One of my take-aways from chapter two is the crucial distinction McCloud makes between iconic and non-iconic abstraction. This forms the basis of Scott McCloud’s big triangle, where he is able to place all comics (and all visual art in fact), and serves as a useful set of axes. Iconic abstraction moves visual communication closer to becoming the pure idea, which is epitomized in its final form by a word representing the object. Non-iconic abstraction moves visual communication more towards the realm of art, where the shapes and lines depicted represent themselves. Finding the right balance of both iconic and non-iconic abstraction is crucial to visual design, as too much iconic abstraction risks overwhelming the viewer with text (assuming they are not in a medium like a book where that is expected), and too much non-iconic abstraction risks the viewer not actually receiving whatever message or idea is trying to be conveyed. However, there is also the risk of too little abstraction in either direction. In many cases, iconic abstraction helps generalize the concepts and ideas being conveyed, and especially when text is used, it makes sure the meaning is clear and delivered concisely. Non-iconic abstraction is useful for the flare that makes a message stand out and is often part of what we think of directly when we imagine good design. McCloud’s analysis of synaesthetics was my key takeaway from chapter 5. As with Dondis drawing the connection between texture and feeling, by showing how nearly every sense can be communicated visually, McCloud makes clear just how much shared visual language we have built up. While not something I was thinking about before, I believe many good designers explicitly take into account what other senses they are evoking with their designs. Each sense has its own sensations that each carry their own connotations and feelings, so by drawing on them through visual stimuli, designers can access whole new worlds of meaning with which to communicate.