In “A Better Pencil,” Dennis Baron defines writing as a “technology” that is valued “in many cases more than speech” (Baron 12). This claim also involves the claim that other technologies are always used to deliver writing. This is important because it creates a technological hierarchy in which the technologies that deliver writing are secondary to the writing itself. “The digital word can be as important or as trivial, as effective or as meaningless, as the analog variety,” (18). For Baron, it is this idea of the delivery mechanism (computers, typewriters, pens, pencils, etc.) as subservient to the writing itself that sets writing apart from other technologies. Although he never states it, possibly because it seems obvious, writing is a technology composed of communication unlike computers and pencils, which cannot write without human input. By extension of Baron’s ideas, not even physical pencil markings on a page are actually “writing.” Rather, it is what the physical markings communicate that is really “writing.” “The content, as always, will have to make it on its own,” Baron says (18).
I define writing as a technology that creates a visible manifestation of information. Baron shies away from stating the purpose of writing, and this is perhaps because it is such a difficult task. He does, however, hint at writing’s purpose through referencing the many applications that writing can be used for such as business and entertainment.
I agree with Baron’s concept of writing as a technology because this definition portrays writing as a multi-use tool. I do disagree with Baron’s claim that “Each new development in writing technology… led to the expansion of the author’s club,” because this suggests that the Internet has created more writers than the pencil (13). There is no way to prove this claim, as writing on the Internet has a much higher visibility than, for instance, every personal journal located in households in the year 1939. There is no way to prove this claim, and I would argue that more people have access to a pencil and paper than have access to the Internet.
In A Better Pencil by Dennis Baron, he gives a brief and back-and-forth history of writing. Barron defines writing as a “technology” (Baron, 12). For my generation, the only way things are technology to us is if they are touch screen. Just as writing has become texting, Baron presents his overview of how we value writing “more than speech” (Barron, 12). Looking into the past, Baron presents how philosophers, Socrates and Plato, were so hesitant and skeptical to the new technology that was writing. While Plato believed “writing could never be as real as speech” (Baron, 2), Socrates thought, “written words are of no use except to remind him who knows the matter about which they are written” (Baron, 3). These mindsets are so foreign to present day Baron points out with how much we not only use writing but how much we rely on it. Philosophers like Plato and Socrates believed that writing wasn’t trustworthy however today we want information “in writing” to make it factual. Moreover, writing presents itself everywhere from soda cans to cereal boxes, and our lives are tracked through receipts and journals (Baron, 9). Baron ultimately concludes that technology works two ways: ”it channels what we do” and “it changes to meet the needs of writers and readers” (Baron, 17). From this, writing has helped to invent technologies from the pen to the computer but it also perpetuates a cycle of how writing is transpired by its creators and absorbed by its consumers. My definition of writing was the creation of anything through that communicates a message. Writing changed everything we know about sharing information. The moment words were first transcribed onto a stone tablet changed how we collect, process, and regurgitate information today. I feel lacking from my definition is the great impact writing has left on our society and the necessity it has become. The part of Baron’s definition I agree with the most is when he said, “more people became writers, and still more became readers” (Baron, 13). Through the timeline Baron presents, he states that people were skeptical with each change in writing (Baron, 17). However, it can be understood that the more writing as a “technology” developed from clay to pen and paper to the computer, literacy increased. Therefore, there was a need for more writers to produce information, and there was an even bigger need for more readers. Although, I do not agree with Baron where he states that researchers are using “a few simple key strokes” of everyone in society to make us “a vast test market” (Baron, 11). We know that advertisements pop-up on websites because of searches we made in the past, but I think I am in control of the information I absorb and moreover keep track of. If I don’t click on the advertisement, the advertisements aren’t going to go away. Just as we may not know the intentions of the words, researchers can’t trust in consumers that every click leads to a sale.
Baron doesn't directly put forth a definition of writing in his essay, but rather constructs it via usage and contextual description. Writing is the thing Socrates and Plato were wary of, as they feared that it was a shallow and insufficient substitute for verbal dialectic, and would effectively replace the need for human memory. The concept of writing as metarepresentation is never directly stated, but is the apparent fear of the Greek philosophers. They saw writing as being too far removed from human discourse, in part because it was representation of representation (written words being representative of spoken words which are themselves representations of ideas, thoughts, feelings, etc.). But writing is also the thing that has served as a means of developing human knowledge and communication for 6000 years. It is precisely the fixed and invariable nature of writing, which Plato and Socrates feared, that has made it so useful to humans in general. Writing, as Baron sees it, is both a skill and a technology, and its benefits throughout history have been visible. Writing has undergone many modal transitions, and each one has been feared and contested, but inevitably becomes the new norm, for better or for worse. Any definition I put forth of writing would be broadly encompassing, for writing is so pervasive and diverse, and the dawn of the computer is consistently reshaping much of our preconceived notions about what writing is and who can partake in it. I would say that writing is any form or variety of coding inscribed upon a physical medium (physical meaning anything comprised of physical objects, including digital interfaces) that at least one entity can understand. The question of what is an entity is a difficult one, because it would seem that though computers are (not yet) sentient entities, they do have the capacity to “understand” writing. What Baron seems to consider to be writing seems to be in keeping with my definition, as far as I can see. Baron addresses that writing is multimodal, but consistently involves the use of characters. I would say that writing could also be non-character based, so long as whatever it is that is inscribed has a specified representative meaning that at least one person knows. If a child were to draw a squiggle that zig-zagged in the middle, and firmly understood this to mean, “I want to eat chocolate”, I would see no way to deny that this too is writing.
Baron’s definition of writing can best be summarized by one of his section headers: “Writing is a technology” (Baron 12). Throughout “A Better Pencil”, Dennis Baron approaches writing as a multipurpose tool, clarifying that it serves to “entertain and inform” as well as serve as a tool of memory (Baron 8). Baron uses this basis while creating a defense for digital writing, the newest innovation in the history of writing technologies – pointing any detractors to the initial reservations against writing systems, and the general unwillingness to adapt to subsequent forms and technologies of writing. While addressing the continual reluctance to adapt to new methods of writing, Baron hits on the idea that the medium of the writing does not affect its content. This conceit is most evident when he states “the digital word can be as important or as trivial, as effective or as meaningless, as the analog variety” (Baron 18). This is also an indicator that he sees writing as encompassing multiple mediums, including both digital and non-digital (e.g. the text that you type on a screen is as much writing as what you write with a pencil). I personally define writing as transcribed language, composed of characters or symbols. And like Baron, I believe writing serves to entertain and inform, as well as serve as a tool of memory (Baron 8). And although Baron never directly states this, writing is a technology created to aid communication. I agree with Barron in his indiscriminatory stance on what writing is; as he says, “writing is found everywhere”, from paper to computers to labels on soda cans (Barron 7). This definition does away with any archaic notion that writing is only writing when it is done by hand, and instead includes type as a form of writing. And I too see writing as a technology, a multipurpose tool.
Baron makes claims that writing in its basic attire is a “technology” (Baron 12). It has evolved from its clay tablet origins for record keeping to its digital and expansive form today. Writing confirms the belief that new technologies are built on older technologies. Of course with all great new inventions come doubt, skeptics, and criticism. Even at writing’s beginning rhetors such as Plato and Socrates looked down on writing with a heavy eye, as they believed it would only serve to diminish dialectic speech that comes with oral debates or face to face interaction. They also were cautious of how trustworthy the written word would be. However, as Baron states over time writing has proven its worth and have become “more familiar” (Baron 5). It can be seen in the form of a receipt for a retail purchase, on posters in a kid’s bedroom, or even on the boxes of our favorite cereal. Writing communicates, reminds, entertains, and above all expands. For me writing’s ability to communicate is what lies in its core. A grocery store lists could tell us the likes/dislikes of a person, if they eat healthy or organic and then we could make further assumptions about their characteristics. Writing is purposeful and there’s always more to be read than just the words on the page. I agree with Baron that all forms of writing are in essence an evolution of technology. Once a newer, faster, or perhaps cheaper medium of writing emerges the latter version typically becomes obsolete. However, Baron focuses his definition of writing more based on their effective mediums, while I believe writing more has more to do with reaching an audience. For myself, a piece of writing that offers value to the reader will always be successful regardless if its scribbled on a sheet of paper or read online.
Baron provides a definition for writing through a display of its history. He illustrates that writing is a technology, and that similar to other technologies such as the wheel and the computer, it has gone through a transformation (Baron, 12). While he provides concrete support for the ways in which the acceptance of writing has shifted (from Plato’s Phaedrus in which writing is going to ruin memory and interaction), to Tide’s website that provides written instructions, interactions, and support for customers digitally, he never defines writing independently of its history. Baron also states that writing as a changing technology is continually increasing authorship (Baron, 13)
My personal definition of writing is based on the idea that writing is an act of communication. Novels, for example, communicate a story to a reader. Newspapers fill readers in on world happenings, and blogs share ideas with both small niche communities and mass followers. I feel that every form of writing fits into this definition. Grocery lists communicate a collection of items to be purchased either by another person or by oneself at a later time and inventory lists communicate current assets to managers, owners, accountants, and appraisers. I also feel that this definition, writing as an act of communication holds true for its past and future, regardless of the technologies it is aided by. While pencils and typewriters and computers have changed the ways in which we write as well as the interpretation of writing, I see no ways in which they have changed what writing is. Baron focuses on writing as relating to memory with reference to Plato (Baron, 1) the acceptance of writing as similar to the acceptance of the wheel (Baron, 13), and writing in regards to new technologies (Baron, 17). Baron spends a relatively brief portion in which he discusses writing as communication, and even then he focuses on the change from mistrust to absolute trust in written words.
In Dennis Baron’s article “A Better Pencil”, he uses vivid imagery and life experiences to explain to the reader what his definition of writing is. Two of his section headers do an excellent job of summarizing his thoughts. The first header is labeled “Writing to remember” (Baron 1) and the second “Writing is technology” (12). Baron begins his piece by including an excerpt from Plato’s Phaedrus, a well-known critique of writing. Baron jokingly adds at the end “We remember this, of course, because Plato wrote it down” (2). Baron expresses the importance of text when it comes to memory. He states, “Writing entertains and informs, but it also remembers” (8). He also includes that “not all writing is memorable” (11), such as grocery lists and store receipts. Those are more often than not thrown away. Dennis Baron also makes a solid statement when he says, “Writing is subjective” (12). Unfortunately, all writing is interpreted by the reader, and each reader may understand the piece differently. Baron writes, “The written word is always subject to the potentially whimsical interpretation of the all-too-often-unreliable reader” (3). I full-heartedly agree with this statement as no one can fully understand a writer’s personal thoughts while reading their work. Some authors choose to leave pieces open-ended for this very reason. Personal opinions and life experiences alter a reader’s interpretation of every document they read. Baron includes an example of this, saying that placing the word “bread” on a grocery list will yield different kinds of bread depending on who is doing the shopping. “Writing is technology” (12) is one of Baron’s main points in this piece. Writing includes texts, e-mails, articles, sales pitches, journals, and everything in between. He claims that new writing technology has caused people to “rethink the differences between speech and writing while at the same time they are redefining boundaries between public and private communication” (17). He explains that writing has absolutely consumed our lives, and that writing on machines has a “cold, unfeeling uniformity” (16) and has replaced the “thoughtful individuality of the handwritten note” (16). As we thoroughly discussed this in class I find Baron’s thoughts on the subject to be very relevant to my life and our future discussions. His point of view was created with a lot of careful thought and observation and I agree with this particular viewpoint. I still define writing as a person’s thoughts transferred to text for a specific audience to read and learn from or enjoy. I would also now like to add that writing is a vital technology for extending our own capacity for memories and for recording history.
Baron describes writing as a form of technology that is currently used in many ways. He views writing as an unavoidable technique of communication. Written words are now so common that people often don’t even realize how often they perform the act of reading and writing throughout every day life. His example included common activities like reading the cereal box in the morning, texting and paying with paper money. Baron also emphasized how something in writing now has more legitimacy than spoken words, which opened my eyes to how impactful writing is and continues to be. Likewise, writing is used a memorization tool, corresponding to legitimacy. As Baron points out housing contracts, job applications and legal documents are all more legitimate, memorable and reliable when they are written down rather than spoken. Although Baron elaborates on how writing is reliable and permanent as well as “it remembers,” he contradicts himself admitting that writing is “not all trustworthy” (11). My interpretation of Baron’s A Better Pencil is that writing is an ever-changing form of technology that is unavoidable. It can be as historic or as revolutionary as people choose.
Throughout "A Better Pencil" Baron summarized the evolution of writing and its impact on humanity. This really opened my eyes. I agree that writing is increasingly unavoidable in today’s society, because writing holds a lot of meaning. It encompasses so much of an every-day life. Also, I agree that as the technology of writing progresses, there will always be critics of the changes. The end of Baron’s "A Better Pencil" illustrates how writing is now a digital technology, and society is so absorbed in it that we will soon be talking to our refrigerators. This exaggeration I do not agree with. I believe that there will always be old-school people unwilling to conform to new technologies. These people will hopefully teach traditionally writing technologies such as cursive and written notes, so that they are not lost.
After analyzing the board picture, I have expanded my definition of writing. Writing is a form of communication with a purpose, expressed through a chosen physical medium. I believe writing is paintings, drawings, words, digital documents, sculptures, etc.
For Baron the definition of writing is technology. This is the case based on the fact that the media by which we compose and read writing is always developing. Development from a stone tablet to a computer is a technological advancement. Advancement in turn depends on a population finding it necessary. Writing is necessary to inform, convey, entertain, warn, advertise, and many other reasons. Because of writings ability to express so much it is something that people must have even if it can be distracting some times. As is the case while driving. There is the distraction of texting and reading signs, which could cause and accident. Accidents could even happen while walking and reading. So while writing is necessary to function in modern society it does have its drawbacks. My definition of writing has to do with purposefully composing a visual. This visual can be alphabetic or image based. There just has be a purpose behind it. If I see a red sign with the word “stop” on it, I know what to do. There is also writing in the traditional sense of a novel. Novels transmit ideas and feelings that could have many intentions. The words across the page inspiring the reader in different ways depending on how it is interpreted. Visuals are also writing because when I see black figure against a yellow background I know to watch for pedestrians, so that sign has transmitted something to me that I must know. I don’t so much agree with Baron’s definition that writing is technology. For me, writing is something that is a part of human nature, it can develop, but it is something that is in us. Writing is something that humans feel the need to do. I do agree that writing remembers. Once something it is written down it is there for us to look at and unless destroyed will remain. We do after all have ancient texts that have given us a view into a world that hardly resembles the present.
On the first day of class I defined writing as the creation of text, with the understanding that ‘text’ could be feasibly anything. If I were to be defining writing for say, my Rhetoric class last semester, my definition would change due to context. In that class we discussed how different philosophers viewed the practice and usage of writing, and so in that case I would define writing as the act of transferring a thoughts or spoken word into written word. In A Better Pencil, Baron emphatically states that writing is technology, as pervasive and inescapable as speech. He also makes it quite clear that writing is a mode of communication which can come in different forms, all with different connotations, such as the generally trusted published textbook, the dismissible or sentimental handwriting, or the binding typed legal contract which has been signed and initialed by hand. He addresses the concept of truth in both speech and writing, recalling Plato’s point that while many people distrusted writing in ancient times due to widespread illiteracy and the newness of the technology, neither is speech inherently trustworthy, and could be subject to the same level of wrongful interpretation by the listener as the reader of written word. I find Baron’s definition a little restrictive, as he is definitely focused on text as the form of writing he is discussing, but as I said, it makes sense in the context. I agree also that writing is a technology, and one which is rapidly evolving alongside new inventions. Baron makes a point about the reach of writing in our world which he presented rather negatively in my opinion, saying that it is to a great extent a tool used to take advantage by gathering points and creating a vast test market for researchers; while that is true to some extent I believe that the far reach of writing in this day and age is overwhelmingly positive.
In “A Better Pencil”, Baron traces writing through time starting with Plato and ending with the World Wide Web. This shows the many definitions writing has taken throughout the ages. In Plato’s time, writing was seen as unworthy compared to the spoken word. However, as writing has become more familiar, it has become easier to trust. Sacred texts and laws are all written down (Baron 5). Baron states writing entertains and informs but is also a tool of memory (8). The written word documents peoples’ lives and helps them remember certain events. Baron also defines writing as a technology (12). The development of writing technology has increased the creation of text. Although there are many critics to new technology, this has made transmitting information more efficient and easier. The creation of the World Wide Web has further expanded the number of Americans reading and writing. Writing online helps people interact and communicate with the world.
In class, my definition of writing was putting your thoughts into words whether on paper or online. However, I believe it is much greater than that. Writing is a way of expressing thoughts, ideas and emotions. It can be used to document important information and also as a memory tool. I believe writing conveys meaning and can be interpreted by people differently. Writing can also occur on many different mediums such as paper or online. It is a major form of communication. As a public relations major, I discovered that writing plays a major role in transmitting information to audiences. When a company has a message, they use writing to communicate with a press release or on social media.
I agree with Baron that writing entertains, informs and remembers. Writing can be used as a memory tool and for documentation. I also agree that writing is a technology. Writing has been constantly evolving as new technologies are invented. I also believe this technology has made it easier to transmit information. I don’t agree that this technology can be threatening. Although the internet has taken over, it is a more efficient way to spread information. I believe writers will always be able to find a way to adapt to this.
In "A Better Pencil," Dennis Baron argues that what we call writing is merely another step in the vast, gradually evolving progression of communications technologies over the ages. Just as writing altered common notions of how we should communicate when it exceeded speech in popularity, so typewriters and computers have expanded our notions of writing.
Although writing involves the usage of characters and symbols to convey information, it is, most importantly, according to Baron, a technology. This means that if the technology of writing should be upheld as an great invention, then so should newer technologies, like computers. Indeed, Baron spends a large portion of the essay explaining how writing was originally met with the same skepticism computers face today. In ancient times, when speech dominated the scene of interpersonal communication, writing was considered - by Aristotle and others - to be unreliable, impersonal, and destructive to man's intellect, rhetoric which still will seem familiar to us now.
I essentially agree with Baron's definition of writing. Through some of the quotes, he does acknowledge that writing is based around characters and symbols, which are central to my definition: "the use of characters and/or symbols to communicate ideas and emotions." I agree that writing is a technology, although this is less central to my definition than it is to his.
I find Baron's point extremely interesting. Still, I feel that he overlooks some of the downsides of technological development. It is true that technology is unstoppable; also, if we have tools that can make tasks easier for us, it would be foolish not to use them. However, the fact that keyboards are more efficient than pens doesn't make them superior in every respect - and neither is writing uniformly superior to speech. In fact, try to find a complaint of Aristotle or Plato that is not backed up by legitimate reasoning of some sort. As Plato wrote, "...Every word, when once it is written, is bandied about, alike among those who understand and those who have no interest in it, and it knows not to whom to speak or not to speak..." Indeed Plato is right that a living, thinking person is better equipped to communicate ideas effectively than an unchanging piece of paper.
Nevertheless, as Baron points out, there is the great irony that we know of what Plato said through his writings. Without the imperfect tool of writing, Plato's marvelous ideas could not have been preserved at all. This shows why we must be willing to embrace new technologies, whatever their downsides. The key to is to find a niche for the older ones in a constantly evolving world - to keep practicing speech, to handwrite our work when we feel oppressed by the all-too-mechanical computer keyboard. We don't have to replace older inventions, but only expand and grow our technology.
Baron defines writing as a technology and tool, characterized by its permanence and connections with memory. He also characterizes it as present in every aspect of life on a daily basis, whether we actively recognize it or not. Baron also defines writing as a technology that is always changing in many ways. With each way taking time for society to recognize and become comfortable with using. Baron also says (in the words of Marshall McLuhan) that writing is often defined by the way it is presented, meaning if it is formatted in print, through printer or type writer or even digitally. I define writing as one of the ways people are able to communicate thoughts and emotions. Writing is also a versatile form of communication. It can be straightforward and clear when presenting date and information. While on the other hand it can also be creatively written or open to the reader’s interpretation. I’d consider writing a necessary part of most parts of modern life. It plays vital roles in learning skills and self-expression. Although it is strange to refer to something as common place as writing as a “technology”, I do agree with this definition. Writing is something that must be learned and is second nature. It has greatly developed and advanced over time, which likens it to other forms of technology. Baron stated that some critics of modern writing criticized computers for making text more unfeeling. Baron also said that critics believed that computers are producing texts that have questionable value and credibility. (Baron 17) This is a statement that I’m struggling to exclusively agree or disagree with. Computers are able to make distributing writing more efficient but may sacrifice how personal it may feel, making the writing distant.
In “A Better Pencil” Baron defines writing as technology. Writing has evolved rapidly throughout the years and has made the transition from clay to pencils, manuscript to printed page, notebook to typewriter and pencils to pixels. Many still view the transition from page to screen as not only impersonal and mechanical but also socially disruptive and intellectually destructive (Baron 13). It has gone from a more personal form, simply being a writer’s connection to the pencil and paper, to texting while driving, writing blog posts, and updating statuses on Facebook. Baron claims that writing is a way for the author to “cloak themselves in anonymity or to create false identities from themselves.” According to Baron, writing is subjective and it is ultimately up to the reader to decipher what a text means to them (Baron 12). To Baron writing has become a form that has completely taken over our lives. Whether driving and reading street signs to accessing a recipe on a website, writing has become a way to externalize our most private thoughts on a broad variety of mediums ranging from paper to screen (Baron 10). Even though Philosophers such as Plato viewed writing as “only a representation of the spoken” that could never be as real as speech, it has evolved way more in today’s society (Baron 2). Now writing acts as a way to entertain and inform but also acts as a way to remember crucial moments in our lives and pass them onto other intrigued readers. Personally, I believe that writing is a form of creative expression that gives the reader an insight into an author’s thoughts and ideas. I typically use it as a way to express certain ideas that I cannot always explain out loud. It allows the writers to be in a completely new state of mind and create a world different from their own, simply by transcribing words onto paper or text on a screen. Thus, I do not completely agree that writing is simply technology. I feel as though it is broader than that. Whether on page or on screen, writing is an author’s way to put all their ideas out into the world. It is not just being distracted by all the new technologies out there with computer’s being so easily accessible. When getting down to the true form or writing, distractions aside, writing will always be a way to express thoughts, ideas, and emotions. Just as Baron claimed, each word written down is a memory. It is permanently written for anyone to read unless erased or destroyed. Writing ultimately allows the author to entertain and inform the readers while giving them a glimpse into their mind set and the new portals they open up through their writing.
Baron’s definition of writing is “a technology.” He explains how writing started off simple and only consisted of a few symbols itched into stone. Just like all other technologies out there, writing has become more advanced as the years go on. Writing has evolved through many things, such as the mediums that Baron describes, “from clay to pencils, from manuscript toprinted page, from notebook to typewriter, from pencils to pixels.” The more popular a new technology becomes, such as writing, the more that people are going to get involved and then the older technology before that becomes not as popular or obsolete. Such as online and digital writing replacing the older ways.
My definition of writing is the expression of one’s own voice, character, and feelings. When writing, the author chooses specific words over others to convey the meaning that they want the reader to understand. For example, choosing the words “riot” over “protests” can say something about a person’s character. Each word carries its own specific definition and emotions. Therefore writing is the simplest form of expressing oneself.
The part of Baron’s definition that I agree with is that writing is always going to have a revolving medium of expression. Someone somewhere is undoubtedly going to think of a better form of writing, and it will probably be more technological advance as well. When Baron states, “it’s equally likely that some people feared and rejected this new form of communication,” I disagree. In this excerpt he is talking about the definition of writing and how it first started off as symbols being etched into clay. I would think people were probably more excited to find a new way of expressing themselves than fear. I do not see how etching words into clay can be fearful at all. It was a new and exciting technology that was bound to flourish.
I, along with many of my classmates, define writing as the process of transforming thoughts into something concrete. This loose definition includes everything from carving a text into stone to drawing a meme or comic. Writing in my opinion is a way to share thoughts with a broad audience that for a variety of reasons cannot be reached otherwise. It is also a way to preserve a thought for a later date, a simple means of remembering. Baron, in “A Better Pencil”, describes writing as a technology. He explains the transformation of writing throughout history as well. He shows the progression with instills the fact that every form of text is a writing. While humans have had the spoken language since the beginning of “homo sapien sapiens” or approximately, “100,000 to 200,000 years ago”, written language is a relatively newer development and from that point until the present every advance in writing is a technological discovery that has been debated. I agree with an abundance of what Baron stated. It coincides with my broad interpretation of writing very well. I appreciate his acknowledgement of the opinions both for and against the different steps in the progression of writing as well. I agree that every advance in writing is an achievement that has been disputed and it will continue to be disputed throughout time. I disagree with the point he made in the “I want that in writing…” portion of the article however, I do not believe that writing always is more credible than spoken words. While I constantly doodle ideas down to help my memory, frequently I’ll find a notepad that has “man in the moor” or something equally cryptic scrawled on it and wonder if I was sane when I wrote it and if so what does it mean. Writing cannot explain every question the audience has about it therefore when someone asks for a conversation in writing it can be rendered useless, this is why it’s easy to find loopholes in contracts. However, in the end writing has helped our species over all advance in ways we would never be able to without it.
In his essay, “A Better Pencil”, Baron defines writing as a “technology”. However, despite being defined as a “technology” itself, writing’s many accompanying technologies help to define it. For instance, handwriting is considered by Baron to be a technology. From typewriters to computers, printing presses to laser printers, pencils to keyboards; all of these technologies help to progress writing. But as Baron stated in his essay, with the introduction of these technologies comes apprehension. He states, “When writing was a new and uncommon practice, it was letters on a page, not face-to-face speech, that sparked distrust” (5). He goes on to explain how people could not trust words on a page over someone speaking to them in person. This largely has to do with the fact that early on, many people were not literate. However, as time went on, writing became a more familiar practice. Baron points out how writing is now all around us. We hardly notice it because we have become desensitized to it, but it truly is amazing how almost everything you can buy at a store has some kind of writing on it. Heck, even the money we use to pay for things has words on it; whether it be a dollar bill, check, or credit card, all our currency has writing on it. I defined writing as words with meaning transcribed on any type of medium - a broad definition. I would likely alter it now, after reading this persons essay. I agreed with a lot of what Barron had to say; especially when he states that, “writing is everywhere” (7). As I mentioned above, it truly is remarkable to think about how often we see writing. It truly is everywhere. However, I did not agree so much with Baron’s ideas about marketing researchers and experts on consumer behavior being on the constant prowl of our web searches. The idea that anyone who uses the internet is part of a “vast test market” seems to be a bit of a stretch (11).
Baron’s sees writing as a way of communication which has been around for centuries. In “A Better Pencil,” Baron shows how the idea of writing down words has changed through out centuries. Writing was seen as useless and unauthentic, but today, writing is an essential part of our every day lives. Baron states the prominence of writing and how it is almost unavoidable. It is valued more than speech. Contracts are written and signed to make promises that words alone could not keep.
My definition of writing is expression of thoughts through words and language to get one’s point across. Writing is not limited to an essay or a novel. Writing can be found in art, music, television and even the radio. Before we can hear the words of songs coming through our speakers or the advertisements made on the radio, the thoughts of how to get this across to the audience are planned out. Whether its an outline of what a commercial should state or just a scribble of words that were part of the initial brain storming process, writing is essential to come up with an organized idea. Musicians write down their lyrics which can be meaningless or as deep and expressive as they would want it to be. Writing to me is a way to express emotions, thoughts, and messages.
I do agree with Baron when he says “the technologies of our literacy...help to determine what we write and what we can’t” (17). Something that is posted to twitter may not be the same thing that can be written for a class assignment. At the same time, the shortened words and modern slang often used in texting and social media are set apart from writing used in a professional setting. I also agree with Baron when he states that trust in writing grew slowly (15). Writing went from being seen as “deceitful” to something that is expected in multiple aspects modern society.
In his article, “A Better Pencil,” Dennis Baron defines writing as a kind of technology. He sees it and describes it as a medium we use to communicate. Throughout the article, he explains the reactions society has had to all sorts of technologies used to communicate. As communication evolved from oral tradition, the world has continuously proven to be reluctant to accept change. Baron goes on to say that with time we have come to trust writing more than spoken word. I would define writing as a means to communicate using language in some way, shape, or form. I would also add that writing is something that can stand alone, and make a statement or share a message without the presence of its originator. Writing can stand on its own whereas spoken word only exists when the speaker is present and speaking. This being said, I agree with Baron that writing is a technology of sorts. It is a means of delivering a message. Baron effectively presents his argument by relating the acceptance of writing to the acceptance of more modern technology. People oppose writing technologies today in the same way that people opposed the transition from spoken word to written word. The pattern that Baron hints at shows us that as new technologies are introduced, we repeat a cycle of rejection and wanting to cling to what has become tradition, when, in the end, a new technology is nothing more than finding new and more efficient ways to do the same things. Though I agree with most of the article, I do disagree with an aspect of writing that Baron mentions as a drawback. He says at one point that in some cases spoken word has the advantage because a writer cannot always be there to defend their writing. In some ways this can be a good thing that makes writing more challenging perhaps, but effective. If you feel the need to defend writing, it may make you think more about what it is you’re saying since you won’t always have the opportunity to defend misreading or misinterpretations.
In “A Better Pencil,” Dennis Baron defines writing as a “technology” that is valued “in many cases more than speech” (Baron 12). This claim also involves the claim that other technologies are always used to deliver writing. This is important because it creates a technological hierarchy in which the technologies that deliver writing are secondary to the writing itself. “The digital word can be as important or as trivial, as effective or as meaningless, as the analog variety,” (18). For Baron, it is this idea of the delivery mechanism (computers, typewriters, pens, pencils, etc.) as subservient to the writing itself that sets writing apart from other technologies. Although he never states it, possibly because it seems obvious, writing is a technology composed of communication unlike computers and pencils, which cannot write without human input. By extension of Baron’s ideas, not even physical pencil markings on a page are actually “writing.” Rather, it is what the physical markings communicate that is really “writing.” “The content, as always, will have to make it on its own,” Baron says (18).
ReplyDeleteI define writing as a technology that creates a visible manifestation of information. Baron shies away from stating the purpose of writing, and this is perhaps because it is such a difficult task. He does, however, hint at writing’s purpose through referencing the many applications that writing can be used for such as business and entertainment.
I agree with Baron’s concept of writing as a technology because this definition portrays writing as a multi-use tool. I do disagree with Baron’s claim that “Each new development in writing technology… led to the expansion of the author’s club,” because this suggests that the Internet has created more writers than the pencil (13). There is no way to prove this claim, as writing on the Internet has a much higher visibility than, for instance, every personal journal located in households in the year 1939. There is no way to prove this claim, and I would argue that more people have access to a pencil and paper than have access to the Internet.
In A Better Pencil by Dennis Baron, he gives a brief and back-and-forth history of writing. Barron defines writing as a “technology” (Baron, 12). For my generation, the only way things are technology to us is if they are touch screen. Just as writing has become texting, Baron presents his overview of how we value writing “more than speech” (Barron, 12). Looking into the past, Baron presents how philosophers, Socrates and Plato, were so hesitant and skeptical to the new technology that was writing. While Plato believed “writing could never be as real as speech” (Baron, 2), Socrates thought, “written words are of no use except to remind him who knows the matter about which they are written” (Baron, 3). These mindsets are so foreign to present day Baron points out with how much we not only use writing but how much we rely on it. Philosophers like Plato and Socrates believed that writing wasn’t trustworthy however today we want information “in writing” to make it factual. Moreover, writing presents itself everywhere from soda cans to cereal boxes, and our lives are tracked through receipts and journals (Baron, 9). Baron ultimately concludes that technology works two ways: ”it channels what we do” and “it changes to meet the needs of writers and readers” (Baron, 17). From this, writing has helped to invent technologies from the pen to the computer but it also perpetuates a cycle of how writing is transpired by its creators and absorbed by its consumers.
ReplyDeleteMy definition of writing was the creation of anything through that communicates a message. Writing changed everything we know about sharing information. The moment words were first transcribed onto a stone tablet changed how we collect, process, and regurgitate information today. I feel lacking from my definition is the great impact writing has left on our society and the necessity it has become.
The part of Baron’s definition I agree with the most is when he said, “more people became writers, and still more became readers” (Baron, 13). Through the timeline Baron presents, he states that people were skeptical with each change in writing (Baron, 17). However, it can be understood that the more writing as a “technology” developed from clay to pen and paper to the computer, literacy increased. Therefore, there was a need for more writers to produce information, and there was an even bigger need for more readers. Although, I do not agree with Baron where he states that researchers are using “a few simple key strokes” of everyone in society to make us “a vast test market” (Baron, 11). We know that advertisements pop-up on websites because of searches we made in the past, but I think I am in control of the information I absorb and moreover keep track of. If I don’t click on the advertisement, the advertisements aren’t going to go away. Just as we may not know the intentions of the words, researchers can’t trust in consumers that every click leads to a sale.
Baron doesn't directly put forth a definition of writing in his essay, but rather constructs it via usage and contextual description. Writing is the thing Socrates and Plato were wary of, as they feared that it was a shallow and insufficient substitute for verbal dialectic, and would effectively replace the need for human memory. The concept of writing as metarepresentation is never directly stated, but is the apparent fear of the Greek philosophers. They saw writing as being too far removed from human discourse, in part because it was representation of representation (written words being representative of spoken words which are themselves representations of ideas, thoughts, feelings, etc.). But writing is also the thing that has served as a means of developing human knowledge and communication for 6000 years. It is precisely the fixed and invariable nature of writing, which Plato and Socrates feared, that has made it so useful to humans in general. Writing, as Baron sees it, is both a skill and a technology, and its benefits throughout history have been visible. Writing has undergone many modal transitions, and each one has been feared and contested, but inevitably becomes the new norm, for better or for worse.
ReplyDeleteAny definition I put forth of writing would be broadly encompassing, for writing is so pervasive and diverse, and the dawn of the computer is consistently reshaping much of our preconceived notions about what writing is and who can partake in it. I would say that writing is any form or variety of coding inscribed upon a physical medium (physical meaning anything comprised of physical objects, including digital interfaces) that at least one entity can understand. The question of what is an entity is a difficult one, because it would seem that though computers are (not yet) sentient entities, they do have the capacity to “understand” writing.
What Baron seems to consider to be writing seems to be in keeping with my definition, as far as I can see. Baron addresses that writing is multimodal, but consistently involves the use of characters. I would say that writing could also be non-character based, so long as whatever it is that is inscribed has a specified representative meaning that at least one person knows. If a child were to draw a squiggle that zig-zagged in the middle, and firmly understood this to mean, “I want to eat chocolate”, I would see no way to deny that this too is writing.
computers are not (yet) sentient entities*
DeleteBaron’s definition of writing can best be summarized by one of his section headers: “Writing is a technology” (Baron 12). Throughout “A Better Pencil”, Dennis Baron approaches writing as a multipurpose tool, clarifying that it serves to “entertain and inform” as well as serve as a tool of memory (Baron 8). Baron uses this basis while creating a defense for digital writing, the newest innovation in the history of writing technologies – pointing any detractors to the initial reservations against writing systems, and the general unwillingness to adapt to subsequent forms and technologies of writing. While addressing the continual reluctance to adapt to new methods of writing, Baron hits on the idea that the medium of the writing does not affect its content. This conceit is most evident when he states “the digital word can be as important or as trivial, as effective or as meaningless, as the analog variety” (Baron 18). This is also an indicator that he sees writing as encompassing multiple mediums, including both digital and non-digital (e.g. the text that you type on a screen is as much writing as what you write with a pencil).
ReplyDeleteI personally define writing as transcribed language, composed of characters or symbols. And like Baron, I believe writing serves to entertain and inform, as well as serve as a tool of memory (Baron 8). And although Baron never directly states this, writing is a technology created to aid communication.
I agree with Barron in his indiscriminatory stance on what writing is; as he says, “writing is found everywhere”, from paper to computers to labels on soda cans (Barron 7). This definition does away with any archaic notion that writing is only writing when it is done by hand, and instead includes type as a form of writing. And I too see writing as a technology, a multipurpose tool.
Baron makes claims that writing in its basic attire is a “technology” (Baron 12). It has evolved from its clay tablet origins for record keeping to its digital and expansive form today. Writing confirms the belief that new technologies are built on older technologies. Of course with all great new inventions come doubt, skeptics, and criticism. Even at writing’s beginning rhetors such as Plato and Socrates looked down on writing with a heavy eye, as they believed it would only serve to diminish dialectic speech that comes with oral debates or face to face interaction. They also were cautious of how trustworthy the written word would be. However, as Baron states over time writing has proven its worth and have become “more familiar” (Baron 5). It can be seen in the form of a receipt for a retail purchase, on posters in a kid’s bedroom, or even on the boxes of our favorite cereal. Writing communicates, reminds, entertains, and above all expands.
ReplyDeleteFor me writing’s ability to communicate is what lies in its core. A grocery store lists could tell us the likes/dislikes of a person, if they eat healthy or organic and then we could make further assumptions about their characteristics. Writing is purposeful and there’s always more to be read than just the words on the page.
I agree with Baron that all forms of writing are in essence an evolution of technology. Once a newer, faster, or perhaps cheaper medium of writing emerges the latter version typically becomes obsolete. However, Baron focuses his definition of writing more based on their effective mediums, while I believe writing more has more to do with reaching an audience. For myself, a piece of writing that offers value to the reader will always be successful regardless if its scribbled on a sheet of paper or read online.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBaron provides a definition for writing through a display of its history. He illustrates that writing is a technology, and that similar to other technologies such as the wheel and the computer, it has gone through a transformation (Baron, 12). While he provides concrete support for the ways in which the acceptance of writing has shifted (from Plato’s Phaedrus in which writing is going to ruin memory and interaction), to Tide’s website that provides written instructions, interactions, and support for customers digitally, he never defines writing independently of its history. Baron also states that writing as a changing technology is continually increasing authorship (Baron, 13)
ReplyDeleteMy personal definition of writing is based on the idea that writing is an act of communication. Novels, for example, communicate a story to a reader. Newspapers fill readers in on world happenings, and blogs share ideas with both small niche communities and mass followers. I feel that every form of writing fits into this definition. Grocery lists communicate a collection of items to be purchased either by another person or by oneself at a later time and inventory lists communicate current assets to managers, owners, accountants, and appraisers. I also feel that this definition, writing as an act of communication holds true for its past and future, regardless of the technologies it is aided by. While pencils and typewriters and computers have changed the ways in which we write as well as the interpretation of writing, I see no ways in which they have changed what writing is. Baron focuses on writing as relating to memory with reference to Plato (Baron, 1) the acceptance of writing as similar to the acceptance of the wheel (Baron, 13), and writing in regards to new technologies (Baron, 17). Baron spends a relatively brief portion in which he discusses writing as communication, and even then he focuses on the change from mistrust to absolute trust in written words.
In Dennis Baron’s article “A Better Pencil”, he uses vivid imagery and life experiences to explain to the reader what his definition of writing is. Two of his section headers do an excellent job of summarizing his thoughts. The first header is labeled “Writing to remember” (Baron 1) and the second “Writing is technology” (12). Baron begins his piece by including an excerpt from Plato’s Phaedrus, a well-known critique of writing. Baron jokingly adds at the end “We remember this, of course, because Plato wrote it down” (2). Baron expresses the importance of text when it comes to memory. He states, “Writing entertains and informs, but it also remembers” (8). He also includes that “not all writing is memorable” (11), such as grocery lists and store receipts. Those are more often than not thrown away.
ReplyDeleteDennis Baron also makes a solid statement when he says, “Writing is subjective” (12). Unfortunately, all writing is interpreted by the reader, and each reader may understand the piece differently. Baron writes, “The written word is always subject to the potentially whimsical interpretation of the all-too-often-unreliable reader” (3). I full-heartedly agree with this statement as no one can fully understand a writer’s personal thoughts while reading their work. Some authors choose to leave pieces open-ended for this very reason. Personal opinions and life experiences alter a reader’s interpretation of every document they read. Baron includes an example of this, saying that placing the word “bread” on a grocery list will yield different kinds of bread depending on who is doing the shopping.
“Writing is technology” (12) is one of Baron’s main points in this piece. Writing includes texts, e-mails, articles, sales pitches, journals, and everything in between. He claims that new writing technology has caused people to “rethink the differences between speech and writing while at the same time they are redefining boundaries between public and private communication” (17). He explains that writing has absolutely consumed our lives, and that writing on machines has a “cold, unfeeling uniformity” (16) and has replaced the “thoughtful individuality of the handwritten note” (16). As we thoroughly discussed this in class I find Baron’s thoughts on the subject to be very relevant to my life and our future discussions. His point of view was created with a lot of careful thought and observation and I agree with this particular viewpoint.
I still define writing as a person’s thoughts transferred to text for a specific audience to read and learn from or enjoy. I would also now like to add that writing is a vital technology for extending our own capacity for memories and for recording history.
Baron describes writing as a form of technology that is currently used in many ways. He views writing as an unavoidable technique of communication. Written words are now so common that people often don’t even realize how often they perform the act of reading and writing throughout every day life. His example included common activities like reading the cereal box in the morning, texting and paying with paper money. Baron also emphasized how something in writing now has more legitimacy than spoken words, which opened my eyes to how impactful writing is and continues to be. Likewise, writing is used a memorization tool, corresponding to legitimacy. As Baron points out housing contracts, job applications and legal documents are all more legitimate, memorable and reliable when they are written down rather than spoken. Although Baron elaborates on how writing is reliable and permanent as well as “it remembers,” he contradicts himself admitting that writing is “not all trustworthy” (11). My interpretation of Baron’s A Better Pencil is that writing is an ever-changing form of technology that is unavoidable. It can be as historic or as revolutionary as people choose.
ReplyDeleteThroughout "A Better Pencil" Baron summarized the evolution of writing and its impact on humanity. This really opened my eyes. I agree that writing is increasingly unavoidable in today’s society, because writing holds a lot of meaning. It encompasses so much of an every-day life. Also, I agree that as the technology of writing progresses, there will always be critics of the changes. The end of Baron’s "A Better Pencil" illustrates how writing is now a digital technology, and society is so absorbed in it that we will soon be talking to our refrigerators. This exaggeration I do not agree with. I believe that there will always be old-school people unwilling to conform to new technologies. These people will hopefully teach traditionally writing technologies such as cursive and written notes, so that they are not lost.
After analyzing the board picture, I have expanded my definition of writing. Writing is a form of communication with a purpose, expressed through a chosen physical medium. I believe writing is paintings, drawings, words, digital documents, sculptures, etc.
For Baron the definition of writing is technology. This is the case based on the fact that the media by which we compose and read writing is always developing. Development from a stone tablet to a computer is a technological advancement. Advancement in turn depends on a population finding it necessary. Writing is necessary to inform, convey, entertain, warn, advertise, and many other reasons. Because of writings ability to express so much it is something that people must have even if it can be distracting some times. As is the case while driving. There is the distraction of texting and reading signs, which could cause and accident. Accidents could even happen while walking and reading. So while writing is necessary to function in modern society it does have its drawbacks.
ReplyDeleteMy definition of writing has to do with purposefully composing a visual. This visual can be alphabetic or image based. There just has be a purpose behind it. If I see a red sign with the word “stop” on it, I know what to do. There is also writing in the traditional sense of a novel. Novels transmit ideas and feelings that could have many intentions. The words across the page inspiring the reader in different ways depending on how it is interpreted. Visuals are also writing because when I see black figure against a yellow background I know to watch for pedestrians, so that sign has transmitted something to me that I must know.
I don’t so much agree with Baron’s definition that writing is technology. For me, writing is something that is a part of human nature, it can develop, but it is something that is in us. Writing is something that humans feel the need to do. I do agree that writing remembers. Once something it is written down it is there for us to look at and unless destroyed will remain. We do after all have ancient texts that have given us a view into a world that hardly resembles the present.
On the first day of class I defined writing as the creation of text, with the understanding that ‘text’ could be feasibly anything. If I were to be defining writing for say, my Rhetoric class last semester, my definition would change due to context. In that class we discussed how different philosophers viewed the practice and usage of writing, and so in that case I would define writing as the act of transferring a thoughts or spoken word into written word.
ReplyDeleteIn A Better Pencil, Baron emphatically states that writing is technology, as pervasive and inescapable as speech. He also makes it quite clear that writing is a mode of communication which can come in different forms, all with different connotations, such as the generally trusted published textbook, the dismissible or sentimental handwriting, or the binding typed legal contract which has been signed and initialed by hand. He addresses the concept of truth in both speech and writing, recalling Plato’s point that while many people distrusted writing in ancient times due to widespread illiteracy and the newness of the technology, neither is speech inherently trustworthy, and could be subject to the same level of wrongful interpretation by the listener as the reader of written word.
I find Baron’s definition a little restrictive, as he is definitely focused on text as the form of writing he is discussing, but as I said, it makes sense in the context. I agree also that writing is a technology, and one which is rapidly evolving alongside new inventions. Baron makes a point about the reach of writing in our world which he presented rather negatively in my opinion, saying that it is to a great extent a tool used to take advantage by gathering points and creating a vast test market for researchers; while that is true to some extent I believe that the far reach of writing in this day and age is overwhelmingly positive.
In “A Better Pencil”, Baron traces writing through time starting with Plato and ending with the World Wide Web. This shows the many definitions writing has taken throughout the ages. In Plato’s time, writing was seen as unworthy compared to the spoken word. However, as writing has become more familiar, it has become easier to trust. Sacred texts and laws are all written down (Baron 5). Baron states writing entertains and informs but is also a tool of memory (8). The written word documents peoples’ lives and helps them remember certain events. Baron also defines writing as a technology (12). The development of writing technology has increased the creation of text. Although there are many critics to new technology, this has made transmitting information more efficient and easier. The creation of the World Wide Web has further expanded the number of Americans reading and writing. Writing online helps people interact and communicate with the world.
ReplyDeleteIn class, my definition of writing was putting your thoughts into words whether on paper or online. However, I believe it is much greater than that. Writing is a way of expressing thoughts, ideas and emotions. It can be used to document important information and also as a memory tool. I believe writing conveys meaning and can be interpreted by people differently. Writing can also occur on many different mediums such as paper or online. It is a major form of communication. As a public relations major, I discovered that writing plays a major role in transmitting information to audiences. When a company has a message, they use writing to communicate with a press release or on social media.
I agree with Baron that writing entertains, informs and remembers. Writing can be used as a memory tool and for documentation. I also agree that writing is a technology. Writing has been constantly evolving as new technologies are invented. I also believe this technology has made it easier to transmit information. I don’t agree that this technology can be threatening. Although the internet has taken over, it is a more efficient way to spread information. I believe writers will always be able to find a way to adapt to this.
In "A Better Pencil," Dennis Baron argues that what we call writing is merely another step in the vast, gradually evolving progression of communications technologies over the ages. Just as writing altered common notions of how we should communicate when it exceeded speech in popularity, so typewriters and computers have expanded our notions of writing.
ReplyDeleteAlthough writing involves the usage of characters and symbols to convey information, it is, most importantly, according to Baron, a technology. This means that if the technology of writing should be upheld as an great invention, then so should newer technologies, like computers. Indeed, Baron spends a large portion of the essay explaining how writing was originally met with the same skepticism computers face today. In ancient times, when speech dominated the scene of interpersonal communication, writing was considered - by Aristotle and others - to be unreliable, impersonal, and destructive to man's intellect, rhetoric which still will seem familiar to us now.
I essentially agree with Baron's definition of writing. Through some of the quotes, he does acknowledge that writing is based around characters and symbols, which are central to my definition: "the use of characters and/or symbols to communicate ideas and emotions." I agree that writing is a technology, although this is less central to my definition than it is to his.
I find Baron's point extremely interesting. Still, I feel that he overlooks some of the downsides of technological development. It is true that technology is unstoppable; also, if we have tools that can make tasks easier for us, it would be foolish not to use them. However, the fact that keyboards are more efficient than pens doesn't make them superior in every respect - and neither is writing uniformly superior to speech. In fact, try to find a complaint of Aristotle or Plato that is not backed up by legitimate reasoning of some sort. As Plato wrote, "...Every word, when once it is written, is bandied about, alike among those who understand and those who have no interest in it, and it knows not to whom to speak or not to speak..." Indeed Plato is right that a living, thinking person is better equipped to communicate ideas effectively than an unchanging piece of paper.
Nevertheless, as Baron points out, there is the great irony that we know of what Plato said through his writings. Without the imperfect tool of writing, Plato's marvelous ideas could not have been preserved at all. This shows why we must be willing to embrace new technologies, whatever their downsides. The key to is to find a niche for the older ones in a constantly evolving world - to keep practicing speech, to handwrite our work when we feel oppressed by the all-too-mechanical computer keyboard. We don't have to replace older inventions, but only expand and grow our technology.
Baron defines writing as a technology and tool, characterized by its permanence and connections with memory. He also characterizes it as present in every aspect of life on a daily basis, whether we actively recognize it or not. Baron also defines writing as a technology that is always changing in many ways. With each way taking time for society to recognize and become comfortable with using. Baron also says (in the words of Marshall McLuhan) that writing is often defined by the way it is presented, meaning if it is formatted in print, through printer or type writer or even digitally.
ReplyDeleteI define writing as one of the ways people are able to communicate thoughts and emotions. Writing is also a versatile form of communication. It can be straightforward and clear when presenting date and information. While on the other hand it can also be creatively written or open to the reader’s interpretation. I’d consider writing a necessary part of most parts of modern life. It plays vital roles in learning skills and self-expression.
Although it is strange to refer to something as common place as writing as a “technology”, I do agree with this definition. Writing is something that must be learned and is second nature. It has greatly developed and advanced over time, which likens it to other forms of technology. Baron stated that some critics of modern writing criticized computers for making text more unfeeling. Baron also said that critics believed that computers are producing texts that have questionable value and credibility. (Baron 17) This is a statement that I’m struggling to exclusively agree or disagree with. Computers are able to make distributing writing more efficient but may sacrifice how personal it may feel, making the writing distant.
In “A Better Pencil” Baron defines writing as technology. Writing has evolved rapidly throughout the years and has made the transition from clay to pencils, manuscript to printed page, notebook to typewriter and pencils to pixels. Many still view the transition from page to screen as not only impersonal and mechanical but also socially disruptive and intellectually destructive (Baron 13). It has gone from a more personal form, simply being a writer’s connection to the pencil and paper, to texting while driving, writing blog posts, and updating statuses on Facebook. Baron claims that writing is a way for the author to “cloak themselves in anonymity or to create false identities from themselves.”
ReplyDeleteAccording to Baron, writing is subjective and it is ultimately up to the reader to decipher what a text means to them (Baron 12). To Baron writing has become a form that has completely taken over our lives. Whether driving and reading street signs to accessing a recipe on a website, writing has become a way to externalize our most private thoughts on a broad variety of mediums ranging from paper to screen (Baron 10). Even though Philosophers such as Plato viewed writing as “only a representation of the spoken” that could never be as real as speech, it has evolved way more in today’s society (Baron 2). Now writing acts as a way to entertain and inform but also acts as a way to remember crucial moments in our lives and pass them onto other intrigued readers.
Personally, I believe that writing is a form of creative expression that gives the reader an insight into an author’s thoughts and ideas. I typically use it as a way to express certain ideas that I cannot always explain out loud. It allows the writers to be in a completely new state of mind and create a world different from their own, simply by transcribing words onto paper or text on a screen. Thus, I do not completely agree that writing is simply technology. I feel as though it is broader than that. Whether on page or on screen, writing is an author’s way to put all their ideas out into the world. It is not just being distracted by all the new technologies out there with computer’s being so easily accessible. When getting down to the true form or writing, distractions aside, writing will always be a way to express thoughts, ideas, and emotions. Just as Baron claimed, each word written down is a memory. It is permanently written for anyone to read unless erased or destroyed. Writing ultimately allows the author to entertain and inform the readers while giving them a glimpse into their mind set and the new portals they open up through their writing.
Baron’s definition of writing is “a technology.” He explains how writing started off simple and only consisted of a few symbols itched into stone. Just like all other technologies out there, writing has become more advanced as the years go on. Writing has evolved through many things, such as the mediums that Baron describes, “from clay to pencils, from manuscript toprinted page, from notebook to typewriter, from pencils to pixels.” The more popular a new technology becomes, such as writing, the more that people are going to get involved and then the older technology before that becomes not as popular or obsolete. Such as online and digital writing replacing the older ways.
ReplyDeleteMy definition of writing is the expression of one’s own voice, character, and feelings. When writing, the author chooses specific words over others to convey the meaning that they want the reader to understand. For example, choosing the words “riot” over “protests” can say something about a person’s character. Each word carries its own specific definition and emotions. Therefore writing is the simplest form of expressing oneself.
The part of Baron’s definition that I agree with is that writing is always going to have a revolving medium of expression. Someone somewhere is undoubtedly going to think of a better form of writing, and it will probably be more technological advance as well. When Baron states, “it’s equally likely that some people feared and rejected this new form of communication,” I disagree. In this excerpt he is talking about the definition of writing and how it first started off as symbols being etched into clay. I would think people were probably more excited to find a new way of expressing themselves than fear. I do not see how etching words into clay can be fearful at all. It was a new and exciting technology that was bound to flourish.
I, along with many of my classmates, define writing as the process of transforming thoughts into something concrete. This loose definition includes everything from carving a text into stone to drawing a meme or comic. Writing in my opinion is a way to share thoughts with a broad audience that for a variety of reasons cannot be reached otherwise. It is also a way to preserve a thought for a later date, a simple means of remembering.
ReplyDeleteBaron, in “A Better Pencil”, describes writing as a technology. He explains the transformation of writing throughout history as well. He shows the progression with instills the fact that every form of text is a writing. While humans have had the spoken language since the beginning of “homo sapien sapiens” or approximately, “100,000 to 200,000 years ago”, written language is a relatively newer development and from that point until the present every advance in writing is a technological discovery that has been debated.
I agree with an abundance of what Baron stated. It coincides with my broad interpretation of writing very well. I appreciate his acknowledgement of the opinions both for and against the different steps in the progression of writing as well. I agree that every advance in writing is an achievement that has been disputed and it will continue to be disputed throughout time. I disagree with the point he made in the “I want that in writing…” portion of the article however, I do not believe that writing always is more credible than spoken words. While I constantly doodle ideas down to help my memory, frequently I’ll find a notepad that has “man in the moor” or something equally cryptic scrawled on it and wonder if I was sane when I wrote it and if so what does it mean. Writing cannot explain every question the audience has about it therefore when someone asks for a conversation in writing it can be rendered useless, this is why it’s easy to find loopholes in contracts. However, in the end writing has helped our species over all advance in ways we would never be able to without it.
In his essay, “A Better Pencil”, Baron defines writing as a “technology”. However, despite being defined as a “technology” itself, writing’s many accompanying technologies help to define it. For instance, handwriting is considered by Baron to be a technology. From typewriters to computers, printing presses to laser printers, pencils to keyboards; all of these technologies help to progress writing. But as Baron stated in his essay, with the introduction of these technologies comes apprehension. He states, “When writing was a new and uncommon practice, it was letters on a page, not face-to-face speech, that sparked distrust” (5). He goes on to explain how people could not trust words on a page over someone speaking to them in person. This largely has to do with the fact that early on, many people were not literate. However, as time went on, writing became a more familiar practice. Baron points out how writing is now all around us. We hardly notice it because we have become desensitized to it, but it truly is amazing how almost everything you can buy at a store has some kind of writing on it. Heck, even the money we use to pay for things has words on it; whether it be a dollar bill, check, or credit card, all our currency has writing on it.
ReplyDeleteI defined writing as words with meaning transcribed on any type of medium - a broad definition. I would likely alter it now, after reading this persons essay. I agreed with a lot of what Barron had to say; especially when he states that, “writing is everywhere” (7). As I mentioned above, it truly is remarkable to think about how often we see writing. It truly is everywhere. However, I did not agree so much with Baron’s ideas about marketing researchers and experts on consumer behavior being on the constant prowl of our web searches. The idea that anyone who uses the internet is part of a “vast test market” seems to be a bit of a stretch (11).
Baron’s sees writing as a way of communication which has been around for centuries. In “A Better Pencil,” Baron shows how the idea of writing down words has changed through out centuries. Writing was seen as useless and unauthentic, but today, writing is an essential part of our every day lives. Baron states the prominence of writing and how it is almost unavoidable. It is valued more than speech. Contracts are written and signed to make promises that words alone could not keep.
ReplyDeleteMy definition of writing is expression of thoughts through words and language to get one’s point across. Writing is not limited to an essay or a novel. Writing can be found in art, music, television and even the radio. Before we can hear the words of songs coming through our speakers or the advertisements made on the radio, the thoughts of how to get this across to the audience are planned out. Whether its an outline of what a commercial should state or just a scribble of words that were part of the initial brain storming process, writing is essential to come up with an organized idea. Musicians write down their lyrics which can be meaningless or as deep and expressive as they would want it to be. Writing to me is a way to express emotions, thoughts, and messages.
I do agree with Baron when he says “the technologies of our literacy...help to determine what we write and what we can’t” (17). Something that is posted to twitter may not be the same thing that can be written for a class assignment. At the same time, the shortened words and modern slang often used in texting and social media are set apart from writing used in a professional setting. I also agree with Baron when he states that trust in writing grew slowly (15). Writing went from being seen as “deceitful” to something that is expected in multiple aspects modern society.
In his article, “A Better Pencil,” Dennis Baron defines writing as a kind of technology. He sees it and describes it as a medium we use to communicate. Throughout the article, he explains the reactions society has had to all sorts of technologies used to communicate. As communication evolved from oral tradition, the world has continuously proven to be reluctant to accept change. Baron goes on to say that with time we have come to trust writing more than spoken word.
ReplyDeleteI would define writing as a means to communicate using language in some way, shape, or form. I would also add that writing is something that can stand alone, and make a statement or share a message without the presence of its originator. Writing can stand on its own whereas spoken word only exists when the speaker is present and speaking.
This being said, I agree with Baron that writing is a technology of sorts. It is a means of delivering a message. Baron effectively presents his argument by relating the acceptance of writing to the acceptance of more modern technology. People oppose writing technologies today in the same way that people opposed the transition from spoken word to written word. The pattern that Baron hints at shows us that as new technologies are introduced, we repeat a cycle of rejection and wanting to cling to what has become tradition, when, in the end, a new technology is nothing more than finding new and more efficient ways to do the same things. Though I agree with most of the article, I do disagree with an aspect of writing that Baron mentions as a drawback. He says at one point that in some cases spoken word has the advantage because a writer cannot always be there to defend their writing. In some ways this can be a good thing that makes writing more challenging perhaps, but effective. If you feel the need to defend writing, it may make you think more about what it is you’re saying since you won’t always have the opportunity to defend misreading or misinterpretations.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete