Showing posts with label Personal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Personal. Show all posts
Friday, April 25, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Reading is "Lonely" - Technology is "Social"
I was reading in my Poets & Writers magazine about how reading is in decline. (I would give appropriate citation – but the mag. is at work – an indication of how I kill time at work…). What the article failed to mention was: why does this decline matter? Who cares if people read?
As I talked with Frances about this topic, I was forced to realize that I don’t really know why it matters whether people read or not. I have my own biases about reading because I have (finally) found joy in it. I stopped reading as a teenager because reading was forced upon me in school. I couldn’t get “into” the books/stories – in fact, I didn’t even see them as stories, but rather, as only mere school assignments. This disdain for being forced to read specific material kept me from being an English major for two years. In essence, I had better things to do – like write.
That’s the other thing this article brought up – reading is in decline, while writing is at a seemingly all-time high. Not only do we have a plethora of books in a bookstore (even all those in a library – my goodness), but now we have the advantage of self-publishing – of blogging – of emailing.
With technology, we have the advantage of having an online voice or persona. We have the notion that we finally exist somewhere in this mass of humanity (which is why, Sy Parrish (perhaps a play on the word “perish”) in One Hour Photo explains that we take pictures – to show someone that we existed AND that we mattered to someone else. I believe the same can be said for the act of writing.) Writing gives us the ability to take a snapshot of something important to us, while allowing us to be in the snapshot – as author, as subject, as perceiver, as a human voice.
I fear I have much more to say on this – and my blog is getting a bit long – which proves problematic for those struggling to catch up with their OWN reading for their OWN blog writing. Who will read my blog? I mean, really read my blog – and care about what I have to say? I certainly admit – I haven’t been able to devote fair attention to my fellow class blog authors. But instead of reading what others have to say this morning, I’m writing – writing to be heard. Writing to be a social and classroom participant.
So, this Poets & Writers magazine mentions why reading might be on the decline – because it is lonely. I never thought about this before. Instead, I always thought about how people resist reading because it takes work (and for those who don’t read – it really does take some effort). And THIS was why it concerned me that people didn't read - because it seems like their brains go into atrophy from lack of use.
I’m seeing how technology allows us to be very egocentric. We can maintain a superficial idea that we are social, that we are connected, when really, what we are most intimate with – is our machine. I touch a machine more than anything else all day. My machine allows me to be social when I want and how I want.
The word social no longer means in the company of a physical society. It now means being in a representation of society.
When everyone has a voice, suddenly no one has a voice... except their OWN.
As I talked with Frances about this topic, I was forced to realize that I don’t really know why it matters whether people read or not. I have my own biases about reading because I have (finally) found joy in it. I stopped reading as a teenager because reading was forced upon me in school. I couldn’t get “into” the books/stories – in fact, I didn’t even see them as stories, but rather, as only mere school assignments. This disdain for being forced to read specific material kept me from being an English major for two years. In essence, I had better things to do – like write.
That’s the other thing this article brought up – reading is in decline, while writing is at a seemingly all-time high. Not only do we have a plethora of books in a bookstore (even all those in a library – my goodness), but now we have the advantage of self-publishing – of blogging – of emailing.
With technology, we have the advantage of having an online voice or persona. We have the notion that we finally exist somewhere in this mass of humanity (which is why, Sy Parrish (perhaps a play on the word “perish”) in One Hour Photo explains that we take pictures – to show someone that we existed AND that we mattered to someone else. I believe the same can be said for the act of writing.) Writing gives us the ability to take a snapshot of something important to us, while allowing us to be in the snapshot – as author, as subject, as perceiver, as a human voice.
I fear I have much more to say on this – and my blog is getting a bit long – which proves problematic for those struggling to catch up with their OWN reading for their OWN blog writing. Who will read my blog? I mean, really read my blog – and care about what I have to say? I certainly admit – I haven’t been able to devote fair attention to my fellow class blog authors. But instead of reading what others have to say this morning, I’m writing – writing to be heard. Writing to be a social and classroom participant.
So, this Poets & Writers magazine mentions why reading might be on the decline – because it is lonely. I never thought about this before. Instead, I always thought about how people resist reading because it takes work (and for those who don’t read – it really does take some effort). And THIS was why it concerned me that people didn't read - because it seems like their brains go into atrophy from lack of use.
Now, my concern has shifted. I still believe it is worthwhile to "work the brain" - but I also now worry that we are falling prey to our mere "notion" that we are social - that we are only making ourselves more isolated and consequently, more lonely.
To be a reader, one must be a receiver of something created, not a creator. To read, one does the activity alone. While I am writing alone, I am writing for social purposes - in effort to connect.
Thus, we have irony. Technology seems to have made us all busier because it has made things more accessible to us. We seem to have no time for anything (as it is, I got up at 4:30 this morning to write an email to a colleague (again, to be social) and to write this blog!)
Yet, I have this notion that technology allows us to “perceive” that we are social and connected. Myspace, for instance, allows for us to connect with old friends, meet new friends, keep in touch with family, etc. The fact that we can see (especially with younger Myspace participants) how one person has over 150 “friends” shows how social we feel we are, how important we are to others, and how technology has allowed for us to “feel” this way. Yet, we never talk on the phone. We find it hard to meet friends for lunch or dinner. As this comic so appropriately shows:
Thus, we have irony. Technology seems to have made us all busier because it has made things more accessible to us. We seem to have no time for anything (as it is, I got up at 4:30 this morning to write an email to a colleague (again, to be social) and to write this blog!)
Yet, I have this notion that technology allows us to “perceive” that we are social and connected. Myspace, for instance, allows for us to connect with old friends, meet new friends, keep in touch with family, etc. The fact that we can see (especially with younger Myspace participants) how one person has over 150 “friends” shows how social we feel we are, how important we are to others, and how technology has allowed for us to “feel” this way. Yet, we never talk on the phone. We find it hard to meet friends for lunch or dinner. As this comic so appropriately shows:
I’m seeing how technology allows us to be very egocentric. We can maintain a superficial idea that we are social, that we are connected, when really, what we are most intimate with – is our machine. I touch a machine more than anything else all day. My machine allows me to be social when I want and how I want.
The word social no longer means in the company of a physical society. It now means being in a representation of society.
When everyone has a voice, suddenly no one has a voice... except their OWN.
Never have I felt so alone.
Friday, April 4, 2008
Introductions
"People never touched one another. The custom had become obsolete, owing to the Machine." - E.M. Forster in his "The Machine Stops."
Blog Purpose
I don't blog regularly because my blogs usually end up being long and many do not care to read something that, on first glance, is so long (maybe a consequence to the need for "instant" gratification technology might encourage - or to the other things we have to get to because we're so busy thanks to our technology…).
In any case, this blog will function, for me primarily, as a way to write and sort out my thoughts regarding the material of this class and to share my thoughts with whomever wishes to read them. I realize that I always apologize for the length of my writings, but I'm not going to do that here. If anything, I'm going to ask that others write *more*.
My Introduction
It's Christmas morning. I'm about six-years-old, and I just opened up my first record player along with a set of forty-fives - The Monkees. I played those records in all their scratch and pop glory, over and over, but eventually, I had to advance to cassette tapes. Tapes were easier to access, and my sister and I could record our make-believe radio shows on them. It wasn't until I was twelve that I owned my first CD - Tears for Fears Greatest Hits. It was another gift. I never saw a reason to buy CDs myself. Cassettes worked great, and were less expensive - definitely attractive to someone who never received an allowance.
Resistant to change and to technological advance, I proudly called myself a luddite. With religious bedtime stories of the apocalypse, which included details about the mark of the beast - a microchip implanted inside of every person where acceptance of it meant giving one's soul to the devil - I did not perceive that technological advances were beneficial. Computers were good only for playing "Hopper" and "Where is Carmen San Diego?" oh, and of course, "Oregon Trail."
Then, the desire for a social life hit. My girlfriends in high school talked about this "chatting" phenomenon - and their parents actually let them do it! I was curious about talking with someone, anyone, over the Internet about anything at all. I could talk with someone in Australia or England! I had a pen pal from South Dakota, and we snail mailed each other, but with chatting, communication was instant.
My parents believed that the Internet was a safe haven for molesters and serial killers (and to this day, my parents still believe this). I was allowed to chat only on a Catholic chat site; however, as an adult, I have advanced into IMing using AOL IM and Yahoo Messenger. In "real life," I was unpopular and had difficulty making friends because I was quiet and kept mostly to myself. But online, I was alive, expressing myself through my favorite medium: writing. I've met over thirty people, in-person, from online chat sessions and have formed actual friendships with people that have lasted well over six years.
I started seeing a divide, however - especially when I would talk about dating people from online. There were those that were in favor of meeting people this way, and those that -seriously- weren't. Though I was on the "luddite" side of things, I saw, and experienced, only benefits in my personal relationships with this technology. I even built my own personal Website, which I replaced with my current-day Myspace page.
Emailing is also a preferred form of communication for me (instead of the phone). I can think about what I want to say, how I want to say it, and have the privilege of using backspace and delete; however, accidentally sending an email to an unintended recipient - usually the person the email was about - is NEVER a good thing. My cell phone is used more for texting than actual calling, also.
I have gone through quite the evolution. Currently, I sit at a desk with a computer for most of my day. From my luddite point of view, this doesn't exactly sound ideal - to have a machine be my daily companion. But it's a fact. Do I understand computers? Hell no. Right next to my work computer, I have a quote: To Err is Human To Really Screw Up You Need A Computer. Though I couldn't agree more with the quote, it is, now, impossible to live without computers. I feel very blessed that my e-Machine (which I bought in 2000, and which I realize outdates me threefold in the computer world) has not died on me or given me any problem because I wouldn't even know where to begin to fix it. Motherboard, RAM, cable, video and sound card are terms I know only as terms, not really as functions. Similarly, I know of HTML, http, ftp, and other related terms, but could never define them.
I still consider myself to be part-luddite. I drive an old car and believe a car should be a car - not a computer. I still want to read "real" in-my-hand books. I think technology is responsible for making life easier, thus busier and more hectic and stressful. I believe that the paper money trail is disappearing with the prevalence of plastic and that this could be dangerous (okay, so I still have some conspiracy theories lurking around in my head from my childhood…). The floaters in my eyes and my reduced tear production are also probably a consequence of staring at a computer all day. I believe that technology brings many, many benefits - but I worry that these benefits might overshadow the potential consequences…
Moreover, the great irony is: I am still conflicted on technology and its role in the classroom. In every oral presentation or lesson I give, technology plays a role. I even attempted to form a discourse community, similar to this one, in a class, which proved highly successful in the end. I'm becoming more used to the idea that technology should be used in the classroom; however, I feel education is becoming something that is marketed and sold to students via technological appeal. This does not mean that I do not see its benefits. As I grow and become more and more accustomed to technology, I'm sure my opinion will change. I guess my real concern has to do with attention spans and incentive: how are these things changing with the advent of technology in the classroom? Are we tied more to our machines than to each other, or even, to our own selves?
Blog Purpose
I don't blog regularly because my blogs usually end up being long and many do not care to read something that, on first glance, is so long (maybe a consequence to the need for "instant" gratification technology might encourage - or to the other things we have to get to because we're so busy thanks to our technology…).
In any case, this blog will function, for me primarily, as a way to write and sort out my thoughts regarding the material of this class and to share my thoughts with whomever wishes to read them. I realize that I always apologize for the length of my writings, but I'm not going to do that here. If anything, I'm going to ask that others write *more*.
My Introduction
It's Christmas morning. I'm about six-years-old, and I just opened up my first record player along with a set of forty-fives - The Monkees. I played those records in all their scratch and pop glory, over and over, but eventually, I had to advance to cassette tapes. Tapes were easier to access, and my sister and I could record our make-believe radio shows on them. It wasn't until I was twelve that I owned my first CD - Tears for Fears Greatest Hits. It was another gift. I never saw a reason to buy CDs myself. Cassettes worked great, and were less expensive - definitely attractive to someone who never received an allowance.
Resistant to change and to technological advance, I proudly called myself a luddite. With religious bedtime stories of the apocalypse, which included details about the mark of the beast - a microchip implanted inside of every person where acceptance of it meant giving one's soul to the devil - I did not perceive that technological advances were beneficial. Computers were good only for playing "Hopper" and "Where is Carmen San Diego?" oh, and of course, "Oregon Trail."
Then, the desire for a social life hit. My girlfriends in high school talked about this "chatting" phenomenon - and their parents actually let them do it! I was curious about talking with someone, anyone, over the Internet about anything at all. I could talk with someone in Australia or England! I had a pen pal from South Dakota, and we snail mailed each other, but with chatting, communication was instant.
My parents believed that the Internet was a safe haven for molesters and serial killers (and to this day, my parents still believe this). I was allowed to chat only on a Catholic chat site; however, as an adult, I have advanced into IMing using AOL IM and Yahoo Messenger. In "real life," I was unpopular and had difficulty making friends because I was quiet and kept mostly to myself. But online, I was alive, expressing myself through my favorite medium: writing. I've met over thirty people, in-person, from online chat sessions and have formed actual friendships with people that have lasted well over six years.
I started seeing a divide, however - especially when I would talk about dating people from online. There were those that were in favor of meeting people this way, and those that -seriously- weren't. Though I was on the "luddite" side of things, I saw, and experienced, only benefits in my personal relationships with this technology. I even built my own personal Website, which I replaced with my current-day Myspace page.
Emailing is also a preferred form of communication for me (instead of the phone). I can think about what I want to say, how I want to say it, and have the privilege of using backspace and delete; however, accidentally sending an email to an unintended recipient - usually the person the email was about - is NEVER a good thing. My cell phone is used more for texting than actual calling, also.
I have gone through quite the evolution. Currently, I sit at a desk with a computer for most of my day. From my luddite point of view, this doesn't exactly sound ideal - to have a machine be my daily companion. But it's a fact. Do I understand computers? Hell no. Right next to my work computer, I have a quote: To Err is Human To Really Screw Up You Need A Computer. Though I couldn't agree more with the quote, it is, now, impossible to live without computers. I feel very blessed that my e-Machine (which I bought in 2000, and which I realize outdates me threefold in the computer world) has not died on me or given me any problem because I wouldn't even know where to begin to fix it. Motherboard, RAM, cable, video and sound card are terms I know only as terms, not really as functions. Similarly, I know of HTML, http, ftp, and other related terms, but could never define them.
I still consider myself to be part-luddite. I drive an old car and believe a car should be a car - not a computer. I still want to read "real" in-my-hand books. I think technology is responsible for making life easier, thus busier and more hectic and stressful. I believe that the paper money trail is disappearing with the prevalence of plastic and that this could be dangerous (okay, so I still have some conspiracy theories lurking around in my head from my childhood…). The floaters in my eyes and my reduced tear production are also probably a consequence of staring at a computer all day. I believe that technology brings many, many benefits - but I worry that these benefits might overshadow the potential consequences…
Moreover, the great irony is: I am still conflicted on technology and its role in the classroom. In every oral presentation or lesson I give, technology plays a role. I even attempted to form a discourse community, similar to this one, in a class, which proved highly successful in the end. I'm becoming more used to the idea that technology should be used in the classroom; however, I feel education is becoming something that is marketed and sold to students via technological appeal. This does not mean that I do not see its benefits. As I grow and become more and more accustomed to technology, I'm sure my opinion will change. I guess my real concern has to do with attention spans and incentive: how are these things changing with the advent of technology in the classroom? Are we tied more to our machines than to each other, or even, to our own selves?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
