Maggie King
English
Self Reflection
Through out this semester I have learned a great deal about the meaning of literature and the conflicting views that are presented when dealing with this topic. I had to ask myself just what makes literature legitimate and through what medium. I had always correlated the term with a lengthy novel, however I found this to be limiting. When reading Birkerts and the other texts for class, the arguments made that technology has lessened the book reading was quite convincing, however questioning the value of the other mediums led to me disagree with this. I decided that literature is not confined to the book and that other sources such as the internet and audio can be considered just as genuine.
I never really gave it much thought before now, but I can definitely see the importance of the discussion and to question where we are headed as far as literature is concerned. In my essay, I combined the first project and the most recent because they seemed to mesh well and were arguing the similar stories. Figuring out where to put what proved a bit challenging but I believe it ended up well. I wanted to share some of my own thoughts and experiences to back up my perspective as well as draw on quotes from the book.
My conclusion is that literature can be expressed through many ways. The limitations of a book only hinder the ability to convey a message. Without the advancement of technology, we would be confined to the paper.
Maggie King
Final Project
Essay
Legit Lit
The Medium and the Message
The legitimacy of literature is not limited to the ink and paper, nor the bound book. With the advancement of technology, authors can present their message or story through an array of mediums. In my experience, reading and writing are not defined by the material in which they are presented. It is the diction, that determines the significance of the literature and the experience that the reader encounters. Some may argue that the only form of writing recognized as legitimate is a book, however I have discovered quite the opposite. Technology has not tarnished the traditional conceptions of writing, yet has made it more accessible to a wider range of audiences. If the reader allows their-self to fully engage in any type of text, meaning can be found whether in a book, on a screen, or through audio.
The argument that the privacy of a book gives one the ability to find significance is understandable. Indeed some have found it much easier to focus reading when it is in their hands and are able to give the story their full attention. On the contrary, in The Gutenberg Elegies, Birkerts explains “Sitting still is too much like being in a classroom. The pencil doodles, the mind drifts”.(143) Words can be distracting, in audio format they can be engaging. Sure, there might be something more magical or private about a hard copy of a novel, but it does not overlook that one can escape just as easily into a web page or story on tape.
Technology gives us the ability to find different ways of conveying a message other than through a book. We can see this with old school encyclopedias compared to new school Wikipedia. Having to look up information by flipping pages and scrolling a screen can prove to contain the same legitimate text as each one another. The words that are chosen are chosen for a reason.That being said, as long as that is occurring, then the medium does not matter.
Looking back into my own past, this remains a fact. I was in second grade and trying to read the first Harry Potter book in my room. At the time I was not a very strong reader nor was I really interested in reading to begin with. I sat there for about thirty minutes re-reading the same sentences over and over again trying to find some meaning. Shortly after, I gave up. The book being about three hundred pages long (which at this time was a lot), overwhelmed me. I was intimidated by the wordy descriptions and ongoing length of the book and it didn’t matter that I was alone in my room with only that in my hand. The message was still at this point unclear.
Then Harry Potter became a movie. As I sat mesmerized by the mysterious spells and wizardry, I found myself being fully engulfed in this story of magic. There it was, the book that I had to tried to read, presented to me in a different form, I could now relate with. Just because it wasn’t the hardcopy, didn’t mean that I couldn’t enjoy the message. I confirmed this realization with several other encounters later on.
Many, many years later, I am finding the same ideas to be true about reading and writing. It was last semester when my good friend Anna called me over to her lap top to read a blog. It was one of her friends from back home who had posted a story venting about why people questioned his pale skin. He explained that, no he was not albino and yes he does go out into the sun. I never thought that I could be so intrigued with an internet post and the point behind it. He seemed to use the perfect wit and diction that allowed me to fully understand what he was saying, and to some degree I could relate and it did not matter that it was posted to the internet over the page.
It is said if you, “Change the medium, you change the message”(143) but this is debatable. A medium is simply a segue for the mind to wonder. A hard back book is no more legitimate than a podcast being played. The two both entail aspects vital to literature and that is a message. Why should it matter the books be published when the audio can be broadcasted? Are not the two the same, both reaching an audience?
When reading any kind of text, it is the reader’s responsibility to engage their-self to the best of their ability. When writing any kind of text, it is the author’s duty to choose their words accordingly to convey their point. Both can be done without the strict limitations that implies meaning can only be found through books. Although there just may be something more intimate or personal about having the individual novel, the fact remains that meaning and understanding are not limited to pages, but can be found through many other mediums heard or read. What is being read is far more important than how it is being read and this is a point that I have confirmed throughout my own experience and one that Birkerts seems to overlook.
Essay Rough Draft
Electronic Text
The Legitimacy of Audio Literature
The legitimacy of literature can be conveyed through any medium, whether heard or read. Most would tend to correlate literature with a lengthy novel of countless pages, however these same stories can be expressed through speaking. The tradition of storytelling has been passed down from generation to generation, to instill certain values and messages one should live by. These were not written down, nor were they published to have in the privacy of one’s hands. Books in audio format not only share this similarity, but they can be looked at as a legitimate source of reading without the eyes being involved.
Listening to a story can be just as effective as visually reading one. The two involve the same kind of effort. In The Gutenberg Elegies, Birkerts recounts a time he was driving while hearing a book on cassette stating, “So I listened and listened- listening takes time…”(143). The effort made in reading a book is the same effort it takes one to listen. The audience must still comprehend the statements being made while following the story’s plot. It is not the eyes that make sense of it all, it’s the brain. Through listening, the ears take in information for it to then interpret. Listening is an important aspect of literature that allows the reader to fully engage in the experience.
Going off of that, while listening to a story one can be even further absorbed in the message. Words can be distracting, but listening can be engaging. No where does it state that the term literature only applies to novels lengthy enough for one to sit and read. Even Birkerts admits, “Sitting still is too much like being in a classroom (143). The pencil doodles, the mind drifts.” In fact, I believe that hearing a story can be more effective than reading one because the audience is hearing the emotions and voice behind it. The voice can make what is being heard immensely more powerful and meaningful. Sure Birkerts might argue that listening is the easy way out of analyzing a message, however there is no indicator that says reading must be difficult in order to have worth.
Words written on a page are there to serve a purpose. Simply put, “…the word on the page is implicitly a memory device”(145). It is a way to ensure the message, to physically have the meaning on paper. Stories can be altered through speaking, but there is no denying what is seen right in front of the reader. This can be a positive aspect of books but still does not take away from the legitimacy of a story on tape. If literature was limited to ink and pen, then stories from the past would be lost. Birkerts agrees story telling is the oldest form of literature that has proven to still be effective today.
There can be something just as magical as a book as there is in being read to. From an early age we are exposed to using our ears as a form of reading. One has not always been able to look at words on a page and know what they mean. It was the ear being trained to listen and comprehend what was being told that created the imagination and interpretation of the story. Birkerts raised a valid question with, “Is it the feeling of being read to as a child, or something deeper, more ancient?”(143). The words coming out can be more genuine than the words being looked at and even as a child we can see this.
It is said if you, “Change the medium, you change the message”(143) but this however is debatable. A medium is simply a segue for the mind to wonder. A hard back book is no more legitimate than a podcast being played. The two both entail aspects vital to literature and that is a message. Why should it matter the books be published when the audio can be broadcasted? Are not the two the same, both reaching an audience?
The fact if the matter is, books in audio format are just as, if not more legitimate than physical words presented on a page. Hearing a story takes just as much effort as reading one does and can be even more convincing than that of a book. The experience the listener has when hearing a story, may be a different experience than reading it, however the author of the words just wants to convey a message. It may be said that a voice takes away from the reader’s own interpretation, yet from what I have found only strengthens the legitimacy of the literature.
Maggie King
English
In The Gutenberg Elegies, Birkerts argues that reading and writing is being tarnished by technology. In my experience however, the two are not defined by the material in which they are presented. It is the diction, that determines the significance of the literature and the experience that the reader encounters. If the reader allows their-self to fully engage in any type of text, meaning can be found if not on the surface.
The argument that the privacy of a book is what gives the person the ability to find understanding is legitimate. I have found it much easier to concentrate and focus on a reading when it is in my hands and I’m in my room, able to give the story my full attention. This however, does not mean that reading an article from the internet or watching a movie based on a book, dismisses a message that the author has tried to convey. Sure, there might be something more magical or private about a hard copy of a novel, but it does not overlook that one can escape just as easily into a web page.
In my life I have found, for the most part, books to be boring. The reason for this is because it has always been forced. I’m forced to look for certain symbols or I’m forced to find the one and only meaning said to be the message of the entire book. Should I not want to read to find my own understanding or interpretation? Authors write because they have a story to tell, and message to present to their reader. When I say authors that encompasses the words they write in any medium, book, internet, newspaper, etc. I think Birkerts focuses to much on the visual, rather than looking at the word’s significance.
I was in second grade and trying to read the first Harry Potter book in my room. At the time I was not a very strong reader nor was I really interested in reading to begin with. I sat there for about thirty minutes re-reading the same sentences over and over again trying to find some meaning. Shortly after, I gave up. The book being about three hundred pages long (which at this time was a lot), overwhelmed me. I was intimidated by the wordy descriptions and ongoing length of the book and it didn’t matter that I was alone in my room with only that in my hand. The message was still at this point unclear. Then Harry Potter became a movie. As I sat mesmerized by the mysterious spells and wizardry, I found myself being fully engulfed in this story of magic. There it was, the book that I had to tried to read, presented to me in a different form, I could now relate with. Just because it wasn’t the hardcopy, didn’t mean that I couldn’t enjoy the message. I confirmed this realization with several other encounters later on.
Many, many years later, here I am finding the same ideas to be true about reading and writing. It was last semester when my good friend Anna called me over to her lap top to read a blog. It was one of her friends from back home who had posted a story venting about why people questioned his pale skin. He explained that, no he was not albino and yes he does go out into the sun. I never thought that I could be so intrigued with an internet post and the point behind it. He seemed to use the perfect wit and diction that allowed me to fully understand what he was saying, and to some degree I could relate.
When reading any kind of text, it is the reader’s responsibility to engage their-self to the best of their ability. When writing any kind of text, it is the author’s duty to choose their words accordingly to convey their point. Both can be done without the strict limitations that implies meaning can only be found through books. Although there just may be something more intimate or personal about having the individual novel, the fact remains that meaning and understanding are not limited to pages, but can be found through many other mediums. What is being read is far more important than how it is being read and this is a point that I have confirmed throughout my own experience and one that Birkerts seems to overlook.
