I don’t seem to have linked to this yet, but there’s a thorough review, by Chris Lindgren,<\/a> of my and my nine co-authors’ book 10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10<\/i><\/a> in the journal enculturation.<\/i> Here are the final sentences of it:<\/p>\n >The book is a rich example of what a possible fusion of theory and techn? might look like in future academic scholarship. In the conclusion, the 10 argue that \u201creading this one-liner also demonstrates that programming is culturally situated just as computers are culturally situated, which means that the study of code should be no more ahistorical than the study of any cultural text\u201d (262). Code is a text, but, as the 10 indicate, it also operates and \u201ccan be representational\u201d of cultural ideals, people, and things. \u201c10 PRINT,\u201d they conclude, \u201cis not just a line of code; it defines a space of possible variations\u201d (266). This insight is perhaps the most useful, since the 10 themselves produced this \u201cassemblage of readings\u201d from a cast of diverse scholars and scholarship. For me, as a rhetorician who is interested in literacy and the fostering of computing cultures, this assemblage also serves as a potential baseline blueprint for the means, processes, and types of cross-disciplinary relationships necessary to build an infrastructure in which Kemeny and Kurtz’s BASIC vision can come to fruition.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I don’t seem to have linked to this yet, but there’s a thorough review, by Chris Lindgren, of my and my nine co-authors’ book 10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10 in the journal enculturation. Here are the final sentences of it: >The book is a rich example of what a possible fusion of theory and … <\/p>\n