When it comes to activism and community service, Wesleyan has always tried to stay ahead of the curve. But this can be difficult, as the concerns and trends of community engagement are constantly shifting. Often, new topics will seemingly erupt out of nowhere, and it will take a while for word to spread. There are so many existing concerns that it can be difficult for new voices to be heard and for old voices to catch on to the changes. It might seem as though the trends in community engagement are shifting constantly, without any pattern. But can technology detect one?
On March 2nd, Matthew Jockers gave a talk at Wesleyan about his research on using quantitative methods for analysis in literature. His talk was titled “Novel Analytics: From James Joyce to the Bestseller Code.” The following article is an exploration of his talk and the ideas he brought forward.
What makes something a piece of art? This might sound like a pretty theoretical question, but English professor Matthew L. Jockers believes that it is possible to take a technical approach.
“Art shows how things are perceived, not known,” Jockers explained. This is a definition that could cause tension in the literary world. After all, writing is messy, personal, and painfully subjective. And yet – “We tend to emphasize the idea that the text is withholding an ‘essential truth,’” Jockers explained. In this way, a literary critic wants to be able to anticipate a certain meaning, causing an endless tug-of-war between objectivity and subjectivity. Jockers does not wrestle with this tension, as evidenced by his book The Bestseller Code, in which he uses analysis to tackle that all-elusive question: What makes a bestselling novel?
In light of the recent election, it is more important than ever to look at how and where we are responsible for perpetuating prejudice. In a previous article, DataCrunch introduced the concept of “Weapons of Math Destruction,” which are data models built from a limited or biased sample of data that result in toxic feedback loops. Since this explanation is most often attributed to artificial intelligence, there is little discussion about how this description could also illuminate the workings of the human mind. While many might want to think of this narrow-mindedness as below the mental capacity of human beings, such a viewpoint is dangerous in that makes having a conversation about prejudice difficult.
I’ve feared the moment that my summers would be turned over to internships for a long time. I can’t remember for how long I’ve known internships are important – probably for as long as I’ve known about applying for college. My relationship with the idea of internships has gone through stages, with me sliding from thinking that they are silly resume builders to valuable and necessary work experience almost every day. I recently decided that I wanted to pursue some sort of consulting internship, and then felt a drop in my stomach similar to when I decided to apply for Wesleyan. But while there is a large and personalized application process still ahead of me, I don’t want to feel as scared as I did then. With this in mind, I sat down with Asie Makarova ’17 and Taylor Chin ’18 to discuss two of the main myths about internships and what truths, based on their experience, lie beneath.
In 1994, a small company called Marvel acquired the rights to sell children’s toys and comic books based off of their characters. During this time they were riding the wave of the comic book boom, a time when comic book consumption and production reached a sudden high. Marvel entered this period of success with high hopes, and followed the lead of other comic book companies to find success. This follow-the-leader approach turned against them when the market collapsed in 1997, forcing Marvel to declare bankruptcy.
All of this happened before Marvel Entertainment was the media power house we know today. Now, it seems as if Marvel is expanding into every corner of product design, churning out movie and TV series with a built in comic book and merchandise market at such a pace that some are calling this Marvel’s Golden Age. This approach is startlingly different than the company’s mantra in 1997, leading many Marvel enthusiasts to ask themselves what has changed between then and now.