Final Project Proposal

For this final project I plan to write a revised version of a combination of the second and third writing projects. For my second project, I discussed the novel Frankenstein in terms of mutability, and for my third project, I discussed the increasingly mutable technological writing medium. I would like to discuss how these two ideas are related and how writers are becoming similar to Frankenstein himself in stitching together old modes of writing to create a new creature out of what has come before. Also, I would like to examine the electronic Frankenstein website and discuss the mutability of the text and its usefulness as a new media text. In doing so, I would like to examine how the writer must learn from Frankenstein and exercise caution in sending his creature out into the world, keeping in mind the pitfalls of technological writing media.
To revise my rhetoric, I plan to work on taking an approach in applying Frankenstein to new media discussion. I plan to incorporate some of the methods that Joseph Harris addresses in the fourth chapter of Rewriting: “acknowledging influences,” “turning an approach on itself,” and “reflexivity.” These terms as a whole refer to the process of incorporating critical views into one’s own writing and adding to the discussion of a topic. Ultimately, I want to work more with addressing the critical perspectives that I incorporate into the text and examining where my own perspective fits into this discussion.
In terms of style, for this project’s revision, I would like to work on the variety of my sentences and clauses. I have a tendency to write longer sentences, relying on phrases such as this one to extend my sentences and ideas. This style works well, but I want to experiment with different types of phrases and clauses and work on varying my sentence length. As for grammar, I would also like to vary my sentences in order to avoid the use of “is” and passive sentence phrasing. Overall, I just want to work on rewriting my sentences using different constructions and working to make more active and interesting sentences.

Reading the Electronic Medium

Self-Reflection
I think that I incorporate a couple different views in my essay but am able to utilize them in a way that compliments and complicates (rather than contradicts) my argument. If I were to come back to this project I would elaborate on the conclusion, and to further it, I would combine this essay with my Frankenstein argument to talk about the mutability of reading and writing in electronic and print media.

Reading the Electronic Medium
When I was in middle school, teaches taught cursive touted it as a necessity for writing in high school and college. Fearing that all would be lost if I did not exactly replicate each and every loop and curl, I practiced along with the other students and was surprised when upon reaching high school, not a single teacher asked for any assignment written in cursive. It was rare that teachers asked for a handwritten sheet at all; they took points off if it was not typed. The developed world is moving away from pen and paper, and even printed novels and newspapers are produced at a keyboard. The electronic age has transformed daily life, especially in regards to reading and writing. We have seemed to readily accept every new media forms with open arms, sometimes with a disregard for its proper use and implications; this phenomenon urges closer attention. New media writing spans many areas, combining audio, hyperlinks to outside sources, and perhaps video or visual elements as well. Obviously, new diversions can take away from writing, distracting the reader away from the ideas of the writer. However, this distraction is not always evident, and oftentimes, the medium adds weight and dimension to the message. Although the medium does not always (but indeed should) enhance the message, the options available to writers and readers through new media has been largely responsible for many worthwhile and compelling creative works that create a more interactive relationship between reader, writer, and text.

A term often associated with electronic media is choice: choice of the reader and of the writer. The reader has more of an active, participatory role in determining not only the interpretation of the text but also the direction the text will lead him. For example, “The Museum,” a hypertextual creation by Adam Kenney allows readers to choose which path they wish to pursue through the museum, mirroring an actual trip to such an institution and the highly subjective and individualized nature of such an experience (Kenney). Obviously, this case is one of many examples of hypertext stories that exist today, but they all give the reader more of a role to play in the reading experience. Choosing which links to follow ultimately determine what message a reader will obtain from the experience and relinquishing some control from the writer. Birkerts argues that placing emphasis on the reader as the paramount participant in the writing process is problematic. He describes his personal horror house which he refers to as a “‘hypertext hotel’” (Birkerts 160) forwarding the term of critic Robert Coover. He explains how both readers and writes can hack the words of the writer, creating new meaning and significance. In his words, technological media deals a “mighty blow to the long-static writer-reader relationship” (163). Birkerts, of course places writer before reader when he writes of the “writer-reader relationship.” The writer, to him, is dominant. The “point” of reading, states Birkerts is “to be subjected to the creative will of another” (163). This statement may be true of print media, and indeed it works well for this form; I often read to get lost in the imagination of another and get out of my own head. However, electronic media often have a different point that the author is trying to get across to his reader, perhaps a point that relies on engaged interaction and individual interpretation. Birkerts’s claim that the writer is always placed above the reader rests on the questionable assumption that the point of electronic media is always the same for print media. Returning to “The Museum,” one can see that the message of the author his enhanced by his medium. The choice of the reader is important in mirroring the engagement one has in a museum experience. In this way, the purpose of a blog or an electronic essay is often different than in novels or journals; they rely on choice and interactivity to derive their message. Although the role of the reader in the direction of what is read is evolving, it is not necessarily a negative change.

Likewise, the role of the writer is not always minimized with the introduction of choice. Birkerts attempts to convey that the power of the writer is being diminished. However, one can argue that this authority is merely changing, similar to that of the reader. The wide array of options now available to the writer – including audio, video, hypertexts, and animation – allow the writer to wear multiple hats. He is the writer, the designer, even the editor and the publisher of blogs and websites. Although Birkerts feels that electronic media create a “candy-store array of choices” (160), can one really state that this choice is definitively and undeniably damaging? The connotation of saying that one has the vast options available in a candy store is to say that there are many bright, flashy objects all vying for attention. A kid in a candy store will most likely eat himself into a coma. Obviously, some writers do take the approach, advocating that more is better and the message does not matter. However, these writers are simply not skilled in the medium. Choice, for a writer, can be a powerful tool when used correctly. The appropriate comparison would be a master craftsman who uses a hammer to build a house as opposed to a novice carpenter who uses it to nail his finger to the wall. Marshall McLuhan – author of the book The Medium is the Massage, which itself combines old and new media – argues for awareness of new media. He asserts that “all media work us over completely” and that mindfulness of how visual and textual pieces work together is important in the technological age (McLuhan 26). The choice of the writer is a greater control over how his thoughts and ideas further envelop and “work over” the reader. In addition to “The Museum” which was discussed in association with the writer’s choice, another multimedia writing project “Inanimate Alice,” makes evident the fact the with technology, a text can be enhanced through the writer’s imagination. “Inanimate Alice” follows a young girl’s inner thoughts as her mother takes her to find her father after he has been missing from their base camp for a few days (Pullinger). As a complimentary element to the text which tells the story, the piece also makes use of pictures and music. The medium in this case envelops the reader. When reading, one hears the electronic music that accompanies the girl’s games, and the mindset of the young girl truly comes alive. Through this visual and auditory technology, the writer was able to make the choice of more actively involving the reader in the story for the purpose of invoking some of the childish wonder and fright that this girl is experiencing. The writer, in a way, still retains his creative choice; sometimes this choice involves giving the reader greater control and immersion.

However, some critics, like Birkerts, disapprove of the scope of choice that new media allow the writer and the reader. Choice can be overwhelming to the human mind. If given the option, the mind often wanders and strays, unsure of which path to take. In his article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?,” Nicolas Carr asks if the depth and range that the internet allows is dividing our attention and expanding choice too far. Of the internet, Carr notes that “it injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed…the result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration” (Carr). Carr certainly has a point. New media, especially those types that live on the World Wide Web, can be distracting. Sometimes hyperlinks propel the reader forward even before the current passage has been read. However, this type of reading happens with books one reads as well. If the story is uninteresting, one finds himself flipping through pages, looking forward towards the ending. Although surely, the internet divides a reader’s attention and makes concentration, all social ills cannot be placed on electronic media. Sometimes the uses of flashy stunts like the use of hyperlinks are simply gimmicks. Hyperlinks will not help make a dry piece more interesting, but it will make a reader feel more unfocused and thus gives the sense that his attention is being pulled in all directions. Honestly, one cannot take a stand that all electronic writing projects are revolutionary and worthwhile. Some truly are distracting and unexciting. However, one cannot view the whole of the genre by its weakest parts, and unsuccessful use of the medium is the fault of the writer, not of technology. Although this type of writing has been evolving steadily in past years, it has not yet reached the highest level of what it can be. Every medium has flaws and limitations. Print media can be criticized for being too stagnant and inflexible, but it is still useful. In the hands of someone who has a real grasp of the medium, it comes to life. When the medium and the message work together, distraction is not evident because the medium is the message. Electronic media are far from perfect, but it still has a lot to offer for people who understand how to use it.

Writing, as a verb, is expanding and so too must our understanding and use of various writing media. Writing and reading have always had many meanings. One can read a room or read an emotion on someone’s face. A fate is said to be written in the stars just as a novel is written on paper. Writing and reading, as evolving terms, can therefore be extended to new, evolving media. One can read the meaning of a visual image as clearly as it is written in the context of the essay. The practice of drawing meaning from these events expands the reader’s creative mind and brings more choice to both the roles of reader and writer. There will always be pieces of writing that are more successful than another, we as writers must only be mindful of the medium in which we are writing. We, as contemporary Frankensteins, stitching together life from old forms, must just be cautious of what we are sending out into the world, learning from the mistake of the modern-day Prometheus.

I pledge my honor that I have completed this work in accordance with the Honor Code.
~Alexandria Smythe

Works Cited
Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies: The Fate of Reading in an Electronic Age. Boston: Faber and Faber, 1994. Print.
Carr, Nicolas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” The Atlantic. N.p., 1 July 2008. Web. 24 Apr. 2013.
Kenney, Adam. “The Museum.” Cyberartsweb. N.p., 4 Apr. 2004. Web. 12 Apr. 2013.
MacLuhan, Marshall. The Medium Is the Message. Corte Madera: Gingko Pr., 2005. Print.
Pullinger, Kate. “Inanimate Alice, Episode 1: China.” Electronic Literature Collection. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2013.

Reading the Electronic Medium

When in middle school, at least in my experience, cursive is taught and touted as a necessity for writing in high school and college. Fearing that all would be lost if I did not exactly replicate each and every loop and curl, I practiced along with the other students and was surprised when upon reaching high school, not a single teacher asked for any assignment written in cursive. It was rare that teachers asked for a handwritten sheet at all, they took points off if it was not typed. The developed world is moving away from pen and paper, and even printed novels and newspapers are produced at a keyboard. The electronic age has transformed daily life, especially in regards to reading and writing. We have seemed to readily accept every new media forms with open arms, sometimes with a disregard for its proper use and implications; this phenomenon urges closer attention. New media writing spans many areas, combining audio, hyperlinks to outside sources, and perhaps video or visual elements as well. Obviously, new diversions can take away from writing, distracting the reader away from the ideas of the writer. However, this distraction is not always evident, and oftentimes, the medium adds weight and dimension to the message. Although, the medium does not always (but indeed should) enhance the message, the options available to writers and readers through new media has been largely responsible for many worthwhile and compelling creative works.

A term often associated with electronic media is choice: choice of the reader and of the writer. In regards to the reader, he has more of an active, participatory role in determining not only the interpretation of the text, but often he also decides in which direction the text will lead. For example, The Museum, a hypertextual creation by Adam Kenney allows readers to choose which path they wish to pursue through the museum, mirroring an actual trip to such an institution and the highly subjective and individualized nature of such an experience. Obviously, this case is one of many examples of hypertext stories that exist today, but they all give the reader more of a role to play in the reading experience. Choosing which links to follow ultimately determine what message a reader will obtain from the experience and relinquishing some control from the writer. Birkerts argues that placing emphasis on the reader as the paramount participant in the writing process is problematic. He describes his personal horror house which he refers to as a “‘hypertext hotel’” (Birkerts 160) forwarding the term of critic Robert Coover. He explains how both readers and writes can hack the words of the writer, creating new meaning and significance. In his words, technological media deals a “mighty blow to the long-static writer-reader relationship” (163). Birkerts, of course places writer before reader when he writes of the “writer-reader relationship.” The writer, to him, is dominant. The “point” of reading, states Birkerts is “to be subjected to the creative will of another” (163). This statement may be true of print media, and indeed it works well for this form; I often read to get lost in the imagination of another and get out of my own head. However, electronic media often have a different point that the author is trying to get across to his reader, perhaps a point that relies on engaged interaction and individual interpretation. Returning to the Museum, one can see that the message of the author his enhanced by his medium. The choice of the reader is important in mirroring the engagement one has in a museum experience. Although the role of the reader in the direction of what is read is evolving, it is not necessarily a negative change.

Likewise, the role of the writer is not minimized in the concept of choice. Birkerts attempts to convey that the power of the writer is being diminished. However, one can argue that this authority is merely changing, similar to that of the reader. The wide array of options now available to the writer – including audio, video, hypertexts, and animation – allow the writer to wear multiple hats. He is the writer, the designer, even the editor and the publisher of blogs and websites. Although Birkerts feels that electronic media create a “candy-store array of choices” (160), can one really state that this choice is definitively and undeniably damaging? The connotation of saying that one has the vast options available in a candy store is to say that there are many bright, flashy objects all vying for attention. A kid in a candy store will most likely eat himself into a coma. Obviously, some writers do take the approach, advocating that more is better and the message does not matter. However, these writers are simply not skilled in the medium. Choice, for a writer, can be a powerful tool when used correctly. The appropriate comparison would be a master craftsman who uses a hammer to build a house as opposed to a novice carpenter who uses it to nail his finger to the wall. Marshall McLuhan – author of the book The Medium is the Massage, which itself combines old and new media – argues for awareness of new media. He asserts that “all media work us over completely” (McLuhan 26). The choice of the writer is a greater control over how his thoughts and ideas further envelop and “work over” the reader.

However, some critics, like Birkerts, disapprove of the scope of choice that new media allow the writer and the reader. Choice can be overwhelming to the human mind. If given the option, the mind often wanders and strays, unsure of which path to take. In his article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?,” Nicolas Carr asks if the depth and range that the internet allows is dividing our attention and expanding choice too far. Of the internet, Carr notes that “it injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed…the result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration” (Carr). Carr certainly has a point. New media, especially those types that live on the World Wide Web, can be distracting. Sometimes hyperlinks propel the reader forward even before the current passage has been read. However, this type of reading happens with books one reads as well. If the story is uninteresting, one finds himself flipping through pages, looking forward towards the ending. Although surely, the internet divides a reader’s attention and makes concentration, all social ills cannot be placed on electronic media. Sometimes the uses of flashy stunts like the use of hyperlinks are simply gimmicks. Hyperlinks will not help make a dry piece more interesting, but it will make a reader feel more unfocused and thus gives the sense that his attention is being pulled in all directions. Honestly, one cannot take a stand that all electronic writing projects are revolutionary and worthwhile. Some truly are distracting and unexciting. However, one cannot view the whole of the genre by its weakest parts. Although this type of writing has been evolving steadily in past years, it has not yet reached the highest level of what it can be. Every medium has flaws and limitations. Print media can be criticized for being too stagnant and inflexible, but it is still useful. I the hands of someone who has a real grasp of the medium, it comes to life. Electronic media are far from perfect, but it still has a lot to offer for people who understand how to use it.

Writing, as a verb, is expanding and so too must our understanding and use of various writing media. Writing and reading have always had many meanings. One can read a room or read an emotion on someone’s face. A fate is said to be written in the stars just as a novel is written on paper. Writing and reading can therefore be extended to new media. One can read the meaning of a visual image as clearly as it is written in the context of the essay. The practice of drawing meaning from these events expands the reader’s creative mind and brings more choice to both the roles of reader and writer. There will always be pieces of writing that are more successful than another, we as writers must only be mindful of the medium in which we are writing. We, as contemporary Frankensteins, stitching together life from old forms, must just be cautious of what we are sending out into the world, learning from the mistake of the modern-day Prometheus.

Remediating the Medium

Sven Birkerts is deeply fearful of remediated texts – hyperlinks, electronic essays, the digital world as a whole that does not live within the pen and on the paper. Indeed, the more tangible medium of print is giving way to new media, and this reality is represented in the prevalent culture of Facebook, blogs, email, and text messaging. According to Birkerts, “hand-written letters gave way to typed letters, which became word-processed letters a great many of the, structured in advance software…e-mail chatter is making rapid inroads on the tradition of paper envelop and stamp” (Birkerts 227). Electronic media are undisputedly making a push to overcome traditional media. However, these forms still exist, but their messages are now made all the more powerful by their medium. A hand-written love letter means much more to the recipient than an affectionate e-mail. The freedom to choose the medium in which a writer works makes the message all the more powerful. We are not forgetting the importance of print media but rather highlighting its importance by using it as a truly worthy and appropriate genre. Blogging is a medium, much like the old-fashioned journal, for ideas that are not always fully developed but rather quick and interactive. One would not necessarily make a book out of the ideas presented in a blog or a journal. One does not use the fine china for a backyard barbeque with family, and one does not use print media for discursive wandering. Rather than replacing traditional means of writing, people are simply given greater choice of how they wish to present such writing. Marshall McLuhan in his work, The Medium is the Massage, suggests that new media has a purpose; it is not to replace old methods but to extend them. The medium is a persuasive tool, it “work[s] us over completely” (McLuhan 25).
Remediated texts are not to be feared. With any artistic form, there are pieces that stand out and make use of the medium in ways that enhance rather than detract, and there are pieces that fall flat and are a poor representation of what can be done with the tools at hand. A clay sculpture made in an elementary art class will not look like one molded by professional hands, but one cannot judge the merit of this mode of expression by its basest form. Janet Murray, author of Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace and a teacher of electronic fiction, proposes that one not look at the potential for failure within the genre but at the potential for great success and originality. Murray states that “the spirit of the hacker is one of the great creative wellsprings of our time, causing the inanimate circuits to sing with ever more individual and quirky voices; the spirit of the bard is eternal and irreplaceable” (Murray 9). The modernist writer is still endowed with the poetic nature of old writers, but he has evolved with the changing times. Some electronic texts have more merit than other, just as with any text, but the potential for greatness is still housed within the artist and his medium.
The internet offers the writer new choices on how to craft his message, potentially making it more powerful than he could with mere pen and paper. For example The Museum, a hypertextual story that lives only as a web-based text, makes use of the internet and its advantages to mirror the experience of a museum. One can choose which room to enter, which pieces to look more closely at and which to walk past. This text is not without its flaws (it was perhaps a bit discursive, and the hyperlinks were at times too distracting to concentrate on story). However, the medium was more effective in giving the reading the experience of a museum than pen and paper would have done. The emphasis is on the reader to create meaning from his individual experience much like when one looks into a painting or a sculpture housed in a museum. “The medium is the message” (McLuhan 26). It works over the reader and is meant to enhance the reading experience. The level of success that a remediated text achieves depends on numerous factors, but the artist is at least now free to choose.

Techno-Speak

“Is Google Making Us Stupid?” The short answer, quite possibly yes, at least in the sense of memorization and such, but the more important question for me would be, is it worth it? Are there benefits to having a wealth of human information at our fingertips that makes losing the ability to retain it all worthwhile? Before humans began writing information down, people had herculean memories. In comparison, the brains of today are rather puny in their ability to recall facts. Studies have shown that when people believe that a piece of information will be available to them later, they are more likely to forget this bit of human knowledge. Nicolas Carr’s aforementioned question raises issues of minimal memorization, lack of concentration, and technological dependence. It is the last line of Nicolas Carr’s article that is especially unnerving: “as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence” (Carr).
By now, many of us must realize what we are losing through Google, through the internet, through 24/7 distraction, but we are still plugged in. We therefore continue because we believe the damage to be worth it, so what do we gain? In terms of essay-writing, we stand to gain much from the advancements in technology. Hyperlinks, in particular, help to facilitate the creative mind. Adam Kenney’s digital interactive cyberdrama, The Museum, is composed of text and hyperlinks, leading the reader in whichever direction he wishes to go, much like a real museum. Kenney’s choice of media works to simulate the actual experience of a museum, making this particular medium far more effective than pen and paper for this particular message. These elements of choice and interaction in The Museum work to push the limits of the traditional reading experience. Janet Murray, author of Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace, notes that her electronic fiction students are becoming more and more comfortable with the electronic medium and she expresses excitement at the implications that this knowledge will have on the future of electronic writing. She writes that “every year [her] students arrive feeling more at home with electronic environments and are more prepared to elicit something with the tone of a human voice out of the silent circuitry of the machine” (Murray 9). For Murray, the increase in electronic advancements is thrilling in that it allows one to test the boundaries of creativity. Hypertexts, video, audio, images are all available to a writer working in the electronic medium.
If Google is making us stupid, at least the rest of the internet is making up for it. Although yes, our memories are not what they used to be, and yes we are more easily distracted, these are inevitable byproducts of the changing times. We keep using the internet because it is useful. The internet is a powerful tool for the writer and provides a medium for creative expression that would not be possible with mere pen and paper. Learning to tune out the distractions of the internet seems to me to be a more realist and useful objective than unplugging oneself completely. Stop using Google. Grab a dictionary, an encyclopedia, a novel. Turn off the computer and focus. It will not be easy. The internet has a lot to offer for the writer, but just like any tool, he must learn how to use it productively.

K.J. Sanchez and Forwarding (Extra Credit 2)

K. J. Sanchez is a playwright/activist/producer (she refers to herself as a “slasher”) who uses interviews as a tool for gathering research for her plays and forwarding it into her material. She spoke here at Washington College on Tuesday, April 9 at the Lit House for her first of two lectures on playwriting. She referred to this session as a “craft talk,” discussing the methods she uses to put together a play. Her approach differed from my previous conception of what exactly a playwright does. I pictured a lone writer, sitting in a room, letting her imaginative determine the characters, the plot, the setting of the story. This, however, is not the case. Sanchez’s work is deeply informed by those around her, borrowing from the stories that others wish to hear told. She explained what she called “the art of the interview” wherein she talks with others about their experiences. She uses three methods: recording and transcribing, listening and later writing a story from that person’s perspective, and listening and simply allowing the conversation to inspire a scene or a character. These methods seem to me to be a type of forwarding, borrowing from the ideas of others and using them as evidence, lending logos and ethos. Sanchez notes how her plays closely resemble “collages,” assemblages of different pieces and materials that come together to create a cohesive whole. Rather than starting off with a clear story in mind she researches intensively on a topic and later puts the different pieces together into a more traditional story arc. The similarity to Marshal McLuhan’s “The Medium is the Massage” occurred to me, particularly the use of collage and her description of the “visceral” elements of a play that are in balance with the overall message since McLuhan’s argument is told partially through images. I was then somewhat amused to learn that Sanchez had been involved in a project early in her career entitled “The Medium” in which she forwarded the argument of McLuhan into a new medium, the play. She did not elaborate very much on this early project, but I was interested about how forwarding McLuhan’s argument into a different medium changed its own message (or massage). The play form is one that still combines writing and images, “writing in visceral forms” as Sanchez referred to it, and becomes a collage of these two elements. Without being able to view the play, it is difficult to tell how the two, the book and the play, are similar or different in their expression of the message through the medium, but it is interesting to think about what McLuhan’s own reaction would have been. Since McLuhan’s argument points to the medium of expression being important to the message, would he have been receptive to its interpretation in the form of a play instead of the original text? Somehow it is easier to imagine McLuhan’s text being forwarded into a newer, technological medium rather than the historical genre of the play. Overall, Sanchez’s idea of forwarding, through her plays is an interesting one to consider in my own writing.

The Electronic Medium

“All media work us over completely. They are so pervasive in their personal, economic, aesthetic, psychological, moral, ethical, and social consequences that they leave no part of us untouched, unaffected, unaltered. The medium is the massage.”
-Marshal McLuhan, The Medium is the Massage

The way in which a story is told is often as deeply influential, if not more so, than its meaning, at least according to Marshal McLuhan, author of The Medium is the Massage. In the tradition of oral storytelling of the past, modern campers crowd around camp fires, eager to hear the ghost stories the make their blood run cold. The camp counselor’s voice softens and then becomes loud at the climax of the story, causing the children to jump in fear in the dark, surrounded by the imagined monsters of the story. Consider reading one of these stories in front of a bright computer screen, in the middle of the day. Then imagine hearing it read in front of a warm fire that is the only light in the midst of the pitch black forest with the reader’s voice inflecting to show fear and excitement. Which presentation would render the more desired effect? Similarly, the way in which an argument is presented has a great impact on the way it is perceived.

Counter to the views of McLuhan, critic Sven Birkerts describes the way in which electronic media negatively impact today’s generation of readers and writers, while he instead prefers pen and paper, pages and ink to be a universal medium of creation. Birkerts writes in his book The Gutenberg Elegies that “may educators say that our students are less and less able to read, or analyze, or write with clarity and purpose” (119) due to the changes inherent in the electronic age. Opponents of pen and paper may have argued that the ability to memorize would be lost, and opponents of the telegraph may have argued that the ability to speak in full sentences would be lost. One has to take the bad with the good. Invention is not new. Only a relatively few people can say that they have lived the same way for decades. It has changed much about everyday life, but humans have always learned to adapt to it because it is all an extension of the familiar. As McLuhan points out, ever new invention is an extension of what has come before it which is itself an extension of the human body. He writes that “the wheel is an extension of the foot” (30, 31) and “the book is an extension of the eye” (33-36). Every new technology builds upon the old. New technology, such as the computer I sit in front of after I retype this line, is an extension of old technology, such as the pen I would throw across the room after scribbling out line after line. Some forms of media are just better for a certain purpose, and others are better for another. One should foster the diversity of our means for expressing ourselves instead of imposing one medium for all expressive pieces. To do such a thing would be like limiting a multimedia artist to paint alone.

New technology merely represents an extension of what has always been a natural human desire, to communicate our desires and thoughts with other people. As McLuhan points out, “we have become irrevocably involved with, and responsible for, one another” (24). Reading represents one of the most social forms of interaction, whether this be online, in print, or otherwise. The words permeate our very being, and we form connections and draw on experiences as we carry on imagined conversations with the text. The medium of our interaction thus becomes important in that it impacts how we digest and process the message behind the medium. Consider the difference with this versus this. As technology changes the way we view writing and makes the writing of others more available, the world becomes a freer exchange of ideas, widening one’s choices of expression and his potential audience.