, the connection between the words and an image in a comic might be critical to understanding how a character is really feeling + the nuances. Dynamicization reminded me of the NYTimes article about Durer for some reason. Perhaps it was because this week’s reading talked about how cultural trends contributed to the “cultural preparation” of kinetic typography. And I thought of how self-portraiture has a long history and it kind of primed our generation/culture for the concept of a “selfie”.

This grammar of kinetic design and dictionary of common kinetic typography concepts seems open up many avenues of creative new ideas that designers did not have access to before when either the designers were stuck thinking statically or when the audience didn’t have the proper visual vocabulary and familiarity with non-static designs. However, I think this grammar and dictionary might result in constraints due to software systems that make design possible having a lag since people can always be creating new ideas or concepts, but then the software has to be updated with new features that allow additions to the rules + grammar.