In "Pencils to Pixels", the stages of literary technologies are discussed. I really like how this author writes and the issue that the computer is simply the latest step in the long line of writing technologies. That writing technologies transitioned from the pencil, to the pen and now to the computer. I like this way of thinking because I believe it is an easier, calmer way of thinking of the evolution of technology as well as the evolution of us craving it so. People are scared of our increased use and need of technology, and rightfully so. Losing touch of the art of using a pencil (or pen) to physically write on a piece of paper worries (generally) the older population. As Baron notes, "The Speaker of the House of Representatives suggested that inner-city school children should try laptops to improve their performance. The Governor of Illinois thinks that hooking up every school classroom to the Web will eliminate illiteracy."
Certainly there is so much more that goes into eliminating illiteracy than handing school children computers, but I believe that if we accept this transition of the computer as the primary source of literary technologies, than we can use it to our benefit.
An interesting paradox to note is that Plato spoke out against writing, in fear it would weaken our memory. And now, with the use of computers, smart phones, tablets, cameras, etc. we often rely on technology to encapsulate our memory. Posting pictures, making notes or to do lists, relying on electronic contact lists are done electronically now. I barely know any of my best friends phone numbers by heart, I just look them up in my phone. Plato would surely see this as cutting corners, relying on other things besides our brain to remember.
Here are a few interesting links, to continue thinking about the pencil v. technology divide:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/03/news/03iht-pencils_0.html
And the toll that technology dependence can have on us:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/07/technology/07brainside.html?_r=0
I would have to agree with the older generation that losing touch with good old pencil and paper is a worry. Don’t get me wrong I know how to type, I am literate with a computer and its functions, however, I do not want it to be my primary form of communication or data storage. When in school I prefer to take notes in a three hole punch, spiral notebook, yet in many class rooms we are required to sit at computers and there aren’t even traditional desks. I know that my notes would be neater if I used the computer but I would rather write them out. I believe that the physical act of writing aids my studying process because it requires me to take the time and actually read and then transcribe the information.
ReplyDeleteCassidy,
ReplyDeleteAll the apprehension about writing at its advent is interesting to me. I read a myth in which a king was apprehensive about the invention of writing because he believed it would result in the perpetuation of false knowledge. This story hints at a strange relationship between writing and truth. We often see writing as something that stands alone, something that is unquestioned in its representation. I wonder if it is our tendency as humans to consider writing as objective, something that preserves facts, something that is more reliable than human memory, that was cause for the initial concern at its advent. Truly it has externalized memory and crippled our memories to a certain degree, but has it been responsible for spreading false knowledge? I wonder about this as I read through our texts unquestioningly.
I liked how you mentioned the assertion Plato made about writing weakening human memory. What do we need to actively "remember" anything if the memory or information could be recorded in a physical, tangible place? Plato's issue with writing was "forgetting too much" by relying on text as an external memory. But then, you also provided a link to an article which not only addressed the issue of forgetfulness, but addressed the other side of the coin:
ReplyDelete"Dr. Aboujaoude also asks whether the vast storage available in e-mail and on the Internet is preventing many of us from letting go, causing us to retain many old and unnecessary memories at the expense of making new ones. Everything is saved these days, he notes, from the meaningless e-mail sent after a work lunch to the angry online exchange with a spouse."
I guess I've always thought of the usefulness of writing and technology being able to save valuable memories, rather than preserving memories that are best forgotten. As far as memory is concerned, do you think technology has been more beneficial or more detrimental? Also, I'm thinking back to when Dr. Downs said that we re-write a memory a little differently each time we think about it. Could it be that technology keeps those memories closer to the "original" than if we had to rely solely on ourselves? Or does technology not affect this mental "re-writing" process at all?