<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>andrew.pilsch.com &#187; why?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://andrew.pilsch.com/blog/tag/why/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://andrew.pilsch.com/blog</link>
	<description>science fiction, new media, technical communications, transhumanism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:55:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>On Google, On Thinking, On Why I&#8217;m Not Working on My Dissertation Right Now</title>
		<link>http://andrew.pilsch.com/blog/2008/06/04/on-google-on-thinking-on-why-im-not-working-on-my-dissertation-right-now/</link>
		<comments>http://andrew.pilsch.com/blog/2008/06/04/on-google-on-thinking-on-why-im-not-working-on-my-dissertation-right-now/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 18:39:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Pilsch</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Home]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dissertation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[english]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[why?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[writing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrew.pilsch.com/blog/2008/06/04/on-google-on-thinking-on-why-im-not-working-on-my-dissertation-right-now/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[	The July issue of The Atlantic arrived at my parent&#8217;s house today. It contains a Nicholas Carr essay entitled &#8220;Is Google Making Us Stupid?&#8221;.  The article is worth a look (in a twist, it isn&#8217;t on the Internet yet), but it isn&#8217;t anything particularly profound.  Basically, his argument is that the Internet, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>The July issue of <em>The Atlantic</em> arrived at my parent&#8217;s house today. It contains a <a href="http://www.roughtype.com/">Nicholas Carr</a> essay entitled &#8220;Is Google Making Us Stupid?&#8221;.  The article is worth a look (in a twist, it isn&#8217;t on the Internet yet), but it isn&#8217;t anything particularly profound.  Basically, his argument is that the Internet, and especially Google, is replacing the way our brains are wired with a more parallel approach to information acquisition, information processing, and information retention.  I would imagine that most people who blog, rss, and otherwise live the Web2.0 lifestyle (I think &#8220;rss&#8221; should be a verb) have, if they stop to think about it, noticed that this change is occurring.  While I&#8217;ve read three books this week, that&#8217;s my job and I&#8217;ve noticed that it&#8217;s getting harder for me to focus on it now that I&#8217;ve got so much information competing for my time.</p>

	<p>The thing is, though, I live in an information ecology that <a href="http://english.la.psu.edu">doesn&#8217;t normally value this style of thought</a>. Instead, the English Department continues to value the long, complex, linear narratives that dominated our cultural mind before television and that Carr says are passing away.  Frankly, I don&#8217;t think this is really how the story goes: television clearly killed the book and, as Carr also points out, people are reading more, now, than they were 20 years ago.  This fact troubles a lot of people (again, Carr says that this reading is a new and different kind of reading that removes a lot of the contemplation of linear text consumption), but I see it as positive.  Also, when I make this claim about text and English Studies&#8217; relationship with it, I don&#8217;t just mean on a profound level: I&#8217;m interested in how many of colleagues&#8217; eyes glaze over when I start excitedly babbling about <span class="caps">RSS</span> readers and Twitter.  <em>On some fundamental level English Studies has never understood the Internet</em>.</p>

	<p>As weird (I was going to say bad) as the new patterns of reading appear (at least to old school, linear authors like Carr and myself), I think the fact that people are reading again, at all, is a really positive and exciting thing. Clar Shirky&#8217;s <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2008/04/27/death-of-the-sitcom.html">ideas about television</a> are true.  It is a waste of time.  I think blogging and rssing, though, aren&#8217;t wastes, as such.  The number of new ideas I&#8217;ve been exposed to this week is greater than what I could have gotten from the three books (although, reading Frank Tipler&#8217;s <em>The Physics of Immortality</em>, Vernor Vinge&#8217;s <em>Rainbows End</em>, and Bruce Sterling&#8217;s <em>Schismatrix Plus</em> makes that almost an untrue claim, but that has more to do with <strong>what</strong> I read).  The problem comes in figuring out how to synthesize this information.  Sure, I&#8217;ve fired off a lot of pithy (in my mind) &#8220;tweets&#8221; about this stuff on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/oncomouse">Twitter</a>, but does that really count?  Also, I&#8217;ve posted about some of it on this blog (and could do a better job, I would imagine), but these media don&#8217;t count as work in the information ecology of a graduate-level English department.  We still highly value linearity.<br />
This dichotomy between what I feel and what I do is starting to become a crisis: as I gear up to write a long, linear book that somehow synthesizes my interests in science fiction, rhetoric, and technical communication at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012#Metaphysical_predictions">the twilight of the current age of mankind</a>, I wonder: &#8220;Why?&#8221; Can a textual form that everyone seems to think is outmoded capture what it means to suddenly think in parallel (as Carr claims the Internet has done)?  If not, what would such a form look like? The answer isn&#8217;t hypertext, as people like Jay D. Bolter have talked about it, as that form is largely a joke and an attempt to wield old forms onto the new logic of the Internet.</p>

	<p>I&#8217;m partly thinking about exploring these issues in my English 015 class this summer, but I&#8217;m not even sure what this new kind of thinking will mean in a composition classroom.  I think one thing I&#8217;m going to do is talk about how to read linearly (which is something that we seem to be forgetting as a culture) as well as how to write in parallel.  I plan on using <a href="http://twemes.com/">Twemes</a> to get the students on Twitter and talking about class.  I have some new media texts to present, so we&#8217;ll see if this can help resolve some of these issues, but, frankly, I worry about the future of this field, in general.<br />
We claim in composition studies that we are teaching our students to write, but what good does it do to teach a model of writing that no longer matches the information ecology that exists outside of our insular world?  Further, how do we teach composition as a discipline that is behind the times, in terms of the cutting edge of text?  I don&#8217;t necessarily have the answers for these questions and I don&#8217;t think that as a discipline we will understand the forms these answers must take for a long time, but I think we need to at least try to keep a few steps ahead of our students.  I think this approach should be implemented, as our society is still going through a shift in the way it deals with these information technologies: despite that most of my students have <a href="http://www.facebook.com">Facebook</a> accounts, I&#8217;ve never had any who (to my knowledge) blog (I&#8217;ve only had a few freshmen who even knew what blogging was).  These changes are not yet complete, but if we don&#8217;t want to get left by the wayside, I think we should start thinking about what composition means in the era of the 140 character &#8220;tweet.&#8221;</p>

	<p>Image Credit: <a href="http://flickr.com/photos/vogoa/337752084/">Sunset in Criação Velha, Pico Island Azores</a> by <a href="http://flickr.com/photos/vogoa/">Ulrich Thumult</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://andrew.pilsch.com/blog/2008/06/04/on-google-on-thinking-on-why-im-not-working-on-my-dissertation-right-now/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
