![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
"In The Future, There Will Be No Paper."
You get that a lot in discussions of eBooks and electronic bill paying and so on and so forth. Some people say it with awe and excitement:"this is the wave of the future and the world will be a better place!" Others say it with trepidation and disappointment, adding, "but I LIKE reading things off paper! It would be horrible!"
I think both sides aren't thinking this through. But first I will address the first group, in effort to show why a world without paper isn't really as great as they think. Then, once I've established a case for the continued existence of paper, we'll move on to discussing the many actual possibilities of both print and electronic media, and explore where the future of both could REALLY go (and why that future is already here).
This is long, so I am splitting it into three separate posts. Today I am only making a case for paper, so if you want to argue with me "BUT HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH ELECTRONIC MEDIA!" you may want to hold off, because I'll be addressing that in the next post.
The Case for Paper #1: Multiple Intelligence Theory, or something like
People who say "But I LIKE paper!" at the thought of a paperless world aren't necessarily just fuddy-duddies unwilling to embrace change. Experiencing words on paper is a DIFFERENT experience than on screen-- a more TACTILE experience. I think of my educational training, Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligences, the many varieties of learning styles. I witnessed this at work in college. My roommate composed and edited all her papers directly on the computer. I drafted longhand, typed it up with minor edits, printed the thing out, cut it into pieces, spread all the pieces out on the floor and rearranged them and fit them together like a puzzle. When I discovered my next door neighbor composed her papers the same way, we both laughed and felt a little more justified in our quirk. We needed that hands-on, big space editing to properly organize our thoughts. It was just the way we worked.
Today I still need paper to organize my thoughts. I do work on the computer, but always with scratch paper handy to jot notes on and also doodle (doodling is an important step). I still always write first drafts --at least of important things I want to get right (not all emails and blog entries, but some of them-- this one, for instance)-- longhand. When I type, I'm inevitably writing for an audience. But whenever I want to capture my own true thoughts without inhibition-- or with LESS inhibition at least-- it has to come out longhand first (witness how when Madeleine L'Engle died, I needed to write about it in my journal first-- THEN I shared it with you).
It is unfair to expect all people to fit themselves into the same data-processing mold. That is a problem that comes up often enough in education as it is. Why make it worse by restricting our methods of information-exchange?
The Case for Paper #2: Environmental Impact
One of the things that bugs me most about the "paperless" movement is the "Go Green: Go PAPERLESS!" catchphrase. Have we really thought this through? It is true, there is much wasted paper in our society. Excess packaging. Junk mail. Printers that always spit out that extra blank page for no good reason. Electronic bill paying-- and statements-- makes sense. So do interoffice memos over email. So does keeping regularly updated reference materials in databases rather than 30-volume book encyclopedias. But is putting EVERYTHING into electronic format really the greener choice?
Paper is made from trees-- a valuable resource, true, but also a RENEWABLE resource. In many cases, it's even made from recycled paper. Once a book is printed, you have it for decades, with no additional material/energy expenditure needed. And when you DO finally throw it out, it eventually biodegrades-- or it can be recycled.
Computers-- eReaders, iPhones, whatever electronic device you've got-- are made from plastics and metals-- NON-renewable resources. They require continuous energy to use (and you have to keep replacing the rechargeable batteries when they get old, too). They BREAK. They become obsolete in a few years at most. And you can't just throw them away-- electronics are Hazardous Waste. And the parts that DO get thrown out at the end after they've been carefully disassembled by the experts, well, they DON'T biodegrade.
Hmm. Going Greener, are we?
It's funny, many people are setting aside, as a Greener (and more economical-- but we'll get to that) choice, Electronics-free days in their homes-- a kind of Sabbath from the constant buzzing plugged-in culture we have. Why on earth would we insist that all our previously nonelectronic pasttimes should become electronic instead, if the greener and more economic option is cutting BACK on electrical usage?
And maybe I've just read too much dystopian fiction, but I don't like the idea of depending too much on electricity. To convert ones entire cultural history to a format that can only be used if you have the right high-tech equipment-- that's just setting oneself up for a cultural apocalypse. After the fall of OUR great empire, how will future archaeologists figure us out? Heck, most of us can't even read the data we left on the 3.5 floppies we used just ten years ago anymore.
The Case for Paper #3: Socioeconomics
There's first the matter of HAVING something, OWNING something, KEEPING something. Sometimes you do want something to keep, to hold. Sure, sometimes you pay for experiences-- concerts, tours, vacations-- but other times you want something more permanent for your money. But that's a simple, general issue. The socioeconomic issues go much deeper than this.
The biggest problem with electronic technology is that it keeps making itself obsolete. You can't just invest in one gadget and be done with it for life. because in a few years that gadget is going to be Incompatible With the Way We Do Things NOW, so you'll have to buy a NEW gadget to compensate. Film projectors to VHS to DVD to BluRay to, what the heck, 3D HD? Vinyl to 8 track to cassette to CD to mP3? And when you bought that first gadget, it wasn't a ten-buck splurge toy to begin with. There's a whole cozy middle-to-upper-class that doesn't see much wrong with this. They're SHOPPERS! They BUY stuff that catches their fancy, even if they have to buy it on credit!
Meanwhile, there are thousands, millions of people in this supposedly first-world country who would rather spend their hard-earned cash on, I don't know, FOOD or something silly like that. Or on Not Losing the Roof Over Their Heads. There are far more people than most of those comfortable iPhone lovers realize who DO NOT HAVE ANY COMPUTER AT ALL at home. I see them all the time at the library. The really depressing moments are when they come to you because they're trying to get a job-- a minimum-wage job at Target, or a strictly-manual labor job mining coal -- and the company only takes applications through their website form. And they first need a valid email address before they can fill out the application. And before you can even help them get a hotmail or gmail account or something, you have to show them where to type the web address in the first place. And how to use the Shift key to make the @. And how to double-click the browser icon. If they GET that job at Target, they're still not going to be on the computer much. They've got better things to do with their minimum wage.
There's already a socioeconomic education gap. Groups like RIF and Beginning with Books and, if I may be so bold, the public library, already do the best they can to make sure every child has at least ONE BOOK they can call their very own. Sure, maybe they can start supplying kids with eReaders instead-- are you willing to donate the extra funds these groups would need to pull that off? And then what happens when the thing breaks or becomes obsolete? For that matter, what happens when the battery goes dead, and the kid can't recharge it because the power's been shut off in their building?
The Cozy Classes take too much for granted, tech-wise. The more dependent we become on technology for our cultural distillation, the more the lower classes will be left in the dust. Yet another reason why you should SUPPORT YOUR PUBLIC LIBRARY. But I'm maybe getting ahead of myself....
Lest you think I'm just one of those Luddite eBook Hater Types, I must reassure you. There is definitely a place for electronic media, and it DOES open horizons. I wanted to make the case for paper off the bat, though. Now that we've established that we DO need both paper and electronic media, in my next post I will explore more deeply the possible uses of both. So (since I have already written this whole series out longhand and don't have to scrounge computer time for composing it-- I just have to type it up), part 2, "Apples, Oranges, Broccoflower: Many Different Media," is coming soon! Like, tomorrow maybe!
You get that a lot in discussions of eBooks and electronic bill paying and so on and so forth. Some people say it with awe and excitement:"this is the wave of the future and the world will be a better place!" Others say it with trepidation and disappointment, adding, "but I LIKE reading things off paper! It would be horrible!"
I think both sides aren't thinking this through. But first I will address the first group, in effort to show why a world without paper isn't really as great as they think. Then, once I've established a case for the continued existence of paper, we'll move on to discussing the many actual possibilities of both print and electronic media, and explore where the future of both could REALLY go (and why that future is already here).
This is long, so I am splitting it into three separate posts. Today I am only making a case for paper, so if you want to argue with me "BUT HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH ELECTRONIC MEDIA!" you may want to hold off, because I'll be addressing that in the next post.
The Case for Paper #1: Multiple Intelligence Theory, or something like
People who say "But I LIKE paper!" at the thought of a paperless world aren't necessarily just fuddy-duddies unwilling to embrace change. Experiencing words on paper is a DIFFERENT experience than on screen-- a more TACTILE experience. I think of my educational training, Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligences, the many varieties of learning styles. I witnessed this at work in college. My roommate composed and edited all her papers directly on the computer. I drafted longhand, typed it up with minor edits, printed the thing out, cut it into pieces, spread all the pieces out on the floor and rearranged them and fit them together like a puzzle. When I discovered my next door neighbor composed her papers the same way, we both laughed and felt a little more justified in our quirk. We needed that hands-on, big space editing to properly organize our thoughts. It was just the way we worked.
Today I still need paper to organize my thoughts. I do work on the computer, but always with scratch paper handy to jot notes on and also doodle (doodling is an important step). I still always write first drafts --at least of important things I want to get right (not all emails and blog entries, but some of them-- this one, for instance)-- longhand. When I type, I'm inevitably writing for an audience. But whenever I want to capture my own true thoughts without inhibition-- or with LESS inhibition at least-- it has to come out longhand first (witness how when Madeleine L'Engle died, I needed to write about it in my journal first-- THEN I shared it with you).
It is unfair to expect all people to fit themselves into the same data-processing mold. That is a problem that comes up often enough in education as it is. Why make it worse by restricting our methods of information-exchange?
The Case for Paper #2: Environmental Impact
One of the things that bugs me most about the "paperless" movement is the "Go Green: Go PAPERLESS!" catchphrase. Have we really thought this through? It is true, there is much wasted paper in our society. Excess packaging. Junk mail. Printers that always spit out that extra blank page for no good reason. Electronic bill paying-- and statements-- makes sense. So do interoffice memos over email. So does keeping regularly updated reference materials in databases rather than 30-volume book encyclopedias. But is putting EVERYTHING into electronic format really the greener choice?
Paper is made from trees-- a valuable resource, true, but also a RENEWABLE resource. In many cases, it's even made from recycled paper. Once a book is printed, you have it for decades, with no additional material/energy expenditure needed. And when you DO finally throw it out, it eventually biodegrades-- or it can be recycled.
Computers-- eReaders, iPhones, whatever electronic device you've got-- are made from plastics and metals-- NON-renewable resources. They require continuous energy to use (and you have to keep replacing the rechargeable batteries when they get old, too). They BREAK. They become obsolete in a few years at most. And you can't just throw them away-- electronics are Hazardous Waste. And the parts that DO get thrown out at the end after they've been carefully disassembled by the experts, well, they DON'T biodegrade.
Hmm. Going Greener, are we?
It's funny, many people are setting aside, as a Greener (and more economical-- but we'll get to that) choice, Electronics-free days in their homes-- a kind of Sabbath from the constant buzzing plugged-in culture we have. Why on earth would we insist that all our previously nonelectronic pasttimes should become electronic instead, if the greener and more economic option is cutting BACK on electrical usage?
And maybe I've just read too much dystopian fiction, but I don't like the idea of depending too much on electricity. To convert ones entire cultural history to a format that can only be used if you have the right high-tech equipment-- that's just setting oneself up for a cultural apocalypse. After the fall of OUR great empire, how will future archaeologists figure us out? Heck, most of us can't even read the data we left on the 3.5 floppies we used just ten years ago anymore.
The Case for Paper #3: Socioeconomics
There's first the matter of HAVING something, OWNING something, KEEPING something. Sometimes you do want something to keep, to hold. Sure, sometimes you pay for experiences-- concerts, tours, vacations-- but other times you want something more permanent for your money. But that's a simple, general issue. The socioeconomic issues go much deeper than this.
The biggest problem with electronic technology is that it keeps making itself obsolete. You can't just invest in one gadget and be done with it for life. because in a few years that gadget is going to be Incompatible With the Way We Do Things NOW, so you'll have to buy a NEW gadget to compensate. Film projectors to VHS to DVD to BluRay to, what the heck, 3D HD? Vinyl to 8 track to cassette to CD to mP3? And when you bought that first gadget, it wasn't a ten-buck splurge toy to begin with. There's a whole cozy middle-to-upper-class that doesn't see much wrong with this. They're SHOPPERS! They BUY stuff that catches their fancy, even if they have to buy it on credit!
Meanwhile, there are thousands, millions of people in this supposedly first-world country who would rather spend their hard-earned cash on, I don't know, FOOD or something silly like that. Or on Not Losing the Roof Over Their Heads. There are far more people than most of those comfortable iPhone lovers realize who DO NOT HAVE ANY COMPUTER AT ALL at home. I see them all the time at the library. The really depressing moments are when they come to you because they're trying to get a job-- a minimum-wage job at Target, or a strictly-manual labor job mining coal -- and the company only takes applications through their website form. And they first need a valid email address before they can fill out the application. And before you can even help them get a hotmail or gmail account or something, you have to show them where to type the web address in the first place. And how to use the Shift key to make the @. And how to double-click the browser icon. If they GET that job at Target, they're still not going to be on the computer much. They've got better things to do with their minimum wage.
There's already a socioeconomic education gap. Groups like RIF and Beginning with Books and, if I may be so bold, the public library, already do the best they can to make sure every child has at least ONE BOOK they can call their very own. Sure, maybe they can start supplying kids with eReaders instead-- are you willing to donate the extra funds these groups would need to pull that off? And then what happens when the thing breaks or becomes obsolete? For that matter, what happens when the battery goes dead, and the kid can't recharge it because the power's been shut off in their building?
The Cozy Classes take too much for granted, tech-wise. The more dependent we become on technology for our cultural distillation, the more the lower classes will be left in the dust. Yet another reason why you should SUPPORT YOUR PUBLIC LIBRARY. But I'm maybe getting ahead of myself....
Lest you think I'm just one of those Luddite eBook Hater Types, I must reassure you. There is definitely a place for electronic media, and it DOES open horizons. I wanted to make the case for paper off the bat, though. Now that we've established that we DO need both paper and electronic media, in my next post I will explore more deeply the possible uses of both. So (since I have already written this whole series out longhand and don't have to scrounge computer time for composing it-- I just have to type it up), part 2, "Apples, Oranges, Broccoflower: Many Different Media," is coming soon! Like, tomorrow maybe!
