I didn’t redo my mindmap much, if we’re being honest. This isn’t because I think it’s perfect – though it’s not laziness, either – but rather because I think the enterprise of the mindmap has an inertia which at this point precludes the possibility of broad revision.
What I did change was to delete the things that were not present within the “reality” of where we’d ended up in network theories of rhetoric – the presence of the rhetor, of the rhetorical situation, of audience, discourse, or exigency.
I did make a few minor changes besides this elision of the rhetorical context – namely, I’ve separated Moderate Expressivism out of Current Traditionalism, which I rescued from its isolation up top after the removal of rhetoric for the rhetorical network.
I want to return to this, but it’s not precisely as clear as I’d like within the model represented here. I’ll speak more to this in my recap for Case Study #3.
Last week’s content on Network society connects directly to my nodes this week for Rickert and Ambient Rhetoric. In my Reading Connections, I spoke to my concerns about the disconnect between the ambience of post-modernity and the “legitimate” historical purposes of rhetoric. However, in the Popplet Mindmap, I am focusing more on the discrete elements of the theory itself.
As such, I have added Ambient Rhetoric, which I connected to both Network Society and by extension its situated capitalist concerns. I have also connected Ambient Rhetoric to Rickert himself, whose theoretical practices I have also connected to ANT, Theories of Practice, Cultural Contexts, and Society as general concerns and informing theories.
I additionally connected the core elements of ambience to the theory itself – Chora tied to the notion of connection as well as Dwelling, and Attunement tied to Kairos. Finally, I also added the notion of the “Ambient Age” within Rickert’s arguments, which I have connected specifically to the concept of Dwelling as connected to Chora (signifying in part my general criticism of the notion that we currently exist in a new Ambient Age, rather than all ages being effectively Ambient in practice.)
This week, I’m still suffering to connect concepts of Network Society to the greater concepts of the course, except in part through the more broad concern of how technoscientism, technopostivism, and “the Leviathan” might be present in the concept of Network Society as contextualized in Manuel Castells (see combined Reading Connections for weeks 12 & 13).
As such, this week I have added Castells, Network Society, Capitalism, and Economics. According to my previous color scheme, I have indicated that Economics functions as a field of study or discourse community which deals with the theoretical frame of “capitalism” as a point of connection to Castells’ Network Society.
That said, I didn’t want to directly source Castells’ work to the whole of Network Society, especially when he is not the originating theorist of the field. To this end, I’ve added sociologist Jan van Dijk and connected Castells to both van Dijk and the field of study – as well as the general practice of sociology.
Finally, in addressing criticism that I reviewed in part for my Castells Reading Connections, I have added “social justice activism as theory foundation,” which I hope helps to maintain a mindfulness of criticism of Guattarian and Network Society practices of presuming that certain functions of capital are inherently negative, non-productive, and oppressive. In rationalist and Cynical frameworks for understanding interpretations of ideology, it may be important to remember the ideologies which drive such interrogations.
Once more in the Popplet breach, my friends. Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of node.
These last two weeks were all about connections. In an effort to make the Popplet exercise (LINK) more relevant to my needs and interests, I have begun trying to figure out where all this work connects to things which are – for better or worse – more defined in their terms. English Studies notions of Hypertext have been tied back to systems engineering and the Hypertext Theory of Jacob Nielsen (no relation – also, SITE LINK HERE). Through exploration of continuities, signification, remediation, and associative practices, Pragmatism is tied through to Social Constructivism – and, by extension, to ANT.
This relationship is tenuous, but one I think it would be productive to study further, if only to illuminate where ANT slips from “Anti-Theory” back into “Pure Theory.” Finally, I connect Latour’s terms of association within Reassembling the Social to his conceptualization of The Leviathan and the networked mediations of his other works, such as “Unscrewing the Big Leviathan” (1981), We have Never Been Modern (1993), and On the Modern Cult of the Factish Gods (2009) – which I have largely drawn from because they are more familiar to me than Latour’s other works, and because Latour makes more sense to me in epistemological/social (Sociological – more on this is a second) contexts.
As one might see in the inset image below (Figure 1), there is a node disconnected from the whole network at this point and located proximally to Social Constructivism (and Latour) labeled “THE WHOLE FIELD OF SOCIOLOGY (NO, REALLY, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS AT SOME POINT.)”
I know English Studies steals (“borrows?”) theories wholesale from other disciplines and decontextualizes the complete purposes of those theories (it’s kinda “our thing”), but I believe we will have to address the functions of ANT as a purely sociological theory – and methodology – for producing not rhetorical/genre/textual, but rather social/personal/psychological, data.
In the meantime, the only thing to do is keep linking non-English Studies theorists like Nielsen, Montaigne, Sanders Peirce, and, yes, Latour, until the field network no longer represents itself, but a generalized multi-disciplinary conceptualization of how networked social functions operate.
This week I did something differently. Instead of my traditional movement of adding three nodes and some connections from the readings, this week I began to curate my Popplet to a degree where the Popplet reflected my overall final view of what is useful to me in the field thus far. This largely resulted in my deleting early works from weeks 1 and 2 which were cluttering the central field, and reducing rhetorical functions to a central focus from which expanding theories are based (see Figure 1).
In addition to the general deletion of most W1 sources (excluding Biesecker), this week I added new content in four primary sections: 1) I created a CHAT section from which I will be expanding notions of “challenge” and multimodality in technology, 2) I created a central Poststructuralism node to connect ideologies of contingency and theories of epistemology to a central belief structure to mirror current-traditionalism, pragmatism, etc., and 3) I added Pierre Bourdieu and his Social Theory of Practice (and its theory element of “habitus” as a connection point for ANT and CHAT.
Finally, 4) I connected “rhetoric” as a field concern to notions of “the real” and Baudrillard as a point of connection to pragmatism, reality, and the semiotic work of Charles Sanders Peirce as a jumping point for future critiques of remediation techniques in CHAT.
In terms of Mindmap formatting, I have worked to unify formatting and relocate nodes to minimize edge overlapping. This was assisted somewhat by the deletion of excess nodes and connections. The revised color key is as follows:
Orange: School of thought, theory, or ideology Green: Elements of rhetorical argument/form Black: Authors/Theorists/Texts Red: Specific Theories and theoretical elements Pink: Broad concepts and contexts of meaning.
The current mindmap can be seen in Figure 2 below. A high-resolution form can be viewed by clicking on the attached image for Figure 2.