Early in Clay Shirky's Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations, he brings up something called "The Tragedy of the Commons," which was a similar theme brought up in my book review of Barbara Monroe's Crossing the Digital Divide. The Tragedy of the Commons concerns how in social situations, when people share resources, they have no incentive to not take more than they need. Shirky's example is a group of shepherds who share a pasture, and have an agreement to not overgraze their sheep, so the other shepherds can feed their flock. Shirky talks about how nothing is stopping one of the shepherds from leaving his sheep out longer, and if he were to do that, the others would have to retaliate to keep up. He also discusses how many restaurants will place a mandatory tip on a large group, because people tend to leave smaller tips in a group setting by assuming others will carry the burden.
This relates to Monroe's idea that on online discussions, many people refuse to speak out or argue, especially in an educational setting, because they're either afraid they're the only one who has that opinion, or someone else will post it for them. I found it interesting that the same theme popped up twice in both books.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Tapscott Part 1
After the Ong and Baron books, I was a little fed up with hearing someone from a different generation attempt to analyze the problems of a younger generation. A lot of analysis from previous readings, while articulate and studied, was hampered by generational gap issues and assumptions because of differences between the writer and the subjects.
Tapscott, then, finds a very agreeable middle ground by utilizing his children in Grown Up Digital. Early on in the book he admits his shortcomings as an outsider, studying a group he isn't a part of. He says "My two most important collaborators were my children ... who spent many hours with me brainstorming, reviewing ideas, and often setting me straight." This honestly is admirable and (in my opinion) gives the book much more credibility. I think it's important to be humble and honest, especially when trying to reach some sort of conclusion about an important argument.
Tapscott, then, finds a very agreeable middle ground by utilizing his children in Grown Up Digital. Early on in the book he admits his shortcomings as an outsider, studying a group he isn't a part of. He says "My two most important collaborators were my children ... who spent many hours with me brainstorming, reviewing ideas, and often setting me straight." This honestly is admirable and (in my opinion) gives the book much more credibility. I think it's important to be humble and honest, especially when trying to reach some sort of conclusion about an important argument.
Things Fall Apart (Part II)
In Walter Ong's Orality and Literacy, he talks about oral societies and how (compared to literate societies) prefer "loads of epithets" that reinforce stereotypes and expectations about their culture. Phrases like "the manly warrior" or "a sturdy wall" or "the nurturing mother" populate the language. He also states that these descriptors are "cumbersome and tiresomely redundant because of their aggregative weight."
I think it's interesting to think about this idea of epithets and stereotypes between the society in Things Fall Apart and our own society in the U.S. Okonkwo struggles with his son's supposedly effeminate personality because his society expects men to be strong and masculine. An oral society like Okonkwo's would fail to accept someone like Nwoye because of his atypical traits.
Compare that to a literate society like our own and you'll find it's not as extreme. Our culture still places expectations upon boys and girls to act a certain way, quite literally from birth. Boys are given a "masculine" color (blue) while girls get "feminine" colored clothes (pink). We still expect boys to enjoy sports and rough housing and girls to play with dolls and dress-up.
But what distinguishes the two is the reaction to someone breaking the norms. Okonkwo chokes Nwoye when he finds he's joined the Christian missionaries, and disowns him shortly thereafter. Things are (generally) not as extreme today.
I think it's interesting to think about this idea of epithets and stereotypes between the society in Things Fall Apart and our own society in the U.S. Okonkwo struggles with his son's supposedly effeminate personality because his society expects men to be strong and masculine. An oral society like Okonkwo's would fail to accept someone like Nwoye because of his atypical traits.
Compare that to a literate society like our own and you'll find it's not as extreme. Our culture still places expectations upon boys and girls to act a certain way, quite literally from birth. Boys are given a "masculine" color (blue) while girls get "feminine" colored clothes (pink). We still expect boys to enjoy sports and rough housing and girls to play with dolls and dress-up.
But what distinguishes the two is the reaction to someone breaking the norms. Okonkwo chokes Nwoye when he finds he's joined the Christian missionaries, and disowns him shortly thereafter. Things are (generally) not as extreme today.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
A Better Pencil (Part 1)
On page 66, Dennis Baron states (quite nonchalantly) that "penmanship is about to become a forgotten skill." He states this as though it's common knowledge that our society is going to completely forget how to use a pen or pencil.
While I definitely think Baron makes some valid arguments here regarding how computers and laptops have changed writing, the pessimistic reactionary attitude that "kids these days just don't care about writing!!" is really childish. For all the good things that Baron discusses in regards to computers and writing, his opinions are invalidated when he claims that writing is dying because computers are so easy to use.
Earlier in the book he even discusses how people in the past may have mocked pencil users because the inkwell and quill was seen as more sophisticated and concise compared to a pencil. And just a few pages later he says "but handwriting itself is far from dead." So why does he say so frankly that "penmanship is about to become a forgotten skill"? It's a strange statement to make and and when he contradicts himself it's hard to take it seriously. I'm curious to see more elaboration in the second half of the book.
While I definitely think Baron makes some valid arguments here regarding how computers and laptops have changed writing, the pessimistic reactionary attitude that "kids these days just don't care about writing!!" is really childish. For all the good things that Baron discusses in regards to computers and writing, his opinions are invalidated when he claims that writing is dying because computers are so easy to use.
Earlier in the book he even discusses how people in the past may have mocked pencil users because the inkwell and quill was seen as more sophisticated and concise compared to a pencil. And just a few pages later he says "but handwriting itself is far from dead." So why does he say so frankly that "penmanship is about to become a forgotten skill"? It's a strange statement to make and and when he contradicts himself it's hard to take it seriously. I'm curious to see more elaboration in the second half of the book.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Things Fall Apart (Part II)
In Walter Ong's Orality and Literacy, he talks about oral societies and how (compared to literate societies) prefer "loads of epithets" that reinforce stereotypes and expectations about their culture. Phrases like "the manly warrior" or "a sturdy wall" or "the nurturing mother" populate the language. He also states that these descriptors are "cumbersome and tiresomely redundant because of their aggregative weight."
I think it's interesting to think about this idea of epithets and stereotypes between the society in Things Fall Apart and our own society in the U.S. Okonkwo struggles with his son's supposedly effeminate personality because his society expects men to be strong and masculine. An oral society like Okonkwo's would fail to accept someone like Nwoye because of his atypical traits.
Compare that to a literate society like our own and you'll find it's not as extreme. Our culture still places expectations upon boys and girls to act a certain way, quite literally from birth. Boys are given a "masculine" color (blue) while girls get "feminine" colored clothes (pink). We still expect boys to enjoy sports and rough housing and girls to play with dolls and dress-up.
But what distinguishes the two is the reaction to someone breaking the norms. Okonkwo chokes Nwoye when he finds he's joined the Christian missionaries, and disowns him shortly thereafter. Things are (generally) not as extreme today. I think it would be interesting to talk further about how the stereotypes that are so casually evident in the language of oral societies contribute to the continuing reinforcement of those stereotypes compared to a literate society.
I think it's interesting to think about this idea of epithets and stereotypes between the society in Things Fall Apart and our own society in the U.S. Okonkwo struggles with his son's supposedly effeminate personality because his society expects men to be strong and masculine. An oral society like Okonkwo's would fail to accept someone like Nwoye because of his atypical traits.
Compare that to a literate society like our own and you'll find it's not as extreme. Our culture still places expectations upon boys and girls to act a certain way, quite literally from birth. Boys are given a "masculine" color (blue) while girls get "feminine" colored clothes (pink). We still expect boys to enjoy sports and rough housing and girls to play with dolls and dress-up.
But what distinguishes the two is the reaction to someone breaking the norms. Okonkwo chokes Nwoye when he finds he's joined the Christian missionaries, and disowns him shortly thereafter. Things are (generally) not as extreme today. I think it would be interesting to talk further about how the stereotypes that are so casually evident in the language of oral societies contribute to the continuing reinforcement of those stereotypes compared to a literate society.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Orality and Literacy Part 1
From reading a brief history of Walter Ong via Wikipedia and other online sources, it's very clear he is well respected in his field and someone whose opinions and writings should be carefully studied. This really upsets me, because so far I've found the information contained in Orality and Literacy to be extremely dated and full of lots of common knowledge information. I guess this can mostly be due to the publication date (1982), but I understand how Ong's book can be useful as a starting off point for our classes discussions and as something to reference back to as we read more complex books and discover more modern ideas.
It's really unfortunate that the book is so old, because Ong was really on the cusp of a technological revolution. If Orality and Literacy had been written just a decade later I'd suspect at least 75% of the book would be discussing computers and new technology. Ong discusses how writing is a learned style of communication and what implications a written text has for how a population forms their ideas.
I'm really curious about how different this book would have been if Ong had been around long enough to write it today. I think the Internet has really changed orality and textual writing forever. Things like globalization and literacy would have never been paired together until the internet, but now we've got things like worldwide emotive symbols and languages like HTML and CSS which are essentially universal.
I think Ong would have been frustrated with how the internet has changed written literacy. In chapter one he expresses frustration at the phrase "oral literature" and how it demonstrates reveals our "inability to represent to our own minds a heritage of verbally organized materials except as some variant of writing, even when they have nothing to do with writing at all." I can imagine Ong shaking his fist at pre-teens and their texting language of "OMG HOW R U WAT R U DOIN 2DAY??"
But like I said, that's why I feel like this text is out of date. If you want to understand new trends and new literacy, you need to approach them with an open mind and think critically about them. I think Ong really lays the foundation for some deeper thought with Orality and Literacy, but in terms of being a useful tool for discussing modern technology and how it works with language, I think it's less than helpful.
It's really unfortunate that the book is so old, because Ong was really on the cusp of a technological revolution. If Orality and Literacy had been written just a decade later I'd suspect at least 75% of the book would be discussing computers and new technology. Ong discusses how writing is a learned style of communication and what implications a written text has for how a population forms their ideas.
I'm really curious about how different this book would have been if Ong had been around long enough to write it today. I think the Internet has really changed orality and textual writing forever. Things like globalization and literacy would have never been paired together until the internet, but now we've got things like worldwide emotive symbols and languages like HTML and CSS which are essentially universal.
I think Ong would have been frustrated with how the internet has changed written literacy. In chapter one he expresses frustration at the phrase "oral literature" and how it demonstrates reveals our "inability to represent to our own minds a heritage of verbally organized materials except as some variant of writing, even when they have nothing to do with writing at all." I can imagine Ong shaking his fist at pre-teens and their texting language of "OMG HOW R U WAT R U DOIN 2DAY??"
But like I said, that's why I feel like this text is out of date. If you want to understand new trends and new literacy, you need to approach them with an open mind and think critically about them. I think Ong really lays the foundation for some deeper thought with Orality and Literacy, but in terms of being a useful tool for discussing modern technology and how it works with language, I think it's less than helpful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)