The Future of Technological Civilization - Chapter 2: Unintended Consequences
"Is Google Making Us Stupid" by Nicholas Carr
"Response to Nicholas Carr's "Is Google Making Us Stupid" by Trent Batson
"The Critics Need a Reboot. The Internet Hasn't Led Us Into a New Dark Age" by David Wolman
The theme of the week seems be what "unintended consequences" have resulted from the development of technology. I am particularly intrigued by the ideas presented in Carr's article which suggests that with each new development in the methods human beings choose to transfer information, there is a resultant effect on the way we think and interpret information. In Carr's article, he presents testimonies of friends stating that they have been influenced by the precise, concise, high-paced, condensed nature of the resources available on the internet and that their constant exposure to such writing has thus hindered their ability to decipher long texts.
This is a topic I had pondered over winter break since I had the time and freedom to read books that I normally wouldn't look at during the semester. As a lover of literature and classic fiction, I primarily focus on works one would likely read in an English AP course. In my searches for other works to read, I stumbled upon Marcel Proust, the author of Remembrance of Things Past. This is a seven volume series, each novel ranging from 600-1000 pages. Upon discovering this colossal collection of text, I began to think to myself how a person in this day and time would ever come up with the time to successfully read all seven of these densely descriptive, prose-filled pages. If I were to try to estimate how many people actually do make it through these mammoths of books, based solely off of reviewers on Amazon (which I acknowledge is limiting), it would appear that the maximum amount of reviewers for one volume is 120. To make a relatively ignorant observation, this appears me to that about 120 reviewers successfully read Swann's Way since the creation of the Amazon website and cared enough to say something about it. Now let's switch to a more modern example of an illustrious and substantial text: Game of Thrones. These novels (so far six installments have been published), also range from 600-1000 pages however there are at least 2,000 reviewers per book! Clearly the public has not suffered from a diminishing attention span as some critics of the internet and modern technology like to comment. If that's the case, what is the fundamental reason for the criticisms on the influence of technology on our ability to comprehend long text? I would say the reason for the criticisms is due to the inability to interpret certain kinds of prose.
Take this excerpt from Game of Thrones: A Song of Fire and Ice (Book 1) 1996
"Until tonight. Something was different tonight. There was an edge to this darkness that made his hackles rise. Nine days they had been riding, north and northwest and then north again, farther and farther from the Wall, hard on the track of a band of wilding raiders".
Compare to this excerpt from Remembrance of Thing's Past: Swann's Way (Volume 1) 1913
"When a man is asleep, he has in a circle round him the chain of the hours, the sequence of the years, the order of the heavenly bodies. Instinctively he consults them when he awakes, and in an instant reads off his own position on the earth's surface and the time that has elapsed during his slumbers; but this ordered procession is apt to grow confused, and to break its ranks".
Perhaps it would be more appropriate to compare books of similar genres, in which case I would choose J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, however we all know how dense that text is. In any case, Game of Thrones, in my opinion, seems to be an adequate estimate of the reading level that the majority of the literate population are capable of comprehending. I personally have to agree that something has significantly changed in the way that human beings these days interpret and recite information - the evidence is both in the things we chose to read as well as the way we chose to write. About a month ago, I watched an episode of Portlandia, a TV show that is meant to present Portland, Oregon in a satirical manner (but is actually quite accurate, from what I hear). The show emphasizes the liberal and trendy (otherwise known as "hipster") behaviors of the people living there. In this episode, there was a skit featuring the Portland Tribune, a local newspaper, and the companies push to appeal to the fast-paced style of the internet and create a webpage of links. In essence, the new owners of the paper explain that people only read every fifth word in a paragraph, therefore they don't need articles. As a result, all "articles" should be reduced to only the most important words. Now, the "Iceberg Theory" was introduced by Ernest Hemingway around the 1920s, which adopted a minimalistic approach to writing - cutting out superfluous and "flowery" writing. However, Carrie Brownstein and Fred Armisen (actors on the show) bring it to a whole new level when they celebrate accomplishment of the editor, who creates a link that sets the sites record for 70 million hits - "Charlize Theron NSFW". Embarrassed and ashamed, the editor retaliates at an old friend stating that this type of writing was the future.
While this is a rather exaggerated scenario (and one I severely hope isn't actually our future), it was the kind of humorous skit that hit home on another level as soon as I read Carr's article. Yes - the internet has allowed human kind to connect despite geographical location and has given us the ability to take advantage of innumerable resources. However, how much of the general public actually take advantage of these resources to learn and develop their intelligence? If they do, in what capacity?
The landscape of performing research has certainly changed - like Carr stated, "Research that once required days in the stacks or periodical rooms of libraries can now be done in minutes." In fact, to find this very quote, I spent approximately 1 minute flipping through my printed out copy of the article before I decided to switch to the website to utilize the "search" function. Personally, I'm so busy with my coursework and other responsibilities that any time I can shave off an assignment is put towards doing something else. Is that a product of my lack of time management, or have I just accumulated so many things to do that I don't physically have time to spare? Do other students have this problem? My friends frequently agree that they do experience this problem where time seems to disappear before their eyes. Is this because all of my friends equally like to overload themselves? If so, what has pushed us to do so? Societal expectations, Rensselaer Polytechnic, our professors, our peers, ourselves? Has the accelerated nature of the internet caused us to adopt equally concise, rapid, and compressed personalities? Will I ever have the time (or patience) to sit down and read Swann's Way? Only time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment