Exit Strategies

“Most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them.”

~ Henry David Thoreau

I’ve been meaning to post this for some time now, but life seems to always get the better of my good intentions.

Last semester, a friend withdrew from the MA program.  She’d been unhappy for a long time so perhaps leaving was the best choice for her self-preservation.  However, her departure left far too many unresolved issues.  I hope that she’ll be able to sort them out, but it takes a great deal of time and effort to overcome your perceived failures and begin to trust yourself again.

She left without a plan B.  Given how the program had disappointed her, I’m not sure if she still wants to be a journalist, no less pursue the idea of finishing her degree.  One of our last meetings was at a breakfast café, and I took the picture of the sculpture that hangs above the café entrance.

Peer Pressure and the Luxury of Time

A 2007 reading study by the National Endowment of the Arts found that Americans were reading less for leisure than in previous years.  I include myself in that segment, and I am wrought by guilt over it.

Well, actually, no, no, I’m not.  However, I do feel a tinge of guilt when I get annoying emails from Good Reads updating me on all the books my friends have started and finished. Even worse are their monthly newsletters nagging me about how many days it’s been since I’ve started a book and haven’t finished.  Given that I’m not a joiner by nature and I’m usually among the last to adopt new technology, you’re probably wondering why I’m on there.  Well, it was under a great amount of peer pressure and with great reluctance that I joined the social networking site. (Well, I might be exaggerating a bit, but it makes for a better story, right?)

It was in its early stage when I joined.  The site was simple and not very commercial; you know when it was hipster cool. The first month went smoothly¸ but it was only in a matter of time when things got strangely competitive.  I was astounded by the amount of books my friends were reading.  They were finishing off 1-2 books a week while I was struggling to keep interest in communication theories.

At first I felt bad because my reading list was pretty sparse – and truth be told, it’s a bit surreal to feel like a loser because you’re not nerdy enough (yes, I know that I needn’t worry about my nerd status).  I was relieved when I found out that it was “acceptable” to the community to list past books you’ve read – and so I listed all of the possible literary works in their database that I’ve ever read or was reading (i.e., on my dusty bookshelf).  I was feeling pretty smug at that point.  Until, people started to update their reading list frequently and projecting themselves to be the consummate reader among the literati by the titles they were posting.  A few of members were posting 3-4 titles per week.

Of course my thought was:  “Oh for ****’s sake!  Where the hell do these people find the time?”

I gave up entirely when people started listing craft books, cook books and those, 3-4 fiction titles – well, almost all were audio books. What?!  Since when is listening considered reading?!

I’m still on the site, but I don’t feel guilty about not reading for leisure.  I would like to think that I read plenty on a daily basis given technology’s offering of information or information overload as some have complained.  So, two years ago people were reading less for leisure.  Today, we get news about the positive sales and proliferation of e-readers and how they encourage long-form reading (rather than snippets) and purchases e-books, whose sales are so positive that new delivery models are being developed.

Yet, in spite of amount of reading that technological advancements encourage, another concern springs forth.  Now, it’s not a matter of how much we read, but what and how fast. The new academic debate is now about deep reading and how the physical text experience and its slower pace lends to better cognitive processing and thus improved reading comprehension.

The argument seems logical enough.  However, I become a bit suspicious when advocates liken deep reading or slow-reading to the slow food or local food movement/lifestyle. I’m a slow reader by habit regardless of how it’s delivered.  But, the suggestion that one needs the actual physical text in hand to better comprehend and connect with the author’s work seems rather absurd considering each reader will have a different experience because they will connect with element and themes that they find identifiable to their life and their beliefs.  Literacy is an end of itself just as eating and having food is essential.  I can tell you that I’m not picky about whether my food is grown locally and organic when I’m starving and strapped for cash.

The comparison of slow reading with slow food further becomes a problem when you think about how those labels are used for social distinction.  Honestly, does the average person really have the time to do these things?  And can they afford it?  What isn’t apparent about this advocacy of slow reading with the physical text is that it also endorses the system that produces the text: the flawed publishing industry which many have regarded as being elitist, narrow in scope, geographically biased and to some degree even sexist.  The argument is that it costs more to promote and produce a physical text, so the industry should be selective.  Fair enough, but given the publishing industry’s woes (journalism too), it is apparent that consumers, i.e. readers, would rather spend their money elsewhere.

While the internet may have its dark side (the anonymity that encourages uncivil behavior and the constant deluge of information), the digital movement has also made the gateway more accessible to a larger group of people who would never have made it through the old gatekeepers and their arbitrary “literary” standards.  Yes, there’s a lot of slough out there (mine included), but that’s better than not having a good story be told at all.

Sigh, this one-upping game is exhausting and never ending, isn’t it?

Good Reads says it’s been 537 days since I started “A History of Economic Thought.”  I wonder if I can find the lectures on iTunes since listening is considered reading now…actually, no, I still don’t consider it reading.

I’ve Got Zero Friends

Saw South Park’s “You Have 0 Friends” episode the other night, and it was pretty funny.  Though much of it hit too close to home, especially, ahem, Kip Drory’s scene below. I don’t have Facebook but this is what would completely happen to me.

Speaking of Facebook, here’s an interesting article from Wired about what CEO Mark Zuckerberg thinks about your “privacy” – he doesn’t care.  Actually, the article’s about  using tweets as sources and the difference between “off the record” and “not for attribution.”  As a rule, I always ask “I can use this” when I’m interviewing just in case BUT I always say “off the record” (a lot) when I don’t want the information to come back to me but I want to guide the reporter in the right direction.

Anyway, for you Facebook users, I’d be closing my account if I were using one.  But it seems to me that this “Post I.T.” generation seems not to be too bothered by their lack of privacy or at least they have an interesting concept of it.

“Zuckerberg’s apparent disregard for your privacy is probably not reason enough to delete your Facebook account. But we wouldn’t recommend posting anything there that you wouldn’t want marketers, legal authorities, governments (or your mother) to see, especially as Facebook continues to push more and more of users’ information public and even into the hands of other companies, leaving the onus on users to figure out its Rubik’s Cube-esque privacy controls.

Facebook has been on a relentless request over the past six months to become the center of identity and connections online. The site unilaterally decided last December that much of a user’s profile information, including the names of all their friends and the things they were “fans” of, would be public information — no exceptions or opt-outs allowed.

Zuckerberg defended the change — largely intended to keep up with the publicness of Twitter, saying that people’s notions of privacy were changing.  He took no responsibility for being the one to drag many Facebook users into the net’s public sphere.”

Fight The System, man!!!

Resistance is Futile

My resistance was a failure from the start, and sooner or later we’re all going to be assimilated into this new tech culture.

I’m taking a momentary break from playing with my new Droid.  Honestly, I didn’t realize how many useless apps there are out there!  I think that I’ve uninstalled about three times as many apps as I’ve decided to keep.  My current challenge right now is to make sure this phone doesn’t become an entertainment distraction (though the magic eight ball is pretty funny as you can edit your own replies).

Besides for the basic email and calendar stuff, I’m not sure what kind of good productive writing apps there are out there.  I’ve got the basic references as well as some free books.  The basic notes tool is fine, and I like the fact that I don’t have to have to carry as many items.  However, I don’t know if I can completely give up writing in a physical notebook or pick up an actual book.

For one, screen drawing just doesn’t compare to the ol’ pencil and paper.  Second, there’s just something irreplaceable about a worn dog-eared book when it comes to reading on a rainy Sunday afternoon.  I don’t mind reading online (I do it every day for hours on end) but I like the charm and simplicity of holding a book.

However, given the current publishing trends, the market seems to be shirking for physical books, at least in certain categories.  I’m not sure reading a children’s picture book is going to work as well online as a novel.  Anyway, there are plenty of articles and online discussions on this topic, so my comments are redundant in terms of the existing business models and problems.

I suppose that’s the one problem we’re all facing as writers; sorting out the “best” channels for advice, networking, exposure, discussion and whatnot.  A lot of it is trial and error, and finding a sense of “belonging” which I think can be difficult on some forums and discussion boards.  I’ve left a few for that reason, but this sense of “belonging” can be a blessing as much as it can be a curse.  You can sometimes get trapped into the group think mentality and become a Borg drone.

Web culture is interesting to watch this continued “modern man problem” – the idea that individual liberty and freedom of expression, classical liberal concepts of John Milton and John Stuart Mill, should superseded the laws of society especially when it came to the censorship of ideas.  Since then, modern society became more polarized and burdened with the extremes of individualism and socialism (notice small “s” is used, don’t freak out).  This problem has become even more complicated as online usage is now global and different political ideologies are struggling for control of information and “speech.”

Check out what the UK just passed.  It’s pretty scary to think that this is Orwell’s native land.  Though it won’t be too long before those laws infringe upon our shores – America is the only country that still protects the freedom of speech but we’re already seeing hate speech policies and codes being developed to “protect victims” – as a potential victim, I’d like to say that I don’t need protecting.  I value my freedom of thought more than I fear being the target of “hateful” or “offensive” speech.

The unintended consequence of a little censorship is censorship.

On love and labor

I left work depressed yesterday. Ten straight hours of staring at a pixelated screen under dull florescent office lights left my eyes dry and sensitive; they were stinging and burning when I walked out into the remaining sunlight.

Ten straight hours of scanning and screening headlines, reading articles, jumping from one web page to the next, copying and editing text, checking codes and links all just to make sure that everything was in line so that it all came up with one click.  What was the reward for my muscle eye strain and complete isolation from another living soul?  510 hits on the professional blog I manage.

It was a small sense of accomplishment that didn’t last long.  Apparently, this insane data-mining and coding may be the future of journalism.   Multitasking is the norm, and I know my way around the computer.  But I don’t know how developers do it day in and day out.  One could argue that writing is a solitary endeavor and it only seems natural to ease in and integrate computer programming into the new journalism routine.

So, what’s the problem?  Perhaps the new generation will adapt better, but I find it an immense challenge separating the noise from the “good” stuff online.  As content producer, the technical stuff can overwhelm and consume the time you should be developing story or content.  I realize that this is the reality and that those who aspire to be journalists or professional writers need to adapt or reinvent themselves.

And thus another new dilemma (added to the working for free issue) – what do you focus on more?  Developing as a writer/journalist, what you love, or working on your technical expertise, your labor?

The practical answer is to do both, but the final decision is up the writer.

Me?  I like the idea of untangling from the web and getting myself into the real world better – it makes for better writing and besides the hit statistics don’t give me meaningful feedback.