week_10_questions_comments-325_25
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| week_10_questions_comments-325_25 [2025/10/30 10:17] – [Readings from Smith and Clancy (Include title of reading you are commenting on)] 76.78.172.130 | week_10_questions_comments-325_25 [2025/10/30 13:26] (current) – [Ruth Cowan, Social History of American Technology] 199.111.65.11 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| Having read " | Having read " | ||
| + | |||
| + | For the reading on “How Electricity Effects Economy in the Home” from 1917, I was intrigued by its assumption that electricity would automatically make all aspects of family life far better despite it not really providing any real data on this. I would love to do more research into the electric toys that supposedly provide children with “instructive merits” that will keep them from “blind alley” jobs when they grow older, since this is quite a huge claim to make. - Noah Rutkowski | ||
| ====== Ruth Cowan, Social History of American Technology ====== | ====== Ruth Cowan, Social History of American Technology ====== | ||
| Line 42: | Line 44: | ||
| Cowan challenges the comforting narrative that household technology automatically lightened women’s work. She shows that while innovations like washing machines and vacuum cleaners changed how housework was done, they didn’t necessarily make it easier or shorter. Instead, they raised expectations for cleanliness and reinforced the idea that domestic labor was primarily women’s responsibility. What I find most powerful is how Cowan exposes this hidden form of industrialization the home becoming a private “factory” run by unpaid labor. For me, this reading highlights how technology can transform social norms as much as it changes physical work. The modern appliances that promised freedom actually deepened dependence on gendered labor divisions, just in more efficient ways. Cowan’s analysis reminds us that progress is never purely mechanical it’s cultural and moral, built into the assumptions about who should benefit from new machines and who is expected to serve them. - Todd Holman | Cowan challenges the comforting narrative that household technology automatically lightened women’s work. She shows that while innovations like washing machines and vacuum cleaners changed how housework was done, they didn’t necessarily make it easier or shorter. Instead, they raised expectations for cleanliness and reinforced the idea that domestic labor was primarily women’s responsibility. What I find most powerful is how Cowan exposes this hidden form of industrialization the home becoming a private “factory” run by unpaid labor. For me, this reading highlights how technology can transform social norms as much as it changes physical work. The modern appliances that promised freedom actually deepened dependence on gendered labor divisions, just in more efficient ways. Cowan’s analysis reminds us that progress is never purely mechanical it’s cultural and moral, built into the assumptions about who should benefit from new machines and who is expected to serve them. - Todd Holman | ||
| + | |||
| + | It doesn' | ||
| + | |||
| + | I honestly found this reading to be one of the most interesting ones from the entire semester so far. I loved the discussion of how religion and colonization impacted views on what counts as “natural, | ||
| + | |||
| + | This reading highlights how technological change is never purely about machines but by its social systems that shape and are shaped by those machines. Her analysis shows that domestic technologies, | ||
| ====== Nye, 133-137 ====== | ====== Nye, 133-137 ====== | ||
| Line 57: | Line 65: | ||
| This chapter talked about the transformation of transportation, | This chapter talked about the transformation of transportation, | ||
| + | |||
| + | The Steamboat excelled against traditional paths, the Railroads excelled against Steamboats, and Trolley Lines grew to better move people in closer areas that Railroads didn' | ||
week_10_questions_comments-325_25.1761819450.txt.gz · Last modified: by 76.78.172.130
