I like your reading of Wesch's article. I think the "crisis" narrative needs to be placed in a larger historical context in order to recognize these issues as ongoing. In fact, one of the more vivid moments in Berkeley in the Sixties focuses on just this sort of crisis, as many leaders of the Free Speech Movement felt alienated from an education that was preparing them for participation in what Eisenhower had called the "military-industrial complex." In other words, I think we are always asking/answering this question of "relevance," and if we're not, then maybe we're in the wrong profession. But it does beg the question as to whether "crisis" is the correct term for it, if in fact, it is an ongoing, changing issue.
Regarding the "subjectivities" rather than "subjects" argument, I think you're basically right. My research is not in rhet-comp, but it is informed by some of the same cultural studies theory. That's not to suggest that we're ahead of the curve so much as to point out a place of intersection, a reason why Wesch's approach might be particularly seductive for those of us in the digital humanities (or related fields).
All Comments
Regarding the "subjectivities" rather than "subjects" argument, I think you're basically right. My research is not in rhet-comp, but it is informed by some of the same cultural studies theory. That's not to suggest that we're ahead of the curve so much as to point out a place of intersection, a reason why Wesch's approach might be particularly seductive for those of us in the digital humanities (or related fields).