Selfe and Selfe's article is perhaps the strangest we've had to read. Written in 1994, I found it woefully outdatedand in some cases, unfounded. Computers only undersatnd things in terms of 1 and 0 - on or off. Therefore, of course DOS works like a hierarchy based information structure. Did it have to? I always thought so. The technology to support bricolage-style interfaces wasn't around or too expensive (I assume, I can't really remember when Windows really caught on). Besides, the argument is irrelevant now. Nobody uses DOS anymore! We have our bricolage interface and it probably oppresses and marginalizes logocentric thinkers. Coincidently, we are now learning CSS - an interface of extreme logocentric privilege. Should we also be allowed to design our zen garden in MSPaint so students that prefer a bricolage interface are placated? Is refusing to do so undemocratic or oppressive? In any case, I think the purpose of this article is to remember to try and reach the widest possible audience when performing technical writing and Web design - you must think beyond your personal preferences and you cannot assume people are privy to the same knowledge and experience that you are.

Barton and Barton’s article is not very accessible. However, I did learn that maps are not necessarily faithful reproductions. They can be subjective. They can make people want to visit someplace, or avoid it entirely. They can also promote nationalism, superiority, and hierarchal structures. I suppose that the map we need to make for class could go all sorts of ways. I had never even considered that…