The reading by Douglas Yellowlees reignited a thought that I originally conjured up in my head when I was in the middle of my teenage years. I remember when it was compulsory to read a book of some sort every week during school, especially in the primary to early secondary stages. “Books are important, books contain knowledge, books ignite your imagination”, the constant propaganda and somewhat fascist behaviour that was being imposed on me and my peers naturally made me inclined to rebel against books in general. Ever since then, I have never really been a big reader and would much rather watch a movie as opposed to reading.

That little voice in the back of my head that never failed to remind me about how important books are has started to fade with this technological boom. I honestly can’t remember the last time I picked up and read a book, as bad as that is to say, it is the truth. The pro-book speeches and why they are so valuable does not really apply in today’s world to the extent that it did before. Information, news, stories, archives, all of these things are now presented in different ways that attract us humans more. Perhaps this is because media is still such a new and developing thing that people simply just go with the flow as it is “new” and they can experience something different. However, we must not forget that everything is so much easier for us to find now, I do not have to sit in a library and scour the shelves or ask a grumpy librarian as to where the section on politics is. All I have to do is use an online database and type in what I want, and I have hundreds upon thousands of different options all readily available to me on my screen. Of course, the literal “reading” element is still there, but the means of finding the information is ridiculously easier than what my parents had to go through.

Furthermore, “remix” culture has also had an impact on the way in which we tell stories. People are able to narrate and illustrate different plot twists and endings to popular historical events in greater detail. I am sure we all have wondered what would have happened in Hitler was still around, and thanks to modern technology and new media, we are able to showcase this in a more realistic fashion. The example used in the reading mentions the notorious Titanic story. Thanks to the accurate representations and demanded hypermediacy of today’s population, audiences are arguably more enthralled and immersed in entertainment platforms such as movies and interactive books. Who would not want to constantly stare at a screen filled with amazing special effects, a setting and scenery that consistently changes, or an interactive layout that allows you to determine what happens next.

On the other hand, of course there are people who still love and enjoy reading books, and for them there is nothing that can replace them. Yes, new media presents us with amazing new graphics or ideas, but it will never replace the power of imagination. If you give a young child a simple ball, he or she can be amused for hours depending on how they utilise their imagination, this child does not have to be spoon fed the reality or overall picture of the story. Perhaps as a society, we have become less self-reliant when we have to entertain ourselves. This new media has arguably “poisoned” us, and we just keep wanting more and more of what we do not actually need. All we really need are words on paper, and to let our brains do the rest.

The reading starts off with a great quote that I feel is excellent food for thought and sums up this point perfectly. Every year a new iPhone comes out with more useless functions, will society ever learn to take a break during this media flurry?

“Undoubtedly man will learn to make synthetic rubber more cheaply, undoubtedly his aircraft will fly faster, undoubtedly he will find more specific poisons to destroy his internal parasites without ruining his digestion, but what can he do mechanically to improve a book?” — Vannevar Bush, “Mechanization and the Record” (1939)

I found it particularly interesting how he talks about the progression of books. Evidently books have been around for absolute ages, they have helped society come so far and wars have been fought over the power of them (as can be seen with the Russian Revolution). Therefore I do not believe that books will die out anytime soon, but there is a definite decrease in their use and importance in today’s world. What I want to know is, if books are dying out and we constantly find new ways to share things – what will come after the Internet dies out?

Wow…can I just say that I had NO idea that interactive Bibles like those mentioned in this reading existed. Different options available for analysis and notes? Impressive! I am not ashamed to admit that I had no idea at all, I thought we were just at the E-Book stage and that was it…obviously not.

The most obvious theme or idea up for debate from this reading of Landow and hypertext was the implementation and effectiveness of digital media combined with education. So many texts, of all genres and ages, have been digitised and are now available online. I feel that the potential and general idea for digitising texts and using the Internet and the online world as a teaching tool is great, but we just haven’t quite gotten it right yet.

Yes, I completely agree that the Internet is useful and extremely effective for learning, as I have mentioned in my previous posts. However, I believe that the Internet is not for everyone, just as essays or exams aren’t for everyone. The Internet is extremely constructive for some, while destructive for others. I personally found that in high school when it finally became acceptable for us to have our laptops open during lessons, my attention span just fell. It was the temptation of the Internet and other things on my computer such as games, it was all so easily and readily accessible. All I had to do was click it on my screen, how would the teacher have any idea if I was doing anything other than listening to her and taking notes like a good student should? If I turned the volume off and did not have a massive grin on my face in, for example, an English literature lesson (because who would, right?), I was relatively safe. This compared to my notebook and pen days was extremely different and definitely less brutal. The freedom of the Internet took me on journeys in my lessons that completely stole my attention.

On the other side however, it was easy to catch up. Everything I had to know was either online, or on a CD in an interactive form in my textbooks. I honestly could not believe that CDs were now included with textbooks, it was all a bit weird to me really. Anyway, I powered on through and caught up with everything as soon as I got home. I worked at home, messed around in school…logic? Ha!

What I am getting at is, in my case, although arguably technology negatively affected my attention span in class, it maximised efficiency outside of class. Any document I wanted I could get, any book, journal, article, anything. If I wanted an in-depth analysis of a book for an essay, done in 10 seconds. Libraries are beautiful buildings, but their need is arguably dying out.

This is not to say that we don’t need teachers anymore, a human being explaining it using technology as a “sidekick” or enhancer is the best combination. When you call a company, I want to be put straight through to a human, I don’t want any of this please hold, press 2 for this, press 1 for this, oops error rubbish. This is similar to learning and education, what if I have questions that the machine cannot answer? What if the initial way it is being taught to me is not getting into my head? A good teacher will be able to try something else within minutes, whereas a machine will probably take me to a questionnaire that will take an extra half an hour to fill out.

Thus, a happy medium must be reached. The teaching at RMIT is very similar to this, as we have lecture slides projected onto a screen that are interactive with different videos and images, yet the supplementary tool that is being utilised effectively is the human aspect and explanations.

Firstly, I had no idea that the word “hypertext” even existed back in 1987. In fact, I was not sure what it was exactly up until a few weeks ago. It appears that the idea of hypermediacy (experiencing several different forms of media at once), as explored in semester two of my first year at RMIT University, was developed in the late 80s and early 90s. This transition period was perhaps the most influential and exponential in terms of growth for different types of media such as videodiscs.

The reading I am making reference to is titled Literary Machines by Theodor Holm Nelson. The basic gist of what he is saying is that he “coined the term “hypertext” over 20 years ago”. Therefore he essentially predicted the Internet and the revolution that it would create, claiming that it would be “the wave of the future, the next stage of civilisation, the next stage of literature,” and much more.

He then continues, starting to sound more and more like a crazy man (which is not hard considering that he maintains and pushes that he came up with the hypertext idea). Nelson then starts explaining what he actually means in terms of hypertext, and explains it literally as a series of interactive pages that branch out to other pages – much like what is happening on the Internet right now, it is probably how you found my blog.

A controversial point is brought up in my mind when going through this set reading. Does this mean that computers and the ways in which devices and the online world works have improved our lives? I remember having debates with my parents about this topic several times in the past, but now that I am actually exploring theorists and their ideas, I will most definitely be undefeated upon returning home to Hong Kong for the holidays.

In a sense of efficiency, business, and entertainment, I would say for the most part that the ways of the Internet and online devices have most definitely improved our lives. For example, as mentioned in the reading, people are not at the mercy of insanely tall stacks of paper containing notes that may or may not be useful – you just don’t throw them away in fear of losing something by accident. Nowadays, all we need to do is type what we need onto a device that fits perfectly in our pocket and click “save”.

You want to access some information? Watch a video? Find an image or song? Have no fear, the Internet is here! Smartphones have arguably become the most recent technological breakthrough. Almost everyone can now access the Internet on their phone and at a cheap price. Any questions you may be pondering at an awkward time with no computer around, you can simply whip out your phone and punch it in instantly.

An argument I have heard all too many times (especially from my mother), is that people have become too engrossed with their phones. As I have lived in Hong Kong my whole life, I can confidently say that the vast majority of people in public are magically glued to their screens. Not only is this cult-like behaviour disturbing, it appears to be negatively affecting our everyday physical communication. Maybe it’s a culture clash between myself and the Hong Kong community, although I find that a terribly weak retort as I have lived my whole life in Hong Kong and have adopted a Hong Kong culture myself. Maybe it is acceptable to be on the phone constantly during a family meal, having to ask people to repeat what they were saying as I was just messaging a friend, or attempting to get a new score on Flappy Bird (great game). I, like many others I am sure, am guilty of this “offence”. I do check my phone during meals, but I am not constantly finding the need to use it. For example, I will reply to a message if I received it first, I will not be the first to initiate a discussion myself during such a time unless it is extremely urgent. You know you have a problem when tables upon tables of people are occupied by “friends” who spend 80% of the meal-time checking their electronic devices (I am not joking, I have seen a woman with her phone, iPad, and Dongle out on the table once).

Despite this apparent overuse of the Internet and online devices, I believe that we have advanced in so many ways thanks to the ability to connect with one another in this vast online web, and to share each other’s knowledge. People are able to connect with others from all around the world in a much simpler way, and a lot of what we know comes from how the theory of hypertext has extended the capabilities of the Internet far beyond what was initially expected. Therefore, in a way, you could say that we are intact communicating more now than ever.