Game change: the way we read and write
When you do something every day, it becomes routine. In the puppet like a zombie, you check your email even before you open the Facebook page, open the weather in your iPhone application, to see if you can wear this new summer clothes? (I, by the way, there are also didn’t wear my new summer?). These things became so universal and so natural that we barely stopped to think about their meaning in larger things. After all, a lot of what we’re doing today, it’s like we’ve been doing it for decades, actually we only have a few years.
Reading and writing are completely naturally we do two things, but in the past few years, its essence has changed very quickly, now it is time to step back, assess, how does this affect our production and consumption blocks of text.
A few months ago, I saw an article in the New York times about how words changed when we moved from typewriters to word-processing machines. Nietzsche used a basic typewriter in his early days, and he said, “our writing tools are also thinking about our ideas.” There must be a relationship between the ability to easily modify what is being written and the freedom we allow ourselves to write.
A SLATE culture Gabfest discusses the New York times article and its review of the book, explaining an interesting observation of Joan didion. She said, in the words written on the word processor not like painting, more like a sculpture, there are a lot of words from the start, until it looks like a decent thing, rather than as carefully as you there will be a typewriter stratification. But how to write digital devices on digital devices? The consumption of writing and the enjoyment of writing will certainly have a certain effect on the writing process itself. However, as the article points out, “it is easier to talk about how the past works than it is now”.
In a sense, we think we’re well equipped to create and create words on our devices, but that’s probably not the case. The most extensive Word processing software, Microsoft Word, is very cumbersome and has not fundamentally changed 20 years and the world around it. Quite a lot. The whole article is devoted to Microsoft’s ubiquitous software.
As Tom Scocca puts it: “desktop publishing has given way to laptops or smartphones. And Microsoft Word is a cruel tool for Web writing. It’s document formatting task means that it created every text the metadata package was very thick, layer cascade folds in a layer of invisible, unnecessary instructions, these words should be how to look on the paper. “So, basically, there is a gap between the way we want to be and now it’s written and our tools.
Fast Company’s review of Slate’s work goes a step further, attributing the user experience in Word to friction with editors. As he puts it, “tracking change” is a convenient way to follow collaborative editing. Instead, it reads like a battle between the Oxford comma (the default color scheme really requires “did you answer the wrong” red?). . When I edited it on GuGe Docs, I felt that my editor was the most laid-back owner in the world. When I edit in Word, I immediately want to get out of a project. “It’s a pretty shocking fact that a software interface can affect the creative process. After all, software is designed by engineers rather than by authors.
We all know that we live in a world of information bombs. Twitter stream, mini feeds, begging for download apps, begging for updated apps, push notifications. At present, the development of the whole industry provides a disjointed opportunity for people. But some of the more innovative writing tools are actually on devices that are incredibly distracting, and these devices mean consumption rather than creation. I used an application called Writer (I wonder how long it took to use this name) on my iPad. In addition to making you feel really cool, because you’re using an application called Writer, it also has some practical features. The app forces you to focus on the sentences you’re writing and prevent everything else. If used together with a physical keyboard, the writing experience can become more fluid.
The interesting thing about information overload is that we’re all contributing to it. If you think about it, we’re writing more today than we did ten years ago. Facebook status updates, you cracked the American presidential election joke, this is a writing. The angry comment you left on your hated blog is part of the record of our time. It was a long time ago that our written communication was limited to very specific audiences. Email a colleague, write a letter to your lover, and write a letter to the editor of the magazine. But today, we all write about the world and see it every day. What’s the impact? So, on the one hand, it means that the quality of what we’re reading is affected, and on the other hand, it means that the real good is more prominent, the paradox of choice.
Another result, as described in The Shallows, is that we are becoming more and more unthoughtful, and I have since started this article six times as far as 9GAG. No one writes about war and peace. As our consumption is hyperlinked, so is our creative process. Assume that you are writing a short story and eventually search for a location to determine its exact location. We all know what’s going on, you are in hampstead heath’s wikipedia page, find out how to describe a particular corner of the this place, and before you know it, you’re writing about Joe Pesci issued album blog article 25, in the name of the little singing, of course. Apparently he couldn’t.
But at this point, there is no practical use to resist change. I find it interesting when people claim that they love the breakdown of a book and the mildew of second-hand bookshops and that they will never have an e-reader. Nonsense, of course. There is no fighting yet. My 70-year-old father, author of more than a dozen books, an old manuscript collector and an avid reader (understatement) like his iPad.
If you really think about it, you won’t love all of your books. There are books you like and you want a specific physical relationship. No, not that kind of pervert, that kind of you catch them, touch them, enjoy their smell. Well, that actually sounds misrepresented. Books are inherently emotional, and they evoke feelings, whether it’s content or form. There will always be physical books, but much less. Likewise, the writer always takes notes in a battered Moleskine notebook.
Technology largely determines how we spend and how we write. One of the most interesting and bizarre developments in recent years has been the widespread use of production tools to improve self-publishing capabilities. Last year, hundreds of thousands of books were self-published, and amazon will convince you that this is a remarkable thing. Although it’s great that people have a desire to write, most of these books are selling a lot. And when do you think a book is defined as its physical objects (or at least content) and it is everywhere, you must stop and think about the hundreds of thousands of book without reading “book” anyone is real books.
The publishing company has a big role to play, and I’m not saying it’s a person who works for one person, but one who helps another. Instead, I use it as a published author. The legitimacy of a person is a person who can achieve some kind of successful work, and the feeling is coexisting with the book itself, and then becomes the reader’s success. There is a mentoring, editing, production and marketing process that can’t be done alone. This is one of the reasons why a small number of successful self-publishing people eventually want to reach a publishing deal with a big house.
Some have mastered their own tools and are committed to interesting reflections on digital publishing. For example, Seth Godin published a series of very successful books in digital format and launched a Domino project. However, godin, kawasaki and other similar writers are technical things. Early adopters of these interesting models already have a huge following and have an in-depth understanding of how technology works, and your average quality fiction writer has not.
I guess the key thing is that things change every day, faster than most people’s lives. Rather than being scared by it and sticking to it (as the French seem to be doing), we should see this as a huge opportunity, even a responsibility. We choose to use these techniques to define a generation of readers and writers.