Following the trend of the first week, I continued to make connections between the first week authors as I filled in more nodes from their works and created corresponding lines between the color-coded author-works. However, instead of bringing the authors together in concert, I spent time trying to isolate their “ruptures” (as a nod to Foucault) as I added in Foucault to the mix, spinning out from the structuralism present as branching paths from the central theme into thinner lines.

Captured in the screenshot below, the connections between ideas in Foucault can be constructed through lines linking the ideas composed under the terms and sub-categories he uses in his discussion within The Archaeology of Knowledge.

 

Using the same central themes I worked from in my reading notes for the week, I linked both Data-palace: Modern memory work in digital environments and Re-membering identity: Recovering textual networks through a remediated canon through the ways both speak to the use of distributed and embodied memory and its analysis.

Bridging Spinuzzi’s Tracing Genres, I also use connections between the work Solberg has done on workplaces practices in the 1920s, ‘30s, and ‘40s and how the the same “crystallization” Spinuzzi tracks in the same way. Both works, I note, Data-palace: Modern memory work in digital environments and Re-membering identity: Recovering textual networks through a remediated canon also communicate the ways in which the situated body is part of the distributed cognition, even if only Solberg notes it more within the context.

Pulling from the reading notes on Tracing Genres, I mapped nodes that matched the two major themes of Systems and Users and Genre Construction, linking out to the ways that each author that Spinuzzi (2003) uses constructs genres in turn. I specifically linked the ideas of Popham and boundary objects with the way that Spinuzzi discusses genre construction within organizations.

Much like what was done last week, the work continued to map out the interconnected terms from Foucault, using the italicized terms within The Archaeology of Knowledge as a guide for how to follow the argument (and methodology) laid out within the book as a way to analyze other things.

Unlike the previous works looked at in this class, The Archaeology of Knowledge gives itself over well to branching out into other nodes, linking the ways that terms are presented within the text as, in its way, layers to dig through on the way toward some final theoretical understand of other texts.

Building off of the first set of readings (Bitzer, Vatz, Biesecker, and Rickert), I plotted out a pattern where nodes and connections grew out from the authors-works into the primary ideas that they wrote about and how I saw them bridging between other author-works. As an example of the connections I drew, I saw the major theme of “rhetorical situations” (obviously found in all the works as curated together) as the main node through which each author, in turn, wrote and discussed.

Color-coding the authors, I made connections between how each covered rhetorical situations and, as the following screenshot shows, branched off accordingly.