Self-Reflection
In my final project, I have combined two of my previous writing projects, my first autobiographical piece and my most recent piece about Digital Wreading. For the final project I wanted to elaborate on the last essay because it was my strongest piece throughout the whole semester. In this last piece I basically focused on the legitimacy of electronic text in present day society using examples from both Sven Birkerts in opposition to electronic text and Katharine Hayles as an advocate for electronic text. I argued that the electronic text that I was focusing on, Storyland, was legitimate. I used counter argument from Birkerts’ book to essentially point out how he contradicts himself throughout his autobiographical section.
In order to elaborate on this piece, I ultimately changed the focus of the essay. Instead of focusing on the legitimacy of strictly the one electronic text that I was examining, I decided to look at the problem of electronic text as a whole being something that is not yet considered legitimate. In order to do this, I changed the introduction around a bit, removing the presentation of Storyland from the immediate introduction to the second paragraph. By doing this I feel that the emphasis was taken off of that particular text and shifted to emphasis on the whole idea of electronic text. Likewise, in the conclusion, I added additional information, which indicated the modifications. In addition to shifting the focus, I decided to bring in my own opinion and my own biographical experiences. This is where my first essay comes into play. I was able to work certain parts of my first essay, where I express my initial views on technology, into my fourth essay. I believe that by bringing in my own experiences and opinion, the reader will be able to relate to and understand my point much more efficiently. Also, in the final project, I decided that a more clear and developed counter argument would really bring out my main point and further devalue Birkerts’ views regarding the illegitimacy of electronic text. To do this, I also incorporated additional quotes from my first essay, which happened to fit nicely into the argument. Similarly, I had to reorganize the original structure of the fourth essay in order to add additional information where necessary in the new piece.
By making these modifications and integrating parts of my first essay, I intend to make my final essay much more elaborate and broad instead of just simply focusing on one specific piece. Also, by adding my own biographical information and opinion, I hope to better convey to the reader where I am coming from. I feel that the finished product is something that I am extremely proud of and I personally believe that my writing has progressed over the semester. I have been able to work on my organization and my use of counterargument. It was in this last piece where I really understood how important counterargument could be in conveying the main idea of an essay. Finally, I feel that I have majorly improved in the editing stage of my writing. Instead of simply writing out a draft and essentially not looking at it again before handing it in, I have learned to really go back and work through my drafts to improve and strengthen all aspects of my essays. Even though I know that I still need some more improvement in these areas, overall, I really feel that I my writing has greatly improved over the course of the semester.
Essay #1: The Transformation of Reading and Writing
In Sven Birkerts’ collection of essays, The Glutenberg Elegies, he argues that reading and writing have become two mediums, which have lost their place in the present, modern technological society. In my experience, similarly I have found that in this changing society there has been a definite shift in the importance of reading and writing in the modern day. As a kid growing up in the 90’s, technology and the onset of new technology has always been part of my life. I can just barely remember the early days of the Internet where surfing the web would tie up the phone lines, as dial-up was the only way to connect to cyberspace. In consequence, since an early age, the media, whether it was the television or computer, were my main sources of information. Although I did read as a child, and all the way through my school years, acquisition of information through the media became the easiest way to stay in touch with the world. It is for this reason that I believe the importance of reading and writing has undoubtedly faded over the past 20 years.
Throughout his book, Sven Birkerts asserts his opinion on the recent drastic changes in society regarding how people acquire their information. He explains how back in the days before the technology of the phone, television, computer, Internet and even books the main method of the dispersal of information was by word of mouth. He goes on to explain further that word of mouth soon was recorded on paper and eventually was mass produced and printed and made available to those that could afford this luxury. Before this time, where books were few and far between due to the labor involved in hand recording information, men read “only a few books- the Bible, an almanac, a devotional work or two […]” (Birkerts, pg.71). By the 1800’s after the invention of the printing press, Birkerts explains, “men were reading “extensively.” They read all kinds of material, especially periodicals and newspapers” (Birkerts, pg. 71). He gives these examples of the drastic change the invention of a printing machine produced in order to convey his belief that the same drastic change is occurring once again. It is his observation, with which I firmly agree, that the same cultural change taking place in the modern day as the presence of the media in people’s everyday lives becomes harder and harder to escape.
In one section of his book, Birkerts recalls his experience teaching a college class on American literature. He explains how he picked books for them to read which he “thought would appeal to the tastes of the average undergraduate and felt relatively confident” (Birkerts, pg. 17) about it. He found however, as the students read through the books, which he, himself, thought were great, the students found “the story over-long, verbose, and a chore” (Birkerts, pg. 17). Thinking that it may just have been the book he selected, he received the same type of response to one of his similar selections. Most students could not pinpoint their disinterest. It was not that they couldn’t understand the language or the vocabulary; it was more due to the fact that the books were old. The students had trouble reading the story because it wasn’t about something relative to the here and now. The stories were too antiquated for the young generation to understand. Having had this experience myself, I completely understand why reading such books was so arduous for the students. Throughout middle school and high school reading for school became much more of a chore than reading the latest Harry Potter book or Twilight book. Throughout school, teachers always chose the classics to read, a few of my least favorites being The Awakening, Jane Eyre, Emma, and Great Expectations. Reading these books because of their antiquity and because they seemed so far-removed from my modern life, became very unpleasant. It is in this way that I can relate to how Birkerts’ undergraduate students may have been feeling in this class. It was not the language of the books or the vocabulary that caused my dislike; it was simply that I was disinterested in the “old times.” With all information being thrown at us from a computer or television screen, who wants to take the time anymore to read and book and contemplate how its meaning could relate to life? I firmly believe that the exposure of our generation to technology and the media has caused this disconnect with the past.
In the same way, writing had become much of a chore for me throughout middle school and high school. Whenever there was the slight chance that I would enjoy the certain books that teachers chose for projects and class writing assignments, I experienced much of the same feeling Birkerts experienced as a college student. He explains that during his time in college, a time where he was so obsessed with reading, he says that “the classroom setting did not kindle my imagination; if a book was on a syllabus, I lost interest” (Birkerts, pg.49). In a similar way, I felt the same about most books I read in school and then was instructed to write extensively about. For me, being forced to follow strict guidelines while writing about a book that I may have had a slight interest in, both exterminated my interest in the book and also my interest in writing about it. Despite losing interest, I would always go through the motions and adhere to the task that was assigned, more out of the necessity to do well than anything else. It was experiences like these throughout my school career, which totally took the fun out of writing for me. Once again I believe that this rebellious attitude of mine relates to the fact that I have grown up in such a technological age where writing and other forms of expression have become so easily shared, whether over the internet or on the television. This sense of freedom which I experience everyday through various forms of media has caused the youth of my generation to wonder about the necessity of adhering to guidelines. I believe that this is the way in which most youths have come to resent conformity imposed by teachers and other authority figures. Students have become confused between what they experience through the media and what they are asked to do in the classroom. Therefore, like Birkerts explains in his book, it seems that the media has caused a definite shift in the way writing is viewed by the youth our generation.
Undeniably, through the example of both Birkerts’ experiences and my own experiences, it has become clear to me that there has been a distinct change in the emphasis of reading and writing in the modern day. With the increased use of the media as a main source of information, it seems that many people are, in the present day, more likely to search the Internet for the latest news or gossip than to pick up the morning newspaper or the latest magazine. It is clear that this disconnect, which is irrefutably attributed to the sudden plunge into an almost purely technological era, is greatly affecting the way in which students view and experience reading and writing.
Essay #4: Is Electronic Text Legitimate?
With the onset of the technological age, certain new technologies are beginning to replace everyday items, which may have been part of everyday life in the past. Most of these new technologies are viewed as positive additions to households and businesses, designed to make life more efficient and easy for the average person. This arrival of new ideas and inventions includes the introduction of electronic texts into society, a concept that many are still trying to understand. Many believe that electronic texts can never be as legitimate as classical literature. Upon first inspection of an electronic text called Storyland, one may wonder if this unconventional bundle of text can be considered legitimate. After reading through Storyland, I believe that simply the content alone of electronic texts allow them to be viewed as serious pieces of literature displayed on a different medium.
Storyland is a text written by Nanette Wylde. It displays short fragmented stories, broken up by sentences appearing one by one. Before any of the text appears, an animated heading can be observed. Flashing colorful letters flicker in and out and finally become stationary as a circus or carnival calliope audio plays in the background. Once the story has completely appeared, and the reader has had a chance to read it, a simple click on the “new story” button in the bottom right corner causes the calliope music to start once again and a new and completely different story to appear. Undoubtedly it can be seen through this description that reading through this series of stories is not what most people consider the traditional way of reading. With the flashing letters and sequential appearance of text, reading through this electronic text becomes an experience in itself.
Although it becomes apparent that reading Storyland is much different than reading any traditional printed novel, neither of these pieces should be discounted as being legitimate. Just as the printed book was the new and outlandish technology back in the days of the first printing press, electronic texts like Storyland are taking on the role of being the new and improved piece of literature that may seem very strange upon its first arrival. In her book Writing Machines, Katherine Hayles talks about the present day boundaries between printed books and electronic texts, undoubtedly the same boundaries that were crossed when the first printed book made its debut. She says as a supporter of the transition to electronic text that, “electronic textuality was here to stay as more print books were reconstructed for the Web, from medieval manuscripts, to illustrated works like William Blake’s books, to multimedia sites devoted to such master texts as Joyce’s Ulysses” (Hayles, pg. 45). It can clearly be seen in many ways that these electronic texts are simply an extension of literary work onto a different and more accessible medium. Nanette Wylde should be considered just as much of an author as another other classical writer. Where such literature is accessed should not determine its legitimacy. It is for this reason that such pieces like Storyland have every right to be considered legitimate literary works.
Although it seems clear that just as much literary effort is put into electronic texts as traditional texts, there are still many who question the legitimacy of these new texts that can only be viewed on some type of screen. Sven Birkerts for example, in his book The Gutenberg Elegies, explains that books are an integral part of his life, defining who he is. It seems as though the newness of these electronic texts almost threatens his existence. He says, “to embrace the microchip and all its magic would be to close myself off from a great many habits and attitudes, ones that define me to myself; I would have to reposition myself on the space-time axis. I would have to say goodbye to a certain way of looking at the world […]” (Birkerts, pg. 213). This argument is clearly flawed in the way in which it is presented. By explaining that coming to accept the new electronic era would involve readjusting in response to technology, he states himself, in the autobiographical section of his book, that back in his childhood novels were a discovery experience. He says that as a child he encountered, “the startling and renewable discovery that a page covered with black markings could, with a slight mental exertion, be converted into an environment, an inward depth populated with characters and animated by diverse excitements” (Birkerts, pg. 35). This statement about discovering literature as a child gives evidence of Birkerts’ ability to reposition himself from the old way of hearing stories as a child to being able to read them. In a way he has already been able to make a transition as a child to printed works, just as the boundaries of printed works were crossed with the invention of the printing press. It is in this way that he is contradicting himself when saying that crossing such boundaries to convert to electronic text is impossible. The newness of literature to him as a child can be directly compared to the newness of electronic text to him as an adult. It can be seen here that Birkerts’ argument to attempt to delegitimize electronic text is flawed.
Clearly, there is much debate over whether or not certain electronic texts are comparable to traditional literature. It becomes clear that there is no reason to delegitimize electronic text simply because they are presented on a new and different medium. The same amount of formulation and planning goes into writing such hypertexts as any traditional classic novel. It seems that those who are opposed to the switch over to electronic text are simply wary of the inevitable onset of technology, possibly changing the world as they once knew it. The inability of any opposition, like Sven Birkerts, to cross the boundary into the new technological age, as Katherine Hayles puts it, should not be a reason to diminish valid pieces of literature.
Final Project: Crossing the Boundaries into the Realm of Electronic Text
Growing up in the 90’s, technology and the onset of new technology has always been part of my life. I can just barely remember the early days of the Internet, where surfing the web would tie up the phone lines, as dial-up was the only way to connect to cyberspace. With the momentum of the technological age only gaining speed, certain new technologies are beginning to replace everyday items, which may have been part of everyday life in the past. Most of these new technologies are viewed as positive additions to households and businesses, designed to make life more efficient and easy for the average person. With the arrival of new ideas and inventions, the use of electronic texts as opposed to printed books is a concept that many are still trying to understand.
As someone who is accustomed to the constant influx of the latest pieces of technology, whether it’s the newest iPod, the world’s tiniest computer, or the digital handheld book, the addition of electronic text to society is something that I view as completely natural and almost inevitable. My first legitimate experiences with electronic text occurred as early as the first time I used AOL instant messenger as a middle schooler. Since the times of messaging classmates via screen names with the latest gossip, I have come across texts of legitimate literary value. While exploring a database filled with electronic text I discovered Storyland written by Nanette Wylde. It displays short fragmented stories, broken up by sentences appearing one by one. Before any of the text appears, an animated heading can be observed. Flashing colorful letters flicker in and out and finally become stationary as a circus or carnival calliope audio plays in the background. Once the story has completely appeared, and the reader has had a chance to read it, a simple click on the “new story” button in the bottom right corner causes the calliope music to start once again and a new and completely different story to appear. Although it is apparent that reading this particular electronic text is much different than reading any traditional printed novel, the added animations and abstract organization of this text should not discount it as being a legitimate piece of literature.
Although it seems clear that just as much literary effort is put into electronic texts as traditional texts, there are still many who question their legitimacy. Sven Birkerts for example, a strong advocate for the conventional printed book, explains that books are an integral part of his life, defining who he is. It seems as though the newness of these electronic texts almost threatens his existence. He states in his book The Gutenberg Elegies that, “to embrace the microchip and all its magic would be to close myself off from a great many habits and attitudes, ones that define me to myself; I would have to reposition myself on the space-time axis. I would have to say goodbye to a certain way of looking at the world […]” (Birkerts, pg. 213). However, prior to his statement about his connection to books, he explains how back in the days before the technology of the phone, television, computer, Internet, and even books the main method of the dispersal of information was by word of mouth. He goes on to explain further that word of mouth soon was recorded on paper and eventually mass produced, printed, and made available to those who could afford the luxury. It is here that Birkerts exerts that mankind has already had to, at one point in their history, make the transition from word of mouth to printed books. By insinuating that this transition has already been made, Birkerts opens up a whole new side to his argument by contradicting himself.
As children we all remember our first experiences with written text, whether the earliest, picture books, or the more advanced chapter books. In the same way, Birkerts explains that like any another child learning to read he encountered, “the startling and renewable discovery that a page covered with black markings could, with a slight mental exertion, be converted into an environment, an inward depth populated with characters and animated by diverse excitements” (Birkerts, pg. 35). This statement about discovering literature as a child gives evidence of Birkerts’ and every other person’s ability to reposition themselves from the old way of hearing stories as a child to being able to read them, just as people in the early 1400s switched gradually to accepting the wonders of the printing press. When saying that crossing such boundaries to convert to electronic text is impossible he is clearly contradicting himself once again. The newness of literature to humans as children can be directly compared to the newness of electronic text experienced as adults. It can be seen here that Birkerts’ argument to attempt to delegitimize electronic text is flawed.
Who’s to say that the computer isn’t the modern day printing press of our age? Undeniably, just as the printed book was the new and outlandish technology back in the days of the first printing press, electronic texts like Storyland are taking on the role of being the new and improved piece of literature that may seem very strange upon its first arrival. In her book Writing Machines, Katherine Hayles, an advocate for the inception of technology, talks about the present day boundaries between printed books and electronic texts, undoubtedly the same boundaries that were crossed when the first printed book made its debut. She says as a supporter of the transition to electronic text that, “electronic textuality was here to stay as more print books were reconstructed for the Web, from medieval manuscripts, to illustrated works like William Blake’s books, to multimedia sites devoted to such master texts as Joyce’s Ulysses” (Hayles, pg. 45). It can clearly be seen in many ways that these electronic texts are simply an extension of literary work onto a different medium. It is for this reason that Nanette Wylde should be considered just as much of an author as any other classical writer.
Undoubtedly, it is apparent that electronic text can simply be viewed as the inevitable extension of printed literature. Just as spoken word transitioned into printed works, printed works are now transitioning naturally into electronic text. Despite this seemingly expected evolution into the electronic age, there is still much debate over whether or not certain electronic texts should be comparable to traditional literature. It becomes clear however, that there is no reason to delegitimize electronic text simply because it is presented on a new and different medium. The same amount of formulation and planning goes into writing such hypertexts as any traditional classic novel. It seems that those who are opposed to the switch over to electronic text are simply wary of the inevitable onset of technology, possibly changing the world, as they once knew it. The inability of any opposition, like Sven Birkerts, to cross the boundary into the new technological age, as Katherine Hayles puts it, should not be a reason to diminish valid pieces of literature.
Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Faber & Faber, 2006. Print.
Hayles, N. Katherine. Writing machines. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2002. Print.
