Screen Shot 2014-04-07 at 9.46.56 AM

Women and Technology and the Future of Games

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Terry Peterman says:

    Well done, Layne. I really like the point about beginning with the procedure and working backwards because games do not write themselves. I think that is a practical tip for most rhetorical scholarship. I like to think a big part of my work in the History of Rhetoric is the systematic investigation and explanation of symbolic acts and artifacts to reveal the relationship between rhetoric and power. I like that you propose a different way to do this with technology and gaming. They are an artifact that I never really thought of extending critique to until I met you and Sam. Its really opened my eyes to whole new way that ideology functions via technology.

    • alexlayne says:

      Thanks TP! It’s so bizarre too, because I’ve been getting a bunch of backlash to the idea that we need to start at the code and move backwards. Scholars seem to 1. think this is going to be too much work or 2. invalidates the other work they’re doing or 3. think it’s somehow already implicated in the present theories that we can move back. It’s not about what we “can” do with these extant theories, but for me it’s about what is being done. That’s why I want a theory that forces this kind of contextual reflected. As always, thank you for your thoughtful comment! Any maybe this is the thread we can use for RSA :)