American Lives in Brandt

I've blogged about Brandt's book before--a couple of entries in 2006 when I read it with my 601 class (I blogged Chapter 5 in Oct 2006, see my blog archives, and also posted a response about Brandt's read on the agricultural economy).  I didn't come at the book from a methodological perspective, though, so I'd like to think through a few questions here.   

Since this book is entitled _Literacy in American Lives_, what pressures and burdens does a project like this carry when the nation-state is mentioned in the title?  What is particularly "American" about this book and this kind of study (beyond the obvious geopolitical location)?  

How does the focus on "American-ness" bear up under the pressure of the focus on a specific region (Madison, Wisconsin) and surrounding environs.  Madison, as she notes, undergoes a transformation common to other mid-sized communities in the 20th century, moving from an agricultural economy to more of an information economy.  Is there a uniqueness to a community like Madison, which is so heavily imbricated in the university as an economic agitator, incubator?  What would a study look like that is not focused around a university town that has mushroomed so greatly and become more urbanized and suburbanized?  Think of a another place where a study like this might be done--what might be different?

How do larger historical events and transformations play out against the backdrop of individual lives?  What do individuals notice versus the researcher about such patterns?  The military service piece is a big piece of what I noticed on this time around--the sponsorship of the U.S. military to boost literacy during war-time    

Brand's  interview questions provide us with an inventory-like, life course-style interview approach. How does that favor specific kinds of individuals?  What might be other ways to research "literacy" in a life?

What role do artifacts of literacy play here?  What are the relative merits of examining literacy artifacts versus literacy narratives?  What are the possibilities and limitations of an interview approach focused on a life narrative?  

How did she decide when she had enough interviewees?  Why 80?  Why select the different pairs/groups to feature?  

What are the possibilities in the idea of literacy as an economic resource and literacy sponsorship as aiding and abetting in that (or suppressing that)?  There is a consistent focus here on literacy as something to be "traded" for economic gain and power (a materialist notion of literacy).  What are the limitations of that kind of framework?   And what are the distinctions to be made across literacies?