I face a dilemma. As of today, the blog-based peer review of Expressive Processing has completed chapter seven ("Authoring Systems") and is embarking on chapter eight ("The SimCity Effect"). But I'm not sure what follows after chapter eight.
In the version MIT Press sent out for blind peer review, the next chapter ("Playable Language") is incomplete. This isn't unusual for blind peer review — but it seems odd, in this more public form, to post an argument left dangling. At the same time, I would like to keep the two reviews close to one another, because I think it strengthens the comparison of their results.
My instinct is to finish the posting for this blog-based review early next week, with the end of chapter eight. This would still leave some time for ongoing comments and response on what will have, by then, been posted: eight chapters that feel, to me, relatively complete.
But, in the spirit of blogging, I'd like to hear what others think before making a decision. And I'd also be interested to hear opinions on Ian Bogost's recent response to this and another project: "Reading Online Sucks." (Which starts out as you'd guess from the title, but then takes a thoughtful turn.) Finally, if there are any overarching ideas about the shape of chapter seven's argument, or other not-yet-raised issues, this is a good place to offer them. (Personally, I'm surprised that no one, so far, has commented on me likening Brutus to a literary hoax...)
Meanwhile, I'm enjoying digging in to the backlog of thoughtful comments on chapter six, and starting to look forward to doing some revision work during UCSD's upcoming spring break.
Powered by WordPress