🚀 go-pugleaf

Paul,

Thanks for your note. Unfortunately, your comments FUNDAMENTALLY miss
the main point of the paper, as I see it.  Your comments are
consistent with the paper, but really ignore the issue of genres,
genre conventions & the limitations of the conventions.

I believe that the (anti)utopoian genres offer interesting
kinds of insights, but they are mislead in important ways,
in the same sense that the combination of romantic comedy
& tragedy have much to teach us, but also ... by their conventions...
leave out a great deal that is important about "daily life."
For example, there is little negiotiation and accomodation in
romantic comedy or tragedy ... an absense that helps heighten
the intensity of comic situations of tragic confrontations.

Similarly, the utopian and anti-utopian genres ignore important
elments of day to day compterization (eg., mediocre training,
annoying system bugs) that can shape system use patterns and
resultant social consequences. On the other hand,
the utopian genres are literatures of possibility: they can inspire
or apall us  and  dramatize hopes and fears in  ways that
go well beyond the dramas of "la vie quotidien."

If you read my paper carefully,
then I have not done a sufficient job of making
these ideas about genre conventions clear.
I appreciate your taking time to send me your comments.
I will reread the paper to make sure that my key
ideas do stand out.

/Rob