taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (Dave Taylor) (07/01/86)
--------
This article is from harvard!wanginst!infinet!rhorn (Rob Horn)
and was received on Fri Jun 27 15:46:11 1986
--------
[good reading! It'd also be interesting to have Rob post some exemplary
letters like those he refers to herein... -- Dave]
I decided to explore how other societies have reacted to high speed
mail. In England during the late 19th and early 20th centuries the
physical mail system rivaled today's electronic mail systems. I think
that the comparison of writing styles is interesting.
Around London mail delivery was at least 4 times daily, and elsewhere
it was at least twice daily. The distances are short enough that same
day delivery was normal everywhere. In the city, it was fast enough
that mail was used to set up lunch and dinner appointments on a same
day basis. People routinely used the mails to carry on conversations.
So on a pure speed basis it is as fast as UUCP or Phonenet mail
systems.
The writing styles have some interesting differences from those seen
in today's electronic systems. The impact of hasty writing is the
same: spelling errors, poor grammar, and difficult hand-writing.
These were just as severe for the quick notes, but many letters were
dictated and passed through one or more review cycles. Those letters
have a different class of errors. They have more simple typos (no
electronic spelling checkers) but fewer grammatical errors.
But there is one very big systematic difference. Even the notes that
were clearly written in haste are much clearer and easier to
understand than electronic mail notes. The English writers took
much greater care to remain civil and polite. They presented clear
cogent ideas. They knew how to use the English language to
communicate.
Most of the recorded writings are from either politicians or literary
figures. Both groups av%generally skilled in the use of English.
But some of the letters are from other relatives or aquaintances, and
these letters are also of generally high quality.
My analysis is that the major difference is due to cultural,
non-computer factors. The use of electronics today is at most
exacerbating an already bad writing culture. I think that these
factors are:
- A far more substantial school training in writing
- A much greater cultural importance attached to writing skills
- Regular practice. A couple letters every day was normal.
(Winston Churchill probably set the extreme. During WW II he ran
much of the government by writing minutes. His throughput
averaged over ten pages every day, seven days a week. He kept
several secretaries occupied to handle just his traffic.)
The only truly computer related factor is the availability of instant
reply. The physical mail user knew that he had an hour or two before
the next post, so there was no psychological urge to write without
taking a few minutes to collect his thoughts. The typical process was
to read all the mail, decide what the replies would be, write them,
then mail them. In fact this applies to many mailers even today; they
just look like instant response is supported.
Rob Horn
UUCP: ...{decvax, seismo!harvard}!wanginst!infinet!rhorn
Snail: Infinet, 40 High St., North Andover, MA