Researchers of humanities and sociology have had an increasing interest in the use of symbols as communication in the modern world; of course, a symbol is just the polite word for emojis. They’re versatile, simple tools that communicate actions and reactions without needing a single word, but online talk now goes beyond that. I can say from personal experience that it is possible to have an entire conversation with only pictures—no regular words necessary. Is this a bad thing? Are we reverting to the prehistoric times of painting on walls to share our thoughts, or are we evolving past the need for language? Generally, I think not, but it’s a bit more complicated than yes and no.
Using images as a form of online communication is not as drastic a change as it may seem; speaking in pictures is surprisingly similar to the spoken word, and in some ways, we’ve already been doing it for years. Most simple ideas benefit from image communication, as visuals transcend subjective interpretation and language barriers.
Communicating is hard. I shouldn’t need empirical evidence to prove that fact, knowing that I struggle to put my thoughts together into words even as I write this piece. Despite this, it is one of the most important things people know how to do. No two folks are cut from the same cloth, and any method to ease stitching them together should be welcomed. Responding to someone with a thumbs up gets across your approval without room for misinterpretation, as opposed to parsing the intentions of saying “nice” with a period instead of an exclamation mark. Universal symbols meet the need for common communication when everybody thinks a little bit differently, as has been the case for a long time.
Images can serve the needs of conversation quite well, but this is only the beginning of symbol application, as it expands even to the needs of a crowd. When you’re driving, there’s no need for a sign on every road that says “stop” or “go” to prompt you, because traffic lights can do the same thing with colors, which do not need to be translated, because their meaning is near-globally understood by drivers. In this case, as in other similar scenarios, it is most beneficial to use images instead of words, because it enables large quantities of commuters to understand what needs to be done without a second thought. International airports, famously crowded, would probably be much harder to navigate if everything was written out in a language many don’t understand instead of using arrows and numbers. If it’s common practice already, what’s the harm in integrating this logic into everyday talk?
Ease of use is not always the top priority in human design. Image communication does not fit all situations; I would not expect the presidential debates to be conducted entirely through tonally incongruous emojis, as entertaining as that would be. In a way, we are reverting to painting on the walls, and that’s because it works. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
Photo from Britannica.com
