tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post1887173930207338035..comments2023-11-05T07:27:43.837-05:00Comments on Narrative and Technology: The Posthuman Era and Hawthorne's InsightAdamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-27237282112325761582008-09-23T15:41:00.000-04:002008-09-23T15:41:00.000-04:00Here's what I liked:1) You nail down what posthum...Here's what I liked:<BR/><BR/>1) You nail down what posthuman means for Lyotard. <BR/><BR/>2) You go to one of the obvious places in Hawthorne to talk about it.<BR/><BR/>3) The paper flows/reads well.<BR/><BR/>Here are the problems. As your readers pointed out, your argument isn't terribly clear. You take far too long to explain what "posthuman" means to you, and then, while you do identify where it plays a role in Hawthorne, you claim that Hawthorne sits on a fence and, thus, you sit on a fence yourself - you don't *respond* to what either Hawthorne or Lyotard think.<BR/><BR/>I come away from this believing that you understand Lyotard and Hawthorne reasonably well, but also with the impression that you aren't inclined to really form your own views on these subjects through them. You have the raw materials for an essay here, but the strong argument is missing. What is the reader supposed to come away with?Adam Johnshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11588769281227456640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-66880374035569233552008-09-17T22:21:00.000-04:002008-09-17T22:21:00.000-04:00I agree with most of the points Matt said so I'll ...I agree with most of the points Matt said so I'll just note the other things I noticed.<BR/><BR/>I think with your intro you really need to define human better since its ultimately whats being effected. What is it that sets us apart from other creatures? What do you mean by "We are the way of life on Earth"? And how are we "slowly wiping ourselves out of existence"?<BR/><BR/>I don't feel you really connected your example from Hawthorne to Lyotard's idea of the post-human world. I think the passage you chose was good you just need to expand on it. It seems from your last two paragraphs your thought is that Hawthorne doesn't have a "side" but I don't really feel that deals with the prompt. I think you just need to connect the two works more.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I just think your main problems are the need to choose an argument, like Matt said and expanding on the majority of your points. The direction of the paper is well it just needs some tweeks.Max Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05323385569972617588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-14545300309331861912008-09-16T15:13:00.000-04:002008-09-16T15:13:00.000-04:00First off, what is your argument? You don't ever p...First off, what is your argument? You don't ever put down in writing exactly what it is that you are trying to say in this post, nor do you come to a conclusion that adequately ties together what you discussed leading up to it. <BR/><BR/>Second, you admit that you are basing your judgments on an assumption of what the term "posthuman" means. Why then did you not look up what the term actually is referring to? The theories and ideas that Lyotard refers to are all well-established philosophical/technical concepts. It doesn't take more than about twenty minutes and a few wiki searches to gain some sort of grasp on them. Then, working on that basis, you can expound your own interpretations.<BR/><BR/>Also, "We could create such advanced technology that we can have whatever we want in a matter of seconds. But this is all theory, so none of this is true. This is not happening, at least not to my knowledge." What about cell phones, microwaves, email, the internet, On Demand programming? These are all examples of current technology that allows us to have in seconds what only 50 years ago would have taken days at the quickest. <BR/><BR/>And finally, you make a lot of claims, but you support very few of them. A reader will not believe you just because you tell them something. You have to prove it to them.Matt Carrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05072887927852026026noreply@blogger.com