Sunday, January 29, 2012

At the Bottom of Pandora's Box

Using technology and new media resources as a means of reading and writing has been largely demonized as, at best, a poor use of our time and detrimental to our skill as writers and thinkers and, at worse, an indication of the ultimate degradation of our society. I am writing this essay in response to those who would criticize the use of new media resources. I would argue that rather than defining the “internet age” as either the saving grace of literacy or its downfall, that the use of these technologies is indicative of an entirely new form of literacy all together: one that promotes writing with a combination of many different stylistic approaches. I am assuming that the critics to which I write this essay are mostly teachers or intellectuals of some sort and I will appeal to their “academia” with a well written and organized essay as well as a plea, that as champions of learning, they should allow me to grow and expand in my writing abilities through the exploration of new mediums. 

As human beings, we have this fear of losing ourselves. A fear that someday our best intentions are going to backfire, that our greatest inventions will be more than we can handle, or that our wildest dreams will become our most terrible nightmares.  In the eyes of some, the Internet has become the pariah of literacy, a Pandora’s box, if you will. They fear this stunning new technology will dazzle us with the riches of social interaction and globalized communication or tempt us with its wealth of knowledge and opportunity only to betray us when we dare to reach for the gifts it offers. They fear that in using the Internet we have released upon ourselves the terrible evils of illiteracy.  These fears, though grounded in logic, forget that there was some good to come out of Pandora’s box. There remains a hope that those of us who are growing up in the internet age will find some way to put our new toys to work for the betterment of ourselves and our society.
The naysayers of the Internet fear that the social networking-obsessed , blog-crazed, entertainment-based, and gossip-centric ways of the Internet have made us shallow and narcissistic. They are certain that we are more concerned with posting a picture of the latte we just drank than we are with learning about what is happening in the world around us. While I agree that Facebook is definitely an enabler of our self-centered tendencies, I would also argue that these sites create a sort of connection to one another that we have never had before. Users of the Internet have become accustomed to the idea that what we do and say and read and write on the Internet is globalized and we are not intimidated by that fact. As a result, when we use the Internet we are consistently thinking of our audience and the impact of what we will say. We are moved and inspired by this audience and it shows through the way we think of writing and its purpose. As Andrea Lundsford writes in her article, Our Semi-literate Youth? Not So Fast, “[Students] were increasingly aware of those to whom they were writing and adjusted their writing styles to suit the occasion and the audience. [They also] wanted their writing to count for something; as they said to us over and over, good writing to them was performative, the kind of writing that ‘made something happen in the world.’ Finally, they increasingly saw writing as collaborative, social, and participatory rather than solitary”(1). People are recognizing and taking advantage of this audience. Instead of working through official channels people are doing things on their own. Kids are becoming world famous musicians through You-Tube (i.e. Justin Beiber, regardless of what people may or may not think of his musical talent, people cannot argue that he got his start on the Internet) People are making movies and videos(i.e. Jenna Marbles and Red v. Blue), writing articles and blogs( i.e. Tavi Williams, fashion blogger), that are gaining them attention that they would not have been given by traditionalists. The Internet is getting people connected and getting people talking, yes it has its drawbacks, but what doesn’t? Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Our professors should celebrate this new interest and approach to writing and beyond that, professors should note the disparity between the attitudes students have for their own writing as compared to their classwork. As Lundsford mentions in her article, Performing Writing, Performing Literacy, “Self-conscious and self-confident, students see themselves as savvy, risk-taking writers when they reflect on their self-sponsored writing activities As Alissa puts it: ‘I am more courageous in my out-of-class writing’”(231). This sense of audience and purpose has drawn something out of students that traditional classrooms have rarely done: it has given them the courage to take risks when they write, to try new things and reach beyond their comfort zones. Isn’t this supposed to be the environment that professors are creating in the classroom? Instead “a lot of that learning (perhaps most of it) is taking place outside of class, in the literate activities (musical compositions, videos, photo collages, digital stories, comics, documentaries) young people are pursuing on their own.”(Our Semi-literate Youth? Not So Fast). The traditional academic approach to writing is out of touch with today’s youth. As Clive Thompson notes in his article, The New LiteracyThe Stanford students were almost always less enthusiastic about their in-class writing because it had no audience but the professor: It didn't serve any purpose other than to get them a grade”(1). If the only purpose to their writing is to get the grade and they’ve already acquired the skills to do so, what need do students have to grow beyond what they already know? Shouldn’t professors endeavor to prevent this kind of stagnation in their students’ literacy? I myself have been frustrated by the stagnation I see in my own writing. I find myself looking at a paper (that I got an A on) in disappointment because I know I could do so much better. More often than not I find my classwork stifling and unfulfilling. When I look at what’s popular on the Internet(and even the novels in print) I know that what I’m writing now won’t make the cut and if that’s the case, why on earth is it making the cut in class? I’d rather get a D on a paper and actually learn something than get an A for not trying. If writers, like myself, who are not finding an outlet for their writing abilities in the classroom, are finding it on the Internet, why should they be criticized?
Let’s say that the people who are actually writing on the Internet aren’t the ones being criticized; that it’s only the people who are solely using the Internet for their own selfish means who are being criticized. I say that even if people aren’t doing anything productive online: even if all they do is hang out on Facebook or Twitter all day long, they are still writing. Shouldn’t professor encourage writing in all its forms, however little it may be? As Thompson notes, “Online media are pushing literacy into cool directions. The brevity of texting and status updating teaches young people to deploy haiku-like concision.” Thompson also points out that, “Before the Internet came along, most Americans never wrote anything, ever, that wasn't a school assignment. Unless they got a job that required producing text (like in law, advertising, or media), they'd leave school and virtually never construct a paragraph again”(1).
Academic writing will always be important but it is not the only type of writing that exists. Styles like journalism, poetry, feature writing, play writing, script writing and creative writing have all been accepted as legitimate writing styles that are beneficial to society. I would argue that the writing we see on the Internet is no different. It is a new form of literacy that connects people to each other in ways that have never been seen before. As Andrew Sullivan writes in his article, Why I Blog, “For centuries, writers have experimented with forms that evoke the imperfection of thought, the inconstancy of human affairs, and the chastening passage of time. But as blogging evolves as a literary form, it is generating a new and quintessentially postmodern idiom that’s enabling writers to express themselves in ways that have never been seen or understood before. Its truths are provisional, and its ethos collective and messy. Yet the interaction it enables between writer and reader is unprecedented, visceral, and sometimes brutal.” Though Sullivan is being specific to blogs I believe it applies to the Internet as a whole. When one’s audience has the potential of becoming so vast, the importance of one’s purpose grows in proportion. Instead of looking only at the problems the Internet brings I ask my peers and my professors to be open-minded and realize the potential the Internet has for learning and teaching. Once Pandora opened her box, she realized the terrors that lay there, but what was done could not be undone and all that remained was hope. Instead of delivering harsh criticism or reveling in a desire for the old days without digital media, we should adapt to the changing times and take hold of the hope that we can make something good out of the box that we have opened.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Blogging About Blogging (Part Two)


Blogging has definitely changed my ideas about..well..blogging. Not about it's purpose in the world or how useful it can be (I still believe most blogs are a waste of server space), but as a writing style in general. I have enjoyed blogging because it has challenged me to write in a way I haven't ever had to write before. In my blogs I have to strive to find the perfect balance between academic and creative writing with a touch of journalistic style to it too. Being freed from the strict academic format has given me the freedom to find my voice in my writing. However, the blog also requires a professionalism of sorts. My writing cannot be sloppy or unorganized. It has to be pleasing to the eye and ear and yet entertaining. I have enjoyed trying to find that balance. I have enjoyed being challenged. Most of the writing courses I take simply do not challenge me to write any differently. As long as I follow the format and write concisely, I will get an A. Thus, there is no incentive to change or expand.


As far as my habits on the web, they have changed immensely. I have taken to watching The Daily Show (my friend and I had a daily show marathon trying to catch up on the most recent episodes...did you know that The Daily Show has been on for over 10 years?!) Like I noted in my earlier post I have put The New York Times as my homepage to watch the news. I also got a few news apps for my phone such as Pulse News, Reddit, and Times Magazine (my favorite news magazine by far). Those are nice because they are quick and easy. I can look at them in between classes, which means, unfortunately, I've been neglecting my Words with Friends and Hanging with Friends games as of late. (oops) The problem with all this is I'm starting to feel like I have too much begging for my attention. I have Facebook, Google+, Gmail, NYTimes, Times, Pulse, Reddit, The Daily Show, my normal TV shows (White Collar was on tonight and I missed it...I was so sad) I have also gotten behind on Bones and NCIS, and I've been started on How I Met Your Mother so I have to catch up on that...I kinda feel like the guy on that video clip we watched in class. There is too much going on in this world to pay attention to it all. I guess the trick is to find what you like and don't like and stick with that...


A New Literacy

The thing that caught my attention the most in Sylvia Scribner's essay, Literacy in Three Metaphors, was when she pointed out that instead of new media tools being either good or bad for our level of literacy, it could be argued as a completely new form of literacy all together. 



"Some argue that, as economic and other activities become increasingly subject to computerized techniques of production and information handling, even higher levels of literacy will be required of all. A contrary view, is that new technologies and communication media are likely to reduce literacy requirements for all. A responding argument is that some of these technologies are, in effect, new systems of literacy." (emphasis my own). 

I was a little disappointed that she didn't expound further on the subject because I think it has everything to do with what we've been talking about lately. Both Carr and Hedge would argue on the side that the internet age has "reduced literacy requirements for all" (though for Hedge that is probably putting it nicely). On the other hand, Sullivan would argue for the benefits of the internet age, that with it "even higher levels of literacy [are] required" (come to think of it, that is probably putting it lightly for Sullivan as well). 

I think the overarching problem is that the internet age is changing the face of literacy as we know it and the literary community doesn't quite know what to think or how to adapt. I like to think of literature like music. With each new generation of music the older generation looks at it grudgingly. Their views vary from That's not music that's just noise, or how can you listen to that crap? or That's devil music! I think the same phenomenon applies to writing and reading, but instead of changing with every generation it changes as technology changes. For a long time writing and reading was only for the elite or the religious but then technology provided the means of mass production. The idea of the common people reading a bible on their own without a priest to read it to them was, at first, absurd but it was gradually accepted and later came to be expected. Now that print is almost universal it has become the status quo but now technology has introduce another change. I think that because changes in literacy occur must less frequently it will meet with more resistance. 

Monday, January 23, 2012

Oh the Shame of Our Ignorance!


“Huge segments of our population, especially those who live in the embrace of the Christian right and the consumer culture, are completely unmoored from reality. They lack the capacity to search for truth and cope rationally with our mounting social and economic ills.”

Wow Chris Hedge, way to generalize an entire religious community (one of which I happen to be a member) but don’t worry I’m not the only one you judgmentally lump into a broad stereotype. No, According to you the majority of America’s population is a bunch of “mindless” idiots who “live in as state of permanent amnesia” and are incapable of “differentiat[ing] between lies and truth” and are “informed by simplistic, childish narratives and cliché”.

Not to fear, my friends, our dear Mr. Hedge understands our plight. In his infinite wisdom and insight he can see that we “still struggle with the most basic chores of daily life from reading instructions on medicine bottles to filling out bank forms, car loan documents and unemployment benefit and insurance papers. [We] watch helplessly and without comprehension as hundreds of thousands of jobs are shed. [We] are hostages to brands.”

(Oh and we happen to all be addicted to fast food because we like the pretty pictures, not because we perhaps are struggling economically because of the financial crisis that is sweeping the country and leaving millions destitute to the point that eating fast food happens to be the only way to feed the entire family, no we, the stupid sheeple, just really enjoy the fact that we don’t have to read a menu). 

We, the poor mindless masses,  are “thrown into confusion by ambiguity, nuance and self-reflection.”

Our faithful friend, does truly try to help enlighten us but “all the traditional tools of
democracies, including dispassionate scientific and historical truth, facts, news and rational debate, are useless instruments in a world that lacks the capacity to use them.”

Oh the shame of our ignorance! If only we were literate like Mr. Hedge, who is obviously a part of “the minority [who] functions in a print-based, literate world. [Who] can cope with complexity and has the intellectual tools to separate illusion from truth”. If we could aspire to reach his great heights perhaps we could stave off the impending doom that comes as a result of our “illiteracy and irrationalism”.

Yet, as we cannot overcome our folly,

“The core values of our open society, the ability to think for oneself, to draw independent conclusions, to express dissent when judgment and common sense indicate something is wrong, to be self-critical, to challenge authority, to understand historical facts, to separate truth from lies, to advocate for change and to acknowledge that there are other views, different ways of being, that are morally and socially acceptable, are dying.”

My dear Mr. Hedge you have shown me the light. I understand the error in my ways. No more will I be enticed by pretty pictures on fast food menus. I will put down my picture books and pick up a newspaper. Only then, I can be as indignant, as biased, and as close-mindedly elitist as you are. Only then can stereotypical insults be as pervasive in my writing as they are in yours.



Click here to become enlighten in the error of your ways by the infinitely wise Chris Hedge

Sunday, January 22, 2012

"Skeptical of His Skepticism"

Is Google making us stupid? That was Nicholas Carr's question in his article published in the July/August issues of the 2008 edition of the Atlantic. To explain my choice in titles, towards the end of his article he says that we should be "skeptical of his skepticism" and I am when it comes to the big picture. On a smaller scale though, I have to admit, he's got a point. My experience reading his article was packed full of irony. First I Googled his article. Ok funny but thats not even the best of it. So I'm not really in a "homework" mood right now anyway and as I was reading, I got a few paragraphs in and noticed that my scroll bar went on and on and on. Dismayed, I said, "Man! How long does this article go on?!"(its not that long actually, there's just a lot of comments at the end) it was just then that I read his comment about how he was not able to read anything really long anymore...I was just a little ashamed of myself. But wait! There's more! Later he mentions how, as we read, we tend to skip from one thing to another, bouncing around the internet. He says that between the flashing ads and incoming emails and hyperlinks and etc. we can hardly help it, well, when he said email, I opened a new tab and went to my email account to check my email without even thinking about it! It was like a reflex. By this point I just laughed a myself for what I'd done.  


So yes, when it comes to the little things, Carr is right. We probably don't have the attention spans that we used to but I hardly think that, as a result of our Googling, we are suddenly going to become the artificial intelligence we've created. In small ways we change and adapt to the tools we use. We create new sets of social norms, we adapt, standards of living rise and fall but I don't believe our fundamental nature, as humans, will ever change. We've seen these concerns pop up over and over in the media. To cite a few examples, Wall-E, Surrogates, Gamer, i-robot, Terminator, The Matrix etc. To use Harris and his belief in intertextuality, it's easy to see how the same kinds of values, problems, moral dilemmas, hopes and hurts are seen over and over in literature from early greek myths to the newest novels on the market. We have more in common with the people of ancient times and throughout history than we think. We live in fear that we will one day destroy ourselves, or change ourselves beyond recognition with what we are trying to build, but people have been fearing that for ages on end, yet we see the evidence of how little we actually have changed through our literature. 

Our Global Conversation


Throughout the introduction and the first chapter of Joseph Harris' book, Rewriting, Harris seems to emphasize the idea that reading and writing is more of a cooperative task than an individual one. When reading the work of another, he thinks it is important to "come to terms" with the text by reading it with a mix of "generosity" and "skepticism".  I was intrigued by how he explained the perspective he thought you should take when writing academically. He said that when writing about another person’s text your focus should not be on explaining what they are trying to say; rather, your focus must be to explain what you took from their writing. The writing itself should be focused on your own ideas and thoughts about what the other has written. In essence you are using the other person’s text for your own devices. BUT Harris also stresses that you should give the text you are referencing its “due”.

Both Harris and Sullivan describe reading and writing as a conversation: an extensive conversation, not only between, reader and writer, but also between, writer and writer. It stretches across time and location. I guess I had never thought about the actual authors of things I had read in that context. I had never put them on my level before; rather I have always taken their work as having much more authority than mine. It never occurred to me that my work has just as much value to this “global conversation” as that of a more prominent author. 

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Blogger App!

I found an app for blogger and I'm using it right now. It's really exciting ;) just thought I'd let you all know. If you want it too just search for blogger at the app store, it's free :)

Monday, January 16, 2012

The Intimate Details of my Classmate's Internet Habits...(as Compared to my Own)

So the title of this post sounds a lot creepier than I intended...oh well, it keeps things interesting. Most of the internet usage of my classmates was pretty typical; however, I was surprised to see how many of them actually do check the news. I guess I'm just the slacker here who doesn't pay much attention to current events. I would have to say that is mostly because I find the news either slightly depressing or annoying. Much of the news (as I noted in my earlier blog I have been paying more attention to the news...at least enough to make nytimes.com my home page and read over the headlines before moving on to FB) is either about the elections (which irritate me...politicians aren't exactly my favorite people right now), some terrible accident or crime that happened somewhere or other, the (unending) conflicts in the Middle East, the financial crisis either here in the U.S. or in Europe, or a number of other calamities around the world. I know, I know, I should care about all this, and, deep down, I do, but I hate to be assaulted everyday with the troubles of the world for which I can do nothing. I feel like I have the choice between cynicism and apathy. 


Ok, now that I've vented on all of you, (sorry!) I also noticed how sites like Facebook have become a part of our daily lives. I think almost every one of my classmates mentioned getting on FB at least once a day. It's amazing how much they have integrated into our lives and our culture.  


Just for grins and giggles I looked up the top most visited websites on the internet. The website I got the information from had the "Top 500 Global Sites" but I'll just list the top 20 here. If you want to see the rest go to http://www.alexa.com/topsites


I literally copy and pasted this on here so I won't take credit for whats written here (and you're on your own with the stuff in different languages. I can't help you there.) 



  • 1

    Google

    google.com
    Enables users to search the world's information, 
    including webpages, images, and videos.
  • 2

    Facebook

    facebook.com
    A social utility that connects people, to keep up
     with friends, upload photos, share links and more.

  • 3

    YouTube

    youtube.com
    YouTube is a way to get your videos 
    to the people who matter to you. 

  • 4

    Yahoo!

    yahoo.com
    A major internet portal and service provider.

  • 5

    Baidu.com

    baidu.com
    The leading Chinese language search engine.

  • 6

    Wikipedia

    wikipedia.org
    A free encyclopedia built 
    collaboratively using wiki software. 

  • 7

    Windows Live

    live.com
    Search engine from Microsoft.

  • 8

    Blogspot.com

    blogspot.com
     

  • 9

    Amazon.com

    amazon.com
    Amazon.com seeks to be Earth's most 
    customer-centric company.

  • 10

    Twitter

    twitter.com
    Social networking and microblogging 
    service utilising instant messaging, 
    SMS or a web interface.

  • 11

    QQ.COM

    qq.com
    China's largest and most used Internet 
    service portal.

  • 12

    淘宝网

    taobao.com
    包括电脑通讯、数码、男装、女装、童装、
    化妆品、书籍音像、运动用品、
    游戏装备等各种商品的买卖,还有相关的社区交流,

  • 13

    Google India

    google.co.in
    Indian version of this popular search engine. 

  • 14

    Yahoo! Japan

    yahoo.co.jp
    Japanese version of popular portal site.

  • 15

    MSN

    msn.com
    Portal for shopping, news and money, 
    e-mail, search, and chat.

  • 16

    LinkedIn

    linkedin.com
    A networking tool to find connections to 
    recommended job candidates, industry 
    experts and businesses.

  • 17

    新浪新闻中心

    sina.com.cn
    包括即日的国内外不同类型的新闻与评论,
    人物专题,图库。

  • 18

    WordPress.com

    wordpress.com
    Free blogs managed by the developers of 
    the WordPress software. 

  • 19

    Google

    google.de
    Suche im gesamten Web, in deutschsprachigen
     sowie in deutschen Sites. 

  • 20

    eBay

    ebay.com
    International person to person auction site,
     with products sorted into categories.