I'm not sure if that's spelled right. Anyway, I'm blown away by all of Buschman's sources. I remember earlier in the semester wondering how certain authors could go around saying this or that is or isn't true without backing up their claims, and someone saying that if they did that it would be constant footnotes and quotes. Now I see what that looks like. It took me a while to get into his writing style because of the constant "interruption" and I'm not sure if that is because I got used to it or if he starts to rely on quotes a little bit less later on. I had to go through and make a point of underlining the points that came from Buschman himself to find out where he stood. What do other people think? I know that some of you are good source critiquers. Is it too much or does it really support his argument?
I found his arguments fascinating, but they have this zealot ring to them that make me not accept everything at face value. I feel like he explains clearly the problems with technology and the bad reasons for the move towards technology, but he doesn't ever explain how technology could fit into his vision. It isn't going away any time soon and I feel like he needs to address how to better incorporate or use technology if he wants his vision of librarianship to happen.