PREPARATION FOR 1/29 (RETTBERG AND MILLER/SHEPHERD)

Hello, Everyone:

We will spend the first part of Tuesday's (1/29) class discussing the results of your group analysis of genres from Thursday, before discussing what Rettberg and Miller/Shepherd argue about blogs as genre. Their articles are not difficult, but they are lengthy because they are building theory based on an analysis of different case studies. Please give yourselves time to read thoughtfully for their claims and examples, but also make note of places where their claims may rub against or conflict with how you understand "blogging" or "citizen journalism." Our goal will be to recognize the take-away concepts in each article, and to consider the possibilities and limitations of those concepts.

Here are some discussion questions that may help you read in advance of Tuesday's class:

1. How does Miller and Shepherd's discussion of genre reflect other genre theories you may have studied, in English, EWM, or media studies classes? Or, if you're new to genre theory, then try to unpack the quote by Berkenkotter and Huckin that they use in the third paragraph of their article. In a way, that quote -- and that paragraph -- holds the genealogy of Miller and Shepherd's genre theory. Do you think the assumptions they make about genre generally hold up when applied to blogs?
2. What are some of the reasons Miller and Shepherd give for studying the blog as a genre? Their overarching claim seems to be that blogs both support and disrupt the distinction between public and private, but there are probably other reasons as well.
3. What is "kairos" in their argument? How is it significant? What does it mean that subjectivity is a product of time and place, formed in interaction with a kairos (second paragraph in final section of the article)?
4. In a way, Rettberg applies genre analysis to three case studies (Dooce.com, Kottke.org, dailykos.com) in order to come up with sub genres, or categories within the blog genre. How does she determine each sub genre? How do her sub genres act like -- or not act like -- Miller and Shepherd's concept of genre? Do you think they have the same expectations of genre?
5. Consider Liebling's 1960 statement about free speech, or free press (Rettberg quotes it in the beginning of her chapter on "Citizen Journalism"). Unpack it, for its assumptions and implications. Why do you think Rettberg opens her chapter with it? Does it apply today?
6. What do you see as the principal justifications or main reasons why Rettberg compares the "blogger" to a "citizen journalist"? And then, what are the main reasons or principal justifications for why this could be a tricky comparison? If it helps, try answer this question by using one of the specific examples Rettberg provides, e.g., Columbine, Baghdad, etc.
7. What is "symbiosis" in Rettberg's argument? How is it significant?

Enjoy the readings!

-Prof. Graban

IN-CLASS ANALYSIS OF SCI/TECH GENRE SAMPLES 1/24

Hello, Everyone:

In teams of 2-3 people (no more, please!) during Thursday’s discussion of our sci/tech public genre samples, I will ask you to spend some time writing a brief but coherent post on the question that corresponds with the genre you are assigned.

Genre Assignments
Wald’s “Is Ethanol for the Long Haul?”: How does Wald push the limits of current research on ethanol use and production to increase the certainty of his position on the topic?

Mann’s “The Coming Death Shortage”: What role do metaphors, lore, speculation, and prediction play in conveying how Mann thinks we should feel about the impending “death shortage”?

Joy’s “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us”: What role do literature, contemporary science, historical science, and current events play in conveying how Joy thinks we should feel about genetic engineering technology?

Lehrer’s “The Future of Reading” (and related links in BB on the Lehrer controversy!): For Lehrer's blog post(s), wherein lies ownership of the ideas he uses? In other words, do you think his blog post(s) reenacts and transforms technical information, borrows it, represents it, or develops it further, or a combination of the above?

Tools/Concepts
To help you develop your response, here are some talking points that will aid your analysis, so I suggest that you compile notes on as many of these things as are helpful:

• shared value(s), ideologies, or assumptions on which the article is based (use 1-2 passages from Killingsworth/Palmer)
• evidence of community formation (use 1-2 passages from Killingsworth/Palmer)
• stasis (or stases) that seems to drive the argument (use 1-2 passages from Fahnestock/Secor)
• arrangement/organization of the article
• evidence of audience accommodation
• key terms, or buzzwords, that the article takes up to challenge, complicate, or reaffirm
• whether/how the article blurs genre or discursive aim, i.e., is it pretty focused in a sci/tech problem, or does it extend the problem out to other fields, such as law, politics, education, business, economics, etc.?
• implied narrative(s) (e.g., dominion, apocalypse, stewardship, anthropomorphization, shared ecology, biodiversity, colonization, etc.)
• relevant concept(s) from Style lesson 3 in “characters” (especially pp. 24-25) or lesson 7 in “shape” (especially pp. 71-75)
• relevant concept(s) from WWC chapter 8 (the final section on ellipses and parentheses) or chapter 10 on “clarity” (especially pp. 138-139, 141-142)

Feel free to post your group response by "commenting" to this post, signing your names (or pseudonyms).

-Prof. Graban