As I read Birkerts’ conclusion, “Coda” I find myself focusing on his discussion of change. Each time the word is mention I feel that it is more alluded to than fully discussed. He mentions a process that is “well underway and that is not likely to stop” he writes that “in my heart I know that the change is already taking place”. With statements such as these it is clear that Birkerts is not ignorant of the inevitability of technology’s presence in society and the changes that will incur as a result. What I find most interesting is that he seems to recognize its inevitability and yet cannot or will not accept it. Two men concerned with technology’s negative aspects, Sven Birkerts and author of the article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, Nicholas Carr, both address change and the fact that the written word has its own history and its own naysayers who disapproved the changes that the written word would bring. Carr discusses Socrates’ “bemoan[ing] the development of writing” fearing the changes it would bring on the way man learned. After reading this article and that particular paragraph I realized I had been approaching electronic texts in the wrong way.
Hypertexts are entirely different from physical texts on paper. In attempting to better understand hypertexts I spent a few minutes researching on the web and found a site which defined the term hypertext in several different enlightening ways. The first is that a hypertext “demands an active reader; it blurs the distinction between author and reader”. According to the site, hypertexts are also fluid, multiple, changing; not fixed or single; they have no beginning or ending, no center or margin, no inside or outside; they are multi-centered; they are networked, collaborative, and finally anti-hierarchical and democratic. Understanding the distinction between reading from a printed book and from a computer allowed me to approach the electronic text “The Jew’s Daughter” correctly.
“The Jew’s Daughter” has a narrative that is unique in that the story is navigated by rolling over a blue word which subtly changes the narrative of the entire page. The text is an example of a hypertext that demands its readers interaction. It is also fluid and changing. If one approaches the text with the understanding that it is NOT a work of literature meant to be printed on page, the need for comparison is eliminated and it can be enjoyed for what it is: an interactive electronic work of literature.
“The Jew’s Daughter” is an example of a hypertext and also of a larger cultural shift to a technological society, one that is feared by Birkerts and many others but one that is inevitable and should be embraced in order to utilize the change in the way we gather information.
Birkerts says that he fears technology because “we are, as a culture, as a species, becoming shallower; that is we have turned from depth”. I disagree with this claim. I believe, after researching and gaining a better understanding of hypertexts, that they are in some ways much more in-depth texts than the printed word. With a hypertext there is no clear beginning or end, one can follow a series of links and dive deeper and deeper into a subject than would be possible with print. Yes the way we learn is changing. Birkerts and Carr are recognizing a very real phenomenon, however they are limiting themselves by approaching change with fear. The inevitable cultural change that is taking place, if embraced, could lead to a revolution in knowledge and the way we as humans learn. Technology allows knowledge to be spread and gained faster and more efficiently than ever before and I don’t believe this will impend our ability to learn as long as we learn how to gain knowledge in the fastest and most efficient way possible.
good start. i like your focus on learning–using that as a defining term for what makes for legitimate or valuable texts.
birkerts might say (nay-saying): yes, but what if the texts we are learning from are simple or shallow, we then become shallow.