Reply to comment

I really liked the part of the article that mentioned that "literary critics understand synecdoche (and its variants, metaphor and metonymy) not as reliably representing any whole, but rather only--and oftentimes deliberately--selected aspects of it." Such a realization and statement speaks to the exclusiveness and reduction of academia. But I also understand how synecdoche can be beneficial to interdisciplinarity. Bringing together parts of one discipline and another discipline can build a bridge of understanding, rather than a tower of exclusion. 

One part of the article that I felt needed clarification was Grobstein's inserted piece about the organization of the brain and observation (p.g. 10). 1.) What exactly is he saying and what does he mean?

2.) Also, why did you decide to write this article? How did the collaboration come about? Have you received ample support from other faculty, administration, and Bryn Mawr College in regards to your particular interests in interdisciplinarity? Where do you envision interdisciplinarity at Bryn Mawr, according McIntosh's five phases of curriculum revision?