Be sure to read the instructions carefully.
Deadline: Papers are due on April 22 at 5:00. I do not accept late papers--no exceptions. You must submit a paper and electronic version. Paper versions are due in my office at 5:00 on April 22. Electronic versions must be sent to my email address: jdean@hws.edu. Again, you must submit both versions (submitting just one does not count and you will get a "0").
Format: Papers must be typed, double-spaced, with a title page, citations (recognized academic form), and page numbers. The paper version must be stapled in the upper left corner. Papers should be 6-8 pages long (5 is too short; 9 is too long).
Style: Papers must have a thesis, that is, a primary claim for which you argue on the basis of your reading of the texts assigned for the class. The thesis must appear in your first paragraph. The assignment is to write an essay on one of the topics listed below. The essay should answer the question the topic poses. In answering the question, the essay should draw from (and cite) the relevant course materials (as well as materials from your presentation if you choose that question). You are welcome to email me your thesis in advance to make sure you are on the right track. I can only answer queries made before noon on April 20.
Assessment: The criteria for assessment (not in rank order) are 1) the format requirements; 2) the cogency of the thesis; 3) the quality of the argument; 4) the quality of the writing; 5) the depth of engagement with the course readings; 6) the understanding of the readings demonstrated in the paper. I am looking for papers that take a position and present strong, well-supported arguments for it. I am also looking for papers that show improvement and development since the beginning of the course.
Questions (choose 1):
1. Terminator 2 depicts a future of sentient machines. Mark Andrejevic envisions a present wherein interactivity disempowers citizens politically while at the same time telling them that they are active and involved. Given the empirical examples we've discussed in class (Movements.org, open source software/development, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and Wikipedia), which vision seems most likely? Are the ways of dealing with (preventing? overcoming?) these two futures the same? Why or why not?
2. Franco Berardi argues that in semio-capitalism, "human minds and flesh are integrated with digital circuits thanks to interfaces of acceleration and simplification. . . " Explain Berardi's thesis. How is it like or not like a vision of Terminators? How is it like or not like the vision of hive mind or singularity Lanier criticizes? Is Berardi right? Why or why not?
3. Franco Berardi contrasts connection with conjunction. Explain these two concepts. What do they entail for the connective generation? Use these concepts to analyze Facebook and/or Twitter.
4. Write an essay in which you compare and contrast Dean and Berardi. Be sure to consider whatever being and the connective generation as well as their discussions of the change in the symbolic/decline of symbolic efficiency.
5. Write an essay that uses one of the theoretical pieces we've read this term (Terranova, Dean, Andrejevic, Berardi) to explore more analytically the empirical material you covered in your class presentation. (These papers will be graded in terms of the depth/detail of your analysis).
6. Franco Berardi describes our world of digital networks in terms of a series of psychopathologies. Yet he also suggests that information technologies are liberating. Which side of his story is more convincing? Why? Are both sides present in our contemporary setting? How or in what sense?
7. Franco Berardi suggests that the connective generation (the generation that learned more words from machines than from their mothers) lacks empathy and desire. He even suggests that art and poetry are captured in semio-capitalism, unable to oppose semio-capitalism. Why does he think this? What are the implications of this claim? Is he right?
No comments:
Post a Comment