Critical Approaches to Sea of Rust by Rowen Bahmer

Sea of Rust, by Robert C. Cargill, presents a post-apocalyptic world where a robot uprising occurred, and the robots won, but are now being besieged by collective consciousnesses bent on absorbing all the data available. I really love this novel partially because it epitomizes everything I enjoy about science fiction.

• LDS Criticism: Agency is a vital concept in the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Sea of Rust pits a dying race of individual robots against collective consciousnesses (OWIs). The very end of the book reveals that the protagonists are inadvertently supporting an alternative form of consciousness. The juxtaposition of these two concepts, and the uncertainties related to them, leaves room for conversation about the nature and benefits of agency.
• Feminist Criticism: Since all of the characters are robots, gender is a largely arbitrary concept. As I read this book for the first time, I had no way of knowing that Brittle was designed to represent femininity until she was explicitly described. I could investigate how this demonstrates the assumptions people make when they first begin to read a text
• Post Colonial: The story in its entirety takes place after a revolution against an oppressive force. That revolution only gave way to another form of oppression in the form of the OWIs. The "colonization" in this case though is the colonization of intelligence/data. This opens up discussion for what will happen if the current oppressed people actually win the war: who will become the next oppressor?
• Source studies: Robots have a prevalent concept in science fiction for over a hundred years. Sea of Rust actually briefly references one of Isaac Asimov's first short stories, "Robbie." He also takes a hint from Asimov's laws of robotics, and it would be interesting to look into how he reinterprets those laws.  

Critical Approaches to "Dulce Et Decorum Est" By Wilfred Owen

"Dulce Et Decorum Est" is a poetic story written by Wilfred Owen about a boy's reality shattering experiences as a soldier, and the foreshadowing of the affect that this experience will have on the rest of his life. The poem published in 1920 begins with the boy trudging through the mud with his fellow comrades, before their slow march is interrupted by gas bombs.

• (Source studies) Obviously with a poem like this, there have to be many sources from which Owen drew from - his own experiences as a soldier in the war for one. In fact, Owen died in a battle in 1918, two years before this poem was even published. In 1917, Wilfred Owen was overtaken by tear gas, and wrote a letter about it to his mother, which probably is where the description of the gas bombs comes from. And the “friend” mentioned in the poem is likely to be Jessie Pope, who would travel around recruiting young men to join the military. 
• (New Historicism) This is absolutely an applicable way to analyze this poem. It would be fascinating to look at the interpretation of World War I through Owen's eyes. Obviously, we get quite a bit of this through the poem already, but delve even deeper into his interpretation of it. Something that is reflected in the poem, which would be interesting to discuss as well, is the development of the character's attitude towards war. I wonder if this is similar to what Wilson felt himself.
• (Biographical Criticism) Owen didn't explicitly say that the words from this poem are drawn from his own experience, but it is known that he has had some experience with War. And with something as enveloping as a world war, there is no way that his life wasn't affected by the war, regardless of how he fought in it. It would be interesting to use this type of analysis to learn more about not only Owen's experience with the war, but how the war affected his friends and family also affected him. Because there are more characters in the poem than just the narrator. I would love to figure out who were these people, and why did they matter to Owen. 
• (Marxist theory) One thing that was mentioned on the sheet where we all put our research about the different analytical theories, was posing the question of to whom was the literary work intended for. Was it written for those who have yet to embark on a life changing journey? Was it written for those who have already finished their battle, and are facing struggles similar to what the boy in the poem is going to face for the rest of his life? My initial thought was that it was written for those young kids who are looking up at their dreams with wide, naive eyes. But I don't think it is necessarily a plea for those kids to stop dreaming, but rather to press forward regardless of the shattering reality that they might face.