Hi Nick! I really enjoyed your slidecast about predictions of moveable homes in the future. In particular, I liked how you zeroed in on the person who made this assertion, Clark. This allowed you to make a nuanced argument about the differences in British and American culture, landscape and politics during the 1960s. Your focus on Clark also added credibility to your presentation as you demonstrated his involvement in 2001: A Space Odyssey, the Apollo missions and his other correct futuristic visions.
I also found your analysis of why moveable homes were not compatible with American values to be a central and eye-opening aspect of your presentation. Clearly, home ownership is a critical element in how the United States defines success, and location is a large component of that social status. As a result, moveable homes undermine both of those central values.
Last, I really liked how you moved this discussion of moveable homes to the contemporary moment. You began your presentation with a demonstration of how moveable homes are now associated with poverty and built a strong argument as to why this association exists. Then, you ended your presentation with the tiny homes movement—a movement that retains the status of moveable homes and adds in modern society’s obsession with miniaturized versions of things.
Overall, this was a great presentation and I learned a lot.
I really liked how you looked at the futuristic concept of moveable homes through the viewpoint of Arthur C. Clarke, particularly emphasizing how he was basing his predictions off of the societal and cultural values that he was familiar with in Great Britain. Your further analysis of the differences between culture in the U.S. and Great Britain was very interesting and emulates the way we have examined past technologies in class such as the railroad and telegraph. As a whole, your slidecast does an excellent and thorough job of discussing the how “the American Dream” and cultural values of the U.S. in the 1960s attributed to the lack of success of moveable homes. For an example, the fact people highly valued house ownership and stability as you pointed out is something I would not have considered right away, but it is critical to think about when understanding how circumstances can impact why some technologies are successful while others are not. I liked your statement about how Clarke imagined what was possible instead of what was practical; that really drove your point home.
I really like the collage of all of the events and circumstances that contributed to the culture of “The Sixties.” You mentioned various influencers, such as the protests of the Vietnam War, MLK in the civil rights movement, the Cold War and the Space Race, and HP’s release of the first computer. It may be beneficial to zoom in on one of these events and discuss it in more depth. Overall, this was a very interesting slidecast and you really excelled at focusing in on how the culture of the 60s explains why Clarke’s prediction was wrong. Great job Nick!
Nice job, Nick. At first, I was little bit lost as you kept bringing in loads of stuff that seemed unrelated like the Beatles and the Space Race, however, I think you did an excellent job tying them all together and making them relevant. They were important in painting the backstory to the argument you were trying to make.
I really liked the unique points that you made and how you developed them. Discussing 2001: A Space Odyssey seems very unrelated to moveable homes, but you provided a great explanation as to why and how they are connected. Your points also flowed very well as you moved from laying down the foundation of the past, to the current status, to how they will be perceived in the future. Your discussion of American ideals and moveable homes was eye opening.
On a critical note, some of the slides were blurry and the pictures were hard to make out. I do not know if that was a rendering issue or not, but finding pictures that have a higher pixel count could solve that issue. The only other suggestion I have is to maybe make your point in the beginning a little bit sooner so that the audience has an idea of why you are building up all that background information.
I liked how you started off with explaining the culture around moveable homes. I am not very familiar with that even today, so it was nice that you provided that context.
Additionally, you made a lot of interesting points. At first, I thought the space stuff was an unnecessary tangent, but the “man versus machine” aspect was an interesting thought.
If there was one area to improve, I would have maybe dug a bit deeper into the difference between using a mobile home for travel and a mobile home which is used as a more long-term option.
Hi Nick! I really enjoyed your slidecast about predictions of moveable homes in the future. In particular, I liked how you zeroed in on the person who made this assertion, Clark. This allowed you to make a nuanced argument about the differences in British and American culture, landscape and politics during the 1960s. Your focus on Clark also added credibility to your presentation as you demonstrated his involvement in 2001: A Space Odyssey, the Apollo missions and his other correct futuristic visions.
I also found your analysis of why moveable homes were not compatible with American values to be a central and eye-opening aspect of your presentation. Clearly, home ownership is a critical element in how the United States defines success, and location is a large component of that social status. As a result, moveable homes undermine both of those central values.
Last, I really liked how you moved this discussion of moveable homes to the contemporary moment. You began your presentation with a demonstration of how moveable homes are now associated with poverty and built a strong argument as to why this association exists. Then, you ended your presentation with the tiny homes movement—a movement that retains the status of moveable homes and adds in modern society’s obsession with miniaturized versions of things.
Overall, this was a great presentation and I learned a lot.
I really liked how you looked at the futuristic concept of moveable homes through the viewpoint of Arthur C. Clarke, particularly emphasizing how he was basing his predictions off of the societal and cultural values that he was familiar with in Great Britain. Your further analysis of the differences between culture in the U.S. and Great Britain was very interesting and emulates the way we have examined past technologies in class such as the railroad and telegraph. As a whole, your slidecast does an excellent and thorough job of discussing the how “the American Dream” and cultural values of the U.S. in the 1960s attributed to the lack of success of moveable homes. For an example, the fact people highly valued house ownership and stability as you pointed out is something I would not have considered right away, but it is critical to think about when understanding how circumstances can impact why some technologies are successful while others are not. I liked your statement about how Clarke imagined what was possible instead of what was practical; that really drove your point home.
I really like the collage of all of the events and circumstances that contributed to the culture of “The Sixties.” You mentioned various influencers, such as the protests of the Vietnam War, MLK in the civil rights movement, the Cold War and the Space Race, and HP’s release of the first computer. It may be beneficial to zoom in on one of these events and discuss it in more depth. Overall, this was a very interesting slidecast and you really excelled at focusing in on how the culture of the 60s explains why Clarke’s prediction was wrong. Great job Nick!
Nice job, Nick. At first, I was little bit lost as you kept bringing in loads of stuff that seemed unrelated like the Beatles and the Space Race, however, I think you did an excellent job tying them all together and making them relevant. They were important in painting the backstory to the argument you were trying to make.
I really liked the unique points that you made and how you developed them. Discussing 2001: A Space Odyssey seems very unrelated to moveable homes, but you provided a great explanation as to why and how they are connected. Your points also flowed very well as you moved from laying down the foundation of the past, to the current status, to how they will be perceived in the future. Your discussion of American ideals and moveable homes was eye opening.
On a critical note, some of the slides were blurry and the pictures were hard to make out. I do not know if that was a rendering issue or not, but finding pictures that have a higher pixel count could solve that issue. The only other suggestion I have is to maybe make your point in the beginning a little bit sooner so that the audience has an idea of why you are building up all that background information.
I liked how you started off with explaining the culture around moveable homes. I am not very familiar with that even today, so it was nice that you provided that context.
Additionally, you made a lot of interesting points. At first, I thought the space stuff was an unnecessary tangent, but the “man versus machine” aspect was an interesting thought.
If there was one area to improve, I would have maybe dug a bit deeper into the difference between using a mobile home for travel and a mobile home which is used as a more long-term option.