tom@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Thomas C Hajdu) (02/28/88)
"It is simple to say that if a new technology extends one or more of our senses outside us into the social world, then new ratios among all of our senses will occur in that particular culture... And when the sense ratios alter in any culture then what had appeared lucid before may suddenly be opaque, and what had been vague or opaque will suddenly become translucent." "The Gutenberg Galaxy" Marshall McLuhan In general, I've been noticing that I am changing the modes by which I communicate. For example, when I want to find out about something, reading feels less comfortable than does watching tv. I get the sense that reading is less vital and available than it seems to have been in the past, while the availability of tv seems to be constantly increasing. Even the act of writing these feelings down seems inappropriate -- negating the experience that I am trying to describe. Its not that the act of reading feels wrong, its rather the way in which that medium transmits its information to me that I find distracting -- the linear patterns of the written word as opposed to the non-linearity of tv images. When I refer to "linear" I dont mean it in the strictest meta- physical sense of time and consequentiality, I mean it in the sense of an association of ideas and ordering of incoming information. In 5 minutes on tv you can get a 30 second summary of world events, five 20 second commercials, a bunch of music and the summary of an upcoming hour long tv drama. This information is not ordered for you by another human being but is chaotic, and in that sense non-linear. Some contemporary writers have managed to represent non-linearity in their prose but I always end up somehow feeling that what I've experienced is a peculiar imitation of what I really wanted to get out of the read -- as if I am experiencing a crude representation of what the writer truely wanted to convey -- linear representations imitating non-linear patterns -- linearity feebly imitating the way in which I perceive the world. When I listen to music, I find that I don't have the patience to listen to a long piece from beginning to end. Its not a lack of concentration as much as a lack of interest. Instead, I prefer to flip between composers, operating the turntable and its records as I do the tv and its ninety available channels. Whether its a preference to watch tv over reading or listening to a bunch of records instead of going to a concert, I keep feeling that people are becoming less social beings. Tom Hajdu Music Dept Princeton University
greg@physics.UUCP (02/29/88)
I too have noticed quite the same phenomena. Much to my own distress, I find that I would rather watch the news on TV than actually sit down and read the paper. People tend to look for the more 'accessible', for lack of a better work, way of obtaining information. It is yet another indication of the intellectual and cultural decline of America - this kind of fast food approach to everything... -greg -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- || Greg Tusar AT&T Bell Laboratories Photonics and Electronics Research | || 600 Mountain Avenue (201) 464-6092 | || {allegra||ihnp4}!physics!greg | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- || Greg Tusar AT&T Bell Laboratories Photonics and Electronics Research || || 600 Mountain Avenue (201) 464-6092 || || {allegra||ihnp4}!physics!greg ||
kaw@uoregon.UUCP (Keith Alan Weinberger) (02/29/88)
Regarding the non-linearity of television: I still watch television news, but only from time to time. Basically, I get bored because there is not enough depth and the reporting is slanted to appeal to conventional American opinions: small farmers good, corporate farmers bad - Cuba bad, Contras good. It's not that I disagree with any or all the slants, but the one-dimensionality of it all, which is probably the result of time constraints, leaves me wanting more. I find I can get the same news by word of mouth. Television still presents ideas in a linear fashion; this is the e essence of language. The problem is that television gives the illusion of the news occuring as you watch it. The immediacy of the visual input saves the viewer the trouble of organizing his thoughts on the subject, and of bringing to bear past experience. Hence the short memory of the American public. The failure to stick to reading for any length of time is a lack of concentration. People think that television gives them understanding of the world. It doesn't. It only gives them an image of it. An image without depth. There is no easy way to gain depth of understanding, one must think and descriminate. If reading is too hard, I would suggest listening to foreign radio news, or National Public Radio to get another side of the story. It should always be kept in mind the source of information. Television is a commercial enterprise. But then keeping this in mind involves thinking, which perhaps Americans consider too much effort.
bitter@ttidca.TTI.COM (Mark Bitter) (03/01/88)
> When I listen to music, I find that I don't have the > patience to listen to a long piece from beginning to end. > Its not a lack of concentration as much as a lack of interest. > Tom Hajdu > Music Dept, Princeton University ^^^^^^^^^^ Gee, maybe you should reconsider your major..! -- Mark Bitter (bitter@ttidca.TTI.COM) Citicorp/TTI 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (213) 452-9191, x2425 Santa Monica, CA 90405 {csun|philabs|psivax|trwrb}!ttidca!bitter
doug@dhw68k.cts.com (Doug Salot) (03/04/88)
In article <1880@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> tom@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Thomas C Hajdu) writes: > >In general, I've been noticing that I am changing the modes by >which I communicate. For example, when I want to >find out about something, reading feels less >comfortable than does watching tv. >I get the sense that reading is less vital and available than it >seems to have been in the past, while the availability of tv seems to >be constantly increasing. Even the act of writing these feelings >down seems inappropriate -- negating the experience that I am trying to >describe. [other examples of slipping into a fast, montage-like world] I found myself reflecting on similar notions recently. For me, the need for instantaneous access to lots of information is a biological drive. Since I was born in the sixties, I have no way of knowing if things were really any different, but my lifetime has been characterized by breadth rather than depth (education = liberal arts, interdisciplinary science is in vogue, TV news and USA TODAY, businesses drive toward diversification, &c), and SPEED is virtually a pagan god (just try to find counter-examples (well, besides sex)). While this discussion probably belongs in soc.iology, these drives are very influential on my cognition and often my physiology. I'm always trying to buck the trend of losing interest in something once I've discovered its "essence" (this can put a real burden on relationships), and I become very nervous when I have to wait or if I have to solve a problem all the way through to the nit level. I strive toward the quickest solution to something even if it's detrimental (like eating dinner in a couple of nanoseconds). I'd love to slow down, but I'm a victim of society! From a physiological standpoint, I'm a mess; economically, quality has suffered, long-term research has suffered, global markets are panic driven; socially, we do things like post netnews articles instead of breaking bread together; politically, we have pigmies trying to act like giants. "Form over function" is the slogan for the eighties. I'm sorry I had to subject you to this, but it was easier than thinking. - Doug -- Doug "" Salot = doug@dhw86k.cts.com = {trwrb,hplabs}!felix!dhw68k!feedme!doug BIRTHRIGHT PARTY | "To the moon, Alice" - Kent CAMPAIGN SLUGANS? | "Got anth in my panth for the man from Xanth"
bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) (03/05/88)
In article <1887@physics.UUCP> greg@physics.UUCP (Greg Tusar) writes: >I too have noticed quite the same phenomena. Much to my own distress, I find >that I would rather watch the news on TV than actually sit down and read the >paper. People tend to look for the more 'accessible', for lack of a better >work, way of obtaining information. It is yet another indication of the >intellectual and cultural decline of America - this kind of fast food >approach to everything... I seem to have come in on the middle of this.. but I don't think it's as bad as Greg paints it. One of the best things commercial television is doing for us is increasing the number (I think) and sheer noise level (I am certain) of their ads. For me, at least, the level has risen to the point where I will *not* turn the tube on unless I have verified that there is a program I might want to watch. The barrage of ads, and the inanity of TV reporters has driven me away from TV news (how many times have you watched the banter between anchors before and especially after "news" reports? Aren't they edifying?). Since learning to read I've always read (at least part) of the newspapers, but it was only when TV rose above my pain threshold that I started taking a look at what I was getting from the two media. While it's true that the paper has *never* offered anything as sensational as the live coverage of the last stand of the Symbionese Liberation Army, the paper offers *much* more information, on many more topics, without time out for advertising for products I am completely indifferent to, than does the horned box. I suspect that I am not alone in this. Those who want more comprehensive information will find it, whether by papers, or magazines, or journals, etc. Those who don't really care (and who in pre-TV days either listened to radio news broadcasts or ignored the news completely) will continue watching it. If this country is in such an intellectual and cultural decline, when were "the good old days", and how were they better? -- William Swan {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!sigma!bill "Once upon a time they burned witches. Not many, just one here and one there, and it went on for a very, very long time. Then one day they started burning them right and left and then it was not very long at all before they quit burning them altogether."
jimh@ism780c.UUCP (Jim Hori) (03/05/88)
In article <1887@physics.UUCP> greg@physics.UUCP (Greg Tusar) writes: >I too have noticed quite the same phenomena. Much to my own distress, I find that >I would rather watch the news on TV than actually sit down and read the paper. >People tend to look for the more 'accessible', for lack of a better work, way of >obtaining information. It is yet another indication of the intellectual and cultural >decline of America - this kind of fast food approach to everything... > >-greg > That's why politicians are judged worthy of coverage based on their ability to provide 'sound bites' - i.e. short, catchy phrases - with content a neutral factor. About your attention span problems with TV info versus print media - my serious suggestion would be to get rid of the TV. jimh@ism780c.UUCP awopbopaloobop alopbamboom ...............................................................
tom@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Thomas C Hajdu) (03/06/88)
In article <2026@ttidca.TTI.COM> bitter@ttidca.tti.com (Mark Bitter) writes: >> When I listen to music, I find that I don't have the >> patience to listen to a long piece from beginning to end. >> Its not a lack of concentration as much as a lack of interest. > >> Tom Hajdu >> Music Dept, Princeton University > ^^^^^^^^^^ > > > Gee, maybe you should reconsider your major..! gee, thats really a nifty idea. i guess i'll just chuck my PhD diss in the garbage and take up auto mechanics or hotel management. thanks for the advice! i am now going to scrub my terminal down with ammonia. tom hajdu
tom@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Thomas C Hajdu) (03/06/88)
In article <9266@ism780c.UUCP> jimh@ism780c.UUCP (Jim Hori) writes: >In article <1887@physics.UUCP> greg@physics.UUCP (Greg Tusar) writes: >>I too have noticed quite the same phenomena. Much to my own distress, I find that >>I would rather watch the news on TV than actually sit down and read the paper. >>People tend to look for the more 'accessible', for lack of a better work, way of >>obtaining information. It is yet another indication of the intellectual and cultural >>decline of America - this kind of fast food approach to everything... >> >>-greg >> > >That's why politicians are judged worthy of coverage >based on their ability to provide 'sound bites' - i.e. >short, catchy phrases - with content a neutral factor. > >About your attention span problems with TV info versus >print media - my serious suggestion would be to get >rid of the TV. When I posted my original question about (schizophrenic/ post-structuralist/post-modern/??) perception I was sort of hoping to hear about books that I might read that refered to my experience: Mcluhan, Kroker, Chambers, Foster, Kern, Venturi, Turkle, Lowe, Foucault, Eco come to mind as writers who bounce off of these feelings in one way or another. If I'm off the mark in posting this question at this newsgroup, please let me know. tom hajdu music dept. princeton university
pyr280@psc90.UUCP (Michael McNamara) (03/06/88)
In article <9266@ism780c.UUCP> jimh@ism780c.UUCP (Jim Hori) writes: >In article <1887@physics.UUCP> greg@physics.UUCP (Greg Tusar) writes: >>I too have noticed quite the same phenomena. Much to my own distress, I find that >>I would rather watch the news on TV than actually sit down and read the paper. >>People tend to look for the more 'accessible', for lack of a better work, way of >>obtaining information. It is yet another indication of the intellectual and cultural >>decline of America - this kind of fast food approach to everything... >> >>-greg >> > >That's why politicians are judged worthy of coverage >based on their ability to provide 'sound bites' - i.e. >short, catchy phrases - with content a neutral factor. > >About your attention span problems with TV info versus >print media - my serious suggestion would be to get >rid of the TV. > > >jimh@ism780c.UUCP >awopbopaloobop >alopbamboom > > > >............................................................... I don't know if I agree with you completely about throwing out one's telivision set if it isn't providing him/her with enough in- formation on items of importance. I belive that TV should be used simply as another reference source that provides the individual with a brief synopsis of thousands of subjects daily. If there is a topic that is presented either in a news program, on public television, or on a special focus show (48hrs, Nightline, etc.) that does interest a person, what's preventing him from getting off his duff and looking for newspapers, books or periodicals that will provide more information! We are all mature adults here (I believe), and I for one, will not allow just one media to provide me with all the information that I need. Let's face it, the problem here is not TV. I believe that the problem resides in the apathy of the individual. If one really wants to under- stand an issue, then he must take the responsibility to find the infor- mation himself. When TV becomes the only source availailable, then it will have to present *all* of the facts surrounding an issue; until then I suggest that we stop fooling ourselves into thinking that the networks are accountable for our educations. We only have ourselves to blame. Mike McNamara
eliot@mind.UUCP (Eliot Handleman) (03/08/88)
In article <1979@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> tom@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Thomas C Hajdu) writes: >When I posted my original question about (schizophrenic/ >post-structuralist/post-modern/??) perception I was >sort of hoping to hear about books that I might read that >refered to my experience: Mcluhan, Kroker, Chambers, Foster, >Kern, Venturi, Turkle, Lowe, Foucault, Eco come to mind >as writers who bounce off of these feelings in one >way or another. Ok, I'll bite: in what way exactly do those authors bounce off of those feelings (which, I seem to recall, had to do with a preference for switching TV channels over reading long books)?
gcf@actnyc.UUCP (Gordon Fitch) (03/09/88)
In article <1977@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> tom@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Thomas C Hajdu) writes: } In article <2026@ttidca.TTI.COM> bitter@ttidca.tti.com (Mark Bitter) writes: } } } When I listen to music, I find that I don't have the } } } patience to listen to a long piece from beginning to end. } } } Its not a lack of concentration as much as a lack of interest. } } } } } Tom Hajdu } } } Music Dept, Princeton University } } ^^^^^^^^^^ } } } } } } Gee, maybe you should reconsider your major..! } } } gee, thats really a nifty idea. i guess i'll just } chuck my PhD diss in the garbage and take up auto mechanics } or hotel management. } I don't know about hotel management, but auto mechanics takes a lot of concentration, an extended span of attention, and great ability to press on in spite of frustration. If you're any good, though, you can probably do better than a lot of PhD's in both income and job satisfaction.