mm b<1. "Print medium is a doomed and outdated technology, a mere curiosity of bygone days destined soon to be consigned forever to those dusty unattended museums we now call libraries." (Rob Coover in 'The End of Books' New York Times 21st June 1992.)
People have been talking about the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials “ever since the first intrepid web 1.0 bloggers plugged in their modems and started writing SEO headlines.” (Adam Gale in Management Today 24th March 2016.)
Do you agree? Update this debate – what might be the future of print in the 21st century? Make sure you reference the comments of our gatekeeper guests and/or your interviews with industry gatekeepers.
The effects and implications of technology has been profound. The impact it has had and continues to have in our lives is immeasurable. !!!!! IT has influenced every aspect of our life, from how we relate to the world and the people surrounding us to the information we have access to, to how we process this information. To even attempt to dissect the ways in which it has changed the way we interact and exist in the world would be a long, torturous task with no foreseeable conclusion. In this essay I will be focusing on the digital medium, more specifically the ways in which it has changed our use of print mediums, focusing mainly on the literary uses of the printed medium, and the implications of this and whether this will lead to the extinction of printed written work.
NP!!!!!
The development of technologies such as smartphones, kindles, laptops and how accessible these have become, has had various implications in our society. It has had a huge influence in our relationship with written work whose aspects are in such a way so tightly intertwined they concurrently impact each other. The way we are now using print mediums less and replacing these with digital mediums has altered the way we communicate, what we share, our attention spans, what we read, the way we read, the work we produce and how we produce it. Whether this change is positive or not and its implications will be explored later in this essay .!!!!! Firstly we need to look at how it has changed.
NP!!!!!
To begin with, the way we consume and consequently now distribute written work is significantly different. The vast majority of people no longer openXXX!!!!! a newspaper to read the news, instead they now scroll through their phones or watch the news on TV. Apps and websites can now be accessed to get the information people would from printed materials such as magazines and newspapers. However, the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials Adam Gale mentions is only partially true.
To an extent there has been a decline in the use of printed materials in general, and we can observe that newspapers especially are not a medium people are choosing to use, particularly the younger generation WHO XXXthat keeps themselves informed through the use of technological devices. In spite of this, books especially continue to have a major role in our society and continue to be utilized to engage with written work. As Patrick and Mark Hazard point out “There are certain stereotyped notions about the intrinsic superiority of print as a medium that stultify our effectiveness in handling the newer media.” Society’s relationship with digital mediums is complex and has an impact in more than just our use of print mediums. As we use technology more we also reflect on the role it plays in our lives finding IT!!!!!, at times, difficult to adjust to the dependence inevitably resulting from the use of these digital mediums. Whether rational or not society seems to have an undeniable attachment to print mediums even as we are using these less. We see it as a way of maintaining our individuality, especially in the literary uses of print medium. According to Patrick and Mark Hazard “It was because of what printing was instrumental in achieving – enhanced individuality, greater control over nature, maximized material abundance – that we respect books (…)” We may be willing to read our news and articles using our smartphones or laptops but for literary pieces, that say something about our individuality and existence, we still find ourselves preferring the comfort of a hardcopy.
NP!!!!!
Where we are getting our information from, in turn, impacts the way the reader processes what they read. As Tim Atkins points out in an interview conducted for this module “It is my understanding, of the way current technology is, that people probably read more from different sources, but they also read more badly, in that, generally people will read more quickly and have shorter attention spans.”
NP!!!!!
While reading widely is, of course, a positive consequence of the rise of the digital medium it has also meant that people are not engaging with the material in the same way.
Take for example, reading the news on a smartphone on the way to work, our attention is being competed for by a number of different things: the commute to work, the people around us, the notification we get as we are reading, the link shown on the page that could potentially be more interesting. It makes it more difficult to concentrate and absorb what we are reading, making us only partially process the information. When reading a physical material however we interact with in in a different manner. The gatekeeper I interviewed seems to agree: “The tactile experience is irreplaceable. It’s a much calmer experience, you aren’t thinking of the battery running out, you aren’t dependent on having wi-fi connection or an outlet (…)” While this seems to be a negative aspect of using digital mediums there are also, of course, advantages. In the case of conducting the interviews for this module, for example, which I recorded on my phone ... FINISH OFF OR REWRITIE!!!!!. Using this technology meant that I didn’t have to be concerned with writing down any answers or notes I could simply engage with the interviewee, making it easier to ask follow-up questions. After the interview I was able to type in the interview word for word. Technology, like anything, proves itself to have both positive and negative aspects. BE XXXbe that as it may we have to consider what we value more. In my opinion, once digital mediums influence the way we consume information so that we do not engage with the material fully it is no longer a medium that can replace print materials.
NP!!!!!
The way we interact with the pieces we read has also influenced what we are choosing to read, which consequently influences what is being written and how. Writers consider their audience and how the readers are accessing and receiving their work. As mentioned on another suggested question for this essay, Simon Prosser publishing director at Hamish Hamilton has claimed "The short story form is better suited to the demands of modern life than the novel." As modern life has increasingly becoming fast paced, people have shorter attention spans as they are constantly exposed to information and stimuluI!!!!!: the needs of general readers continually change and writers obviously respond to this, in any case, writers seem to be doing this to a bigger extent. They are aiming at giving the audience what they want since if they do not manage to captivate their audience they will simply turn to the other options available.
NP!!!!!
Personally, I think people no longer value the written word as much as they once DID XXXhave because of how easy it is to acquire. In the interview with Tim Atkins he seems to share this opinion: “You don’t have to work for it anymore, I mean, I wanted this book for about ten years before you could buy books on the internet and every bookshop I went to they wouldn’t have it. (…) When I bought it I was super excited, and I read it because I worked for it and I’d wanted it. Now you want something, you go like that (snaps fingers) and you get it so this kind of access to information means that you don’t value it as much I think.” On THE !!!!! one hand, the value we attach to print medium has changed drastically due to society being bombarded with information, we are not appreciating what we are reading we are wondering if there may be a link that could take us to a more interesting piece, the endless possibilities while valuable have simultaneously made it so that each possibility is less so.
The declinING!!!!! use of print mediums has changed not only what we are writing but also the writing process as a whole SUCH AS !!!!!The way we edit, for example. !!!!! ”Y!!!!!you can edit a poem five hundred times on your phone, in the way that when I was a kid I would type it out and I’d go ‘oh, no, I’ve put a comma there and I don’t want the comma’ so you would have to type the whole poem again.” (Atkins) More importantly, in my opinion, are the implications of digital materials being updated and edited continuously with no proof of a former version. This possibility of changing ‘completed’ work has made written work less reliable. As explained by Krista Rasmussen: “(…) if digital editions are unfinished and open, then the relationship between the work’s texts will be unfinished and open as well.” (133) This has made the work less permanent, the possibility of updating a newer version with no sign of having done causing us to no longer trust the written word in the way we once did.
NP!!!!!
With books, on the other hand, when one does update their work and print out a different version of it there is still proof that the other one existed, we are still able to refer back to the original version and even compare its changes with the newer version. This is one of the reasons people have an attachment to print medium: it is proof, we have control over it, we can keep it and continually reference to it knowing it will not be deleted. !!!!!. “The difference between print and digital lies in our phenomenological understanding of a document. The physical book is present to us as a full-fledged object in the world even when we are not reading it.” (130, Rasmussen) We have purchased this information and it is now, in a way, our property. This uncertain yet easy way to access information also puts into question the value readers attach to it.
NP!!!!!
There is an accountability with printed materials that is absent with digital material. We trust books more because there is an entity we can attach to it, there is an author, a publisher, an editor, people we can pin responsibility on. Whereas before we would resort to written material for cultural wisdomXXX and meaning and use it to guide us in society, for example, or the use of scholarly resources or the way in which a lawyerXXXX turn to previous archive cases to guide them.
NP
NP
Not being able to rely on digital materials in the same way as one CAN XXXwould with printed materials as it is an unreliable source of information is perhaps also another reason why we are still attached to printed materials. Expanding on the lack of accountability digital mediums have, we can look at who the authors of today are. Online, anyone can be an author, there is no screening process. A person is encouraged to not only share their work but opinions, at times presenting them as facts as one can see in sites like Wikipedia. Our current society is encouraged to share, as pointed out by the gatekeeper “I think we are encouraged to write more, there are a lot more writers nowadays as we get an instant hit: instant feedback from our friends and other readers.” This means that different sources are reaching an audience, no matter how reliable they may be:” Apparently anyone with a camera phone, camera or notepad can now be considered a journalist” (Morris) The existence of various work that is not reliable or true also contributes to making the written word less valuable.
When Rob Coover talks about the doomed and outdated technology print medium is becoming, he is focusing on the clear increase of digital medium use and while it may be true that print materials are in fact declining in use and no longer play the same role in our lives AS they once did I believe he need to consider print materials in a wider context. In a way, we seem to value print materials more than we ever have. , T!!!!!his does not mean, however, that we resort to it the most. We need to consider how in the face of another, perhaps more practical option we do still turn to and continue to produce printed materials. In the interview with gatekeeper he voices this thought too: “I don’t see it as outdated, just that we are being offered another option, which is very, if not more practical but human beings are not always practical. We like pretty things and things we find familiar or comforting and to have things a certain way. Hopefully this will be one of those things that we logically would arguably make more sense to replace with another option but we keep resorting for the simple notion of it providing us with some kind of comfort”
NP!!!!!
NP!!!!!
To say that the digital medium does not have its advantages would not be true: we have a lot more variety available to us, we are able to read in a number of different places without having to carry a printed material with us, we are able to research references immediately. However, as with everything else this also has other implications XXXX DDDDeciding which advantages and disadvantages are more relevant is of course up to each individual.
Personally, I am of the opinion that reading a physical book does enrichen the experience and the way we interact with the material we read. As voiced by Gatekeeper “You feel more attached to an object. On the internet it feels more ephemeral, I mean, we can also look at it in the literal sense, when you have a book, for example, you have your own copy of this person’s piece of writing, you can write on it, there is a coffee stain on some pages, bent pages marking something you want to revisit, all of this makes the writer’s work a little bit more your own. This, I think, is a very powerful thing, you are not only taking someone’s words, taking it in and interpreting it but you are physically doing thisXXX . IIIit’s a much more personal exercise.” A physical book is there, in other words, it exists outside of a medium we use a lot but do not fully comprehend:XXXX technology.
Our relationship with print mediums has unquestionably changed and continues to change along the years. This has influenced and changed a number of different aspects in our life, from the way we consume and interact with written material to the creation of this material. It has put in question a number of things and impacted society in a wider context, not only the way we interact with the written world but, in some ways, the world as a whole.
1. "Print medium is a doomed and outdated technology, a mere curiosity of bygone days destined soon to be consigned forever to those dusty unattended museums we now call libraries." (Rob Coover in 'The End of Books' New York Times 21st June 1992.)
People have been talking about the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials “ever since the first intrepid web 1.0 bloggers plugged in their modems and started writing SEO headlines.” (Adam Gale in Management Today 24th March 2016.)
Do you agree? Update this debate – what might be the future of print in the 21st century? Make sure you reference the comments of our gatekeeper guests and/or your interviews with industry gatekeepers.
The effects and implications of technology has been profound. The impact it has had and continues to have in our lives is immeasurable, it has influenced every aspect of our life, from how we relate to the world and the people surrounding us to the information we have access to, to how we process this information. To even attempt to dissect the ways in which it has changed the way we interact and exist in the world would be a long, torturous task with no foreseeable conclusion. In this essay I will be focusing on the digital medium, more specifically the ways in which it has changed our use of print mediums, focusing mainly on the literary uses of the printed medium, and the implications of this and whether this will lead to the extinction of printed written work.
The development of technologies such as smartphones, kindles, laptops and how accessible these have become, has had various implications in our society. It has had a huge influence in our relationship with written work whose aspects are in such a way so tightly intertwined they concurrently impact each other. The way we are now using print mediums less and replacing these with digital mediums has altered the way we communicate, what we share, our attention spans, what we read, the way we read, the work we produce and how we produce it. Whether this change is positive or not and its implications will be explored later in this essay, firstly we need to look at how it has changed.
To begin with, the way we consume and consequently now distribute written work is significantly different. The vast majority of people no longer opens a newspaper to read the news, instead they now scroll through their phones or watch the news on TV. Apps and websites can now be accessed to get the information people would from printed materials such as magazines and newspapers. However, the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials Adam Gale mentions is only partially true.
To an extent there has been a decline in the use of printed materials in general, and we can observe that newspapers especially are not a medium people are choosing to use, particularly the younger generation that keeps themselves informed through the use of technological devices. In spite of this, books especially continue to have a major role in our society and continue to be utilized to engage with written work. As Patrick and Mark Hazard point out “There are certain stereotyped notions about the intrinsic superiority of print as a medium that stultify our effectiveness in handling the newer media.” Society’s relationship with digital mediums is complex and has an impact in more than just our use of print mediums. As we use technology more we also reflect on the role it plays in our lives finding, at times, difficult to adjust to the dependence inevitably resulting from the use of these digital mediums. Whether rational or not society seems to have an undeniable attachment to print mediums even as we are using these less. We see it as a way of maintaining our individuality, especially in the literary uses of print medium. According to Patrick and Mark Hazard “It was because of what printing was instrumental in achieving – enhanced individuality, greater control over nature, maximized material abundance – that we respect books (…)” We may be willing to read our news and articles using our smartphones or laptops but for literary pieces, that say something about our individuality and existence, we still find ourselves preferring the comfort of a hardcopy.
Where we are getting our information from, in turn, impacts the way the reader processes what they read. As Tim Atkins points out in an interview conducted for this module “It is my understanding, of the way current technology is, that people probably read more from different sources, but they also read more badly, in that, generally people will read more quickly and have shorter attention spans.”
While reading widely is, of course, a positive consequence of the rise of the digital medium it has also meant that people are not engaging with the material in the same way.
Take for example, reading the news on a smartphone on the way to work, our attention is being competed for by a number of different things: the commute to work, the people around us, the notification we get as we are reading, the link shown on the page that could potentially be more interesting. It makes it more difficult to concentrate and absorb what we are reading, making us only partially process the information. When reading a physical material however we interact with in in a different manner. The gatekeeper I interviewed seems to agree: “The tactile experience is irreplaceable. It’s a much calmer experience, you aren’t thinking of the battery running out, you aren’t dependent on having wi-fi connection or an outlet (…)” While this seems to be a negative aspect of using digital mediums there are also, of course, advantages. In the case of conducting the interviews for this module, for example, which I recorded on my phone. Using this technology meant that I didn’t have to be concerned with writing down any answers or notes I could simply engage with the interviewee, making it easier to ask follow-up questions. After the interview I was able to type in the interview word for word. Technology, like anything, proves itself to have both positive and negative aspects be that as it may we have to consider what we value more. In my opinion, once digital mediums influence the way we consume information so that we do not engage with the material fully it is no longer a medium that can replace print materials.
The way we interact with the pieces we read has also influenced what we are choosing to read, which consequently influences what is being written and how. Writers consider their audience and how the readers are accessing and receiving their work. As mentioned on another suggested question for this essay, Simon Prosser publishing director at Hamish Hamilton has claimed "The short story form is better suited to the demands of modern life than the novel." As modern life has increasingly becoming fast paced, people have shorter attention spans as they are constantly exposed to information and stimulus: the needs of general readers continually change and writers obviously respond to this, in any case, writers seem to be doing this to a bigger extent. They are aiming at giving the audience what they want since if they do not manage to captivate their audience they will simply turn to the other options available.
Personally, I think people no longer value the written word as much as they once have because of how easy it is to acquire. In the interview with Tim Atkins he seems to share this opinion: “You don’t have to work for it anymore, I mean, I wanted this book for about ten years before you could buy books on the internet and every bookshop I went to they wouldn’t have it. (…) When I bought it I was super excited, and I read it because I worked for it and I’d wanted it. Now you want something, you go like that (snaps fingers) and you get it so this kind of access to information means that you don’t value it as much I think.” On one hand, the value we attach to print medium has changed drastically due to society being bombarded with information, we are not appreciating what we are reading we are wondering if there may be a link that could take us to a more interesting piece, the endless possibilities while valuable have simultaneously made it so that each possibility is less so.
The decline use of print mediums has changed not only what we are writing but also the writing process as a whole. The way we edit, for example, ”you can edit a poem five hundred times on your phone, in the way that when I was a kid I would type it out and I’d go ‘oh, no, I’ve put a comma there and I don’t want the comma’ so you would have to type the whole poem again.” (Atkins) More importantly, in my opinion, are the implications of digital materials being updated and edited continuously with no proof of a former version. This possibility of changing ‘completed’ work has made written work less reliable. As explained by Krista Rasmussen: “(…) if digital editions are unfinished and open, then the relationship between the work’s texts will be unfinished and open as well.” (133) This has made the work less permanent, the possibility of updating a newer version with no sign of having done causing us to no longer trust the written word in the way we once did.
With books, on the other hand, when one does update their work and print out a different version of it there is still proof that the other one existed, we are still able to refer back to the original version and even compare its changes with the newer version. This is one of the reasons people have an attachment to print medium: it is proof, we have control over it, we can keep it and continually reference to it knowing it will not be deleted. . “The difference between print and digital lies in our phenomenological understanding of a document. The physical book is present to us as a full-fledged object in the world even when we are not reading it.” (130, Rasmussen) We have purchased this information and it is now, in a way, our property. This uncertain yet easy way to access information also puts into question the value readers attach to it.
There is an accountability with printed materials that is absent with digital material. We trust books more because there is an entity we can attach to it, there is an author, a publisher, an editor, people we can pin responsibility on. Whereas before we would resort to written material for cultural wisdoms and meaning and use it to guide us in society, for example, or the use of scholarly resources or the way in which a lawyers turn to previous archive cases to guide them.
Not being able to rely on digital materials in the same way as one would with printed materials as it is an unreliable source of information is perhaps also another reason why we are still attached to printed materials. Expanding on the lack of accountability digital mediums have, we can look at who the authors of today are. Online, anyone can be an author, there is no screening process. A person is encouraged to not only share their work but opinions, at times presenting them as facts as one can see in sites like Wikipedia. Our current society is encouraged to share, as pointed out by the gatekeeper “I think we are encouraged to write more, there are a lot more writers nowadays as we get an instant hit: instant feedback from our friends and other readers.” This means that different sources are reaching an audience, no matter how reliable they may be:” Apparently anyone with a camera phone, camera or notepad can now be considered a journalist” (Morris) The existence of various work that is not reliable or true also contributes to making the written word less valuable.
When Rob Coover talks about the doomed and outdated technology print medium is becoming, he is focusing on the clear increase of digital medium use and while it may be true that print materials are in fact declining in use and no longer play the same role in our lives they once did I believe he need to consider print materials in a wider context. In a way, we seem to value print materials more than we ever have, this does not mean, however, that we resort to it the most. We need to consider how in the face of another, perhaps more practical option we do still turn to and continue to produce printed materials. In the interview with gatekeeper he voices this thought too: “I don’t see it as outdated, just that we are being offered another option, which is very, if not more practical but human beings are not always practical. We like pretty things and things we find familiar or comforting and to have things a certain way. Hopefully this will be one of those things that we logically would arguably make more sense to replace with another option but we keep resorting for the simple notion of it providing us with some kind of comfort”
To say that the digital medium does not have its advantages would not be true: we have a lot more variety available to us, we are able to read in a number of different places without having to carry a printed material with us, we are able to research references immediately. However, as with everything else this also has other implications, deciding which advantages and disadvantages are more relevant is of course up to each individual.
Personally, I am of the opinion that reading a physical book does enrichen the experience and the way we interact with the material we read. As voiced by Gatekeeper “You feel more attached to an object. On the internet it feels more ephemeral, I mean, we can also look at it in the literal sense, when you have a book, for example, you have your own copy of this person’s piece of writing, you can write on it, there is a coffee stain on some pages, bent pages marking something you want to revisit, all of this makes the writer’s work a little bit more your own. This, I think, is a very powerful thing, you are not only taking someone’s words, taking it in and interpreting it but you are physically doing this, it’s a much more personal exercise.” A physical book is there, in other words, it exists outside of a medium we use a lot but do not fully comprehend: technology.
Our relationship with print mediums has unquestionably changed and continues to change along the years. This has influenced and changed a number of different aspects in our life, from the way we consume and interact with written material to the creation of this material. It has put in question a number of things and impacted society in a wider context, not only the way we interact with the written world but, in some ways, the world as a whole.
1. "Print medium is a doomed and outdated technology, a mere curiosity of bygone days destined soon to be consigned forever to those dusty unattended museums we now call libraries." (Rob Coover in 'The End of Books' New York Times 21st June 1992.)
People have been talking about the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials “ever since the first intrepid web 1.0 bloggers plugged in their modems and started writing SEO headlines.” (Adam Gale in Management Today 24th March 2016.)
Do you agree? Update this debate – what might be the future of print in the 21st century? Make sure you reference the comments of our gatekeeper guests and/or your interviews with industry gatekeepers.
The effects and implications of technology has been profound. The impact it has had and continues to have in our lives is immeasurable, it has influenced every aspect of our life, from how we relate to the world and the people surrounding us to the information we have access to, to how we process this information. To even attempt to dissect the ways in which it has changed the way we interact and exist in the world would be a long, torturous task with no foreseeable conclusion. In this essay I will be focusing on the digital medium, more specifically the ways in which it has changed our use of print mediums, focusing mainly on the literary uses of the printed medium, and the implications of this and whether this will lead to the extinction of printed written work.
The development of technologies such as smartphones, kindles, laptops and how accessible these have become, has had various implications in our society. It has had a huge influence in our relationship with written work whose aspects are in such a way so tightly intertwined they concurrently impact each other. The way we are now using print mediums less and replacing these with digital mediums has altered the way we communicate, what we share, our attention spans, what we read, the way we read, the work we produce and how we produce it. Whether this change is positive or not and its implications will be explored later in this essay, firstly we need to look at how it has changed.
To begin with, the way we consume and consequently now distribute written work is significantly different. The vast majority of people no longer opens a newspaper to read the news, instead they now scroll through their phones or watch the news on TV. Apps and websites can now be accessed to get the information people would from printed materials such as magazines and newspapers. However, the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials Adam Gale mentions is only partially true.
To an extent there has been a decline in the use of printed materials in general, and we can observe that newspapers especially are not a medium people are choosing to use, particularly the younger generation that keeps themselves informed through the use of technological devices. In spite of this, books especially continue to have a major role in our society and continue to be utilized to engage with written work. As Patrick and Mark Hazard point out “There are certain stereotyped notions about the intrinsic superiority of print as a medium that stultify our effectiveness in handling the newer media.” Society’s relationship with digital mediums is complex and has an impact in more than just our use of print mediums. As we use technology more we also reflect on the role it plays in our lives finding, at times, difficult to adjust to the dependence inevitably resulting from the use of these digital mediums. Whether rational or not society seems to have an undeniable attachment to print mediums even as we are using these less. We see it as a way of maintaining our individuality, especially in the literary uses of print medium. According to Patrick and Mark Hazard “It was because of what printing was instrumental in achieving – enhanced individuality, greater control over nature, maximized material abundance – that we respect books (…)” We may be willing to read our news and articles using our smartphones or laptops but for literary pieces, that say something about our individuality and existence, we still find ourselves preferring the comfort of a hardcopy.
Where we are getting our information from, in turn, impacts the way the reader processes what they read. As Tim Atkins points out in an interview conducted for this module “It is my understanding, of the way current technology is, that people probably read more from different sources, but they also read more badly, in that, generally people will read more quickly and have shorter attention spans.”
While reading widely is, of course, a positive consequence of the rise of the digital medium it has also meant that people are not engaging with the material in the same way.
Take for example, reading the news on a smartphone on the way to work, our attention is being competed for by a number of different things: the commute to work, the people around us, the notification we get as we are reading, the link shown on the page that could potentially be more interesting. It makes it more difficult to concentrate and absorb what we are reading, making us only partially process the information. When reading a physical material however we interact with in in a different manner. The gatekeeper I interviewed seems to agree: “The tactile experience is irreplaceable. It’s a much calmer experience, you aren’t thinking of the battery running out, you aren’t dependent on having wi-fi connection or an outlet (…)” While this seems to be a negative aspect of using digital mediums there are also, of course, advantages. In the case of conducting the interviews for this module, for example, which I recorded on my phone. Using this technology meant that I didn’t have to be concerned with writing down any answers or notes I could simply engage with the interviewee, making it easier to ask follow-up questions. After the interview I was able to type in the interview word for word. Technology, like anything, proves itself to have both positive and negative aspects be that as it may we have to consider what we value more. In my opinion, once digital mediums influence the way we consume information so that we do not engage with the material fully it is no longer a medium that can replace print materials.
The way we interact with the pieces we read has also influenced what we are choosing to read, which consequently influences what is being written and how. Writers consider their audience and how the readers are accessing and receiving their work. As mentioned on another suggested question for this essay, Simon Prosser publishing director at Hamish Hamilton has claimed "The short story form is better suited to the demands of modern life than the novel." As modern life has increasingly becoming fast paced, people have shorter attention spans as they are constantly exposed to information and stimulus: the needs of general readers continually change and writers obviously respond to this, in any case, writers seem to be doing this to a bigger extent. They are aiming at giving the audience what they want since if they do not manage to captivate their audience they will simply turn to the other options available.
Personally, I think people no longer value the written word as much as they once have because of how easy it is to acquire. In the interview with Tim Atkins he seems to share this opinion: “You don’t have to work for it anymore, I mean, I wanted this book for about ten years before you could buy books on the internet and every bookshop I went to they wouldn’t have it. (…) When I bought it I was super excited, and I read it because I worked for it and I’d wanted it. Now you want something, you go like that (snaps fingers) and you get it so this kind of access to information means that you don’t value it as much I think.” On one hand, the value we attach to print medium has changed drastically due to society being bombarded with information, we are not appreciating what we are reading we are wondering if there may be a link that could take us to a more interesting piece, the endless possibilities while valuable have simultaneously made it so that each possibility is less so.
The decline use of print mediums has changed not only what we are writing but also the writing process as a whole. The way we edit, for example, ”you can edit a poem five hundred times on your phone, in the way that when I was a kid I would type it out and I’d go ‘oh, no, I’ve put a comma there and I don’t want the comma’ so you would have to type the whole poem again.” (Atkins) More importantly, in my opinion, are the implications of digital materials being updated and edited continuously with no proof of a former version. This possibility of changing ‘completed’ work has made written work less reliable. As explained by Krista Rasmussen: “(…) if digital editions are unfinished and open, then the relationship between the work’s texts will be unfinished and open as well.” (133) This has made the work less permanent, the possibility of updating a newer version with no sign of having done causing us to no longer trust the written word in the way we once did.
With books, on the other hand, when one does update their work and print out a different version of it there is still proof that the other one existed, we are still able to refer back to the original version and even compare its changes with the newer version. This is one of the reasons people have an attachment to print medium: it is proof, we have control over it, we can keep it and continually reference to it knowing it will not be deleted. . “The difference between print and digital lies in our phenomenological understanding of a document. The physical book is present to us as a full-fledged object in the world even when we are not reading it.” (130, Rasmussen) We have purchased this information and it is now, in a way, our property. This uncertain yet easy way to access information also puts into question the value readers attach to it.
There is an accountability with printed materials that is absent with digital material. We trust books more because there is an entity we can attach to it, there is an author, a publisher, an editor, people we can pin responsibility on. Whereas before we would resort to written material for cultural wisdoms and meaning and use it to guide us in society, for example, or the use of scholarly resources or the way in which a lawyers turn to previous archive cases to guide them.
Not being able to rely on digital materials in the same way as one would with printed materials as it is an unreliable source of information is perhaps also another reason why we are still attached to printed materials. Expanding on the lack of accountability digital mediums have, we can look at who the authors of today are. Online, anyone can be an author, there is no screening process. A person is encouraged to not only share their work but opinions, at times presenting them as facts as one can see in sites like Wikipedia. Our current society is encouraged to share, as pointed out by the gatekeeper “I think we are encouraged to write more, there are a lot more writers nowadays as we get an instant hit: instant feedback from our friends and other readers.” This means that different sources are reaching an audience, no matter how reliable they may be:” Apparently anyone with a camera phone, camera or notepad can now be considered a journalist” (Morris) The existence of various work that is not reliable or true also contributes to making the written word less valuable.
When Rob Coover talks about the doomed and outdated technology print medium is becoming, he is focusing on the clear increase of digital medium use and while it may be true that print materials are in fact declining in use and no longer play the same role in our lives they once did I believe he need to consider print materials in a wider context. In a way, we seem to value print materials more than we ever have, this does not mean, however, that we resort to it the most. We need to consider how in the face of another, perhaps more practical option we do still turn to and continue to produce printed materials. In the interview with gatekeeper he voices this thought too: “I don’t see it as outdated, just that we are being offered another option, which is very, if not more practical but human beings are not always practical. We like pretty things and things we find familiar or comforting and to have things a certain way. Hopefully this will be one of those things that we logically would arguably make more sense to replace with another option but we keep resorting for the simple notion of it providing us with some kind of comfort”
To say that the digital medium does not have its advantages would not be true: we have a lot more variety available to us, we are able to read in a number of different places without having to carry a printed material with us, we are able to research references immediately. However, as with everything else this also has other implications, deciding which advantages and disadvantages are more relevant is of course up to each individual.
Personally, I am of the opinion that reading a physical book does enrichen the experience and the way we interact with the material we read. As voiced by Gatekeeper “You feel more attached to an object. On the internet it feels more ephemeral, I mean, we can also look at it in the literal sense, when you have a book, for example, you have your own copy of this person’s piece of writing, you can write on it, there is a coffee stain on some pages, bent pages marking something you want to revisit, all of this makes the writer’s work a little bit more your own. This, I think, is a very powerful thing, you are not only taking someone’s words, taking it in and interpreting it but you are physically doing this, it’s a much more personal exercise.” A physical book is there, in other words, it exists outside of a medium we use a lot but do not fully comprehend: technology.
Our relationship with print mediums has unquestionably changed and continues to change along the years. This has influenced and changed a number of different aspects in our life, from the way we consume and interact with written material to the creation of this material. It has put in question a number of things and impacted society in a wider context, not only the way we interact with the written world but, in some ways, the world as a whole.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
1. "Print medium is a doomed and outdated technology, a mere curiosity of bygone days destined soon to be consigned forever to those dusty unattended museums we now call libraries." (Rob Coover in 'The End of Books' New York Times 21st June 1992.)
People have been talking about the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials “ever since the first intrepid web 1.0 bloggers plugged in their modems and started writing SEO headlines.” (Adam Gale in Management Today 24th March 2016.)
Do you agree? Update this debate – what might be the future of print in the 21st century? Make sure you reference the comments of our gatekeeper guests and/or your interviews with industry gatekeepers.
The effects and implications of technology has been profound. The impact it has had and continues to have in our lives is immeasurable, it has influenced every aspect of our life, from how we relate to the world and the people surrounding us to the information we have access to, to how we process this information. To even attempt to dissect the ways in which it has changed the way we interact and exist in the world would be a long, torturous task with no foreseeable conclusion. In this essay I will be focusing on the digital medium, more specifically the ways in which it has changed our use of print mediums, focusing mainly on the literary uses of the printed medium, and the implications of this and whether this will lead to the extinction of printed written work.
The development of technologies such as smartphones, kindles, laptops and how accessible these have become, has had various implications in our society. It has had a huge influence in our relationship with written work whose aspects are in such a way so tightly intertwined they concurrently impact each other. The way we are now using print mediums less and replacing these with digital mediums has altered the way we communicate, what we share, our attention spans, what we read, the way we read, the work we produce and how we produce it. Whether this change is positive or not and its implications will be explored later in this essay, firstly we need to look at how it has changed.
To begin with, the way we consume and consequently now distribute written work is significantly different. The vast majority of people no longer opens a newspaper to read the news, instead they now scroll through their phones or watch the news on TV. Apps and websites can now be accessed to get the information people would from printed materials such as magazines and newspapers. However, the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials Adam Gale mentions is only partially true.
To an extent there has been a decline in the use of printed materials in general, and we can observe that newspapers especially are not a medium people are choosing to use, particularly the younger generation that keeps themselves informed through the use of technological devices. In spite of this, books especially continue to have a major role in our society and continue to be utilized to engage with written work. As Patrick and Mark Hazard point out “There are certain stereotyped notions about the intrinsic superiority of print as a medium that stultify our effectiveness in handling the newer media.” Society’s relationship with digital mediums is complex and has an impact in more than just our use of print mediums. As we use technology more we also reflect on the role it plays in our lives finding, at times, difficult to adjust to the dependence inevitably resulting from the use of these digital mediums. Whether rational or not society seems to have an undeniable attachment to print mediums even as we are using these less. We see it as a way of maintaining our individuality, especially in the literary uses of print medium. According to Patrick and Mark Hazard “It was because of what printing was instrumental in achieving – enhanced individuality, greater control over nature, maximized material abundance – that we respect books (…)” We may be willing to read our news and articles using our smartphones or laptops but for literary pieces, that say something about our individuality and existence, we still find ourselves preferring the comfort of a hardcopy.
Where we are getting our information from, in turn, impacts the way the reader processes what they read. As Tim Atkins points out in an interview conducted for this module “It is my understanding, of the way current technology is, that people probably read more from different sources, but they also read more badly, in that, generally people will read more quickly and have shorter attention spans.”
While reading widely is, of course, a positive consequence of the rise of the digital medium it has also meant that people are not engaging with the material in the same way.
Take for example, reading the news on a smartphone on the way to work, our attention is being competed for by a number of different things: the commute to work, the people around us, the notification we get as we are reading, the link shown on the page that could potentially be more interesting. It makes it more difficult to concentrate and absorb what we are reading, making us only partially process the information. When reading a physical material however we interact with in in a different manner. The gatekeeper I interviewed seems to agree: “The tactile experience is irreplaceable. It’s a much calmer experience, you aren’t thinking of the battery running out, you aren’t dependent on having wi-fi connection or an outlet (…)” While this seems to be a negative aspect of using digital mediums there are also, of course, advantages. In the case of conducting the interviews for this module, for example, which I recorded on my phone. Using this technology meant that I didn’t have to be concerned with writing down any answers or notes I could simply engage with the interviewee, making it easier to ask follow-up questions. After the interview I was able to type in the interview word for word. Technology, like anything, proves itself to have both positive and negative aspects be that as it may we have to consider what we value more. In my opinion, once digital mediums influence the way we consume information so that we do not engage with the material fully it is no longer a medium that can replace print materials.
The way we interact with the pieces we read has also influenced what we are choosing to read, which consequently influences what is being written and how. Writers consider their audience and how the readers are accessing and receiving their work. As mentioned on another suggested question for this essay, Simon Prosser publishing director at Hamish Hamilton has claimed "The short story form is better suited to the demands of modern life than the novel." As modern life has increasingly becoming fast paced, people have shorter attention spans as they are constantly exposed to information and stimulus: the needs of general readers continually change and writers obviously respond to this, in any case, writers seem to be doing this to a bigger extent. They are aiming at giving the audience what they want since if they do not manage to captivate their audience they will simply turn to the other options available.
Personally, I think people no longer value the written word as much as they once have because of how easy it is to acquire. In the interview with Tim Atkins he seems to share this opinion: “You don’t have to work for it anymore, I mean, I wanted this book for about ten years before you could buy books on the internet and every bookshop I went to they wouldn’t have it. (…) When I bought it I was super excited, and I read it because I worked for it and I’d wanted it. Now you want something, you go like that (snaps fingers) and you get it so this kind of access to information means that you don’t value it as much I think.” On one hand, the value we attach to print medium has changed drastically due to society being bombarded with information, we are not appreciating what we are reading we are wondering if there may be a link that could take us to a more interesting piece, the endless possibilities while valuable have simultaneously made it so that each possibility is less so.
The decline use of print mediums has changed not only what we are writing but also the writing process as a whole. The way we edit, for example, ”you can edit a poem five hundred times on your phone, in the way that when I was a kid I would type it out and I’d go ‘oh, no, I’ve put a comma there and I don’t want the comma’ so you would have to type the whole poem again.” (Atkins) More importantly, in my opinion, are the implications of digital materials being updated and edited continuously with no proof of a former version. This possibility of changing ‘completed’ work has made written work less reliable. As explained by Krista Rasmussen: “(…) if digital editions are unfinished and open, then the relationship between the work’s texts will be unfinished and open as well.” (133) This has made the work less permanent, the possibility of updating a newer version with no sign of having done causing us to no longer trust the written word in the way we once did.
With books, on the other hand, when one does update their work and print out a different version of it there is still proof that the other one existed, we are still able to refer back to the original version and even compare its changes with the newer version. This is one of the reasons people have an attachment to print medium: it is proof, we have control over it, we can keep it and continually reference to it knowing it will not be deleted. . “The difference between print and digital lies in our phenomenological understanding of a document. The physical book is present to us as a full-fledged object in the world even when we are not reading it.” (130, Rasmussen) We have purchased this information and it is now, in a way, our property. This uncertain yet easy way to access information also puts into question the value readers attach to it.
There is an accountability with printed materials that is absent with digital material. We trust books more because there is an entity we can attach to it, there is an author, a publisher, an editor, people we can pin responsibility on. Whereas before we would resort to written material for cultural wisdoms and meaning and use it to guide us in society, for example, or the use of scholarly resources or the way in which a lawyers turn to previous archive cases to guide them.
Not being able to rely on digital materials in the same way as one would with printed materials as it is an unreliable source of information is perhaps also another reason why we are still attached to printed materials. Expanding on the lack of accountability digital mediums have, we can look at who the authors of today are. Online, anyone can be an author, there is no screening process. A person is encouraged to not only share their work but opinions, at times presenting them as facts as one can see in sites like Wikipedia. Our current society is encouraged to share, as pointed out by the gatekeeper “I think we are encouraged to write more, there are a lot more writers nowadays as we get an instant hit: instant feedback from our friends and other readers.” This means that different sources are reaching an audience, no matter how reliable they may be:” Apparently anyone with a camera phone, camera or notepad can now be considered a journalist” (Morris) The existence of various work that is not reliable or true also contributes to making the written word less valuable.
When Rob Coover talks about the doomed and outdated technology print medium is becoming, he is focusing on the clear increase of digital medium use and while it may be true that print materials are in fact declining in use and no longer play the same role in our lives they once did I believe he need to consider print materials in a wider context. In a way, we seem to value print materials more than we ever have, this does not mean, however, that we resort to it the most. We need to consider how in the face of another, perhaps more practical option we do still turn to and continue to produce printed materials. In the interview with gatekeeper he voices this thought too: “I don’t see it as outdated, just that we are being offered another option, which is very, if not more practical but human beings are not always practical. We like pretty things and things we find familiar or comforting and to have things a certain way. Hopefully this will be one of those things that we logically would arguably make more sense to replace with another option but we keep resorting for the simple notion of it providing us with some kind of comfort”
To say that the digital medium does not have its advantages would not be true: we have a lot more variety available to us, we are able to read in a number of different places without having to carry a printed material with us, we are able to research references immediately. However, as with everything else this also has other implications, deciding which advantages and disadvantages are more relevant is of course up to each individual.
Personally, I am of the opinion that reading a physical book does enrichen the experience and the way we interact with the material we read. As voiced by Gatekeeper “You feel more attached to an object. On the internet it feels more ephemeral, I mean, we can also look at it in the literal sense, when you have a book, for example, you have your own copy of this person’s piece of writing, you can write on it, there is a coffee stain on some pages, bent pages marking something you want to revisit, all of this makes the writer’s work a little bit more your own. This, I think, is a very powerful thing, you are not only taking someone’s words, taking it in and interpreting it but you are physically doing this, it’s a much more personal exercise.” A physical book is there, in other words, it exists outside of a medium we use a lot but do not fully comprehend: technology.
Our relationship with print mediums has unquestionably changed and continues to change along the years. This has influenced and changed a number of different aspects in our life, from the way we consume and interact with written material to the creation of this material. It has put in question a number of things and impacted society in a wider context, not only the way we interact with the written world but, in some ways, the world as a whole.
1. "Print medium is a doomed and outdated technology, a mere curiosity of bygone days destined soon to be consigned forever to those dusty unattended museums we now call libraries." (Rob Coover in 'The End of Books' New York Times 21st June 1992.)
People have been talking about the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials “ever since the first intrepid web 1.0 bloggers plugged in their modems and started writing SEO headlines.” (Adam Gale in Management Today 24th March 2016.)
Do you agree? Update this debate – what might be the future of print in the 21st century? Make sure you reference the comments of our gatekeeper guests and/or your interviews with industry gatekeepers.
The effects and implications of technology has been profound. The impact it has had and continues to have in our lives is immeasurable, it has influenced every aspect of our life, from how we relate to the world and the people surrounding us to the information we have access to, to how we process this information. To even attempt to dissect the ways in which it has changed the way we interact and exist in the world would be a long, torturous task with no foreseeable conclusion. In this essay I will be focusing on the digital medium, more specifically the ways in which it has changed our use of print mediums, focusing mainly on the literary uses of the printed medium, and the implications of this and whether this will lead to the extinction of printed written work.
The development of technologies such as smartphones, kindles, laptops and how accessible these have become, has had various implications in our society. It has had a huge influence in our relationship with written work whose aspects are in such a way so tightly intertwined they concurrently impact each other. The way we are now using print mediums less and replacing these with digital mediums has altered the way we communicate, what we share, our attention spans, what we read, the way we read, the work we produce and how we produce it. Whether this change is positive or not and its implications will be explored later in this essay, firstly we need to look at how it has changed.
To begin with, the way we consume and consequently now distribute written work is significantly different. The vast majority of people no longer opens a newspaper to read the news, instead they now scroll through their phones or watch the news on TV. Apps and websites can now be accessed to get the information people would from printed materials such as magazines and newspapers. However, the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials Adam Gale mentions is only partially true.
To an extent there has been a decline in the use of printed materials in general, and we can observe that newspapers especially are not a medium people are choosing to use, particularly the younger generation that keeps themselves informed through the use of technological devices. In spite of this, books especially continue to have a major role in our society and continue to be utilized to engage with written work. As Patrick and Mark Hazard point out “There are certain stereotyped notions about the intrinsic superiority of print as a medium that stultify our effectiveness in handling the newer media.” Society’s relationship with digital mediums is complex and has an impact in more than just our use of print mediums. As we use technology more we also reflect on the role it plays in our lives finding, at times, difficult to adjust to the dependence inevitably resulting from the use of these digital mediums. Whether rational or not society seems to have an undeniable attachment to print mediums even as we are using these less. We see it as a way of maintaining our individuality, especially in the literary uses of print medium. According to Patrick and Mark Hazard “It was because of what printing was instrumental in achieving – enhanced individuality, greater control over nature, maximized material abundance – that we respect books (…)” We may be willing to read our news and articles using our smartphones or laptops but for literary pieces, that say something about our individuality and existence, we still find ourselves preferring the comfort of a hardcopy.
Where we are getting our information from, in turn, impacts the way the reader processes what they read. As Tim Atkins points out in an interview conducted for this module “It is my understanding, of the way current technology is, that people probably read more from different sources, but they also read more badly, in that, generally people will read more quickly and have shorter attention spans.”
While reading widely is, of course, a positive consequence of the rise of the digital medium it has also meant that people are not engaging with the material in the same way.
Take for example, reading the news on a smartphone on the way to work, our attention is being competed for by a number of different things: the commute to work, the people around us, the notification we get as we are reading, the link shown on the page that could potentially be more interesting. It makes it more difficult to concentrate and absorb what we are reading, making us only partially process the information. When reading a physical material however we interact with in in a different manner. The gatekeeper I interviewed seems to agree: “The tactile experience is irreplaceable. It’s a much calmer experience, you aren’t thinking of the battery running out, you aren’t dependent on having wi-fi connection or an outlet (…)” While this seems to be a negative aspect of using digital mediums there are also, of course, advantages. In the case of conducting the interviews for this module, for example, which I recorded on my phone. Using this technology meant that I didn’t have to be concerned with writing down any answers or notes I could simply engage with the interviewee, making it easier to ask follow-up questions. After the interview I was able to type in the interview word for word. Technology, like anything , proves itself to have both positive and negative aspects be that as it may we have to consider what we value more. In my opinion, once digital mediums influence the way we consume information so that we do not engage with the material fully it is no longer a medium that can replace print materials.
The way we interact with the pieces we read has also influenced what we are choosing to read, which consequently influences what is being written and how. Writers consider their audience and how the readers are accessing and receiving their work. As mentioned on another suggested question for this essay, Simon Prosser publishing director at Hamish Hamilton has claimed "The short story form is better suited to the demands of modern life than the novel." As modern life has increasingly becoming fast paced, people have shorter attention spans as they are constantly exposed to information and stimulus: the needs of general readers continually change and writers obviously respond to this, in any case, writers seem to be doing this to a bigger extent. They are aiming at giving the audience what they want since if they do not manage to captivate their audience they will simply turn to the other options available.
Personally, I think people no longer value the written word as much as they once have because of how easy it is to acquire. In the interview with Tim Atkins he seems to share this opinion: “You don’t have to work for it anymore, I mean, I wanted this book for about ten years before you could buy books on the internet and every bookshop I went to they wouldn’t have it. (…) When I bought it I was super excited, and I read it because I worked for it and I’d wanted it. Now you want something, you go like that (snaps fingers) and you get it so this kind of access to information means that you don’t value it as much I think.” On one hand, the value we attach to print medium has changed drastically due to society being bombarded with information, we are not appreciating what we are reading we are wondering if there may be a link that could take us to a more interesting piece, the endless possibilities while valuable have simultaneously made it so that each possibility is less so.
The decline use of print mediums has changed not only what we are writing but also the writing process as a whole. The way we edit, for example, ”you can edit a poem five hundred times on your phone, in the way that when I was a kid I would type it out and I’d go ‘oh, no, I’ve put a comma there and I don’t want the comma’ so you would have to type the whole poem again.” (Atkins) More importantly, in my opinion, are the implications of digital materials being updated and edited continuously with no proof of a former version. This possibility of changing ‘completed’ work has made written work less reliable. As explained by Krista Rasmussen: “(…) if digital editions are unfinished and open, then the relationship between the work’s texts will be unfinished and open as well.” (133) This has made the work less permanent, the possibility of updating a newer version with no sign of having done causing us to no longer trust the written word in the way we once did.
With books, on the other hand, when one does update their work and print out a different version of it there is still proof that the other one existed, we are still able to refer back to the original version and even compare its changes with the newer version. This is one of the reasons people have an attachment to print medium: it is proof, we have control over it, we can keep it and continually reference to it knowing it will not be deleted. . “The difference between print and digital lies in our phenomenological understanding of a document. The physical book is present to us as a full-fledged object in the world even when we are not reading it.” (130, Rasmussen) We have purchased this information and it is now, in a way, our property. This uncertain yet easy way to access information also puts into question the value readers attach to it.
There is an accountability with printed materials that is absent with digital material. We trust books more because there is an entity we can attach to it, there is an author, a publisher, an editor, people we can pin responsibility on. Whereas before we would resort to written material for cultural wisdoms and meaning and use it to guide us in society, for example, or the use of scholarly resources or the way in which a lawyers turn to previous archive cases to guide them.
Not being able to rely on digital materials in the same way as one would with printed materials as it is an unreliable source of information is perhaps also another reason why we are still attached to printed materials. Expanding on the lack of accountability digital mediums have, we can look at who the authors of today are. Online, anyone can be an author, there is no screening process. A person is encouraged to not only share their work but opinions, at times presenting them as facts as one can see in sites like Wikipedia. Our current society is encouraged to share, as pointed out by the gatekeeper “I think we are encouraged to write more, there are a lot more writers nowadays as we get an instant hit: instant feedback from our friends and other readers.” This means that different sources are reaching an audience, no matter how reliable they may be:” Apparently anyone with a camera phone, camera or notepad can now be considered a journalist” (Morris) The existence of various work that is not reliable or true also contributes to making the written word less valuable.
When Rob Coover talks about the doomed and outdated technology print medium is becoming, he is focusing on the clear increase of digital medium use and while it may be true that print materials are in fact declining in use and no longer play the same role in our lives they once did I believe he need to consider print materials in a wider context. In a way, we seem to value print materials more than we ever have, this does not mean, however, that we resort to it the most. We need to consider how in the face of another, perhaps more practical option we do still turn to and continue to produce printed materials. In the interview with gatekeeper he voices this thought too: “I don’t see it as outdated, just that we are being offered another option, which is very, if not more practical but human beings are not always practical. We like pretty things and things we find familiar or comforting and to have things a certain way. Hopefully this will be one of those things that we logically would arguably make more sense to replace with another option but we keep resorting for the simple notion of it providing us with some kind of comfort”
To say that the digital medium does not have its advantages would not be true: we have a lot more variety available to us, we are able to read in a number of different places without having to carry a printed material with us, we are able to research references immediately. However, as with everything else this also has other implications, deciding which advantages and disadvantages are more relevant is of course up to each individual.
Personally, I am of the opinion that reading a physical book does enrichen the experience and the way we interact with the material we read. As voiced by Gatekeeper “You feel more attached to an object. On the internet it feels more ephemeral, I mean, we can also look at it in the literal sense, when you have a book, for example, you have your own copy of this person’s piece of writing, you can write on it, there is a coffee stain on some pages, bent pages marking something you want to revisit, all of this makes the writer’s work a little bit more your own. This, I think, is a very powerful thing, you are not only taking someone’s words, taking it in and interpreting it but you are physically doing this, it’s a much more personal exercise.” A physical book is there, in other words, it exists outside of a medium we use a lot but do not fully comprehend: technology.
Our relationship with print mediums has unquestionably changed and continues to change along the years. This has influenced and changed a number of different aspects in our life, from the way we consume and interact with written material to the creation of this material. It has put in question a number of things and impacted society in a wider context, not only the way we interact with the written world but, in some ways, the world as a whole.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
1. "Print medium is a doomed and outdated technology, a mere curiosity of bygone days destined soon to be consigned forever to those dusty unattended museums we now call libraries." (Rob Coover in 'The End of Books' New York Times 21st June 1992.)
People have been talking about the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials “ever since the first intrepid web 1.0 bloggers plugged in their modems and started writing SEO headlines.” (Adam Gale in Management Today 24th March 2016.)
Do you agree? Update this debate – what might be the future of print in the 21st century? Make sure you reference the comments of our gatekeeper guests and/or your interviews with industry gatekeepers.
The effects and implications of technology has been profound. The impact it has had and continues to have in our lives is immeasurable, it has influenced every aspect of our life, from how we relate to the world and the people surrounding us to the information we have access to, to how we process this information. To even attempt to dissect the ways in which it has changed the way we interact and exist in the world would be a long, torturous task with no foreseeable conclusion. In this essay I will be focusing on the digital medium, more specifically the ways in which it has changed our use of print mediums, focusing mainly on the literary uses of the printed medium, and the implications of this and whether this will lead to the extinction of printed written work.
The development of technologies such as smartphones, kindles, laptops and how accessible these have become, has had various implications in our society. It has had a huge influence in our relationship with written work whose aspects are in such a way so tightly intertwined they concurrently impact each other. The way we are now using print mediums less and replacing these with digital mediums has altered the way we communicate, what we share, our attention spans, what we read, the way we read, the work we produce and how we produce it. Whether this change is positive or not and its implications will be explored later in this essay, firstly we need to look at how it has changed.
To begin with, the way we consume and consequently now distribute written work is significantly different. The vast majority of people no longer opens a newspaper to read the news, instead they now scroll through their phones or watch the news on TV. Apps and websites can now be accessed to get the information people would from printed materials such as magazines and newspapers. However, the death of books and newspapers and other physically printed materials Adam Gale mentions is only partially true.
To an extent there has been a decline in the use of printed materials in general, and we can observe that newspapers especially are not a medium people are choosing to use, particularly the younger generation that keeps themselves informed through the use of technological devices. In spite of this, books especially continue to have a major role in our society and continue to be utilized to engage with written work. As Patrick and Mark Hazard point out “There are certain stereotyped notions about the intrinsic superiority of print as a medium that stultify our effectiveness in handling the newer media.” Society’s relationship with digital mediums is complex and has an impact in more than just our use of print mediums. As we use technology more we also reflect on the role it plays in our lives finding, at times, difficult to adjust to the dependence inevitably resulting from the use of these digital mediums. Whether rational or not society seems to have an undeniable attachment to print mediums even as we are using these less. We see it as a way of maintaining our individuality, especially in the literary uses of print medium. According to Patrick and Mark Hazard “It was because of what printing was instrumental in achieving – enhanced individuality, greater control over nature, maximized material abundance – that we respect books (…)” We may be willing to read our news and articles using our smartphones or laptops but for literary pieces, that say something about our individuality and existence, we still find ourselves preferring the comfort of a hardcopy.
Where we are getting our information from, in turn, impacts the way the reader processes what they read. As Tim Atkins points out in an interview conducted for this module “It is my understanding, of the way current technology is, that people probably read more from different sources, but they also read more badly, in that, generally people will read more quickly and have shorter attention spans.”
While reading widely is, of course, a positive consequence of the rise of the digital medium it has also meant that people are not engaging with the material in the same way.
Take for example, reading the news on a smartphone on the way to work, our attention is being competed for by a number of different things: the commute to work, the people around us, the notification we get as we are reading, the link shown on the page that could potentially be more interesting. It makes it more difficult to concentrate and absorb what we are reading, making us only partially process the information. When reading a physical material however we interact with in in a different manner. The gatekeeper I interviewed seems to agree: “The tactile experience is irreplaceable. It’s a much calmer experience, you aren’t thinking of the battery running out, you aren’t dependent on having wi-fi connection or an outlet (…)” While this seems to be a negative aspect of using digital mediums there are also, of course, advantages. In the case of conducting the interviews for this module, for example, which I recorded on my phone. Using this technology meant that I didn’t have to be concerned with writing down any answers or notes I could simply engage with the interviewee, making it easier to ask follow-up questions. After the interview I was able to type in the interview word for word. Technology, like anything, proves itself to have both positive and negative aspects be that as it may we have to consider what we value more. In my opinion, once digital mediums influence the way we consume information so that we do not engage with the material fully it is no longer a medium that can replace print materials.
The way we interact with the pieces we read has also influenced what we are choosing to read, which consequently influences what is being written and how. Writers consider their audience and how the readers are accessing and receiving their work. As mentioned on another suggested question for this essay, Simon Prosser publishing director at Hamish Hamilton has claimed "The short story form is better suited to the demands of modern life than the novel." As modern life has increasingly becoming fast paced, people have shorter attention spans as they are constantly exposed to information and stimulus: the needs of general readers continually change and writers obviously respond to this, in any case, writers seem to be doing this to a bigger extent. They are aiming at giving the audience what they want since if they do not manage to captivate their audience they will simply turn to the other options available.
Personally, I think people no longer value the written word as much as they once have because of how easy it is to acquire. In the interview with Tim Atkins he seems to share this opinion: “You don’t have to work for it anymore, I mean, I wanted this book for about ten years before you could buy books on the internet and every bookshop I went to they wouldn’t have it. (…) When I bought it I was super excited, and I read it because I worked for it and I’d wanted it. Now you want something, you go like that (snaps fingers) and you get it so this kind of access to information means that you don’t value it as much I think.” On one hand, the value we attach to print medium has changed drastically due to society being bombarded with information, we are not appreciating what we are reading we are wondering if there may be a link that could take us to a more interesting piece, the endless possibilities while valuable have simultaneously made it so that each possibility is less so.
The decline use of print mediums has changed not only what we are writing but also the writing process as a whole. The way we edit, for example, ”you can edit a poem five hundred times on your phone, in the way that when I was a kid I would type it out and I’d go ‘oh, no, I’ve put a comma there and I don’t want the comma’ so you would have to type the whole poem again.” (Atkins) More importantly, in my opinion, are the implications of digital materials being updated and edited continuously with no proof of a former version. This possibility of changing ‘completed’ work has made written work less reliable. As explained by Krista Rasmussen: “(…) if digital editions are unfinished and open, then the relationship between the work’s texts will be unfinished and open as well.” (133) This has made the work less permanent, the possibility of updating a newer version with no sign of having done causing us to no longer trust the written word in the way we once did.
With books, on the other hand, when one does update their work and print out a different version of it there is still proof that the other one existed, we are still able to refer back to the original version and even compare its changes with the newer version. This is one of the reasons people have an attachment to print medium: it is proof, we have control over it, we can keep it and continually reference to it knowing it will not be deleted. . “The difference between print and digital lies in our phenomenological understanding of a document. The physical book is present to us as a full-fledged object in the world even when we are not reading it.” (130, Rasmussen) We have purchased this information and it is now, in a way, our property. This uncertain yet easy way to access information also puts into question the value readers attach to it.
There is an accountability with printed materials that is absent with digital material. We trust books more because there is an entity we can attach to it, there is an author, a publisher, an editor, people we can pin responsibility on. Whereas before we would resort to written material for cultural wisdoms and meaning and use it to guide us in society, for example, or the use of scholarly resources or the way in which a lawyers turn to previous archive cases to guide them.
Not being able to rely on digital materials in the same way as one would with printed materials as it is an unreliable source of information is perhaps also another reason why we are still attached to printed materials. Expanding on the lack of accountability digital mediums have, we can look at who the authors of today are. Online, anyone can be an author, there is no screening process. A person is encouraged to not only share their work but opinions, at times presenting them as facts as one can see in sites like Wikipedia. Our current society is encouraged to share, as pointed out by the gatekeeper “I think we are encouraged to write more, there are a lot more writers nowadays as we get an instant hit: instant feedback from our friends and other readers.” This means that different sources are reaching an audience, no matter how reliable they may be:” Apparently anyone with a camera phone, camera or notepad can now be considered a journalist” (Morris) The existence of various work that is not reliable or true also contributes to making the written word less valuable.
When Rob Coover talks about the doomed and outdated technology print medium is becoming, he is focusing on the clear increase of digital medium use and while it may be true that print materials are in fact declining in use and no longer play the same role in our lives they once did I believe he need to consider print materials in a wider context. In a way, we seem to value print materials more than we ever have, this does not mean, however, that we resort to it the most. We need to consider how in the face of another, perhaps more practical option we do still turn to and continue to produce printed materials. In the interview with gatekeeper he voices this thought too: “I don’t see it as outdated, just that we are being offered another option, which is very, if not more practical but human beings are not always practical. We like pretty things and things we find familiar or comforting and to have things a certain way. Hopefully this will be one of those things that we logically would arguably make more sense to replace with another option but we keep resorting for the simple notion of it providing us with some kind of comfort”
To say that the digital medium does not have its advantages would not be true: we have a lot more variety available to us, we are able to read in a number of different places without having to carry a printed material with us, we are able to research references immediately. However, as with everything else this also has other implications, deciding which advantages and disadvantages are more relevant is of course up to each individual.
Personally, I am of the opinion that reading a physical book does enrichen the experience and the way we interact with the material we read. As voiced by Gatekeeper “You feel more attached to an object. On the internet it feels more ephemeral, I mean, we can also look at it in the literal sense, when you have a book, for example, you have your own copy of this person’s piece of writing, you can write on it, there is a coffee stain on some pages, bent pages marking something you want to revisit, all of this makes the writer’s work a little bit more your own. This, I think, is a very powerful thing, you are not only taking someone’s words, taking it in and interpreting it but you are physically doing this, it’s a much more personal exercise.” A physical book is there, in other words, it exists outside of a medium we use a lot but do not fully comprehend: technology.
Our relationship with print mediums has unquestionably changed and continues to change along the years. This has influenced and changed a number of different aspects in our life, from the way we consume and interact with written material to the creation of this material. It has put in question a number of things and impacted society in a wider context, not only the way we interact with the written world but, in some ways, the world as a whole.
Marketing Plan
In my poetry I strive to make the information and assault to the senses we experience daily silentRP. The importance of silence, the unsaid and the negative space is something that WOnot only I explore but hope to encourage my reader to ASWELLexplore. My target audience, therefore is anyone living in the current world. Once published I would endeavour to promote my Ppppoetry pamphlet in a number of ways using both print mediums and non-?print?? ONESmediums. NP?
My main focus would be on being an active member of the poetry community (which I would do) by being a part of poets’ social media groups as well as attending different events and networking. These are also important to keep AN? up date about the literary world and adapt to the constant change in the audience’s wants and needs which are constantly changing.
Social media platforms would be an effective way to not only have an online presence, making it easier for people to find me and know more about what I do, but also for me to be up to date with events such as readingS, workshops, festivals, that are happening that might be relevant and that I may want to participate in.
Instagram and Pinterest:
As poetry is generallyOFTEN a short piece of written work these are easier to share. I would use Instagram and Pinterest, two social media platforms focused on sharing photos, to post lines from poems and images that I found pertinent to the type of poetry featured in the pamphlet.
Facebook:
Having an online presence is important for readers to be able to find you online, so as to read more of your writingS?, buy your work, contact you about any collaboration, reading?, festival?, AND facilitate receiving feedback. Facebook would also be valuable in being informed about poetry events, for example, joining poetry groups such as Jeff Hilton’s Xing the line group???. It would also be importantA GR8 WAY to advertise any events I might be doing such as signings, reading, or a collaboration.
Blog AS A SCROLL DIARY?:
A blog, as well as aiding me in the promotion of my poetry would also be a platform to talk about other topics, for example the writing process,!!! thoughts on other written work, what I am reading so as to build a DEEPER?? relationship with my audience.
Website BLOG??:
Building a website would allow THE reader to have access to information about myself, my work, how to acquire it, any events I may be organizing or participating in and any articles AND X, reviews relevant to my work.
To be more involved in the poets’ community as well as expose myself to potential readers I would do GIVE??? reading or perform my poetry which can enhance or change a poem’s meaning making it interesting to people who have not read my work and those who may have. Poetry venues, libraries, book fairs, festivals would be some of the places to do this.
Poetry venues: ***KINDA CHUCKED IN WITH NO EXPALANATION??
- The Poetry Café
22 Betterton Street
London WC2H 9BX
Email: poetrycafe@
Telephone: 020 7420 9888
22 Betterton Street
London WC2H 9BX
Email: poetrycafe@
Telephone: 020 7420 9888
- Rhymes with Orange
Libraries:
- National Poetry Library
Belvedere Road
London SE1 8XX
Belvedere Road
London SE1 8XX
Book fairs:
- London Book Fair: Poetry Collective
Contact: Amy Walkeron +44 (0)208 910 7878.
Festivals:
- European Poetry Festival
- Cheltenham Poetry Festival
Website: cheltenhampoetryfest.co.uk
Twitter: https://twitter.com/
As well as attending poetry events I would also organize my own readingS. This would allow me to interact with other people interested in poetry and other poets. I would contact The Book Club about the venue and collaborate with other poets.
***
***
- The Book Club (100 – 106, Leonard Street
London, EC2A 4RH
London, EC2A 4RH
Collaborations:
Collaborating with others would not only help promote my pamphlet but would also be an (incredibly) enrichening experience /. as well as help me be a part of a wider community: the poets’ and artists’ community. Collaborating with OTHER TYPE OF? artist would also help expand and create innovative pieces SUCH AS? This could be a visual artist, a musician, a dancer, illustrator. Through Facebook groups such as ‘Wandsworth Arts Team’ which local artists are part of. ( INCOMPLETE - NO VERB)
As well as reviewing other authors’ work I would also submit my work to be reviewed:***
- Acumen:
Website: https://www.acumen-poetry.co.
Email: patriciaoxley6@gmail.com
- Agenda:
Website: http://www.agendapoetry.co.uk
- Ambit:
Website: http://www.ambitmagazine.co.uk
Email: contact@ambitmagazine.co.uk
- Envoi:
Email: envoi@cinnamonpress.com
- The London Magazine:
Website: https://www.thelondonmagazine.
- The Poetry Review:
Address: The Poetry Review, The Poetry Society, 22 Betterton Street, London WC2H 9BX
OPENING SENTENCE?
Working with local mediums such as local radio and local newspaper to promote my work either by sharing some of it or by talking about the writing process NO VERB.
- Riverside Radio
Website: http://www.riversideradio.com
- Wandsworth Times
Website: https://www.
Covering Letter
Joana Meehan
University of Roehampton
Erasmus House – Stuart Lodge
SW15 5PU – London
+447 542 872 770
Amy Acre
Bad Betty Press
Dear Ms. Acre,
I am writing to you to share my poems for your consideration.
In my poetry I attempt at one of your main objectives: making space for more and varied voices. However, the voice I intent to make space for, in many ways, is the reader’s.
I find myself fascinated with what one can say without saying as well as the balance between guiding the reader and allowing them to ‘take the lead’.
I am approaching you as I feel that my work may be a good fit with you as publishers.
It is my understanding that your main focus is on pamphlets and full collections by emerging authors. I believe, that in particular Joel Auterson’s work titled ‘Unremember’ you published in 2017 resonates with me as a writer.
I feel that these poems are fitting for our current time in their simplicity allowing one to read and instantly take something from it and perhaps later, if it disturbs something they can see reflected in their own lives, reflect more upon it and digest it for what it actually is: a snapshot of modern life and what it means and feels to be in it.
These are poems of how people are a result of their experiences. Their everyday, their pain, their questions, the things that they leave unsaid. This collection of poems is an attempt at saying it. Without doing so.
Thank you and all the best,
Joana Meehan
Statement of Intent
Poetry CAN BE BOTH?? is in equal parts unbelievably frustrating and incredibly rewarding. FOR ME WRITING MEANS ((To write poetry)) one has to observe and reflect about themselves as well as the world they are part of and the role they play in it. ((Whether when writing or reading,)) poetry allows us to look closely at something, at times making it clearer and other times making it unclear and unfamiliar (DELIBARTELY AMBIGIOUS??)) . It is in this unfamiliarity that poetry happens.??? The exciting possibilities the unpredictability of poetry provides CAN?takes us somewhere we had not planned for.
NP
NP
The work I find myself drawn to is poetry that encourages me to reflect. At its most self-indulgent, writing poetry is a calming, peaceful activity even when it is exactly the opposite of that: every frustration or sombre mood resulting from it welcome as FOR ME?? it is the only way to process the anxiety of living. I enjoy exploring different aesthetics, techniques and themes and seeing how these can stretch the meaning of what one is writing. It is fascinating how the literal and figurative meanings come together to allow us to continuously unravel a poem and reflect on the different angles we can consider.
In my opinion poetry is a form of creative writing that focuses just as much, if not more, on how things are said ASWELL AS??? rather than just what is being said. My poems tend to rely heavily on the unsaid, at times this being JUST??? almost as important as what is said. In my personal statement written for my application to university my first line was: ‘a blank piece of paper is as exciting as it gets’. At the time, what I meant (((by this))) was that alLLLL the possibilities available were exciting to me.
WHY NP??
WHY NP??
Now, however, I realize that perhaps my interest is not only in all the possibilities of how to fill the piece of paper but how to utilize it. (((What I mean by this is that))) finding the agreement between writing and omitting. The negative space, pauses and silences VERB MISSING possibilities in their own right. The challenging question of what one can say without actually saying is DIF WD!! a question I reflect on while??? and with my writing. The quest to find balance between sharing too much and saying just enough guiding my work NO VERB.
My interest in poetry was actually something that was made clear to me only while at U?u??niversity. A poet that sticks out as having had an influence on my writing is John Cage and the way he uses other peoples’ writing to generate his own work as well as his interesting take on spacing in some of his work. Another IS?would be Gertrude Stein and her exploration of possibilities which HAS??inspired me to be more experimental and being bolder. AndPPP lastly, poet Samiya Bashir who made me reflect on how I consider and work with structure and lineation. In a performance attended in my second year of university her reading, her)) pauses, her))AND? emphasis on certain words brought to my attention the importance of the placement of the words inON the page and how this too contributes to making a piece of work more engaging.
In my poems I tend to favour simple, colloquial?? language, AIMING?? my attempt is to write in a straightforward manner, being general while being specific, the focus being on the reflection the reader is invited to do. I find WOespecially fascinating focusing on everyday life and language and utilizing pauses and silences. NP??In our current world where our senses are constantly assaulted my poetry aims to provide relief. The reader is encouraged to take a moment, to pause, and rather than BEtold what to think: left to fill in the blanks himself THEMSELF.
Np????
Np????
In a culture that lives in a fast paced, overwhelming environment focusing on silence is challenging, especially when we consider our short attention spans and need for instant gratification. Nevertheless???, I FEEL ?? this (strenuous task?) is an important exercise absent from our lives. This is whyDW? I seek publication, to provide readers, in some small but hopefully significant way with a moment of silence: a moment of reflection
No comments:
Post a Comment