CCR 633:

Textual Machinery & Rhetorical Agency,

Ancient to Digital

Look out honey, ‘cause I’m using technology.

- Iggy Pop, “Search and Destroy”
-

We are becoming the servants in thought as in

action, of the machine we have created to serve us.
- John Kenneth Galbraith

Contact
Prof. Krista Kennedy

Email: krista01@syr.edu (Preferred. With rare exceptions, I respond to all emails

within 48 hours.)
IM: drkristakennedy on gTalk, iamkristak on AIM (If you see me online, you’re wel-
come to ping me. After 5 p.m. and on weekends, I may or may not respond.)
Twitter: kakennedy
Office Hours: 1:00 - 2:00 T/Th
Office: HBC 228

Course Description
Technologies of writing and reading are ubiquitous to the point of invisibility in our
daily lives. As we go about mundane communicative tasks, we seldom pause to consider
our essential tools: styluses, the alphabet, handwriting, paper, printing, screens, and
pixels. These technologies have immense rhetorical consequences that influence the
formation of knowledge, power, and community identities. In this course, we will ex-
plore intersections of rhetorical agency and the material aspects of textual production.
We’ll begin at the beginning and work our way toward the digital age, using the follow-
ing questions to focus our inquiry:

• How have humans historically created and refined technologies to meet communica-
tive needs?
• How do technologies influence the form, content, and distribution of human writ-
ing?
• Can technologies (particularly communicative technologies) possess agency?
• How do publishing technologies shape the formation of communities and power?
• How have we rhetorically constructed narratives of our complex interactions with
communicative technologies?
Meeting Spaces, Physical and Digital
HBC 020, which needs no introduction, is our default meeting space.
We will also meet in the Antje Bultmann Lemke Room, located on the 6th floor of Byrd
Library in the Special Collections Research Center. See the schedule for dates.
Our course website is located at http://www.kristakennedy.net/ccr633/.

Texts
Required: (Prices listed are for new books via Amazon.)
• Brooke, C.G. (2009). Lingua fracta: Toward a rhetoric of new media. Cresskill,
N.J.: Hampton Press. $24.95.
• Gitelman, L. (2000). Scripts, Grooves, and Writing Machines. Stanford: Stanford
University Press. $26.95.
• Hayles, N.K. (2002). Writing machines. Cambridge: MIT Press. $14.05
• Lanham, R.A. (1995). The electronic word: Democracy, technology, and the arts.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. $30.00
• Schmandt-Besserat, D. (1996). How writing came about. Austin, University of
Texas Press. $17.37 ***Note that this is the first abridged edition: ISBN
0292777043.***

Recommended:
• Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread
of nationalism. Verso.
• Baron, D. (2009). A better pencil: Readers, writers, and the digital revolution. New
York: Oxford University Press.
• Duncombe, S. (2008). Notes from the underground: Zines and the politics of alter-
native culture. Microcosm Publishing.
• Eisenstein, E. (1979). The printing press as an agent of change. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
• McMillian, J. (2011, available for pre-order as of January). Smoking typewriters:
The sixties underground press and the rise of alternative media in America. New
York: Oxford University Press.
• Morley, D. & Worpole, K. (2009). The republic of letters: Working class writing and
local publishing. Philadelphia: New City Community Press.
• Smith, M.R. & Marx, L. (Ed.), (1994). Does technology drive history? Cambridge:
MIT Press.

Major Assignments
Blogging (15%): You will consider and discuss the weekly topics on our course blog.
This is an open-ended assignment: you may focus on any aspect of the week’s readings
that interests you, bores you, disturbs you, or sends you looking for more stuff. It
should conclude with at least three potential questions for discussion. There are many

CCR 633: Rhetoric, Writing, & Technologies 2

ways to succeed in this assignment, but your response should comprise more than just
notes. In the best of all worlds, these responses will result in both digital and classroom
conversations. Blog posts are due each week by midnight on Monday.
Class Facilitation (15%): You will facilitate our opening discussion two times during
the semester by providing an overview of 1-2 of the texts assigned for that week. If you
choose a debate between scholars (i.e. the Giesler, Lundberg & Gunn debate or the
Eisenstein/Johns debate), you’ll be responsible for facilitating the entire exchange. If
you choose a book-length work, then you’ll be expected to handle the book as a whole.
Your facilitation, which should be 10-15 minutes, should provide us with:
• information about the author
• a quick summary of the text(s)
• identification of the central argument/concerns of the text
• 2-3 discussion questions
You should prepare some form of visual aid for your discussion; this might be a hand-
out, a blog post, or some form of text that we can view in projection.
Dead Technology Project (30%): You will develop and provide connective commen-
tary for a curated collection on a dead technology of your choice. Your focus should be
historical and/or critical in nature. The collection may include written text, audio, or
visual materials, and should be the equivalent of a 2,000 word paper. (We can confer
over exactly what that means, depending on your individual project designs.)
Alternative Technological Narrative (40%): Over the course of the term, you will
develop an extended research project focused on less-commonly-discussed technologi-
cal narratives. For example, you might choose to focus on cultural issues, overlooked
technologies, or a particular technological moment. You will develop a multimodal ex-
ploration of your topic in just about any way that you choose - a database; an interactive
timeline and meta-commentary; a media-rich syllabus and course site; or some other
web-based scholarly resource. I am open to the use of a wide range of technologies to
create this end product and am happy to discuss possibilities with you.

Expectations
As with all graduate-level courses, you’re expected to show up, be collegial, and contrib-
ute consistently in an engaged and original fashion. You’re also expected to meet dead-
lines unless an emergency arises. These simple tenets will take you a long way in the
field.
I’m happy to meet with you, whether before or after class, during office hours, by ap-
pointment, or online. If I don’t hear from you, then I will assume that you’re doing just
fine.

CCR 633: Rhetoric, Writing, & Technologies 3

Schedule of Events

Module 1: Recent Conversations on Agency and Technology

Jan. 18: Defining Technology and Rhetorical Agency
Introductions
Syllabus Review
Weekly Responsibilities Sign-Up

• Baron, D. (2009). Writing it down. In A better pencil: Readers, writers, and the
digital revolution. New York: Oxford UP. 3-18.
• Kline, S.J. (1985). What is technology? In Philosophy of technology: The technologi-
cal condition. Eds. Scharff, R.C. & Dusek, V. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 210-212.
• Campbell, K.K. (2005). Agency: promiscuous and protean. Communication and
Critical/Cultural Studies, 2.1, 1-19.

Jan. 20: Aspects of Rhetorical Agency

• Leff, M. (2003). Tradition and agency in humanistic rhetoric. Philosophy and Rheto-
ric, 36.2, 135-147.
• Geisler, C. (2004). How ought we to understand the concept of rhetorical agency?
Report from the ARS. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 34.3, 9-17.
• Lundberg, C., & Gunn, J. (2005). Ouija board, are there any communications?
Agency, ontotheology, and the death of the humanist subject, or, continuing the ARS
conversation. Rhetoric Society Quarterly 35.4, 83-105.
• Geisler, C. (2005). Teaching the post-modern rhetor: continuing the conversation on
rhetorical agency. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 35.4, 107-113.

Jan. 25: Technological Determinism

Smith, M.R. & Marx, L. (Ed.), (1994). Does technology drive history? Cambridge: MIT
Press. 1-100.

Jan. 27: Nonhuman Agency

• Johnson, J. (1988). Mixing humans and nonhumans together: the sociology of a
door-closer. Social Problems, 35.3, 298-310.
• Miller, C.R. (2007). What can automation tell us about agency? Rhetoric Society
Quarterly, 37.2, 137-157.
• Miller, C.R. (2004.) Expertise and agency: transformation of ethos in human-
computer interaction. In Hyde, M. (Ed.), The ethos of rhetoric, (pp. 197–218). Co-
lumbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.

Module 2: Historical Development of Writing Technologies

Feb. 1: How Writing Came About
Schmandt-Besserat, D. (1996). How writing came about. Austin, University of Texas
Press.

CCR 633: Rhetoric, Writing, & Technologies 4

Feb. 3: Writing, Memory, and Thought
• Aristotle. (2004). On the Soul ; And, On Memory and Recollection. 449b2 - 450a27.
• Plato. (2006). Phaedrus. 274b-276a.
• Plato. (2008). Protagoras. 338e-348a.
• Plato. (2007). Theatetus. 142a, 191c.
• Ong, W. (1986). Writing is a technology that restructures thought. In Bauman, G.
(Ed.), The written word: Literacy in transition. Wolfson College Lectures 1985. Ox-
ford: Clarendon Press. Available
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36156900/Writing-is-a-Technology-That-Restructures
-Thought-PDF-by-Walter-J-Ong.

Feb. 8: Writing, Publishing, and Piracy in Ancient Greece

• Enos, R. Literacy in Athens during the archaic period: A prolegomenon to rhetorical
invention. In Atwill, J.M. & Lauer, J.M. (Ed), Perspectives on rhetorical invention.
(pp. 176-191.) Knoxville: Tennessee Studies in Literature.
• Davison, J.A. (1962). Literature & literacy in ancient Greece. Phoenix 16.3, 141-156.
• Davison, J.A. (1962). Literature & literacy in ancient Greece II: Caging the muses.
Phoenix 16.4, 219-233.

Feb. 10: In Praise of Scribes

Meet in Lemke Room
Introduction to Special Collections
• Trimethius (1492). De laude scriptorum.
• Gold, D. (2008). The accidental archivist: Embracing chance and confusion in his-
torical scholarship. In Kirsch, G.E. & Rohan, L. (Eds.), Beyond the archives: Re-
search as a lived process. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Press. 13-27.
• Mastrangelo, L. & L’Eplattenier, B. (2008). Stumbling in the archives: A tale of two
novices. In Kirsch, G.E. & Rohan, L. (Eds.), Beyond the archives: Research as a lived
process. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Press. 161-169.
• The SU Special Collections Research Center website:
http://library.syr.edu/find/scrc/. Click around and familiarize yourselves with who
they are and what they do.

Feb. 15: The Printing Press as Agent

Meet in Lemke Room
Eisenstein, E. (1979). The printing press as an agent of change. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. 3-113.

Feb. 17: The Printing Press as Agent, Cont.

• Eisenstein, E. (1979). The printing press as an agent of change. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press. 114-162
• Johns, A. (1998). The book of nature and the nature of the book. In The nature of the
book: Print and knowledge in the making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1-
57.

Optional: Visit to the Grandin Print Shop, Palmyra NY

CCR 633: Rhetoric, Writing, & Technologies 5

Feb. 22: Images and Reproducibility
Meet in Lemke Room
• Maynard, P. (2010). Working light. Philosophy of Photography 1.1. 29-34.
• Roh, F. Mechanism & expression. In Trachtenberg, A. (Ed.), Classic essays on pho-
tography. (pp. 154-163.) New Haven, CT: Leete’s Island Books.
• Benjamin, W. (1936). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. Avail-
able http://www.dzignism.com/articles/benjamin.pdf.

Feb. 24: Documentary Photography in the American Midwest

Meet in Lemke Room
• Ward, J. (2010). Solomon Butcher and the great white turkey. In Sullivan, D., May-
lath, B., & Hirst, R. (Eds.) Revisiting the past through rhetorics of memory and am-
nesia. Cambridge Scholars Press.
• Hoelscher, S.D. (2008). Picturing Indians: Photographic encounters and tourist fan-
tasies in H.H. Bennett’s Wisconsin Dells. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. 3-
53,

Optional: Visit to Eastman House, Rochester NY

March 1: Handwriting
• Thornton, T.P. (1998). Handwriting in America. New Haven: Yale UP. (ix-xiv, 3-41,
143-175.)
• Douglass, F. “Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave” (ex-
cerpts)
• Baron, D. (2009). Thoreau’s pencil. In A better pencil: Readers, writers, and the
digital revolution. (pp. 33-48.) New York: Oxford UP.

March 3: Writing Machines: Phonographs and Typewriters

Meet in Lemke Room
Gitelman, L. (2000). Scripts, Grooves, and Writing Machines. Stanford: Stanford UP. 1-
147.

March 8: Writing Machines: Phonographs and Typewriters, II

Meet in Lemke Room
Gitelman, L. (2000). Scripts, Grooves, and Writing Machines. Stanford: Stanford UP.
148-229.

March 10: The Politics of Paper

• Mortensen, P. (2001). Reading material. Written communication 18. 395-439.
• Prendergrast, C. & Ličko, R. (2009). The ethos of paper: Here and there. JAC 29.1-2.
199-228.

March 13 - 20 SPRING BREAK

CCR 633: Rhetoric, Writing, & Technologies 6

Module 3: Alt text, alt communities

March 22: Print and the Formation of Community

Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of
nationalism. Verso. (excerpt)

March 24: Textual Undergrounds I: Early 20c. Zine Culture

Meet in Lemke Room
Duncombe, S. (2008). Notes from the underground: Zines and the politics of alterna-
tive culture. Microcosm Publishing. 6-110.

March 29: Textual Undergrounds II: Local Publishing and Class

Guest: Steve Parks
Morley, D. & Worpole, K. The republic of letters: Working class writing and local pub-
lishing. (2009). 1-87.

March 31: Textual Undergrounds III: Local Publishing and Politics

Guest: Margaret Himley
McMillian, J. (2011). Smoking typewriters: The sixties underground press and the rise
of alternative media in America. Oxford University Press. Excerpt.

April 4-9 ATTW & CCCC

Module 4: Digitalities

April 12: Dreams of a New Machine

• Chambers, E. (1734). Considerations preparatory to a new edition, available to the
publick.
• Wells, H.G. (1938). Contribution to the new Encyclopédie Française, August, 1937.
In The World Brain. Garden City: Doubleday, Doran & Co., Inc. 39-80.
• Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. The Atlantic. Retrieved Jan. 7, 2010 from
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush .
• Licklider, J.C.R & Taylor, R.W. (1968). The computer as a communication device.
Science and Technology (September), 20-41.

April 14: Code and Power: Gender, Eugenics, Tabulation

• ENIAC. In Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENIAC
• Light, J.S. (1999). When computers were women. Technology and culture (July),
40.3. 455-477. Available
http://labweb.education.wisc.edu/steinkuehler/elpa940/readings/Light.pdf
• Black, E. (2001). IBM and the holocaust: the strategic alliance between Nazi Ger-
many and America’s most powerful corporation. Dialog Press. 7-22, 75-104.
• Haynes, C. (2010). <meta> Casuistic code. In From A to <A>: Keywords of markup.
Eds. Dilger, B. & Rice, J. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 228-235.

CCR 633: Rhetoric, Writing, & Technologies 7

April 19: The Electronic Word
Lanham, R.A. (1995). The electronic word: Democracy, technology, and the arts. Chi-
cago: University of Chicago Press. 1-137.

April 21: The Electronic Word, Cont.

Lanham, R.A. (1995). The electronic word: Democracy, technology, and the arts. Chi-
cago: University of Chicago Press. 138-276.

April 26: Multimedia

Hayles, N.K. (2002). Writing machines. Cambridge: MIT Press.

April 28: A Rhetoric of New Media

Brooke, C.G. (2009). Lingua fracta: Toward a rhetoric of new media. Cresskill, N.J.:
Hampton Press.1-112.

May 3: A Rhetoric of New Media, Cont.

Guest: Collin Brooke
Brooke, C.G. (2009). Lingua fracta: Toward a rhetoric of new media. Cresskill, N.J.:
Hampton Press. 113-201.

May 5: Presentations, Feasting

CCR 633: Rhetoric, Writing, & Technologies 8