User talk:Jskarlin/sandbox

NOTES FOR WIKIPEDIA ASSIGNMENT FOR ITP CORE 2

 * User:ObscuraScientia - I just added a bunch of content for the Wikipedia assignment. I laid out a basic framework for our lesson plans -- let me know if they make sense as a general trajectory. Do you think it would be better to get them to hunt for poor citation in a general wikipedia wormhole, or to choose a subject matter in which they can drill down through layers of citation? I suppose we can always offer a couple different versions. I started to write up the final assignment (which I don't think is a full research paper, but just a short summary/response paper), and started to try to work out some of the particulars of the weeks accordingly.

What do you think? Jskarlin (talk) 22:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Notes for CYBORG Sandbox

 * Hi User:Mckinniburgh

--Jskarlin (talk) 00:10, 22 September 2015 (UTC)


 * User:Jskarlin want to add the text you had already, and we can do some editing? --Mckinniburgh (talk) 00:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * heck yes, I do, User:Mckinniburgh --Jskarlin (talk) 00:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi J + MC! Nice work on Cyborg Manifesto so far. Looking forward to seeing how it comes out. Smythp (talk) 23:45, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Smythp thanks for reading! User:Mckinniburgh just did some magic making.--Jskarlin (talk) 19:26, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Strategy?
User:Mckinniburgh -- I thought perhaps we might talk good times for writing. Gathering extra citations is going to take a little time. Do we want to break down critical response in particular categories, or even by decade? I feel like we could do subsections on feminist response/citation, animal studies response, or something along those lines? Or perhaps breaking it into popular vs academic critique? let me know what you think.--Jskarlin (talk) 13:03, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

User: Jskarlin --hey there! ready to get going on this! To clarify, our assignment is as follows: add a well-cited paragraph to the page in question. i have my notes that we're going to edit on the cyborg manifesto page, and focus primarily on criticism. off to find some sources now. --User: Mckinniburgh Mckinniburgh (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

User: Jskarlin --okay! got a chunk of writing done. i think it would be super-helpful if you wanted to go back in and flesh out some of the paragraphs (although i think the first one might be okay, but i'd love your edits) with a little more research. then we can coordinate getting this on the article page itself! thanks so much! Mckinniburgh (talk) 15:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Couple more JSTOR arcticles
This might be helpful, it's an interview: http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.gc.cuny.edu/stable/466237  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mckinniburgh (talk • contribs) 15:49, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Mckinniburgh Here are just the first few of 821 JSTOR search returns for "Cyborg Manifesto"

Materializing a Cyborg's Manifesto Author(s): Jackie Orr Source: Women's Studies Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 1/2, VIRAL (SPRING/SUMMER 2012), pp. 273- 280 Published by: Feminist Press at the City University of New York Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23333457 Accessed: 05-10-2015 18:26 UTC

The Persistence of Complexity: Re-reading Donna Haraway's Cyborg Manifesto Author(s): Matthew Gandy Source: AA Files, No. 60 (2010), pp. 42-44 Published by: Architectural Association School of Architecture Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41378495 Accessed: 05-10-2015 18:29 UTC

Chapter Title: From Cyborgs to Animals: Donna Haraway Book Title: How to Be an Intellectual: Essays on Criticism, Culture, and the University Book Author(s): Jeffrey J. Williams Published by: Fordham University. (2014) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt13wzw7w.20

I'll look more after class. --Jskarlin (talk) 18:31, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

THE PROSE
(a place to start drafting the paragraph). Mckinniburgh (talk) 13:40, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Criticism and controversy were built into the essay's publication history: the East Coast Collective of the Socialist Review found the piece "a naive embrace of technology" and advocated against its publication, while The Berkeley Collective ultimately insisted that it go to print. The essay has been described as "controversial" and "viral" in its circulation through multiple academic departments and disciplinary boundaries, contributing to the critical discourse on its claims. This controversiality was matched by its omnipresence; Jackie Orr, Associate Professor of Sociology at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University, writes, "It is hard to be a feminist graduate student in the U.S. humanities or social sciences after 1985 and not be touched in some way by the cyborg manifesto." The rapid adoption of the article in academic circles also increased the pace of the critical conversation surrounding the work, and in 1990, Haraway felt that the essay had "acquired a surprise half life," which made it "impossible to rewrite" and necessitated revisiting the topic in her subsequent publications.

Many critiques of A Cyborg Manifesto focus on a basic level of reader comprehension and writing style, such as Orr's observation that "undergraduate students in a science and technology class find the cyborg manifesto curiously relevant but somewhat impenetrable to read." This is corroborated by Helen Merrick and Margret Grebowicz's observation that scientists who reviewed Primate Visions had similar issues, particularly as related to Haraway's use of irony. . Judy Wajcman, Professor of Sociology at the London School of Economics and Political Science, suggests in TechnoFeminism that "the openness of her writing to a variety of readings is intentional," which "can sometimes make Haraway difficult to interpret;" however, it does not seem that Wajcman critiques Haraway's tone for its capability to encompass more possibilities, rather than limit them.

Critiques of Haraway have also centered on the accessibility of the thematic topics she discusses in her writing, and according to third-wave feminist readings, her work "assumes a reader who is familiar with North American culture," and posits that "readers without the appropriate cultural capital are...likely to find it infuriatingly obscure and impenetrable." Considering the question of accessibility more broadly, disability studies have focused on Haraway's essay, noting the absence of "any kind of critical engagement with disability...disabled bodies are simply presented as exemplary...requiring neither analysis nor critique"--a gap which Alison Kafer, Professor of Feminist Studies at Southwestern University, attempts to address in Feminist, Queer, Crip.

Wajcman also argues that Haraway's view of technology in A Cyborg Manifesto is perhaps too totalizing, and that the binary of "the cyborg solution and the goddess solution" ultimately "caricatures feminism" by focusing too readily on a dichotomy that may in fact be a false one.

Moved the Prose to the Sandbox proper

 * Hi User:Mckinniburgh -- Awesome work! I'm just trying to integrate the last few sources (a reference to popular cultural critique (the Wired article)) and the couple of sources from the current version on criticism. I'll look at it this evening! Jskarlin (talk) 19:40, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

last few bits
[[User:Mckinniburgh]
 * I read the Wired article and it's really useful, so I figured I'd brush up the "beyond academia' paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jskarlin (talk • contribs) 03:15, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Questions for Michael
User:Theredproject We are nearing a close on this lovely editing exploration. I'm a little nervous to pull the trigger. How do you review before we properly publish?
 * I'm now convinced I've missed the proper place to post this. When you say "post on both our talk pages'... How do you mean?

Jskarlin (talk) 03:25, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * My talk page lives here: User_talk:Theredproject and you can talk to me there, or you can call me in, as you did above. Going to bed now, but will look at this tmrw.--Theredproject (talk) 03:37, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This looks good User:Jskarlin and User:Mckinniburgh. I would suggest two kinds of revisions to make: paraphrase more, and avoid the focus on the speaker (and their titles). So, your sentence:
 * This controversiality was matched by its omnipresence; Jackie Orr, Associate Professor of Sociology at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University, writes, "It is hard to be a feminist graduate student in the U.S. humanities or social sciences after 1985 and not be touched in some way by the cyborg manifesto."
 * Might be rewritten as such:
 * This controversiality was matched by its omnipresence; Jackie Orr has noted that nearly all American feminist graduate students in the humanities or social sciences encounter the essay.
 * OR even:
 * This controversiality was matched by its omnipresence; nearly all American feminist graduate students in the humanities or social sciences encounter the essay.
 * Throwing this out there: either make the names you are quoting into links, or remove them? If they are blue links, that means the speakers have wiki-authority, like Judy Wajcman for example. Lastly, Be Bold! --Theredproject (talk) 13:42, 12 October 2015 (UTC)