Indicatives

Traditional visual design has not made an effective distinction between visual

“contrasts” that are merely decorative (i.e., varieties of shape, space, line, color,

texture, and typeface that create aesthetically “interesting” or “attractive” visuals)

and those sharper visual contrasts that provoke physical action in viewers. In

Peircean analysis, this is a critical distinction. In particular, strong lines, bullets,

arrows, line-enclosed negative space, or radical changes in size, color, typeface,

etc. all serve the primary function of physically directing audience focus. Any

amount of decorative variety may be acceptable as long as the whole remains

unified, but these strongly contrasting, strongly indicative elements can only be

effective if used sparingly, in measured doses in any given figure or page. The

Peircean analysis explains exactly why indicative contrast is irritating and anxiety

producing if overused. We classify as indicatives those visuals that primarily

provoke action. The exact nature of that action differentiates the two major

indicative subtypes, namely signals and action triggers.