Sometimes, actually, quite often, I lose sight of what it is I want to do when I grow up. Wow, this sounds like it's gonna be one of those confessional type post, doesn't it? At any rate, I have come a long way in achieving what it is I want to be when I grow up, but there are times that I lose sight of certain parts. I try to force myself into a box I just don't quite fit into.
Today was my wake-up call. I sat and listened to Cheryl Ball and Ryan Trauman talk about digital design, and it all started coming back to me again. I love being an academic (although I'm sure some would question whether or not I'm truly there :-)), but I also love being a tech geek. Yes, that's me, a geek, a nerd, a gadget gurl, and I'm proud of it. So it's time I start immersing myself into the types of text I want to create.
To that end, tonight I read Susan H. Delagrange's "When Revision Is Redesign: Key Questions for Digital Scholarship" published in Kairos. Delagrange's reflection on her revision on a piece she submitted to Kairos that was returned with "revisions and resubmit" opened my eyes to what digital composition can and even should be. The article (found here, http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/14.1/inventio/delagrange/index.html) explains Delagrange's revision process and lays out what she believes she did wrong, as well as the things she insisted on keeping in the text for strong rhetorical reasons.
Delagrange remarks that "by highlighting some of the complexities of the design and redesign of one digital project, I hope to demonstrate the complicated relationship between seeing and design in envisioning and enacting argument, to make more visible the rhetorical and intellectual work of scholarship in digital media, and to argue by example for publishing scholarship about new media in new media" ("Introduction"). Delagrange has inspired me once again to strive for what I want to be when I grow up. I want to be a new media author and designer. I have to marry my past (techie) with my current status (academic) in order to be happy. I have to find that balance. Delagrange has reminded me once more of what I want to do, and I am on the right track again (for now).
Today was my wake-up call. I sat and listened to Cheryl Ball and Ryan Trauman talk about digital design, and it all started coming back to me again. I love being an academic (although I'm sure some would question whether or not I'm truly there :-)), but I also love being a tech geek. Yes, that's me, a geek, a nerd, a gadget gurl, and I'm proud of it. So it's time I start immersing myself into the types of text I want to create.
To that end, tonight I read Susan H. Delagrange's "When Revision Is Redesign: Key Questions for Digital Scholarship" published in Kairos. Delagrange's reflection on her revision on a piece she submitted to Kairos that was returned with "revisions and resubmit" opened my eyes to what digital composition can and even should be. The article (found here, http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/14.1/inventio/delagrange/index.html) explains Delagrange's revision process and lays out what she believes she did wrong, as well as the things she insisted on keeping in the text for strong rhetorical reasons.
Delagrange remarks that "by highlighting some of the complexities of the design and redesign of one digital project, I hope to demonstrate the complicated relationship between seeing and design in envisioning and enacting argument, to make more visible the rhetorical and intellectual work of scholarship in digital media, and to argue by example for publishing scholarship about new media in new media" ("Introduction"). Delagrange has inspired me once again to strive for what I want to be when I grow up. I want to be a new media author and designer. I have to marry my past (techie) with my current status (academic) in order to be happy. I have to find that balance. Delagrange has reminded me once more of what I want to do, and I am on the right track again (for now).
RSS Feed
