“Writing …a consciousness-raising activity.” part two
I concur with J.D. Bolter’s views that new generations of “writers were reaching and defining a new audience”, a larger global audience and that “the computer and the printed book still seemed to serve different spheres of communication” due in part to the text qualities of the computer “(flexibility, interactivity, speed of distribution) rather than those of print (stability and authority)” (Bolter, 2001 p 2-3). What concerns me is when Bolter states “digital technology seems to reduce the distance between author and reader by turning the reader into an author herself” (Bolter, 2001 p. 4) there may be some readers who will baulk at being placed in the writer position; being uncomfortable with the associated image of “a monumental figure” with the accompanied greater responsibility to the readership.
There seems to be a higher burden on the writer to be more than a writer. Instead of concentrating on the content, the essence of a document, as a narrative or a science research paper; the writer must divert more of his attention to physical aspects of digital production. Editors and publishers may still be needed by writers.
“[I]n the ideal, if not in practice, an electronic text can tailor itself to each reader’s needs, and the reader can make choices in the very act of reading.” … “[H]ypertextual writing can go further, because it can change for each reader and with each reading. Authors can exploit the dynamic quality of hypertext to alter the nature of an audience ‘s shared experience in reading.” (Bolter, 2001 p. 11)
Hypertext has its advantages but also may provide opportunity for misuse. Readers can be sent to publishers’ own sites. Writers may link to sites to give negative or inaccurate criticism. Stranded relationships between authors and their readership could result if there is a greater dependency on other people’s works. Overuse of hyperlinks can send any reader in to a tailspin.
If as Bolter states “the computer constitutes a technology of writing beyond mechanization, a postindustrial form of writing” (Bolter, 2001 p. 15) does the computer revert back to reducing the distance between the human hand and the written word, even though handwriting includes the shaping, gestural forming of each letter? As we have explored the transition from manuscripts to digital printing, I see a loss of the individual identities of each author/writer or creator/craftsman contained in the finished product.
When Ong discusses (Ong 2002 p. 147) various narratives, especially the detective story, films come to mind: the DaVinci Code and those Harrison Ford adventures. How many narrative plots do we remember without picturing images from the screen adaptations? What memorable narratives have not been captured on film? Has society transitioned onto another stage of writing /communication development whereby narrative writing is developed for video, film? There seems to be a movement from writing/ oral to oral/visual with such video productions as ET, Star Wars, and Spielberg and Cameron blockbusters. How often have we tried to read the original book first before seeing the films? The oral performer of old is now moved to positions on the screen (large and small).
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing Space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ong, Walter. (2002). Orality and literacy: The technology of the word. NY: Routledge.
Word Count 516
“How often have we tried to read the original book first before seeing the films? The oral performer of old is now moved to positions on the screen (large and small)”
This line in your post stuck with me the most, I often refuse to see the movie version of books because the movie almost never does the book justice, there are of course a few exceptions to this rule (Harry Potter is one of them in my opinion.), In Chapter 4, Bolter says, “verbal text has usually contained and constrained the images on the printed page.” (Bolter, 2001 p. 47). When I read this, I think of how reading allows us to expand our imaginations, yet when we watch television or a movie the images are “given to us”. How many times has one read a book and then watched the movie and been disappointed either with the actor selection for certain characters based on the authors description, or even the way a scene appears on the screen.
Bolter also says, “image will take over from the written word.” The fame of Instagram can be attested to this, I think that people love visuals and this social media favourite has become a quick favourite with many. Sure, I can describe my trip to Greece on Twitter of Facebook, but if I can attach a picture to that description it takes the post to another level. Photos and digital images are mandatory for successful webpages and blog posts, we love visuals, there is no denying it.
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing Space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hi Heneefa;
I guess it comes down to whether we are reading fiction or non fiction as to whether we want the visuals or not and when. As you say, when reading fiction such as Harry Potter seeing the movie, the author gives the child in us permission to be creative in our own minds. We become part of the plot. Words can be very expressive in the right context. When it comes to nonfiction such as scientific dissertations, we value the diagrams and accompanying images to keep us on track with what the author is stating. In this case the author does not want his readership to stray from his intended results. We are to remain in our place in the audience. I think this could be said of some video documentaries. If our interest is piqued, we would then research further for fact. would you say there is less creativity on the part of the reader in nonfiction?
Twitter and Facebook could be classified as being in the middle between fiction and non fiction. Images supplement the minimal text resulting in conversation between the author and the reader for more clarification of message. The amount of time invested into the writing takes on a higher value over the content.
Thanks for your response.
Terry