Who Will Actually READ This?

Because I'm visiting Daniel's college this week, I've been attending classes with him.  One of his classes had a discussion based on an Article by Nicholas Carr that investigated whether or not Google has made us stupid. One of the first issues he addresses is how Google and other internet mediums of information have altered the way that we read and consequently, the way we think.  He uses many examples throughout the history of writing and reading that emphasize how people allow technology to alter the way we absorb information.  After the internet became a household commonality, information was easier to obtain.  While this made writing papers and curious researching easier, it also opened the gates for many distractions from the actual writing on the webpage.  Advertisements, hyperlinks, pictures etc. distract readers from the actual content of the article and more. In fact, he believes that articles longer than four paragraphs go either only partially read or skimmed.  This is likely due to people believing it is excess or unnecessary information, being lazy, or not appreciating the artistry behind the development of an essay, paper, or even blog entry.


In college especially, when we have so much to read - some of which we may prefer not to *cough* Machiavelli *cough* (shout out to my Honors comrades) - it's easy to just want to skim over assignments or even things we choose to read.  Until I read this article, I didn't realize how much I do it on a regular basis. So what though? Isn't that enough to get the idea behind the writing? Can't we get the essence behind the writing? Actually no.  A serious problem arises when we read in this manner.  By not reading deeply - reading shallowly - we remove a significantly important piece of the work: its writer.  We don't know these people though right? What does it matter if you don't know another one of the millions of people in the world?  The problem this point of view breeds is the removal of the humanity of the text.

By removing humanity from a text, we lose the relationship with the text.  Especially for college readers, creating a relationship with a text can make the difference between a "C" and a "B" or even a "B" and an "A."  A relationship with the text provides a deeper reading and connection with the author's perspective.  Additionally, removing the humanity and the author prevents us from recognizing techniques the author may slip in to prove their point.  For example, the article by Nicholas Carr, or even this very post, employ irony by inserting and utilizing the very devices the authors complain about.  The webpage that contains Carr's article has hyperlinks, pictures and ads. Some of which this post shares. All of this can distract readers from the actual content in the article, proving Carr's point before we even begin reading his article.  But we forget to appreciate the artistry and process behind his work if we focus on the distractions surrounding his writing.

So what do we do then? Not post our writing online? It killed me when one of the students in Daniel's class said that there was no point to blogging. Blogging reveals the humanity behind writing because the readers willingly and intentionally build a relationship with the authors. Building a relationship with the authors and realizing the humanity behind writing is not just writers complaining about the world not appreciating them enough.  As Carr states in his article, this drive for instant gratification rather than taking the time to develop a relationship with the text diminishes our humanity.  Rather than embracing our humanity, we allow machines to dictate what holds our attention.  We are lazy enough to let a machine carry out relationships which used to be an element of pride.  In previous times, we took the time to build relationships with texts, with occupations, with people.  Instead of leaving when times got tough, people were patient and valued their relationships enough to take the time to appreciate it.  Reading ancient texts was a significant feat.  Understanding them was a necessity.  Small shop owners created their trade by hand. Although sometimes the work was meticulous, these workers took great pride in their work.  Even though cobblers spent hours making shoes, the finished work left them with the greatest satisfaction. And Lord knows the divorce rates were incredibly lower than they are today. People didn't need instant satisfaction, instant gratification. People didn't skim writings. They read them.

How can something like this be fixed though? With new technology, it's not possible to go back to exactly the way things were before. Modern technology allows us to save lives, communicate, travel etc. We can't just remove technology, nor should we. So what now? We must find a way to blend the two.  For educational reading, I would recommend reading with a notebook beside you. Otherwise, I would go into a piece of writing with an open mind and remembering the writer behind the piece.  If we ignore the writer, we ignore the fact that the author is attempting to communicate with us..to have a conversation. Thus, we ignore the humanity behind writing and reading. Instead, we let a machine dictate how we perceive a work. Letting machines dictate the way we read, think and act can be a scary concept. If you're interested in considering what that type of world would look like, watch the "Matrix." Keep that in mind when you read another piece of writing.  If you have stuck with me through FIVE WHOLE PARAGRAPHS, then I thank you. Happy Reading :)