Trask- Hayles Prompt
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 1 Hayles argues that websites like Wordle and the use of a hermetic word frequency counters are valuable tools to combatting the close-reading problem that seems so prevalent:
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 Now it is time to rethink what reading is and how it works in the rich mixtures of words and images, sounds, and animations, graphics and letters that constitute the environments of twenty-first century literacies.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 2 For today I would like to take a closer look at what a rethought definition of reading might look like based on what we’ve read from Hayles and learned about DH in general. What did reading mean before the advent of the internet vs. now? How has that definition changed or remained the same? What are the pros and cons to redoing this definition? Are there disciplinary implications? How can we start to put into practice this rethought, ever-changing art form. What would a word cloud for reading look like pre and post Internet?
Hayles does, indeed, champion the use of machine-reading software and strategies (like Wordle), which she says “provide the basis for wide-ranging experimentation by students and teachers alike” (78). But it’s important to note that Hayles is not advocating for the use of these tools / strategies in lieu of close-reading, or as a replacement for close-reading. Rather, she wants us to expand our contemporary definitions of reading to allow for multiple modes and methodologies (including both close and machine-assisted reading).
It’s important to keep this in mind; Hayles isn’t saying that these tools will combat the “close-reading problem,” as you call it, or will provide a replacement for the kind of reading that was done in the past. Rather, she sees them as useful for creating “entry points” (74) to texts — entry points which can then be explored via traditional (“close”) reading.