This week’s readings were a bit challenging for me. I reviewed the blog posts and as I began this post (Rachel’s popped up as I was editing it), I saw that those who posted about Moretti were really pleased with the book. I found it fascinating, but confusing. Moretti’s work is interesting, and an application of it was illustrated with our Wordle and Many Eyes games this past week. It’s about restructuring our data to see if anything else pops out for consideration. If I Wordle my working draft for my final paper, will my themes and thesis be immediately visible like they were in my Fall 2008 work? However, I’m not sure how I would map, graph or…tree…my work. I understand that we need to think outside the box sometimes. However, as DGQ pointed out, we have to be mindful that not every new idea will work for our purposes. I think I’m getting tired of the technology bandwagonning of the last few years. What’s wrong with a hard copy newspaper or book? What’s wrong with going to live theater? What’s wrong with going to an archive? What’s wrong with teaching live? Yes, technology helps us view things in different ways, and we can expand our reach. I just feel that sometimes we’re so busy reaching we forget to keep ourselves grounded.
A man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a Heaven for? -Robert Browning