Text, Technology and Authority

For longer than I have been an English teacher I have been fascinated with text, and while our initial readings have explored plausible definitions for text, examined the relationship of text with technology, and pondered how the evolving nature of text has influenced traditional means of communicating and thinking, one observation that particularly intrigued me was found while listening to the audio recording of the Cambridge Forum and within O’Donnell’s and Engell’s discussions.  Near the end of the recording, there is an interesting exploration of Earsmus, a 16^th century monk, who seemingly understood how the use of newer technologies can help generate a sizable audience and thereby position oneself in a place of authority, even though one is not necessarily anything approximating authoritative on the subject that one explores.  O’Donnell says, “this renegade monk used the printing press and used the media of new mass communications to create and propagate an image of himself which has been astonishingly successful” (55:15 – 56:11).  Somehow, this seems something similar to marketing oneself as authoritative primarily because of the cutting-edge technology utilized, as is seen so commonly on the internet, in photography circles, within electronic music and a myriad of other places.  It’s as if being on the vanguard of utilizing new technology, and expressing one’s self with newer forms of representation, makes ones seem more credible to contemporary audiences.  O’Donnell goes on to say, “he [i.e. Earsmus] was creating a kind of old fashioned throwback image of himself as the reassuring old fashioned guy who knows this new-fangled stuff.  Well in every stage of new technologies coming into play, there are people who find ways to create themselves using the new medium to impress their image upon other folks, uh, and to create authority” (55:15 – 56:11).  It’s this relationship of text to newer technologies that seemingly lends authority to one’s work that I find interesting.  Why is it that through the use of newer technologies does it seemingly makes one’s work more credible?  Would this monk’s work have been as well received had he circumvented the use of the printing press and printed his text entirely on a scroll?

This relationship between text, technology, and authority has obvious rhetorical implications.  While looking at a Mark’s–a well known Canadian clothier’s—flyer, I pondered if I could be as easily persuaded to purchase shoes on sale if the flyer that I received at my door was created entirely by hand.  Would I be so inclined to buy new shoes if they were represented by pencil crayons rather than by a complicated series of digitally produced images?  One may argue that the digitally produced images of the shoes are more accurate and thus give me a better idea of what I’m buying, but this isn’t necessarily true. The digital images have been embellished and the shoes have been placed in a context that says more about how they look while strolling sandy tropical beaches, with an attractive mate, than what they will look like and feel like on my feet.  So, it is that sometimes more antiquated—perhaps simpler– forms of text, and the technology that they are produced on, render more accuracy than representations created by more advanced technology.  For example, I have read books wherein the author describes a location, or emotion, that feels far more authentic and real than similar representations created by newer technologies.  I once read a book with a setting in India, A Fine Balance, that seemed more real, and more vivid, than many other movies I have seen set in India.  But, given that older technologies can, when well executed, render more accuracy and presumably can be more credible, this is often not perceived to be the case by contemporary audiences.  Newer technologies imply progress and one assumes that the message conveyed with the technology is equally progressive and built on a stronger foundation of understanding much like the corresponding technology.

The implications for this surrounding education and the acquisition of knowledge are significant.  How many times have I began to talk about some subject only to have my students gradually start to look out windows, or nonchalantly start examining their cell phones?  I fair a little better at keeping their attention if I were to put a copy of a printed text in front of them, but our course material achieves the most respect if it is shown on a screen through video.  I imagine if a retired substitute teacher, attempted to teach my class with an overhead projector, the created text would not seem that credible.  But, if a younger, whipper snapper came in with glasses capable of augmented reality, I’m sure that my students would find whatever text that was produced to be entirely credible and authoritative.

Source:

Engell, J. (Presenter) & O’Donnell, J. (Presenter). (1999). From Papyrus to Cyberspace [radio broadcast]. Retrieved from https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/4290/files/609973/preview