Im not suggesting a real war on text. I continue to be amused by how
such a phrase can cause such apparent offense, it wasnt meant to, Im
not interested in any sort of war or book burning. I should be more
careful if I use the phrease in future.
I study history in an informal way, when did I ever attempt to
dininish the role of text in the history of humans?
I think the history of the world in the last century has been rather
sharply influenced by video, especially in the form on television. Its
changed the face of politics and news and the manufacturing of consent.
I remain unsure of the future and other forms of communication that
rely on very high technology interfacing to the body. If Id been a
child of the 1950's I might have expected everyone to have jetpacks by
now but it hasnt happened.
Steve of Elbows
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "rob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> does anyone study history?
>
> i see comments stating implicitly or explicitly that video will
(note use of
> future tense, that's a clue folks) have the same profound effect as
writing.
> ha ha ha.
>
> the effect of the masses being taught to read/write changed
EVERYTHING in
> europe (i was born there, now live in north america, so i'll leave my
> observations to these places)... no western culture would exist in any
> recognizable form without writing/print... this is not an
exaggeration: read
> about events following the black plague, memory cathedrals, martin
luther,
> etc and it's affect on society. (one interesting example is none of
us can
> remember much compared to those who lived before)
>
> video's not close to that and is unlikely to be: no fundamental
institutions
> have yet formed from the existence of video... no social hierarchies
of any
> importance (videobloggers are clearly more important than anyone
else on the
> planet but leaving that aside...) have developed either... yes,
hollywood
> generates "celebrities" people who are accorded higher social status
in a
> mundane way, but this phenomena has been around a very long time, it
isn't
> new; gladiators for instance.
>
> but even more importantly...
>
>
> in my opinion, before video will replace text, something will
replace video.
>
> new technologies have already been developed that are more likely to
play a
> large role in communications over this century... here's a couple i
recently
> read:
>
> how about the one that can directly interface to the brain (new
scientist
> reports on electroencephalography with quadriplegics able to make a
> wheelchair move forward, left or right)... considering the full
implications
> of devices like this, it's not hard to see where the real
revolutions will
> occur in communications.
>
> developments in hormones allow people to "bottle" emotional states.
(look up
> Oxytocin's and the University of Zurich)... what artist wouldn't
want to get
> their hands on something like that? (not to mention politicians,
frustrated
> lovers, etc)
>
>
> UPSIDE
> so easy to be critical... one really should reveal one's own
preferences.
>
> where i do feel video steps up and above is regarding tangible
experiences.
> reading travel books has nothing on even the most amateur video footage
> taken in some far-off location. the subtle interplay of facial
features, etc
> gives clear messages that'd never translate as well in text form.
>
> my videoblogs otherwise are usually quite amateurish technically,
but they
> capture an emotion nicely... more pro ones tend to be overly
concerned with
> polish rather than content. there's also a sense of lack-of-control ("i
> dunno why it worked out so good, but check it out!" type of blogs)
which i
> enjoy. serendipity.
>
> newscast blogs are ok, but the regard i have for them stems from their
> social function... they blog stuff corporate newscasters won't touch, or
> think is unimportant, or is unsuited to their political agenda.
>
> blogs in the "omg i'm so special" style are ok in small doses... easy to
> relate to cuz hey! "I" am the most important person in my
universe... and i
> would hope everyone else feels the same about themselves in their
> universe... but i'll only watch a few before moving on to someone else.
>
>
> CONCLUSION
> video's just another tool in the arsenal we have to communicate.
>
> a statement like "war on text" implies such a narrow vision of what
> experiences are worth sharing... i can't imagine how drab and dull
things
> would be, tho if i go back and re-read 1984 perhaps i'll have an idea.
>
> later
> rob
>
> ps ~ someone wrote that video is non-linear... only from a creators
> perspective... the audience has no such luxury. whereas text? there's a
> thing called skim-reading. works great.
>
> text requires far less attention than video... do the test: glance at a
> paragraph, glance at a video. which one do you feel confident you
understand
> the creators intent?
>
> and hyperlinks? they are the embodiment of non-linear, allowing a
person to
> go back/forth at will to whatever section they wish. video has
nothing as
> effective... hotspots are a cool idea, but there's a lack of grace
regarding
> how they're incorporated into video footage. hypertext links otoh can be
> ignored or used with no distraction to the reading material.
>
> pps ~ "war on text"? ick. must've been a joke i missed cuz i find it a
> tasteless phrase.
>
> ppps ~ i'll go back to lurking now.
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
1.2 million kids a year are victims of human trafficking. Stop slavery.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WpTY2A/izNLAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
