A couple of Latour-related articles have been going around lately, particularly this article in the NY Times and more recently this critical piece by Alex Galloway at least partly occasioned by the Times article. Galloway's rejection of Latour (and Deleuzian, new materialism in general, if one reads other works of his) comes down to the infelicity of this... Continue Reading →
Manuel Delanda in rhet/comp?
Being somewhat in between projects right now, I've started working on an article that, at least at this point, begins with exploring the value of DeLanda's assemblage theory for rhetoric and composition. DeLanda often comes up on this blog and has been an important thinker for me for 10-15 years at least. His earlier works... Continue Reading →
On the importance of deep mixture density networks and speech synthesis for composition studies
Eh? What's that? I'm talking about AI approaches to the synthesis of speech on your smartphone and related devices. I.e., how does Siri figure out how to pronounce the words its saying? OK. But what does that have to do with us? Another necessary detour around the aporias of disciplinary thought... This is really about... Continue Reading →
distributed deliberation and Cambridge Analytica
One of the major stories of the weekend has surrounded the interview with Christopher Wylie, former employer turned whistleblower of Cambridge Analytica. Here's that interview if you haven't seen it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXdYSQ6nu-M It's good to see this story getting attention, but it's also something we've basically know for a while, right? For example, here's a NY Times op-ed... Continue Reading →
An alternative to plumbing the depths of fascist souls
Many have noted their displeasure/anger with two recent NY Times pieces both by Richard Fauset: the first is a piece of reporting about a particular Nazi/white nationalist, Tony Hovater, and the second is what I think one would call a reflective op-ed follow up to that story. The displeasure/anger stems from the way in which the pieces... Continue Reading →
Blade Runner 2049 and electrate film criticsm
Blade Runner 2049 is a film that has generated some divided criticism. To borrow from the comedian Mitch Hedberg's story about his experiences in a band: "Some people loved us. Some people hated us. Some people thought we were ok." And really what more is there to say about aesthetic judgment after the fact? Describing the... Continue Reading →
the late age of close reading and the data humanities
I have been working on my book, so I haven't found as much time to write here, and this post comes out of the work I'm doing there rather than any particular current event (though I'd like to think it has some currency!). In the broadest terms the manuscript considers the value of a particular... Continue Reading →
thinking with Manuel Delanda in rhetoric and composition
Perhaps you are familiar with the recent and excellent essay collection, Thinking with Bruno Latour in Rhetoric and Composition (edited by Paul Lynch and Nathaniel Rivers). If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it, but I'm not here to talk about it today. It's just the inspiration for the title of this missive, where I... Continue Reading →
de-baits in the digital humanities
The LA Review of Books has published 4 interviews so far in an ongoing series on the digital humanities conducted by Melissa Dinsman. The series promises "Through conversations with both leading practitioners in the field and vocal critics, this series is a means to explore the intersection of the digital and the humanities, and its impact... Continue Reading →
