I voted early this afternoon, and didn't have to wait long, as luck would have it. For the past few minutes, I've been slapping the candidate. I must say, it's fun in a futile way.

Thirty-five years ago today, Mike was born, and shortly thereafter he was brought home from the hospital, replacing his father's beloved pet at his mother's behest. Maybe he'll tell the story; I hope so. :) Happy birthday, Mike. All the best.

I'm reading David Allen's Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity after reading Clay's review of it, and I haven't been able to put it down. I read it while I brushed and flossed, and now I'm fighting sleep to get through chapters. The most significant benefit so far is that it has helped me to tighten up the connections between the tasks I lay out for myself and my desired outcomes and goals. The book is filled with little gems that I appreciate (like "There is no reason ever to have the same thought twice, unless you like having that thought."); most people would scoff at them, but I'm what some call a "stress puppy"; that is to say, I tend to get stuck in a loop of freaking out about a task, dreading it, and feeling guilty if I don't do it or if I don't do it as well as I had hoped. I don't have any trouble figuring out what needs to be done. My major problem is that I have a distorted perspective when it comes to tasks: I know what I need to do, and then when I do it, I feel better, but only because I can cross that thing off the list, not because I understand that task in terms of a desire of mine (which is the only way I can get real satisfaction out of it, satisfaction that can be a powerful motivator). For example, I'm looking forward to grading tomorrow, because I can cast that task as a "Next Action" -- an often-used term in the book -- in the service of my desire to be a good teacher, which is a major driving force for me. Sigh...I think I'm the last person to understand the direct application of the task-goal connection principle, but better late than never, I guess.

I'm looking forward to reading more of the book tomorrow, but it has already helped. I think now I'll divide my to do lists into two columns, one for the task and the other for the goal and desire -- the prize, heh -- associated with it. The funny thing is, a number of my friends and colleagues already tell me that they consider me to be productive. And for good reason, probably: I mean, it's Saturday night at 2 a.m. and I'm reading a book about how to get things done. On a few occasions, my last roommate stuck her head in my room and said, "It's Friday night! Stop working!" I'm good at creating the illusion of productiveness, that's for sure. Don't believe it. :)

Everyone in academia needs to watch these nine short films spoofing MLA interviews. Funniest thing I've seen on the interweb in a while. :D Via Kairosnews.

Watch it now. Via Ampersand. (I'm going to have this song in my head all day!)

Move along, nothing to see here. These are really just my bookmarks for when I eventually teach a rhetorical theory and methods course that I can design myself and make Wikipedia articles part of the required work: when, not if. 'Cause the students in my first-year composition class would be flabbergasted and would not like it at all if I waltzed in there tomorrow and said, "Hey, you guys, change of plan! Instead of doing the research papers you've been preparing for all semester, we're going to do Wikipedia articles on the following list of topics instead!" Anyway, on to the needed articles:

• Authorship (They've got plenty on IP, but only a stub on authorship.)
• Reflexivity
• Auto-Ethnography
• Rhetorical Criticism
• Visual Rhetoric (I know a few people who could do a mighty fine job with it.)
• Pathos
• Stephen Toulmin
• Donna Haraway

I searched for Toulmin out of curiosity, but I'll bet there are easily a hundred compositionists, rhetoricians, and pedagogical theorists who aren't represented in Wikipedia. Those searches are for another evening, though. By the way, I searched for myself too, but alas, there was nothing. :( :P

Here's my submission for Computers & Writing 2005, which is part of a panel on authorship-intellectual property-collaboration-open source, tap tap: and all that jazz! :)

Recent critiques of authorship have yielded the following insights. First, authors do not exist outside a social and historical context; social and material conditions enable and constrain authorship. Authors are, historically speaking, usually men, usually white, and usually economically privileged enough to afford the leisure time it takes to write. Second, a text is not the product of a sole author. Barthes argues that texts consist of "multiple writings, drawn from many cultures and entering into mutual relations of dialogue, parody, contestation." The field of composition has moved from the understanding
of authorship as a solitary act resulting in a product owned by an individual to an understanding of authorship as a weaving together of other texts the writer has read and voices he or she has heard in conversation. Lunsford (1999) takes up these critiques of authorship and calls for new ways of thinking "a view of agency as residing in what
Susan West defines as the "unfolding action of a discourse; in the knowing and telling of the attentive rhetor/responder rather than in static original ideas" (as cited in Lunsford, 1999, p. 185-186). Lunsford argues for "owning up" rather than owning, agency in
"answerability," and a view of self as always in relation to others.

This presenter will bring these ideas to bear on weblogging communities and practices. Weblogs emerged pari passu with the rise of open source and publicly licensed software, the backlash against the tightening of copyright restrictions in the 1990s, and the popularity of peer-to-peer networks. This influence can be seen in the widespread use of Creative Commons licenses on weblogs and in the rhetorical practices of weblogging, which take place in a network and for an audience who is invited to respond. Weblogging communities value accountability, exchange in the form of comments or trackbacks, and authority as situated in the connections one makes among discourses and the selecting and interpreting of content.

I posted this poem a while back, but as the election nears, I believe the blogosphere (especially the undecided voters) ought to have a second look at it. Upon hearing that Laura Bush cancelled a tea for poets after hearing that some of them planned to protest the war in Iraq, Julia Alvarez wrote:

The White House has disinvited the poets

to a cultural tea in honor of poetry

after the Secret Service got wind of a plot

to fill Mrs. Bush’s ears with anti-war verse.

Were they afraid the poets might persuade

a sensitive girl who always loved to read,

a librarian who stocked the shelves with Poe

and Dickinson? Or was she herself afraid

to be swayed by the cooing doves, and live at odds

with the screaming hawks in her family?


The Latina maids are putting away the cups

and the silver spoons, sad to be missing out

on música they seldom get to hear

in the hallowed halls. . . The valet sighs

as he rolls the carpets up and dusts the blinds.

Damn but a little Langston would be good

in this dreary mausoleum of a place!

Why does the White House have to be so white?

The chef from Baton Rouge is starved for verse

uncensored by Homeland Security.


NO POETRY UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE!

Instead the rooms are vacuumed and set up

for closed-door meetings planning an attack

against the ones who always bear the brunt

of silencing: the poor, the powerless,

the ones who serve, those bearing poems, not arms.

So why be afraid of us, Mrs. Bush?

you’re married to a scarier fellow.

We bring you tidings of great joy—

not only peace but poetry on earth.