These readings, I found, do raise more questions than they offer answers (something I think I mentioned last week; so I should probably stop expecting answers, eh?). The discussion of technology is a tricky one though, something that both concerns and excites me as an academic because technology these days shifts and develops rapidly, and that shift can be observed in these articles. Ten years is a canyon-sized gap that makes composition research seem desperately outdated. Yancey speaks to this back in 2004: “I have to wonder out loud if in some pretty important ways and within the relatively short space of not quite than ten years, we may already have become anachronistic” (302). I found Haas’s discussion on materiality interesting, but she is writing about the capital-N InterNet, which, to be fair, was twenty years ago.
I originally had more specific questions about Haas’s book on materiality and Yancy’s article on multi-modality, but as I write, more pressing questions about technology and our role as compositionists come to mind. So, because these articles seem to have quickly dated themselves, and the academic research process can be quite slow and labored, how does the development of composing technologies impact our field? Are we agile enough to keep up? And considering the research in Haas’s book, how do we bridge the gap between digital compositions and more traditional physical modes of composition (which I think might be the theme of that UNCC FYW conference)?