Talk:Aidan Brewster
Comment #1:
Aidan Brewster: Your initial question of “Does authenticity of self-presentation matter” is one that I have often pondered in examining what the last impact of my online identity is in the “real” world, and the manner in which you outline the shortcomings of Facebook as an accurate social medium was an enjoyable read. That being said, I feel as a fellow pre-law student and a competition-level gamer there was a distinct lack of analysis on the part of your specific Facebook elements, and that highlights such examples would have contributed greatly to the wonderful philosophical arguments you make throughout. For example, if you have any, what “likes” or “quotes” that you have on your Facebook profile speak to the depth to which it fails to reflect you as a person? Additionally, family members (if I recall correctly) need to be approved to show up on your Facebook profile. As someone who has listed numerous family members and a significant other, there must have been some level of personality reflection there that signified your desired to publicly identify with these people. I understand the desire (or generally apathy towards) presenting all elements of your lifestyle or aspirations on your profile, but as you stated in your conclusions, there is that nagging desire to update information, and so it begs the question as to why/what are your motivations behind when you need to “update” your online identity.
Stylistically, it is a well-constructed entry and flows logically in line with what the assignment asks for. The style suits the arguments and presentation very well and was clear throughout. I enjoyed the read through and thoughts/ideas you examined.
-Andrew Sylora
Comment #2:
Aiden Brewster
OVERALL
You separated your analysis into the three concepts of online presentation described in class: authenticity, embodiment, and temporality. Therefore, I think that the structure of your autobiography fits the assignment spec well. Moreover, the important questions in each section are in bold font, which helps the reader find the main points and the focus of your evaluation. Furthermore, I think that the witty and sarcastic comments throughout the autobiography and underneath the photos add to your style and are entertaining. I will break down my peer review into your sections:
AUTHENTICITY
I like the question “Was (Is) my profile an authentic projection of myself as a person?” I think, however, you should change this sentence to the present tense, since I assume the Facebook profile still exists. Moreover, you do not answer this question until the fourth paragraph, so I think that you should pose the question later in the autobiography (closer to the fourth paragraph).
I very much like that you mention that “This concept of “veiling” facts or truths is not something that is new to the internet”. I agree that when we examine the authenticity of an online avatar we must realize that people have always selectively revealed themselves to others. I agree with you, and believe that this behavior does not hinder, and often even nurtures relationship. I think, though, that you can change the double quotes to single quotes since this is a metaphor, not a quote.
I think that the authenticity section of the essay has a lot of ‘stuffing’ material that does not add to the autobiography itself. For example, in the third sentence, you could omit everything past “inner workings”. The part about extreme stress is extra material that does not support your message. (Also, are you sure that extreme duress unveils a person’s complete self?) I think that you could shorten this portion of your autobiography and analyze your Facebook profile sooner.
EMBODIMENT
In this section, you immediately answer the question that you pose in the first paragraph. This helps with the logical flow of the autobiography. The examples you use, like the distaste for walking in Ann Arbor, support your argument very well: I could not tell these things about you from the Facebook profile. Yet, the statement “I really hate walking places in Ann Arbor” doesn’t make sense. You either really hate walking in Ann Arbor, or you really hate walking to places in Ann Arbor: one cannot walk a place.
In the second paragraph, first line: What limits embodiment? You say ‘this’ limits embodiment, and I am not sure what ‘this’ is.
I find your question “What is presented and what is assumed?” to be very thoughtful and astute. I agree that people make assumptions about a person based upon their Facebook profile: these assumptions are often not accurate. I agree that this danger deserves analysis.
TEMPORALITY
Albeit short, the section on temporality is straight to the point and informative. I like the comparison of a Facebook profile to a resume. You could expand on the temporality section of your autobiography if you choose: you could write about the Facebook timeline, about any major changes you make to your profile, or about the effect of an outdated Facebook profile on your self-representation. I think you could leave the temporality section how it is, because I don’t see any major flaws, or you could expand.
-Rachel Joyce
