People like change, simple as that. What people also like, it seems, is to make that change on the hardest topics. A good example is Doug Eymans work “Defining and Locating Digital Rhetoric” (2015), where he put himself in the tailend of an old argument.
Learning on the internet has changed drastically and there really isn’t one way to describe how. Eyman brought up information from two different authors who spoke of rhetoric and intertextuality. Eyman states, “the main conclusion here is that both constructing and, more importantly for Warnick’s analysis, understanding texts that use intertextuality as a rhetorical effect is more easily accomplished”(Eyman, 2015). The argument he comes up with after seeing that their main conclusion was similar, was to make it modern.
In my opinion, reading anything outdated gives me a headache. The world around us is changing so rapidly that it is hard to keep up with. But I am just saying that as a student. I can’t imagine how difficult it is to keep up with the times while writing a whole new itinerary for a writing process. Eyman argues that he wants to adjust and “ align theories and methods of classical and contemporary rhetoric to networked texts and new media as objects of study” (Eyman, 2015). It is important to keep history preserved. However, it becomes difficult to get accustomed to if we can’t move forward.
Like in the Agency and Privacy blog, I mentioned learning online. Kim and Burtis made good points and it seems Eyman is in agreement. They care about us as students to be safe and on topic with our technology. We have just simply gone along with it. It’s just second nature to me now to always just look something up at my convenience. And honestly, as sad as it is to say, I think I would have a panic attack if I ever had to go back to scanning textbooks. Not that I ever did but, yea.
Leave a Reply