Introduction to the course; print and fill out the class Information Sheet and bring it to class on Thurs. Go to Office 365 (it replaced Mason Live) and set up mail forwarding if you do not check your GMU email several times a week and did not do this last semester.

I will also help you add my email addresses to your safe list so messages about the class will not be blocked by GMU's spam filter. (We may have to finish some of these items during our second meeting.) You should also create a course folder in Office 365 so you can easily locate course related messages. 

In addition, this week, 1) you will register on Wordpress.com; 2) I will invite you to accept write permissions on the class blog; 3) you will introduce yourself to your fellow students; and 4) you will comment on each other's postings. The instructions for the assignment are at page/prompt 03 on the upper right of the class blog; instructions for registering and posting are at page/prompts 02a and 02b as well as below.

Now let's get started setting up permissions so you can introduce yourself to the class on the blog following page/prompt 3 at http://202s17.wordpress.com/  Before you can post, you will need to register on Wordpress.com--unless you already have an account, which those of you in an LLC ENGH 101 section f16 already have--and accept the invitation to join the blog. There are five steps:  1) you will receive an email from kthomps4/Wordpress inviting you to be an author on the ENGH 101 course blog; 2) you will follow the link in the email (#1 Signup in email) and register on Wordpress.com FOR JUST A USER NAME, NOT A SITE; 3) you will then accept the invitation to join the class blog (#2 Accept Invitation in email) and then you will log on to the class blog if you are not already logged on; 4) you will introduce yourself to your fellow students. 

If you have problems, you might try going to SIGN UP FOR JUST A USER NAME. In either case, use your GMU user name and email address; write down your password (or use one you will remember). If your user name is already taken on WordPress, add letters or numbers to your GMU user name.  You agree to the terms of service by clicking Sign up. How you fill in your profile on the next page is up to you. Click submit.  

Once you are fully registered and logged on at Wordpress, you should also see the course blog under My Blogs on the left side of the page. Click on that link (and choose the blog for this course if you are registered for more than one blog).

When you mouse over My Sites on the top left of the class blog you should see a menu that includes Blog Posts/Add under Publish.  If you do not, type in manually /wp-admin at the end of the class blog URL.  That will take you to the Dashboard and Posts/New. The Write link (pencil icon) on the right top side of the blog also brings you to the new post form. 

Give your post a title like “03-Intro Ken T” and enter the text of your post in the box under Post. Once I have given you authorship privileges, you should also see a check box with your name under People at the top right of the Write page (its one of the “categories”). Also check Introductions before you click on Publish. If I haven’t entered your first name and last initial yet under the name categories, you can edit your post in a day or two, check your name category and click save changes. For this and all subsequent posts, title the post with the assignment number/name and your first name/last initial. (Note: you can edit your published posts by clicking on the edit button underneath the post.)

Before class, read Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, pp. 7-18 (Walton and his meeting with Victor). BRING THE NORTON CRITICAL EDITION OF THE NOVEL TO CLASS FROM NOW ON.

Introduction to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and its mythic status in debates about the potential dangers of science and technology. In the weeks to come, we will explore two separate but related issues in conjunction with our discussion of Shelley's novel and later film adaptations:

1. the extent to which it is either possible or desirable to create a human being through science and engineering
2. the extent to which computers and other machines could advance to the point where we would have increasing difficulty distinguishing them from human beings. As we shall see, the replicants of Blade Runner are quite different from both Dr. Frankenstein's creature and more modern ideas about cyborgs or AI. But both are presented as having consciousness and potentially make claims on our moral imagination.

We will begin exploring these issues in class by watching Ridley Scott and others discuss Shelley and modern science in the Prophets of Science Fiction series.  The video is available from Amazon at  http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0065K6PJO (42 min total).  

Next week, we will listen to the opening of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein using an audible.com recording of the opening (Audible 17:23-25:38 & 41:05-48:20 or 20 min total).  Today, I will provide an overview of Walton's initial letters and use the 1818 title page (p. 3) and the 1831 Introduction (especially p. 168) to set up the issue of religious limits on scientific ambition.  The 1818 edition of the novel focuses more on family responsibility, as Anne Mellor points out in the Ridley Scott documentary.  Mary Shelley puts more emphasis on religious themes in the 1831 Introduction than she does in the 1818 text of the novel, which puts more emphasis on familial responsibilities and connections to nature and community.  As we shall see, religious prohibitions, in contrast, play a central role in the 1931 James Whale film.  Beginning to sort through these differences is important because it bears on your first paper which asks you to address three questions:   

1. What is Mary Shelley’s position on the ethics of creating life (i.e. is it a good or bad idea) and how does she use the story to present her position
2. What is the position in at least one of the films we have watched and how is it presented
3. What is your position on creating life and how is it similar and how different from Mary Shelley’s, and James Whale’s and/or Ridley Scott’s?  Here you can bring in more recent developments, as noted below, but also make sure you cover in detail the way the issue is treated in Shelley and one or more of the films. 

We will continue discussing these and other issues when we return to the opening of Mary Shelley's novel next week and watch the James Whale films and Blade Runner after that.  In Blade Runner, for example, Roy Batty's awareness of his own mortality is part of what humanizes him.  In Ridley Scott's film, genetically engineered beings possess consciousness, feel pain, and are aware of their own upcoming deaths. 
I will set these issues up at the end of class by playing a clip of Roy's final speech, "I've seen things," at:  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8&feature=related    

Since many of you were in f16 LLC ENGH101s but some were not, we will review Alan Turing's famous thought experiment (The Turing Test) by watching The Machine That Changed the World Part I (43:40-54:30 min).  Note that the links to the Waxy.org site for Machine Part I above are for the supplementary material on the page; the video itself is no longer available there.  You can find Parts II-V of the series on YouTube:  Part II, Part III, Part IV and Part V.  I will use a personal copy for Part I in class.     

(NOTE:  A more recent exploration of some of the issues raised by Turing is available in the presentation of Milo, the virtual boy, by Peter Molyneux, the head of Microsoft's European games division. Also see the interview with the philosopher Daniel Dennett on The Turing Test. For background, you may also want to look at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on The Turing Test.  We will return to these issues later when we talk about the creatures consciousness and account of his own life in Mary Shelley in relation to later ideas about AI.      

Before class today you should have your introduction up on the blog (page/prompt 03); by the end of the week, you should have commented on at least two of your fellow students' posts, picking up on what interests you in their intro posts and responding in a friendly way.  Also make sure to print and fill in the Information Sheet.  

Before class, REVIEW Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein, pp. 7-18 (Walton and his meeting with Victor). BRING THE NORTON CRITICAL EDITION OF THE NOVEL TO CLASS.  Also before class, watch the historian of science Susan Lederer on the Frankenstein myth and modern science. The complete talk is at http://video.whyy.org/video/1475831010 and you should review it (or your notes) before you write your first paper.   


You should now have your introduction up on the blog (page/prompt 03) and have commented on at least two of your fellow students’ posts, picking up on what interests you in their intro posts and responding in a friendly way.  Also make sure to print and fill in the Information Sheet and bring it to class if you did not bring it last Thurs.    

At the beginning of class we will listen to the opening of Frankenstein using an audible.com recording of the opening (Audible 17:23-25:38 & 41:05-48:20 or 20 min total).  We will compare this section to the opening of Kenneth Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994). The film is available in video-on-demand (VOD) format on Amazon.  We will watch only selections from the Branagh film in class; you will have the option of watching and writing about the entire Branagh film for extra credit for Thurs March 2nd. 

We will also look at Dore's 1876 illustrations (plates 5-10) when we discuss p. 12 in Frankenstein.  Mary Shelley heard Coleridge read the poem and alludes to it in her novel.    

Last Thurs we looked at the 1818 title page (p. 3) and the 1831 Introduction (p. 168) to set up the issue of religious limits on scientific ambition.  The 1818 edition of the novel focuses more on family responsibility, as Anne Mellor points out in the Ridley Scott documentary you watched last week.  As I think you will see as you proceed through the novel, Mary Shelley puts more emphasis on religious themes in the 1831 Introduction than she does in the 1818 text of the novel, which puts more emphasis on familial responsibilities and connections to nature and community.  As we shall see, religious prohibitions, in contrast, play a central role in the 1931 James Whale film. 

We will watch Blade Runner at our first Cinema and Supper,  Feb 17th or 24th.  To set up the film and link it to some of the issues discussed in the Prophets of Science Fiction documentary, I pointed out that the genetically engineered replicant, Roy Batty’s awareness of his own mortality is part of what humanizes him in the clip we watched at the end of class last Thurs.  In the Ridley Scott’s film, genetically engineered beings possess consciousness, feel pain, and are aware of their own upcoming deaths.  You can review Roy’s final speech, “I’ve seen things,” at:    
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8&feature=related      

Before class, read Frankenstein, pp. 18-35 (Victor's account of his life through his idea of creation).  At the beginning of class we will listen to the audible.com recording of the opening of Victor's own narration and discuss the focus on family history and the beginnings of his interest in science.  We will also discuss his early interest in alchemy and later scientific education at Ingolstadt focusing in particular on Waldman's lecture on modern science, (Audible 1:04:30-).

We will begin watching the 1931 Universal Studios adaptation of Frankenstein in class today.  The film was directed by James Whale with Boris Karloff as the Monster (70 min).   The adaptation is currently available at Vimeo.  Such online availability is often quite unreliable, however, so its worth noting that the 1931 film is also available in VOD format on Amazon.   By Feb 16th, you should have watched the entire 1931 film on your own.  We will not watch the whole film in class. 

We will look carefully at the pre-credit warning by Edward Van Sloan (the actor who plays Waldman) in Frankenstein (1931).  I will talk briefly about the Edison Film Trust (1908-1915) and Carl Laemmle's resistance to its practices and his son's role in Universal's turn to Horror in the early 1930s.  We will watch through Elizabeth and Victor Moritz's visit to Waldman. 

There will be a blog posting due before next class (page/prompt 4a/4b) on the differences in the versions of the story we have read/seen. There are two questions--one on Walton's role and character and the other on Victor, the origins and shifts in his interest in science, and his plans and ideas about creating a living being.  You will post on one question and comment on a at least two of your fellow students posts on the other question.    

Before class read Frankenstein, pp. 35-70 (Victor creates, abandons and talks to his creature). We will begin with a review of Victor’s ideas about creation (pouring a torrent of light into a dark world, being blessed by his creatures, frantic work with dead bodies) and then compare Victor’s pre-creation vision and post-creation response to the creature.  We will also discuss the impact of sublime landscape during his return home, and his first sighting and then first meeting with his creation after his initial abandonment.   

In our class discussion, we will pay particular attention to the extent to which Mary Shelley  gives us details about the creature’s reaching out to Victor that provide a more innocent picture of the creature than Victor’s reading of  the situation. 

Also before class today, look at the Introduction and five pages from the Birth of Frankenstein section of the NLM-NIH Frankenstein: Penetrating the Secrets of Nature website (see navigation under EXHIBITION on tab near top).  Note the short discussion of Galvani's work (click on the Boundary Crossing/1818), a moment in the history of electricity I discussed in ENGH101 last semester along with Volta and the uses of electricity in popular entertainment.      

Blog post 4a or 4b due before class today; comments by Sun at midnight at the latest.  You will form groups today and next class; form groups from those sitting near you to facilitate discussion.  I will then finish the group list on the blog next class.  Make sure to check the list and let me know if I have made any mistakes.  Commenting is due after class on Thurs and must be completed by Sun Feb 12th at 11:59pm. 

JAN 30TH IS THE LAST DAY TO ADD CLASSES
FEB 13TH IS THE LAST DAY TO DROP WITH 33% TUITION PENALTY

Before class, read Frankenstein, pp. 70-101 (monster's story through killing of William). During class we will talk about the creature's story and the key role 1st person narrative plays in this part of the novel as opposed to the 1931 Universal Studios Frankenstein. 

We will watch more of the 1931 film in class beginning with a quick review of Waldman's meeting with Victor and Elizabeth and then going on to the stealing of the criminal brain, the lead up to creation scene, the creation, and its immediate aftermath, particularly the "monster" seeing the light.  The 1931 film is at the JC library; it is also currently available at Vimeo.  Such online availability is often quite unreliable, however, so its worth noting that the 1931 film is also available in VOD format on Amazon.   By Feb 16th, you should have watched the entire 1931 film on your own. 

Next Tues we will focus on a comparison of the De Lacey cottage scenes in the novel (pp. 74-97) and  the blind man scene in the 1935 sequel, The Bride of Frankenstein (DVD chap 10, 35min-). 

Blog Post 04a or 04b was due Tues.  See page/prompt 04 for details as well as the group list.  You will comment on at least two of your fellow students posts on the other question by today at midnight or Sun by 11:59pm at the very latest.  I will pass around the group sign up sheet again today; finalize your groups from those sitting near you to facilitate discussion.  I will then finish the group list on the blog.  Let me know if I have made any mistakes or if you have missed both classes this week (a very bad thing) and need to be added to the group list.  .  

Before class, read Frankenstein, pp. 101-139 (creating a mate and creature's revenge).  During class, we will compare the De Lacey cottage scenes in the novel (pp. 74-97) and  the blind man scene in the 1935 sequel, The Bride of Frankenstein (DVD chap 10, 35min-).   The Bride of Frankenstein is available on Amazon VOD. 

In your reading for today, pay particular attention to the ‘make me a mate’ sequences in the novel (pp. 101-104, 118-121).  Starting today, we will compare these pages to the bride plot in the 1935 sequel, The Bride of Frankenstein (in a future class, DVD chap 5-7 & 15-17).   Today, we will quickly review Frankenstein's travels and next class his wedding night anxieties.     

Blog post 05a or 05b is due by midnight on Thurs Feb 16th on Victor's creation of the "monster" and its aftermath. There will be two questions--one on the creation itself and the other on the monster's story.  Both will include comparisons between Shelley's novel and the 1931 film.  You will post on one question and comment on one of your fellow group members' posts on the other question by Sun Feb 19th at 11:59pm.    

Review historian of science Susan Lederer on the Frankenstein myth and modern science before you write your first paper; the video is at http://video.whyy.org/video/1475831010     

Before class, read Frankenstein, pp. 140-161 (wandering and revenge, Walton's narrative again).  We will not get to all of this assignment today but make sure you have completed by the weekend so you can write the first blog post section of your first paper on Shelley for next Tues.  The revised first paper will be do March 9th in class or March 10 in my office (Robinson A 253).   

Blog post 05a or 05b is due by midnight, comment on one of your fellow group members' posts on the other question by Sun Feb 19th at 11:59pm.    

BEGIN SIGN-UP FOR TUTORING APPOINTMENTS which will start the week of Feb 21st.  The tutors will hold their hours in Eisenhower Rooms G101 (Lounge office 1059) or G115 (multi-media sometimes on Wed 12-2pm).   You will be receiving an email with instructions on how to schedule appointments.  To sign up for a specific appointment, click here; to see a schedule of appointment times and instructions, click here.  John, one of the peer tutor/mentors will come to class and talk at the beginning of our meeting about the services the tutors provide and show you how to sign up.   

We will begin class by discussing the monster’s demand that Victor make a mate for him (pp. 101-104), his delay in beginning the project as he travels (pp. 109-117) and the 2nd creation aborted (pp. 118-121).  We will then watch Bride of Frankenstein DVD chap 5 today.  We will also touch on Victor’s anxieties on his wedding night in Shelley and watch the Little Maria scene in the 1931 Whale film. 

Next class we will watch Bride of Frankenstein, DVD chapters 6-7, 11 & 15-17.  We will then do a survey of the assigned reading for today, focusing in particular on the chase, the debate about returning home, and Walton’s meeting with the creature, some of which we will return to next class. 

Note that any paper handed in on March 9th or 10th without a fully documented tutoring session (group or individual) will be lowered one half letter grade. I will also average in a zero to your class participation grade if you miss a tutoring appointment. If you do miss an appointment, to avoid having a zero averaged into your class participation grade you will need to have an extra tutoring session over the course of the semester. If you are unable to attend an appointment, please cancel prior to the start time of your appointment by contacting your instructor. Three tutoring appointments will be required for all students this semester. 

Since tutoring got going a bit later than hoped in Feb, I suggest having group appointments with 2-3 of your fellow students to discuss your ideas and posts. 

By midnight tonight, post to the blog a 200 word draft of the first part of paper #1 on the ethics of Frankenstein's creation of the creature/monster in Shelley's novel.  Begin the paper/post with a detailed description and analysis of how the issue is presented in Shelley’s novel.  At the end, briefly take a position of your own on the ethics of what Dr. Frankenstein did.  Provide examples (in your paper you will need at least two quotes) to back up your claims about Shelley’s novel.  For your paper you will need to fully explain the reasoning behind your own position on whether the creation of life is good or bad, right or wrong but for now concentrate on Shelley. You will add a discussion of the Whale film(s) Thurs Feb 23rd and Blade Runner Sun Feb 26th.   

You are required to bring a print copy of your paper post--or posts--to one of the LLC tutors in Eisenhower Rooms G101 (Lounge office 1059) & G115 (multi-media, on some Wed 12-2pm).   The revised version of your paper will be due on Thurs March 9th in class (or March 10th in my office, Robinson A 253).  For these tutoring visits you can go with one or more other students from the class for group sessions where you read your posts and then have a group discussion. To sign up for an appointment, click here. 

During class today we will go over the posting, group work and tutoring sign-up and Thurs briefly cover the crowd scenes and ending of the 1931 film.  Today, we will watch Bride related scenes from the 1935 Whale Frankenstein films including Dr. Pretorious' role in the 1935 sequel and the sad ending of the Bride subplot in the 2nd Whale film.  We will begin by going over the end of the novel, Walton's crew's request to return home and Victor and Walton's response.   

To aid your thinking about the larger issues, if you have time I suggest looking at some of the articles in the Frankenstein Futurography series on Slate Magazine including

• "Why Frankenstein Is Still Relevant, Almost 200 Years After It Was Published"  

• "Dr. Frankenstein’s Three Big Mistakes"

• "What Victor Frankenstein Got Wrong" 

• "The Modern-Day Victor Frankensteins?"

As you begin to work on paper #1, think about some of the specific differences between the 1931/1935 films and Mary Shelley’s novel.  We will have watched the Little Maria scene, wedding night, crowd scenes and happy ending from the 1931 film. You should be thinking about the larger issues/comparisons below as you write and revise your paper.  

1. the fact that the 1931 film frames the ethics of what Frankenstein did more in terms of divine prohibitions and Mary Shelley more in terms of family responsibility. 
2. Note, however, the lines on p. 152:  "All my speculations and hopes are as nothing; and like the Archangel who aspired to omnipotence, I am chained in an eternal hell."  These lines imply that Victor--like Satan--has been punished for violating divine order but do not explicitly set out religious reasons for opposing creating life like we see in the two James Whale films.  
3. And note that the tone in the Whale films is sometimes hard to pin down, witness the oddly smiling "spokesman" for the Producer, Carl Laemmle, who comes on stage in the prologue to the film and warns the audience that the film might "horrify" them and they still have a chance to leave.  The spokesman (played by the actor who plays Waldman in the film) calls Frankenstein "a man of science who sought to create a man after his own image without reckoning upon God."  Review the beginning of the Vimeo clip at https://vimeo.com/10060290.      
4. the criminal brain motif in the 1931 film vs. the creatures openness to experience in Shelley's novel with reference to the Little Maria Scene in the 1931 film.
5. the suggestion in the 1931 film that Frankenstein doesn't pay attention to details like the criminal brain (review Dr. Waldman's warning after the creation) or what might be called an early example of risk management thinking.  
6. Boris Karloff's use of mime to suggest some of the positive qualities we see in Shelley's version

As you start work on your paper, review the historian of science Susan Lederer talk on the Frankenstein myth and modern science. Pay particular attention to the end of the talk on the limits of the Frankenstein myth in thinking about the ethics of science today.  Watch the complete video at http://video.whyy.org/video/1475831010    

FEB 24TH--FINAL DROP DEADLINE (67% TUITION PENALTY)  

By midnight tonight, update your post by adding another 200 words on the 1931/35 Whale Karloff film(s) we watched in class.  Compare the approaches to the ethics of what Frankenstein does in the film(s) and novel (Post 6, Part 2). 

On Friday Feb 24th there is a required Cinema and Supper showing of Blade Runner (1982) at the at the Eisenhower Hall (lounge and multi-media room).  Pizza at 7pm; film showing in the theatre at 7:30pm. Blog post 06 Part 3 is due by Sun at midnight.  

Make sure to SIGN-UP AND ATTEND TUTORING APPOINTMENTS. The tutors will hold their hours in Eisenhower Rooms G101 (Lounge office 1059) or G115 (multi-media on Wed 12-2pm).  To sign up for a specific appointment, click here.  Three or more tutoring appointments will be required for all students this semester.  I will also average in a zero to your class participation grade if you miss a tutoring appointment. If you do miss an appointment, to avoid having a zero averaged into your class participation grade you will need to have an extra tutoring session over the course of the semester. If you are unable to attend an appointment, please cancel prior to the start time of your appointment by contacting your instructor.

The assignment for Paper #1 is quite detailed because I wanted to lay out some possible directions the paper could go in--and head off some potential problems--but the basic set of questions you have to cover are simple: 

1.  What is Mary Shelley’s position on the ethics of creating life (i.e. is it a good or bad idea) and how does she use the story to present her position

2.  What is the position in at least one of the films we have watched and how is it presented

3.  What is your position on creating life and how is it similar and how different from Mary Shelley’s, and James Whale’s and/or Ridley Scott’s?  Here you can bring in more recent developments, as noted on the assignment sheet but also make sure you cover in detail the way the issue is treated in Shelley and the film(s).  
MAKE SURE TO COVER ALL THREE QUESTIONS     

TODAY IN CLASS WE WILL START WORKING ON DOYLE'S SHERLOCK HOLMES STORIES USING THE GRANADA TV ADAPTATIONS.  IF YOU HAVE TIME YOU CAN READ THE STORIES ASSIGNED FOR EACH CLASS BUT YOU SHOULD FOCUS YOUR EFFORTS ON YOUR FRANKENSTEIN PAPER AND IF YOU DO NOT READ THEM NOW, READ THE STORIES OVER SPRING BREAK.   If you have time after class, read The Red-Headed League, pp. 263-287 in the Bantam Classic edition, Volume 1.  We will watch selections from the Granada TV adaptation of the story. 

If there is time at the end of class, we will begin to explore the more recent idea of genetic and biological engineering and the psychological and moral issues it raises through a brief introduction to Blade Runner (1982).  If we do not get to these clips, we will watch the Whitehead talk before Blade Runner on Friday. 

• Deckard Meets Rachel and Voight-Kampff 1
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndnd-ERnWew
• Deckard Meets Rachel and Voight-Kampff 2
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-DkoGvcEBw&feature=related
• Roy Batty, I've seen things
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8&feature=related
• What Does It Mean to be Human, John Whitehead on Blade Runner
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77K1juU_Ua8&feature=related

After you watch Blade Runner, think about the following points: 

1. the extent to which Roy Batty and Pris' relation to one another and Roy's death scene with Deckard suggest replicants have human qualities and cannot be dismissed as machines needing "retirement."
2. Whether the Tyrell Corporation is a sinister organization that has brought Mary Shelley's implicit critique of Victor's irresponsibility to a new and heightened level.

Group Work in Class:  I will give you time in class today to get into your groups and discuss the issues connected with your first paper blog posts.  Either pair up with someone in your group and explain to each other what you posted on Shelley the Whale film(s), Blade Runner and your own position OR take turns in your groups.  Respond to each other with questions and comments. 

In your comment on your group members’ paper/posts due before the next class, begin by indicating 

• whether and why you think they are correct in their analysis of the positions on creating life in the novel and the films. 

• whether you agree with your fellow students’ position on the ethics of creating the monster or not and why.   If they have not taken a position of their own yet, note that.  Provide examples and details in your comments. 

Divide up who will comment on whose post and make sure everyone receives detailed feedback.  These comments are due before class on March 2nd.  See page/prompt 06 for details.  Make sure you address the numbered list at the end of the prompt: 

1. Does the paper/post answer the assignment question (should Dr. Frankenstein/Tyrell have created the monster/the replicants)?  Is this answer tied to a larger point about the ethics of scientific and technological innovation and discovery?  Be specific about what each paragraph contributes.
2. Are there any sections of the paper/post that wander from the main point or aren’t tied to it with transitions?  Be specific and suggest ways the author could tie his or her points together better.  Should some points be cut?
3. What reasons does the author give for holding his or her position?  Be specific and note whether these reasons need further explanation and support.  What could they add?
4. What evidence does the author provide for his or her points?  Does the author provide detailed examples for the point he or she is making from the novel and film(s)?  Is the evidence clearly tied to the larger point or could it be integrated better into the argument?   Can you think of any examples or other kinds of evidence the author could add to make their points more convincing?
5. Is there a conclusion at the end of the paper/post that pulls together the points the author has made?  If not, what do you see as the points needing pulling together from what the author has written so far.

Remember that you should go over a draft/blog post AND/OR have a group brain storming sessions at least once with one of the LLC tutors (David or John) by Wed March 8th.  The tutors' office is in Eisenhower Rooms G101 (Lounge office 1059) or G115 (multi-media on Wed 12-2pm).  Make sure to sign up for appointments. For David and John's hours, click here. Missing appointments will lower your class participation grade (or require two make-up visits).  Group appointments are an option but must be fully documented by each participant. 

In preparation for revising your posts for paper #1, make at least one comment on your group members’ paper/posts before class today,  Begin by indicating 

• whether and why you think they are correct in their analysis of the positions on creating life in the novel and the films.

• whether you agree with your fellow students’ position on the ethics of creating the monster or not and why.   If they have not taken a position of their own yet, note that.  Provide examples and details in your comments. 

Divide up who will comment on whose post and make sure everyone receives detailed feedback.  See page/prompt 06 for details.  Make sure you address the numbered list at the end of the prompt: 

1. Does the paper/post answer the assignment question (should Dr. Frankenstein/Tyrell have created the monster/the replicants)?  Is this answer tied to a larger point about the ethics of scientific and technological innovation and discovery?  Be specific about what each paragraph contributes.
2. Are there any sections of the paper/post that wander from the main point or aren’t tied to it with transitions?  Be specific and suggest ways the author could tie his or her points together better.  Should some points be cut?
3. What reasons does the author give for holding his or her position?  Be specific and note whether these reasons need further explanation and support.  What could they add?
4. What evidence does the author provide for his or her points?  Does the author provide detailed examples for the point he or she is making from the novel and film(s)?  Is the evidence clearly tied to the larger point or could it be integrated better into the argument?   Can you think of any examples or other kinds of evidence the author could add to make their points more convincing?
5. Is there a conclusion at the end of the paper/post that pulls together the points the author has made?  If not, what do you see as the points needing pulling together from what the author has written so far.

If you have time, before class, read The Man With The Twisted Lip, pp. 351-375 in the Bantam Classic edition, Volume 1.  We will watch the Granada TV adaptation of the story in class (up to Neville’s narrative at the end).  We will discuss some key components of Holmes’ method today and watch Neville’s account of his life next Tues.       

Feb 27 to Mar 31--Selective Withdrawal Period (undergraduate students only)     

You should be concentrating on your first paper but if you have time, read A Scandal in Bohemia, pp. 239-263 in the Bantam Classic edition, Volume 1.  At the beginning of class, we will watch Neville's narrative at the end of The Man With the Twisted Lip.  We will then go on to Holmes and Watson's meeting with the King of Bohemia from the first part of the Granada TV adaptation of A Scandal in Bohemia (0-21:30).  On Thurs we will watch the rest of the adaptation (21:30-51 min), all in preparation for our viewing of the Sherlock episode A Scandal in Belgravia at our next Cinema and Supper, March 18th. 

In my introduction to A Scandal in Bohemia, I will point out how Watson defines Holmes' objectivity in terms of his sexual disinterest at the beginning of Doyle's A Scandal in Bohemia.  To demonstrate that this motif occurs elsewhere in Doyle's stories, we will look at Watson and Holmes discussion of Mary Morstan near the beginning of A Sign of Four, p. 135 (a longer story I did not assign).  I will also introduce some ideas from the history and philosophy of science including the rise of probabilistic thinking that are relevant to the second paper.  We will return to these issues after break. 

For those of you uncertain of how to set out your own position on the issues you address in the first paper,

• one approach is to summarize the positions of Shelley, Whale/Karloff and/or Scott and then sort through where you stand in relation to the positions laid out in the novel and film(s);

• another approach could be to think about possibilities today that could eventually lead further, like cloning, genetic engineering, or AI/Machine Learning and write about balancing risks and opportunities; 

• In both cases, reviewing the Susan Lederer lecture you were assigned to watch (and then review Feb 9th) and thinking about the examples in Ridley Scott’s Prophets of Science Fiction Shelley episode we watched in class on Jan 21st would be helpful if you had time.   

• For an example of one recent attempt to create guidelines to manage the risks of new technologies, see the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council of Britain's Framework for Responsible Innovation and Principles of Robotics. 

To aid your thinking about the larger issues you should look at the articles in the Frankenstein Futurography series on Slate Magazine including

• "Why Frankenstein Is Still Relevant, Almost 200 Years After It Was Published"  

• "Dr. Frankenstein’s Three Big Mistakes"

• "What Victor Frankenstein Got Wrong" 

• "The Modern-Day Victor Frankensteins?"

Paper #1 is due in class today (or at my office in Robinson Hall A 253 by Friday at 4pm).  The paper should be 3+ pages (typed double spaced) and include in-text cites and a Works Cited (MLA) or References page (APA). 
You are required to have gone over a draft or had a group brainstorming session with one of the LLC tutors (David or John) by today.  For David and John's hours, click here.  To make an appointment go to https://app.acuityscheduling.com/schedule.php?owner=11678545

Also include a brief but detailed typed statement of what you changed as you worked on the paper based on the feedback you received from your peers (on the blog and in class) and from the Peer Tutor you saw, either individually or in a group.  This statement should include the name of the tutor you saw, the day and time of your session(s), what you went over.  If it was a group session, include the names of the other members of your group. 

You will need citations to the play, films, and other sources you consulted. You can use in-text cites and an MLA Works Cited page or APA in-text cites and List of References; you can also use Chicago style footnotes.  Include the exact title and date of the films and performances you analyze. 

NO CLASS-SPRING BREAK MARCH 13TH-19TH

Over break, read any of the Sherlock Holmes stories we went over in class that you have not read because you were working on paper #1.  Also, take a look at the middle section of A Study in Scarlet pp. 63-103, if you think you might write your final paper (#3) on Study in Pink's elimination of the Utah section of Study in Scarlet and the larger question of the new form of entertainment Doyle developed, a form which anticipates the modern TV serial.  This paper will be due May 5th, after paper #2 on Holmes' methods and after our study of Tim Wu's ideas about the cycle in 20th century information industries. 

IF YOU WERE NOT IN MY CLASS LAST SEMESTER, YOU MUST WATCH all of A Study in Pink over break.  A Study in Pink is Episode 1 from Season 1 of Sherlock.  Everyone in my class last semester enjoyed the film and its a good choice for a gathering of family and friends. 

ALSO WATCH the rest of A Scandal in Bohemia if you missed the last class before break.   
Begin two minutes in on Part 3 of 6 and watch through Part 6 on the YouTube version or rent at Amazon (21:30-51 min).  
 

Read A Study in Scarlet, chapters 3-7 in part 1, pp. 20-63 (The Lauriston Garden Mystery, What John Rance Had to Tell, Our Advertisement Brings a Visitor, Tobias Gregson Shows What He Can Do, and Light in the Darkness). 

Required in-class group work.   Review pp. 30-34 and discuss in your groups the following questions: 

1. How does Holmes come up with his account of what he has learned at Lauriston Gardens?

2. What does he still not know at this point in the story?

3. How does his approach to the crime differ from Gregson’s and LeStrade’s?

Note:  Review A Scandal in Bohemia, pp. 239-263 in the Bantam Classic edition, Volume 1 in preparation for the Sherlock episode A Scandal in Belgravia we will watch on Fri.   

FRI March 24th--MIDTERM GRADING PERIOD ENDS AND MIDTERM GRADES AVAILABLE ON PATRIOTWEB. 

Before class, read A Study in Scarlet, chapters 6-7 in part II,  pp. 103-120 (A Continuation of the Reminiscences of John Watson, M.D. and The Conclusion). 

BY MIDNIGHT TODAY, POST to the blog your description and analysis of two of Holmes methods and your thoughts on whether they are scientific or not and if not, how you would categorize them.  Write about A Study in Scarlet and one other story.  Make sure to define what you  mean by science and analyze in detail at least one example from Mr. Sherlock Holmes or The Science of Deduction and one other story we have read.  Cite pages or provide contextual information for the sections of the story you discuss.  Remember to check your name (under People), Holmes’ Methods (under Assignments) and group number in the category boxes to the right of the posting area.  See the list below for the group numbers and their members.

Before class Thurs, leave brief comments on your fellow group members Post #8 (Holmes method), drawing on what you learned from you reading and our class discussion. Chose the posts you will comment on based on the groups you used for the paper #1 posts/comments (see page/prompt 8 for the list). Make sure to refer to specific scenes in the Doyle stories we have read in both your post and your comments.  Talking about the film and TV adaptations is optional; if you do write about the adaptations make sure to give the exact title and not confuse the two versions. 

During class, we will discuss chapter 6-7 in Part II.  In particular, I will introduce two ideas: 

1. The difficulties almost all film and TV adaptations have had with the Utah inset tale, Part II chapters 1-5, pp. 63-103.  I have not assigned but you can read it for the extra-credit blog post that sets up one of the options for the final paper. 
   
   Instead, we will look at Jefferson Hope's shortened narrative in chapter 5 of Part II (pp. 105-113; Audible 4:08:12-).  We will then discuss Holmes' analysis (pp. 115-119; Audible 4:33:16-) in relation to Hope's previous statement in Watson's account.   
   
   
2. The idea of probabilistic induction as one of the key characteristics of Holmes' method.  We will very carefully go over pp. 115-118 in A Study in Scarlet and talk about the logic of Holmes' method here.  See the section we will discuss today at the Adelaide e-book site.  If you are interested in learning more about probabilistic induction (the term philosophers of science often apply to this way of thinking), read Soschichi Uchii's Sherlock Holmes and Probabilistic Induction (read the Abstract and go onto the article if you are interested).  Holmes himself terms this process analytic reasoning and says the ability "to reason backward" is rare.  Here is what he says in the concluding chapter of A Study in Scarlet:  "Most people, if you describe a train of events to them will tell you what the result would be. They can put those events together in their minds, and argue from them that something will come to pass. There are few people, however, who, if you told them a result, would be able to evolve from their own inner consciousness what the steps were which led up to that result. This power is what I mean when I talk of reasoning backward, or analytically" (Doyle 115-116).  
   
3. We will end class by reviewing two sections in A Study in Pink, the Sherlock remake of Scarlet you watched either last semester or over spring break.  See the scene where Holmes figures out what "Rachael" is (DVD chap 6; 57:34-1:14:12) and the scene with the cab driver and the pills (DVD chap 7; 1:14:05-1:21:22).   

SIGN-UP AND TUTORING APPOINTMENTS today. The tutors' office is in  Eisenhower Rooms G101 (Lounge office 1059) or G115 (multi-media, sometimes on Wed 12-2pm). During class, I will give you some time to sign up for appointments. For David and John's hours, click here.

You should be working hard now on Paper #2 on Sherlock Holmes' methods (building on your blog post).  Sign for a tutoring appointment if you have not done so already.  You will need to see a tutor at least once while you are working on paper #2, due on April 6th or 7tth. In paper #2, you will need to:

• Describe and analyze two methods Holmes uses in his investigations.  Make sure to discuss specific examples.   
• Make an argument about the status of these methods (scientific, non-scientific, a mix, etc.) and optionally whether he is a scientific detective overall.  Make sure to define what you mean by science. 
  OPTIONAL:  make a related claim about the role of these methods in his practice as a consulting detective. Here think about why people consult and place trust in Holmes. Do objectivity or science play a role here? Also optional:  What kind of knowledge does Holmes gain through applying his methods? For some possibilities, see the 2nd bulleted list below, beginning with Richard Feynman. 
• Along the way, quote from and analyze relevant scenes from two of the following stories: A Study in Scarlet, A Scandal in Bohemia, The Red Headed League, The Man with the Twisted Lip, and if you want to jump ahead and read it on your own, The Final Problem. You are also invited to discuss the films we have watched but make sure to provide exact titles and dates and be precise and specific on any differences from Doyle's stories.  Make sure to include in-text cites tied to a Works Cited (MLA) or References (APA) page. 

Note that in our study of Sherlock Holmes, I have been arguing that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle popularized the idea that ordinary problems could be resolved by consulting a scientific professional. That does not mean that all of his methods are scientific.  Some sources that may be useful here include the following.  We will go over these during class today and you should review them as you are revising your paper next week:: 

• The physicist Richard Feynman's famous and provocative 1964 lecture on scientific method, which begins with guessing, moves on to computing the consequences, and then comparing those to experience/experimentation.  Holmes was not so positive about guessing, but he did often think probabilistically, as we have discussed. See The Sign of Four (not assigned), pp. 128-130.
• Rosemary Jann's claim, in Sherlock Holmes Codes the Social Body,  that "Holmes seldom tests the logical validity" of his reasoning.  Instead, "Doyle has simply arranged the plots" so Holmes "guesses correctly the first time, or easily eliminates alternative hypotheses."   See the first two paragraphs of her article  at http://xroads.virginia.edu/~DRBR2/jann.pdf
• The philosopher, Danny Scoccia's page from his Engineering Ethics class, What is a Profession, which defines a professional as "someone who possesses an expertise or knowledge about how to do things that are vital to our (the publics) well-being. . ."
• The Wikipedia article, Profession, which defines a profession as a "vocation founded upon specialized educational training the purpose of which is to supply objective counsel and service to others. . ." 

Last class we discussed the testing of the two pills found on the window sill where Stangerson was murdered in A Study in Scarlet.  See pp. 57-59. Today, we will discuss whether this scene is consistent with  Rosemary Jann's claim that "Holmes seldom tests the logical validity" of his reasoning but that instead, "Doyle has simply arranged the plots" so Holmes "guesses correctly the first time, or easily eliminates alternative hypotheses."   See the first two paragraphs of her article  at http://xroads.virginia.edu/~DRBR2/jann.pdf   

We will also look at another short section of A Sign of Four, Doyle's second story that I have not assigned.  See, Holmes reflections on having upset Watson from reading his family history from his watch (a scene we saw in altered form during a cab ride in A Study in Pink).  Holmes apologizes for viewing the watch as an "abstract problem" and ignoring Watson's sensitivities and then says he can only say in such cases what was the "balance of probability."  Holmes then goes on to say he never guesses (p. 129). 

 Reflect back to the physicist Richard Feynman on scientific method (it begins with guessing, moves on to computing the consequences, and then comparing those to experience/experimentation) and think about whether Holmes' method is scientific here and in the two pills scene.   We will compare this scene from A Sign Four to the version added into A Scandal in Belgravia (DVD 11:07- and 18:25-). 

MARCH 31st--INCOMPLETE WORK FROM f16 DUE TO INSTRUCTOR

Paper #2 (in print form) on Sherlock Holmes' methods is due either Thurs April 6th in class or by Fri April 7th at 5pm in my office in Robinson A 253.  You are expected to have had one LLC Peer Tutoring session (group or individual) while you are working on paper #2 and required to have had three by the end of  the semester.     

In the paper, you will need to:   

• Describe and analyze two methods Holmes uses in his investigations.  Make sure to discuss specific examples.   
• Make an argument about the status of these methods (scientific, non-scientific, a mix, etc.)and optionally whether he is a scientific detective overall.  Make sure to define what you mean by science. 
  OPTIONAL:  make a related claim about the role of these methods in his practice as a consulting detective. Here think about why people consult and place trust in Holmes. Do objectivity or science play a role here? ALSO OPTIONAL:  What kind of knowledge does Holmes gain through applying his methods? For some possibilities, see the 2nd bulleted list from March 26th, beginning with Richard Feynman. 
• Along the way, quote from and analyze relevant scenes from A Study in Scarlet and one of the other Doyle stories we read:  A Scandal in Bohemia, The Red Headed League, The Man with the Twisted Lip, and if you want to jump ahead and read it on your own, The Final Problem. You are also invited to discuss the films we have watched but make sure to provide exact titles and dates and be precise and specific on any differences from Doyle’s stories.  Make sure to include in-text cites tied to a Works Cited (MLA) or References (APA) page.

1. The visualization of London in the Guy Ritchie film. Describe in detail how London is presented in the film and then say what you think of Ritchie’s approach. (Note: I would call it historical reconstruction filtered through a graphic novel/gaming lens).
2. The action sequences. Describe Ritchie’s approach to action and take a position on their importance to the film and whether they depart from Doyle’s stories.
3. Irene Adler’s character. Describe her role in the film and her relation to Holmes. Compare their relationship to what Holmes says about Irene in A Scandal in Bohemia.
4. The Watson Holmes relationship. Describe in detail how Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law interact in the film and if their relationship is different than in the Conan Doyle stories you read.
5. The addition of super villains like Lord Blackwood or Professor Moriarty not present in the Doyle stories. (Note: Professor Moriarty only appears in one of Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories, which, for the most part, are concerned with more mundane crimes and criminals.)

If you attend the showing, you can do this supplementary assignment for extra credit. The supplementary assignment is due by Thurs April 27th 11:59pm. It should be 200+ words.

For extra-credit, read The Empty House (pp. 759-781) and post what you think of the role or Moriarity in Doyle's final problem and of Moran in the Empty House vs. Lord Blackwood in Sherlock Holmes (2009).  The post will be due when you hand in your final paper on May 11th.  This Extra-Credit post is especially useful for those of you who are missing some posts or who are going to write your final paper on recent films of Sherlock Holmes.  YOU MUST TALK TO ME IN ADVANCE IF YOU WANT TO DO THE POST. 

See page/prompt 12D and page/prompt 12C for the two extra-credit/make-up posts due by May 11th. 

Before class, read Tim Wu, The Master Switch, pp. 217-237, The Mass Production of the Spirit (Audible II, 2:03:05-3:01:18). 

During class, we will review very carefully Tim Wu, pp. 219-232 (Audible II, 2:09:53-2:46:25), on risk management strategies in the entertainment industry starting with Wu's discussion of entertainment economics, Steven Ross' transformation of Warner Brothers in the 1970s, and conglomerates mining and developing intellectual property.  We will also briefly go over a sections I did not assign, pp. 86-98, The Paramount Ideal (Audible I, 3:52:36-4:30:17). 

During class next week, you will form groups--based on what you plan to write your final paper on--so that you can discuss either risk management in entertainment (page/prompt 12a) or the cycle and the internet (page/prompt 12b).  Starting in class today, you should look carefully at questions 12a and 12b below and talk in your groups about which you are thinking of writing your final paper on.  

Risk management and recent film (12a):

1. Why was the failure of Heaven's Gate an important event in the history of independent film in America? 
2. Why is the entertainment industry especially prone to risk and how did the Edison Patent's Trust and the Hollywood Studios seek to minimize this risk? 
3. What new strategy of risk management was developed to minimize the uncertainties of the film business starting with Steven Ross' creation of Warner Communications?  What does Wu see as the advantages and disadvantages of conglomeratization? 
4. What is the complementary strategy of risk management Wu calls intellectual property development?  Why do 21st  century studios look for "properties ripe for redevelopment"? 
5. To what degree do these strategies of risk management apply to the 2009 Warner Brother film Sherlock Holmes?   

The cycle and the internet (12b):       

1. How and why is the internet decentralized, giving individuals a degree of control not present in AT&T's circuit switched system, according to Wu? 
2. How was the development of the internet dependent on the development of the computer as more than a superfast calculating machine?    What role did J.C.R. Licklider and Douglas Engelbart play in these developments?      
3.  What was Paul Baran's contribution to the development of the internet?  Explain the difference between decentralized packet switching and AT&T's centralized switch based system.      
4.  Explain how and how Cerf and Kahn's internet protocols were an ad hoc accommodation to the existing system and why this is important for the design of the internet and its potential exemption from the cycle         
5. How are the ideas of Friedrich Hayek and other critics of centralization relevant to the design of the internet according to Wu? 

At the beginning of class, we will watch selections from Edison's early films (DVD Intro, chapters 2, 9, 15, 16, 21, 23, 36, 39, 40, 57, 58, 61, 67) from Edison:  The Invention of the Movies (2005).  If there is time, we will also watch The Great Train Robbery (1903) also on Edison:  The Invention of the Movies DVD.  We may not have time to watch the 1910 Edison Frankenstein (12 min, available on YouTube in several locations, including here); I invite you to watch it on your own, especially if you are writing your final paper on a recent film adaptation.   If you want to explore Edison's role in the film industry further, explore the section on Edison from the Library of Congress' Inventing Entertainment site. 

By next Sun, May 7th, at 11:59pm a group post is due with answers to either today's questions on risk management (page/prompt 12a) or next Tuesday's questions on the internet (12b). Whatever post you do, you should divide up the labor and assign questions to different group members. But make sure the parts of your post fit together.  By Tues May 9th, you are responsible for writing in specific terms about what your learned from each of your fellow group members’ posts by leaving a comment on your own group’s post.  

REMEMBER TO SIGN-UP FOR TUTORING APPOINTMENTS FOR PAPER #3 as well as the optional rewrites of paper #1 or #2. The former can either be brainstorming sessions or meetings devoted to draft revisions.  The latter need to be draft revision meetings.  As you know by now, the Tutor's office is in Eisenhower Rooms G101 (Lounge office 1059) or G115 (multi-media on Wed 12-2pm).  For David and John's hours, click here.  To sign up for a specific appointment, click here.   If you want to rewrite papers #1 or paper #2 you need to send me a plan in advance, set a due date before the exam, and see a tutor.

THE LAST DAY OF LLC TUTORING IS TUES MAY 9TH SO MAKE YOUR APPOINTMENTS NOW. 

Before class, read Tim Wu, The Master Switch, pp. 168-175 (The Radicalism of the Internet Revolution) and 196-216 (Esperanto for Machines).  I will briefly go over a section I did not assign , pp. 160-167, The Right Kind of Breakup (Audible I, 7:07:38-7:29:30).   If you are going to write your final paper on risk management in the entertainment business using a film like Sherlock Holmes (2009), this reading is optional and sets you up for extra credit points if you answer at least two of the five questions in 12b below as well as your group post for 12a.  A GROUP POST ON GROUP 12a OR 12b BY SUN IS REQUIRED.  

SEE THE GROUP LIST IN THE PROCESS OF REVISION SO THAT EVERYONE IN A GROUP IS PLANNING ON WRITING THEIR FINAL PAPER ON THE SAME QUESTION.  I WILL POST AN UPDATED GROUP LIST AFTER CLASS.  Here are the two paper #3 questions: 

1. Whether the internet is different from earlier information technologies and therefore exempt from what Tim Wu calls the cycle--and why this might matter. 
   To prepare for this paper question, do group blog post QUESTION 12B by Sun May 7th.  The individual print paper is due May 11th/12th.
2. How Wu's theories or risk management in the entertainment industry bear on the Robert Downey/Jude Law Sherlock Holmes film(s) or other recent adaptations and what this might mean for the value of the film(s). 
   To prepare for this paper question, do group blog post QUESTION 12A by Sun May 7th.  The individual print paper is due May 11th/12th.

Before we go over the reading, we will review the final paper assignment on the question "is the internet different" OR on the question of "risk management" and recent Sherlock Holmes films.  REMEMBER TO SIGN-UP FOR AND ATTEND TUTORING APPOINTMENTS FOR PAPER #3. These can be brainstorming sessions or meetings devoted to draft revisions.  You are required to have seen a  tutor three times this semester.  The Tutor's office is in Eisenhower Rooms G101 (Lounge), G111 or G115 (multi-media).  For David and John's hours, click here.  To sign up for a specific appointment, click here  

During class, we will review very carefully Tim Wu, pp. 169-175 (Audible II, 0:0:15-19:25)) and pp. 197-201 (Audible II, 1:12:40-1:32:20), on the history of the internet (and the computer) and why the internet is potentially different from earlier information technologies and therefore exempt from the cycle.  This class and next you will then break into groups and discuss ONE of the questions below based on what you are planning on writing your final paper on.  

Risk management and recent film (12a):

1. Why was the failure of Heaven's Gate an important event in the history of independent film in America? 
2. Why is the entertainment industry especially prone to risk and how did the Edison Patent's Trust and the Hollywood Studios seek to minimize this risk? 
3. What new strategy of risk management was developed to minimize the uncertainties of the film business starting with Steven Ross' creation of Warner Communications?  What does Wu see as the advantages and disadvantages of conglomeratization? 
4. What is the complementary strategy of risk management Wu calls intellectual property development?  Why do 21st  century studios look for "properties ripe for redevelopment"? 
5. To what degree do these strategies of risk management apply to the 2009 Warner Brother film Sherlock Holmes?   

The cycle and the internet (12b):       

1. How and why is the internet decentralized, giving individuals a degree of control not present in AT&T's circuit switched system, according to Wu? 
2. How was the development of the internet dependent on the development of the computer as more than a superfast calculating machine?    What role did J.C.R. Licklider and Douglas Engelbart play in these developments?      
3.  What was Paul Baran's contribution to the development of the internet?  Explain the difference between decentralized packet switching and AT&T's centralized switch based system.      
4.  Explain how and how Cerf and Kahn's internet protocols were an ad hoc accommodation to the existing system and why this is important for the design of the internet and its potential exemption from the cycle         
5. How are the ideas of Friedrich Hayek and other critics of centralization relevant to the design of the internet according to Wu? 

At this point you should have made at least a tentative decision on your final paper topic.  Going forward you should focus your attention on  the reading and assignments connected with the question you will write on for May 11th.   

If you are writing your final paper on the internet, I highly recommend your reading  Tim Wu, The Master Switch, pp. 269-299 (Father and Son).  I also recommend reading pp. 255-6 (The Internet Against Everyone).  During class, we will go over Wu's take on the iPhone announcement of 2007 and its significance for relations between Apple, Google, and AT&T.  We will then discuss Wu's account of the history of Apple (pp. 274-280) and Google (pp. 280-284) and Wu's take on the dangers they may pose to an open internet. 

About half way through the class, you will form/revise groups to work on posts 12a or 12b.   SEE THE GROUP LIST.  THOSE WHO ARE ABSENT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHECKING TO SEE IF THEIR PREVIOUS GROUP IS WORKING ON THE POST (is the internet different or risk management & Sherlock Holmes) they are interested in working on.  IF NOT, either arrange to be in a group or do all the post questions for 12a or 12b on your own by this Sunday. 

By Sun May 7th at 11:59pm a group post is due with answers to either the question on risk management (page/prompt 12a) or the internet (12b). Whatever post you do, you should divide up the labor and assign questions to different group members. But make sure the parts of your post fit together.  By Tues May 9th 11:59pm, you are responsible for writing in specific terms about what your learned from each of your fellow group members’ posts by leaving a comment on your own group’s post.

1. Whether the internet is different from earlier information technologies and therefore exempt from what Tim Wu calls the cycle--and why this might matter; or
2. How Wu's theories or risk management in the entertainment industry bear on the Robert Downey/Jude Law Sherlock Holmes film(s) or other recent adaptations and what this might mean for the value of the film(s).

Paper #3, is due during our scheduled final exam time, 1:30-4:15pm in our regular classroom or Friday in my office (Robinson A 253 10-5pm).  Write on either:   

1. Whether the internet is different from earlier information technologies and therefore exempt from what Tim Wu calls the cycle--and why this might matter; or
2. How Wu's theories or risk management in the entertainment industry bear on Robert Downey/Jude Law Sherlock Holmes film(s) or other recent adaptations and what this might mean for the value of the film(s).   

Your paper should be 3 pages, typed and double spaced, and include in-text citations (MLA or APA) and a Works Cited (MLA) or References (APA) page or Chicago style footnotes/endnotes. You can see sample papers and check your citations by studying your ENGH101 writing handbook. For LLC ENGH 101 students last semester, that would be Diana Hacker's Pocket Style Manual.   

Our LLC tutors (David and John) were available until May 9th to help you with your paper by either discussing the issues and going over options and/or working on printed drafts with you.  You were expected to have one session with them as you worked on your third paper and required to have three sessions overall this semester. 

Include a typed statement with your final paper about what you went over and what you changed.