Blair, in his essay entitled “The Possibility and Actuality of Visual Arguments”, states that “for something to count as an argument, we have to be able to say what the claim is and what the reasons are, and we have to be able to say so clearly enough that the claims or reasons can be accepted or rejected.”
The take-away I got from this definition is that a visual argument consists of more than one image, because it must convey both the claim and the reasons. Or perhaps one image with multiple focal points would also serve this purpose.
I think a visual argument can be used just as effectively as a written argument to compel a viewer to action. In fact, visual arguments can be more effective; for example, short documentaries [MM1] can create visual arguments that compel viewers to develop specific opinions. Even briefer, take this single image [MM2] as a visual argument.
A visual argument in a single image may struggle to establish both premises and resultant claims; however a complete visual argument can be established in a series of images. It can compel the reader forward by establishing undeniable links between the images to create a narrative argument that flows from one image forward to the next.
In comparison to a visual essay, the visual argument is should present images that create a tied together and complete argument. In my initial visual essay (as yet to be posted, do hold on to your horses, dear reader), the photographs posted were not linked together; they rely on the text to connect them. To really pull off a “visual argument”, rather than just a verbal argument supported by visual elements, the piece would need to establish the premise and reasons visually, not verbally.
Looking Forward: My visual essay will soon arrive, followed quickly by my visual argument! Get excited!
Useless Buzzing Noises 
