7
May

cyborging the robot army

   Posted by: K. Mahoney   in academic, blogging, comp/rhet, professional, research, rhetoric

robotsThe end of the semester is for the most part here. Students are finishing project, papers, and exams. And faculty are knee deep in grading. And as I sit at my desk reading and responding to student papers, I am having my android dreams of the robot army to come.

In particular, I am thinking about hybrids…cyborgs to be more precise. Cyborgs that cross disciplinary boundaries and who neither respect, nor desire, disciplinary fortifications. That does not mean that cyborgs are wishy-washy about their agenda or intellectual commitments. No, cyborgs just start from a different place.

In fact, the whole “literacies” family of CURLS robots is a little underdeveloped in the whole scheme of things. The more I think about it, the more I think that cyborgs are more fitting than robots when it comes to literacies. Take digital rhetorics/literacies, for example. On the one hand, we could develop a robot that would approach its task from the rhetoric angle–and do it quite well. However, digital writing/design bleeds into several other areas–even in the immediate family: desktop pub, info design, and media studies, for example. So, when thinking about designing a “digital rhetoric” robot, it would make more sense to turn to a cyborg.

Haraway book jacket imageSuch a proposal will be tricky, though. After all, cyborgs do not exactly have a glowing reputation–think Blade Runner, Terminator, and, of course, the BorgDonna Haraway notwithstanding. But an interesting way of approaching the task at hand, methinks. Diversify the robot army.

Yes, it’s the end of the semester.

Yes, I’m punchy.

Sunny skies, low humidity, 78 degrees.

Tags: , , , , , ,

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 7th, 2008 at 3:33 pm and is filed under academic, blogging, comp/rhet, professional, research, rhetoric. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 comments so far

Chris
 1 

While cyborgs would indeed seem to blend the best of both worlds, the term itself cyborg has quite the loaded context. Yet, when you begin the thought process you describe cyborgs as a hybrid – which to me has a much more pleasing connotation (sure it still needs gas to run, but it is perhaps a crutch or small step towards energy independence).
Using the looser term allows for more of the bleeding across literacies that are necessary for a curriculum to work: certain hybrids heavily grounded in the digital realm (a complete literacy including coding and site/network development abilities), other hybrids grounded in the “classic” idea of literacy. Both broods need a strong core, reference point, touchstone – but each has the freedom to develop in different manners befitting their interests.

Also, is the proposed Composition, Rhetoric, Literacy Studies acronym CRLS or CURLS? & if it is indeed CURLS what does the U stand for?

May 8th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
 2 

And it’s fitting that you’d be the person to comment on the hybrids…having Battlestar also on my mind…the “incoherent” talk of the hybrid, the one who cannot be understood within the existing discursive framework. A monster or a prophet?

And, thanks for pointing out the “U”. Phonetics. “U” is now under erasure.

May 8th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment