Saturday, January 26, 2013

Unit 1 Essay: Literacy and the Modern World


Evan Steinhorst
1/25/13
Writing and Rhetoric


Literacy and the Modern World

            For too long the concept of literacy has been debated.  Its meaning, its purpose, its very characteristics; all of it have been analyzed to the point of absurdity.  And yet, it just keeps going.  Like a never-ending plague, it just won’t end!  But I’m afraid that’s not the point of this essay.  If so, this quite possible could be the easiest essay ever written.  Unfortunately, I’m here to answer the question of whether our modern technology, the Internet specifically, has affected our literary abilities positively or negatively.  With my infinite wisdom and knowledge accumulated over the past few weeks I can say with certainty that the answer is yes and no.  Now before you question my indecisiveness let me say that it is valid. 
            With respect to the fact that my generation is smack in the middle of this technological boom, it’s not unreasonable for one to suspect me to be bias.  But it’s quite the contrary!  Our modern era has injured the literary habits of the world.  The greatest example of this is right in front of you now; it’s always in front of you.  The Internet.  With the Internet’s conception we have gained the ability to access information quickly and easily.  And yes, the whole “touch of a button” phrase does indeed apply here.   We have Google, Yahoo, and Bing.  These massive search engines house more information then could be looked at in an entire lifetime.  Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites have also become a source of information sharing.  However, this easy information access is not all it’s cracked up to be.  In Nicholas Carr’s article, Is Google Making us Stupid, he argues that this easy access to information is having adverse affects on our attention spans.  Carr, an American writer and winner of the Pulitzer Prize in 2011, asserts that we are losing the ability to concentrate on anything longer than a few pages.  “Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text.”  Take a minute to think about the last time you had to read something longer then a page?  Did you begin to lose interest or start to wonder about other things?  Likely you did. I know that I am guilty of such concentration failure.  I’ll even admit that when first reading Carr’s article, I even found myself mentally drifting away!  We are constantly faced with quick, easy, and short blurbs of information that we are losing the ability to sit down and read.  When I look at an article on The New York Times or on MSNBC, the article usually consists of a few paragraphs to a few pages. However, they all lack specifics and only give a modest amount of useful information.  It’s a classic case of quantity over quality I’m afraid.  But it doesn’t end there, it never does.  For in close association with our lack of concentration is our substitution of purpose with entertainment.  Basically, the assertion is that we are throwing out all meaning in our society for sheer entertainment.  And while it may seem farfetched, the facts do speak for themselves.  Chris Hedges, and American Journalist, said it best in a passage from his article America the Illiterate:
In an age of images and entertainment, in an age of instant emotional gratification, we do not seek or want honesty. We ask to be indulged and entertained by clichés, stereotypes and mythic narratives that tell us we can be whomever we want to be, that we live in the greatest country on Earth, that we are endowed with superior moral and physical qualities and that our glorious future is preordained, either because of our attributes as Americans or because we are blessed by God or both. 
I cannot, myself, deny the existence of this entertainment over purpose aspect that has begun to consume our world.  Such sites as Imgur and Reddit are prime examples of this hostile takeover.  These sites, and those like them, have become the vain of countless college students.  I myself am an Imgur addict.  But image sites are just the tip of the entertainment iceberg. In a revelation that had me speechless, Hedges astoundingly discovers how far this entertainment supplement has gone:
During the 2000 debates, George W. Bush spoke at a sixth-grade level (6.7) and Al Gore at a seventh-grade level (7.6). In the 1992 debates, Bill Clinton spoke at a seventh-grade level (7.6), while George H.W. Bush spoke at a sixth-grade level (6.8), as did H. Ross Perot (6.3). In the debates between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, the candidates spoke in language used by 10th-graders. In the debates of Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas the scores were respectively 11.2 and 12.0. In short, today’s political rhetoric is designed to be comprehensible to a 10-year-old child or an adult with a sixth-grade reading level. It is fitted to this level of comprehension because most Americans speak, think and are entertained at this level.
I don’t know about you, but this terrifies me.  To think that our literacy has degraded to a 6th grade reading level, that’s what’s used to govern our nation.  Now if that didn’t scare you, nothing else will.  Now there may be some of you thinking “But that’s still the ability to read? Is that not literacy?”  Well not according to Hedges.  Hedges does not believe literacy is the ability to read or write. No, for him it is the ability to read and write with purpose.  And to an extent I do agree with him.  The rest of Hedges’s article is constant ranting and insulting putdowns directed towards the American public for their literary failure.  But my friends do not fret; there is a head for every tail of a coin.  Or a silver lining behind every cloud.
            If you have made it this far without getting bored and checking Facebook, or even scared off I congratulate you.  You have stuck it to Hedges! And if you have or ever read his America the Illiterate you’ll understand what I mean.  Anyway, let us now turn out attention the benefits that this technological monst--- I mean masterpiece has done for us all.
In all honesty, we have truly benefited in the literary sphere, I mean just look how exposed we are to it.  In perhaps the first article to ever defend my generations texting and social media using, Andrea Lunsford, gives those technophobics a good one-two punch.  Lunsford, a former professor at Stanford University and Director of its Writing and Rhetoric department, argues in, Our semi-literate Youth? Not So Fast, that our developing technology has allowed my generation to become exposed to new forms of literacy.  “So yes, these students did plenty of emailing, and texting: they were online a good part of every day; they joined social networking sites enthusiastically.”  This is what many people attribute as the cause of this perceived illiteracy that has taken a hold of our lives.  “But rather than leading to a new illiteracy, these activities seemed to help them developed a range or repertoire of writing styles, tones, and formats along with a range of abilities.”  We finally have an argument for why we should be texting at the dinner table or class; we are improving our literary capabilities!  But if you like that you’ll love this. “In short we found that students today certainly make errors—as all writers do—but that they are making no more errors than pervious studies have documented. Different errors yes—but more errors no.”  See guys, we aren’t giant failures, we are just like everyone else; average failures.
Remember how I said that because of the Internet we are beginning to supplement quality with quantity?  Well that still remains true, but it would be imprudent of me to ignore the benefits that are also gained.  While its true that we are losing an aspect of quality, the quantity we are gaining is nothing to smirk at. We, above all other generations, are the most informed.  No other generation has ever been as in touch with our fellow human brethren across the globes as us.  It was thanks to social networking that allowed the Arab Spring revolts of 2011 to take place and Egypt among others managed to overthrow their oppressive governments. Small Wars Journal’s TJ Waters had made a brilliant correlation between the use of social media and it’s new literary prowess and the substantial reform of the Arab Spring:
Social media eliminates two important impediments to communication – distance and delay – creating new pathways for people to connect in near-real time.  But the social networks themselves are insufficient to drive a population to the streets.  It is the increased use of these systems on mobile platforms that has created new expressions of leverage and power.
American psychologist Sylvia Scribner, who devoted her time to understand literacy and the human mind, claims that literacy is a powerful tool for power in her article Literacy in Three Metaphores. “The International Symposium for Literacy, meeting in Persepolis, Iran (Bataille 1976), appealed to national governments to consider literacy as an instrument for human liberation and social change.”  These two pieces were published decades apart, but they correlate so well that there can be little doubt of the power literacy can hold.  And when used correctly it can change the world for the better.  If you have stuck it out with me for this long let me just say thank you!  And for your loyalty I will reward you with the greatest benefit bestowed upon us by our technologically influenced literacy---freedom and closeness.
            I’m afraid I won’t have too many sources or references for this part. I suppose you’ll just have to trust my word, but haven’t I lied to you yet.  Let me start off with “closeness”.  Now what in heaven’s name could I mean by that?  Because we are so easily connected with others around the world we are constantly exposed to new ideas and beliefs.  Cultures, religions, ideas, practices, languages, all these new and diverse concepts that we normally would never interact with in our own personal bubble are right there in front of us thanks to social media, or should I say social literacy.  Unlike past generations we are able to interact with people, at real-time, from across the globe.  Because of this we are mixing, meeting, and socializing the many different human forms of literacy.   I’ve said in a past blog post that literacy and humanity is one in the same. “It has changed and evolved from oral speech, hieroglyphics, calligraphy, cursive, print, text, and images.  Because literacy is a human construct, it makes sense that it would be as adaptive and diverse as mankind.”  And now more then ever we are able to expand that literary melting pot.  But is still goes far beyond that, because from closeness we gain a greater freedom.  With the invention of the Internet we can freely post what we feel and think.  While that may not be true for some parts of the world, for arguments sake, we will focus on those that can.  In the United States we have the freedom of expression.  Blogging, the first topic we looked at, has become a way for many writers, famous or otherwise, to express what they cannot on social media or in social contexts.  Andrew Sullivan, famous blogger and former editor, believes that the introduction of blogging has greatly increased the circulation of ideas and discussions.  It is in his article Why I Blog that Sullivan explains the appeal of blogging:
It was obvious from the start that it was revolutionary. Every writer since the printing press has longed for a means to publish himself and reach—instantly—any reader on Earth. Every professional writer has paid some dues waiting for an editor’s nod, or enduring a publisher’s incompetence, or being ground to literary dust by a legion of fact-checkers and copy editors. If you added up the time a writer once had to spend finding an outlet, impressing editors, sucking up to proprietors, and proofreading edits, you’d find another lifetime buried in the interstices. But with one click of the Publish Now button, all these troubles evaporated.
From a sociological perspective, we hide who we are.  We really do.  We wear mask to disguise our true selves in order to move along, day to day, in this world.  But blogging allows so many to freely express their true thoughts, without the fear of personal retribution.  This new literary era has allowed us to do something no other generation in history could do, be ourselves.
            Literacy is always in movement, changing and adapting with the times.  While this generation surely faces some issues and concerns with this newest version, it also has new opportunities and benefits not available to previous generations.  We should confront these concerns and harvest the benefits.  For those who fear this change let me remind you that when life does not change it becomes stagnant. When stagnant, it dies.  And for those who ignore the issues facing us, remember that a small tear in a piece of paper is all that’s needed to rip the whole thing apart.



Thanks To:

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid." What the Internet is doing to our brains. n. page. Web. 26 Jan. 2013. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/

Hedges, Chris. "America the Illiterate." (11/08/08): n. page. Web. 26 Jan. 2013. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20081110_america_the_illiterate/

Lunsford, Andrea. "Our Semi-Literate Youth? Not So Fast." n. page. Web. 26 Jan. 2013. http://www.stanford.edu/group/ssw/cgi-bin/materials/OPED_Our_Semi-Literate_Youth.pdf
Scribner, Sylvia. "Literacy in Three Metaphors." n. page. Web. 26 Jan. 2013. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1085087?seq=1

Sullivan, Andrew. "Why I blog." n. page. Web. 26 Jan. 2013. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/why-i-blog/307060/

Waters, TJ. "Social Media and Arab Spring." (11/14/12): n. page. Web. 26 Jan. 2013. http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/social-media-and-the-arab-spring

Monday, January 21, 2013

Coming Full Circle


Let me start right off the bat and say the hardest thing about writing these blog posts was actually writing.  Let me elaborate, I’ve always been forced and instilled to write very analytical and proper papers.  As a result I don’t have much love for writing.  However, I will say that I love writing satirically or with voice, but those experiences are few and far between.  You may notice that this blog post, and the last one, is considerably different from my past ones.  It has taken me this long to finally feel comfortable stepping out of the drilled in notion of how to write a paper.  Honestly, because I had not been able to truly write with my own voice, I never found the previous posts to be of any interest.  So, bare with me for a moment while I finally release what I’ve been thinking all along, who the hell cares!?  Really? We are arguing over what literacy is?  Literacy is certainly a combination of many different aspects that much is true.   But we focus so hard on analyzing and dissecting it that we create a larger problem then there needs to be.   It’s just like a math problem that you think too hard about and therefore miss the obvious answer/solution to.   You want to condense literacy into different stages or states?  Very well then, here is your simple answer: Literacy is the ability to read, speak, and write.  It’s the interpretation and expression of ideas amongst humans.  Literacy is, and I sincerely mean this, truly amazing.  It has guided humanity through the ages, propelled it forward through advancement and discovery.   It has brought cultures together and pushed them apart.  Literacy is remarkable, but it isn’t the all or nothing answer to the questions you are looking for.  It does not hold the secret of life nor does it tell you what you should do tomorrow.  As I said before, literacy is the expression, interpretation, and continuation of ideas.  It’s a human construct, a remarkable construct, but a human one.  As beautiful and flawed as its creators.  That is literacy.

The Never Ending Argument of Literacy


After reading Lunsford’s writing on the misconception that today’s generation is semi-literate, I can’t help but laugh.  Honestly, I have never before come across a writer who defended this generation’s media oriented literacy.  It really throws a wrench into Carr and Hedges’s argument.  I will consent to the idea that while our generation may not be as messed up with literacy as either of them suggest, it definitely is not at it’s best.  Let’s be honest with ourselves for a moment, the idea that literacy has three states as explained by Scrinber is not only unnecessary, but completely foolish.   Literacy has and always will adapt and change with the times, its never stationary.  It has changed and evolved from oral speech, hieroglyphics, calligraphy, cursive, print, text, and images.  Because literacy is a human construct, it makes sense that it would be as adaptive and diverse as mankind.  This concern over literacy is stupid. Yes, stupid. It’s as simple as that.  Why?  Because rather then focusing on how we return to the methods of the past to improve the present, we should turn to what is in front of us and make the best of a “perceived” bad situation. 
Now, there is one thing that all these writings have in common; they show fear, contempt, guilt, and concern for the illiterate.  Where does this come from? Are we afraid that they will be taken advantage of as was seen during medieval times?  Or are we concerned that their “ignorance” will inevitable doom us all?  No, the answer is much more pretentious, they are different.  We admire literacy, but we shun those that do not share our own versions or concepts of it because it is not the majority.  We have the great gift of literacy, the ability to share and express ideas.  That’s the true meaning of literacy, its very purpose.  Its unfortunate we use it rather to label, segregate, and berate one another.


Monday, January 14, 2013

The Informed Stupid


Perhaps its because I personally favor satirical forms of literature, but I found Hedge’s article amusing.  That’s not to diminish the message he is trying to convey.  In short, Hedge believes that the American public is divided into two groups, the small, literate, and intellectual and then the illiterate dipshits.  Pardon the language, but it really is the general description he provides.  Our society, according to Hedge, is slowly rotting away as we continue to find new ways to reduce the need to read, think critically and engage actively. 
He makes a brilliant point when he shows that in recent years, presidential hopefuls have given speeches that are at the reading level of a 7th grader.  This is because it’s entertaining to the masses, and easy to understand.  But there is no real substance to it.  Honesty and integrity are lost.  For Hedge, literacy is not just the ability to read something.  Literacy is the ability to read something that has purpose and power behind its words.  It shouldn’t be substituted by entertainment.  Now, I will admit that I find his perspective of the future to be too bleak.  As his article was written in 2008 and it is now 2013, I can say that while there are still many issues unanswered, things are slowly progressing.  We have a long way to go, but it’s not the end all.
            At the start of Carr’s article he states that he has found himself, over the years, losing the ability to maintain focus on a piece of literature.  Something that came so easy to him years ago.  This immediately resonated with me, for I know that I am guilty of, after the first three pages, getting distracted and having my mind shuffle between other thoughts.  Carr cites that a cause of this loss of attention lies within the Internet and its ability to quickly and easily distribute information.  Our society is a product of the web; we are constantly on the move and no longer have the time nor patience to give our attention to something longer than 10 minutes.   It’s an unfortunate reality that even I cannot ignore.   This easily ties into Hedge’s argument that the majority of the American people look only for entertainment, not substance.  Both Hedge and Carr relate that the general public wants a simplified explanation, not an in depth one.  Carr does admit that because of the introduction of texting and the Internet, we are reading more then ever before.  But it is this very idea that Hedge is concerned with.  In short, we may be reading more today then ever before, but the old saying still holds true: quality over quantity. 

Reading? Writing?


What is reading and writing?  At the basic level writing is the act of putting ones thoughts on some form of paper.  Reading is the act of mentally hearing another’s thoughts.  However, such a basic idea does little to excite the imagination or inspire.  Both Sullivan and Harris were advocates of adding personality to one’s writing.  Harris believed that writing, even if it is the repetition of an older work, is done a new each time it is rewritten.  So, a more appropriate definition of writing would be to consider it the expression of ideas or thoughts, designed to stimulate discussions and rational or even irrational thoughts.  Reading, therefore, would be the continued survival of these thoughts and ideas, changing slightly overtime, but eventually finding themself being written down again.