The idea of a quick read is nothing new. They’ve been around since the Victorian Era.
- The Penny Dreadful, 19th century – small chapbooks published on cheap paper for middle class adolescents for mindless entertainment. It was sensational fiction for the masses.
- Magazines. A lot of long stories were originally published serially in magazines. Pinocchio was originally published in sequence in The Strand magazine. No one ever complained about reading small parts of a tale at a time then.
- Comic books / graphic novels. Often more pictures than words, some crazy amazing books are graphic novels – V for Vendetta, The Watchmen ... is their intellectual value compromised due to the inclusion of pictures? Archie is a bloody God as far as I’m concerned.
- The poetry chapbook. Designed to be flipped through.
- Coffee table books. Visually pleasing AND informative. I’ve totally quoted coffee table books in essay’s before, no lie.
The list goes on ...
Google may present a quick and painless way to get at information, but I don’t think it is making us stupid. There are valid points to the argument that Google is detrimental to young scholarly minds, to be sure, but the bottom line is, the human desire to be an expert at something, to live for something, will triumph Google’s brevity and pithiness. We are miners, and as long as there are questions, there will be demands for answers.
(Plus, I'm kind of scared Google can hear my thoughts and might turn me into one of those colourful plastic balls in their headquarters.)
No matter how we may try to pummel his skinny ass, the geek will never die.
No comments:
Post a Comment