Reading with computers, but what about writing?
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 1 After finishing Hayle’s piece, I found myself trying to conceptualize what the “new” kind of digital reading would look like. Per her anecdotal date (which coincides with my experience), it does seem that our attention spans have become shorter, even at the collegiate level. Therefore, my first thought is that wikis are the future of reading—absorbing lots of related information at once in hopes of creating a digital gestalt in our minds. However, per the research cited in Hayle’s argument, jumping from page to page via wikis actually hinders retention (and enjoyment) of a piece of writing. (Granted, this was based on a text that was not born digital so that might make a difference…)
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 She suggests, then, that the solution is more reliance on computers, to the point where we land on computer-assisted reading. My initial response is horror: this is how the robot uprising begins. Upon further reflection (and hyperventilating into a paper bag) I’ve warmed up to the idea.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 3 If we’ve landed at a point in our scholarship where we can “read” images, movies, graphic novels etc., hasn’t our definition of “reading” already changed? Meaning, reading in this sense is merely to take in and interpret information. You can do that without having read an entire text yourself. If you have a tool that helps you examine a text closely while you skim the surface for the main points, isn’t the end result the same? Hayles supports this idea when she observes, “Patterns in large data sets may be so subtle that only sophisticated statistical analysis can reveal them” (74). Recognition of patterns is part of reading, and the human picks up with the interpretation, analysis, and argument. Same work, different way of getting there.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 1 We already know that there are different kinds of reading. We read newspapers differently than we read novels because they’re written for different purposes and we come to them understanding that distinction. The internet has provided a new reading medium that we haven’t quite figured out yet, and that’s perhaps because it’s grown to contain almost everything. It has perhaps raised a generation of “skimmers” and “scanners” but that same generation is using technology to create amazing tools (like computer-assisted reading).
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 Perhaps one of the issues here stems from the fact that our writing has not kept up with our evolved reading. We have not yet fully embraced the possibilities inherent in a piece of writing that’s born-digital. And perhaps we don’t understand enough about how we read digital material for our writing to keep up. How will our writing evolve? When it does, will it meet our reading skills and alleviate some of this anxiety?
I would have to agree that attention spans have shortened, mine included. Though when I am reading online I do like the hyperlinks, especially on wiki. When reading for pure curiosity, I retain what I read, but if it is for writing, I generally have to look back several times to remember what it is that I just read.