Techno Redemption (WAS Re: M&D c50 The Golem)

[alice wellintown]

I never respond to anything I don't read with care. I read the article.
It's bullshit.


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:24 PM, <bandwraith at aol.com> wrote:

> What isn't true? Read the article before you go off half-cocked. If you
> can't get institutional access I'll email it to you. She's writing from
> within the context of "American Studies" and making the case that that
> particular discipline within the Academy is situated to add a uniquely
> interdisciplinary perspective to all the numerous studies which
> have considered the issue, not that many scholars haven't written about it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
> To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Thu, Apr 4, 2013 9:34 am
> Subject: Re: Techno Redemption (WAS Re: M&D c50 The Golem)
>
>  This simply isn't true. American scholars have studied this matter in
> great depth. Moreover,  the issue of stewardship is an essential part of
> the study of technics in America, and in nearly every department at
> Universities in America. the ethics, the ideological forces embedded in
> technics is the focus of intense scholarship. I can provide a long list of
> the books I've read on this. Most of these are common on syllabi at
> Amrfican colleges.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:34 AM, <bandwraith at aol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Slow and Low Progress," or Why American Studies Should Do Technology
>> *Author: *de la Peña, Carolyn
>> *Publication info: *American Quarterly 58. 3 (Sep 2006): 915-941,981.
>>
>> This essay suggests that scholars in American studies have something to
>> learn from Mary Shelley. We in the United States frequently tell stories of
>> technological redemption and technological damnation. We do not, however,
>> spend much time considering stories of technological stewardship. A legacy
>> of positivism has embedded our political, social, and cultural systems with
>> a disturbing patina of technological "neutrality." And, in many ways, we as
>> scholars have contributed to this legacy of positivism by failing to
>> critique technology as both substance and ideology in American cultural
>> life. The field of American studies has largely left questions of
>> technology to others, in spite of our early leadership in innovative
>> methods of technological analysis and cultural critique. And while
>> discipline-based inquiries into technology have been immensely useful at
>> revealing particular histories and consequences of American technology,
>> they have not been primarily focused on issues of diversity, equity, and
>> justice that are fundamental to our field. Nor have they been written with
>> a particular focus on interdisciplinary connections that embed everyday
>> actions within their larger political and cultural systems
>>
>>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>> To: bandwraith <bandwraith at aol.com>
>> Cc: pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 10:47 pm
>> Subject: Re: M&D c50 The Golem
>>
>>
>>  “The function of science fiction is not only to predict the future, but
>> to prevent it."   Ray Bradbury
>> *
>> *On Wednesday, April 3, 2013, wrote:
>>
>>> A' and it's worth pointing out that if Doc Frankenstein would've just
>>> cut the monster a little slack and exercised a little responsibility for
>>> his creation, things might have turned out better. Is it too late? I'd like
>>> to know.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>> To: bandwraith <bandwraith at aol.com>
>>> Cc: pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>> Sent: Wed, Apr 3, 2013 10:09 pm
>>> Subject: Re: M&D c50 The Golem
>>>
>>> Mary Shelly resurrected the Golem most nobly. And it still has legs.
>>>
>>>  Frankenstein is about hubris, as is the Golem.
>>> Technology is Modern Hubris.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130404/7d85d7ec/attachment.html>