September 28, 2009

I thought the handout on Birkerts' The Gutenberg Elegies was interesting. Although I am very impressed with much of his foresight into what will occur in print culture (and what already has since 1994), I am not sure that the situation is as drastic as he thinks it is. For example, I don't think language will lose it's complexity and depth of meaning because of electronic communication. I don't know too much about linguistics, but one of the few things I do know is that languages are universally complex and logical. Just because a language or a dialect does not look the way we are used to seeing "proper" grammar does not mean it is not logical and complex. I do not think that language will lose subtlety, wit, and irony because of electronic communication. Electronic communication is primarily for the masses, and were the masses ever the masters of wit and paradox? No, but they have always been able to communicate effectively, and often beautifully, whether in print, song, or visual representation. Clearly, electronic communication can be used for academic discourse as well as common communication (ahem.... blogs).

I am also interested in what was said on this handout about the lack of physical interaction that develops from electronic information and communication. It is true, I often communicate more with friends online than I do in person, and I definitely prefer to research online than in the library. I am just not sure as to what the implications of these preferences and practices are. As far as friendship and love are concerned, I think that technology has increased our capacity for maintaining relationships. Personally, it has been much easier for me to maintain deep, meaningful friendships because of e-mail and facebook. When I do have the opportunity of seeing those people face to face, I think our interaction is enriched by the communication we have had online. With the invention of the railroad two centuries behind us, society has long moved past the age when everyone one might communicate with remained in relative proximity. Communication, and print, must change to keep up with the physical distance.

This handout has prompted me to think about how print culture has changed since Stephen Burroughs wrote his memoir. People who think they are more important than they are still write memoirs. And those memoirs are still read by lots of people. The letters that are included in his memoir are interesting in light of the topic of the changes in print culture. Traditional "correspondence" has all but diminished from popular society. But we can see from Burroughs' memoir that that may not be a bad thing. He says he wrote several letters to his father that his father never received (if we can believe him that he actually wrote them, that is). Burroughs also has hardly any communication with his wife and family when he is separated from them. He also has no way of knowing that his whole reason for going all the way to Georgia has already left the state. Then we must also consider the literacy rate and how that would effect Burroughs' readership. Even if people are not reading as closely as they once did, as Birkets says, at least people are reading.

I would also be really interested in looking at how the carnivalesque interacts with the changes in print culture, but I do not feel competent enough on this subject to get to into it yet. From what I do think I understood of Vice, however, the larger public body is important to carnival elements. What does it mean then that electronic print allows for the larger public body to interact in the same texts more readily? People can also actively respond to the actors because of electronic print. Does that more electronic print more carnivalesque?