Evolution of Writing Technology

It is interesting how the ideas of purity and authenticity keep cropping up as technology advances and has an impact on writing or at least the general perception of writing. Starting in the 20th century we see technology in general and specifically related to writing seemed to progress and alter the idea of text at a previously unprecedented rate. Ages passed with writing on stone and clay tablets, which eventually gave way to more portable means to produce text such as parchment, pencil, pen, and ultimately printing press.  In the late nineteenth and first half of the twentieth century we see the proliferation of a mobile printing press aka the typewriter, which was quickly usurped by the personal computer within a span of 100 years.

We have this small window in relatively recent history in which writing went from a very handicraft/artisanal process (in terms of actually putting text on a medium) to a very utilitarian and more accessible process. At one point writing was handled by the privileged and educated few, but with the mass availability of inexpensive paper, pencils, and pens, people were soon able to create seemingly a seemingly endless amount of work with relative ease and no specialized training (calligraphy, chiseling, etc). Ultimately taking us to where we are today with inconceivable numbers of people able to create and publish their own thoughts and ideas in digital format.

It seems that with the spread of writing (or more importantly content creation), the idea of purity or authenticity has consistently been an issue. As discussed by Ong and now Baron, Plato saw several problematic issues with writing as a standard practice and felt that not only would writing limit our reliance on memory, but also diminish the capacity for critical thought/argument because there is no way to discover the true meaning of any written text in the absence of the author. There may be some validity to Plato’s statement, but writing supplanted oral story telling as the most accepted way to share information. However, this idea of purity did not escape as cultures and societies continued to remediate communication. It seems that there is always this latent criticism that anything new is inherently less pure than the old way. Beyond the example of Plato, in “Thoreau’s Pencil” we see a more modern iteration of this idea in which Thoreau scoffed at the idea of the telegraph because there isn’t as much of a connection with the author of the message. This chapter continues to elaborate on how this idea persisted as the telephone replaced the telegraph, and how new forms of media have started to join these older options.

The older more artistic and labor-intensive forms of writing haven’t gone away, but they do seem to be held in higher esteem or assigned greater worth than “common” methods of writing even if the new and common methods are more efficient or appropriate. However, I’d argue that there’s not much use in worrying about these changes in how we write. I think a more appropriate response is to adopt these new writing technologies, which absorb some of the tedium of writing, and build upon these technologies and knowledge to more clearly focus on the intended message rather than the mechanics of production.