In today’s society, technology is constantly changing. Companies like Apple produce a product and a year later the product is considered dated because of the emergence of a new model. Though the technological market is always changing, there is periodically a product that introduces a feature that is considered so novel or different that it revolutionizes how people interact with the world. In an essay entitled From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technology writer Dennis Baron takes reader through some the most groundbreaking movements in technology. He shows readers that while each form of technology is different from its preceding forms, there are similarities in how society responds to new technology. He examines the power of new technology by tracing its impact on literacy. Throughout his essay he focuses on the history of the pencil; Baron illustrates how the pencil was once viewed as a groundbreaking technology that had a strong influence on literacy and writing practices. Today most people would have difficulty viewing the pencil as an object that is as cutting edge as a computer, but that is exactly the argument that Baron makes in this essay.
For Baron, in order to explore the technology associated with writing, it is important to acknowledge that the “first writing technology was writing itself” (Baron, 4). His discussion of writing highlights one of the major characteristics associated with any emerging technology, dissent. Baron writes that “writing was once an innovation resisted by traditionalist because it was unnatural and untrustworthy” (Baron, 4). As Baron points out, one of the voices that spoke out against writing was Plato who believed that the writing would “produce forgetfulness in the minds of those that learn to use it” (Plato, 165). Plato also believed that writing would lead to a hollow education for students because they would be able to read without instruction. Knowledge could now be divorced from its source; an instructor no longer had to be present in order to impart knowledge.
While Plato opposed writing technology, others believed writing would bring a positive change to the world. Interestingly enough, future generations would not have access to Plato’s teachings without the written word. Writing helps people preserve information that would otherwise be lost.
If we apply many of Plato’s arguments about writing to modern forms of technology many of the same issues emerge. The computer and more importantly the internet, the e-reader, smart phones all have impacted the way people communicate and engage with information. Since Baron’s essay was written in 1999, it provides an interesting view of how people viewed technology like the computer and the internet in the 90’s. He writes how leaders believed “that hooking up every school classroom to the Web [would] eliminate illiteracy” (Baron, 1). It is difficult to imagine that anyone would oppose a form of technology that could help increase literacy, but similar to previous writing technologies the computer and the internet does come with its own level of controversy.
There are large issues like the digital divide arguments that tell us how less developed countries still lack access to the internet. Arguments about censoring the web, about file sharing copyrighted material, the number of debates are endless. The number of debates can take this post in numerous directions, but the influence on writing practices is quite interesting. While society as a whole would argue that the computer is central to their ability to communicate and record information, there are also cons to this new technology. A scenario that Baron mentions in his essay illustrates the conflicts to the growth of the computer as a primary writing technology. Baron writes;
I found that I had become so used to composing virtual prose that I could no longer draft anything coherent directly on to a piece of paper […] the writing practices I had been engaged in regularly since the age of four, now seemed to overwhelm and constrict me, and I longed for the flexibility of digitized text” (Baron, 1).
I will be the first to admit that I rely on my word processor to identify spelling and grammar mistakes, when I write things by hand I question if my spelling is correct. I would probably miss many of the grammar mistakes without a grammar check. Many people I know rely on auto-fill options on Google and text messaging programs to provide the correct spelling of words. People no longer have to invest the same level of care when constructing a document.
Also, if we return to Plato’s critiques of writing as a technology, these critiques we can apply them to the computer and internet. Plato feared that writing as a technology would lead to forgetfulness. Smart phones allow people to have information at their fingertips; the need to commit information to memory is no longer necessary. College students will readily admit that they cram information in order to pass an exam, and then forget the information once the exam is over.
Plato also warned against getting information without instruction. The modern day version of this argument may center on questions of credibility. The internet provides an endless source of information, when a person researches without proper instruction there is a possibility of using a source that lacks credibility. For example, teachers often warn students to refrain from using Wikipedia because the information on the site is provided by users. The internet is the one place where anyone can be an expert.
Baron also points out that “as a literacy technology begins to become established, it also goes beyond the previous technology” and “while writing cannot replace many speech functions it allows us to communicate in ways that speech does not” (Baron, 6). I would argue that Baron’s statement is no longer truthful; changes in technology are changing the way we communicate. Rather than speak to each other many of us communicate through text messaging. Rather than call a customer service representative we engage in a live chat (I am not entirely the person I am chatting with is real). Communication is becoming increasingly impersonal. How often do you go to dinner and see a couple texting (probably each other) at the dinner table.
Baron’s essay really makes readers think about how far writing technologies have come. The question is if there is ever a point where new technology goes too far. I am the first to admit my love of the internet, computer, kindle, smart phone and laptop (I often have them on and in front of me at the same time) but I am also the first admit that the older writing technologies have a certain charm that is disappearing.
Do we have to lose old writing technologies to embrace new writing technologies? Is there a benefit to keeping both? Can we keep both?
Please view the link below. An example of how I randomly think about this class. This video ended up being relevant to my most recent post and will probably be relevant in my next one (and yes I did watch Beastly and I enjoyed it.
These are interesting questions, and my response may be a little all over the place (but I guess that’s okay since we’re blogging…).
ReplyDeleteI hope we can keep both; I see benefits to keeping both anyway. There’s just something special about receiving a hand-written letter or card as opposed to an email or an e-card. I can’t imagine life without a computer or the internet though. However, I think it’s important to know how to conduct research using other methods than the internet. I vaguely remember the card catalogue; I was in middle school at the time. But plenty of my coworkers have talked about how much longer research papers took to write. I think there’s something to be said about having to spend all that time to conduct research (even if it’s just learning to be patient). With technology, people expect to have information fast.
I think I have been able to find a balance because of my generation. I guess I have the best of both worlds. I’m old enough that the older forms of communication aren’t nonexistent to me, but I’m young enough that I don’t fear change. Technology seemed to evolve during high school and college years. For instance, I didn’t have internet until I was in high school, but I didn’t use it much until college because all I had was dial-up at home (and it took forever). My college years were spent IMing. Social media didn’t take off until the end of college years as an undergrad; I joined my senior year of college when there was no newsfeed and only college students could join. I haven’t embraced all aspects of technology yet. I don’t have a kindle; I don’t have a smart phone (mostly because I’m too cheap to pay for the data plan). My friends tease me, in fact, because I finally got a phone with a keyboard. I do text a lot, but I have a general rule that if it takes more than two texts to explain what I’m trying to say, then I will call the person. To sum it up, even though I value text, I also value a good old-fashioned phone call.
Earlier in your post, you talked about Plato’s critique on writing and how it leads to forgetfulness. Then you talked about smart phones giving us information at our fingertips. I think cell phones in general prevent us from remembering things. Since I’ve had a cell phone, I can no longer remember phone numbers. In high school, I knew everyone’s number (and I still remember most). I don't have to remember cell phone numbers now though because I can just program them in my phone (since I don't have to dial the number every time). I do know my cell phone number, but I know some people who don’t even know their own cell phone number.
DeletePersonally, I wish we could go back to the simple days of letter writing-like you said it has a 'certain charm' about it. Maybe this is crazy but I have this theory that true, raw writing comes when it's done with a paper and pen-we think too much when we type because we can go back and delete, rearrange, and edit. I love that feeling when you write so much your hand aches, that's when I feel I've really written, really let it out on that piece of paper. I think writing on paper brings out more genuine and vulnerable emotions because it's almost like a rough draft of your thoughts, but maybe that is just me. And that is why even though I am an avoid smart phone, computer, and kindle user, it makes me sad to see how 'technology needy' we are becoming. If our internet stops working, we freak out. What would our lives be like without Google? It’s almost like our world’s ‘go to’ bible these days We'd actually have to look things up in a book, what a crazy thought.
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong, the advanced technology today is great and incredibly useful, but I wish we could somehow be forced to just turn it all off for a week or two each month (to go along with our final discussion last week). I think it's making us extremely lazy-our phone's seem to have all the answers, so we don't really have to search for anything anymore. To feed off of Susan and old fashion researching, this semester I had to write a research paper and felt very discouraged when I found limited information online. I was starting to think the internet just knew everything. So, I resorted to the library for the first time in years. I didn't even know where to begin when I got there and it made me feel pretty pathetic. I was actually working for information and it felt odd (so that's what it's like to write a research paper).
I also feel as though we are missing the little things in life because we are too busy looking at our phones. Sometimes people don't even look up when their walking because their texting or browsing the internet on their phones-they don't acknowledge the beauty of their surroundings. It's harder to keep people's attention these days-if you walk into a classroom you are likely to find at least one person texting. And like you said, many couples text while at dinner or on a date. It's as if life is competing against smart phones and phones are winning by a landslide.
Before I answer your discussion questions, I want to say I’m glad that you mention how “Plato also warned against getting information without instruction.” I feel we need to be more intentional than ever in synthesizing the information we read, simply because there is so much information available, and the majority of the general public can contribute information. In one respect, I think this is a good thing because we’re challenged to think more critically about what we read. Whether we receive instruction or a reminder from a professor to choose our sources carefully, or whether we just remind ourselves to consider information critically, Plato was onto something in his warning.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your questions, I don’t think we absolutely have to lose old writing technologies to embrace new writing technologies. I believe we have somewhat of a choice. Yes, our technological society is going to force us to use some new writing technologies, particularly in the workplace. But we don’t need to dismiss the old technologies completely.
I think there is definitely a benefit to keeping both old and new writing technologies, and I believe we can keep both. You mentioned you often rely on spell check to correct your spelling and grammar. I do the same. Sadly, I think my spelling skills have declined. I was once an excellent speller, but I would be embarrassed to tell you how often I look up the spelling of words when I am handwriting something. As amazingly helpful as technology can be, I think it’s allowed our brains to become quite lazy. New writing technologies may afford us convenience and speed, but the pen and pencil keep us sharp. While we may be forced to use a word processor at work, we don’t need to abandon the art of the handwritten letter. We really can keep both old and new writing technologies, if we make the effort.