
doi: 10.26913/ava1202308
In this poster I compare two types of visualization that can be distinguished by the role of the viewer. In the first, which I call “closed visualization,” interpretation is seen as a decoding of meanings already set by the author. The other—“open visualization”—sees the viewer as an active co-creator of meanings. In its processual character, open visualization elicits the critical potential of the imagination and is open to new contexts and interpretations. As such, open visualization democratizes the production of knowledge by enabling the critical analysis of the spectator. Instead of the hegemonic production of discourse typical of closed visualization, it introduces a “diagonal perspectivism” that allows problems to be seen from differentiated perspectives. As examples of the mentioned models of visualization I will analyze two projects: Neil Halloran’s The Shadow Peace: The Nuclear Threat and Aby Warburg’s Mnemosyne Atlas.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
