Tag: literacy

#oneaday, Day 217: “Book? LOL!”

I forget the exact circumstances of when I came across the quote in this post’s title. It may have been on some form of social networking website, or dating site, or something like that. But it was a good few years back now.

The context of the quote was in one of those sections you get on pretty much all online profiles that asks you to list your favourite music, films, TV shows and books. This person’s favourite books were listed as “book? lol”.

That struck me as rather sad, but perhaps a little unsurprising given the general attention span of most people these days. Why sit down with a book which delays gratification and requires active use of the brain when you can be immediately bombarded with information via TV and the Internet?

It’s an age-old argument of course, and one which has probably been running ever since every new information-giving technology came along. However, it seems particularly ironic in the context of the Internet, given that much of it is, in fact, text. Sure, there are pretty pictures and buttons that fart when you click on them and pornography, but it’s still fundamentally built on text. You’re reading text right now. Is your head hurting yet?

The fact that everyone has a voice on the Internet is one of those things that is debatable as to whether it is a Good Thing or not. But as part of having that voice, everyone has the opportunity to give their thoughts and expand on them as much as they want to. The sad thing is, though, in many cases, people don’t feel like they have the time to read (or write) a full, well-considered argument. Instead, they denounce it as a “wall of text” and choose not to read it.

It happens in video games, too. A friend of mine once said that he couldn’t get through Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney because there was “too much reading”. It’s a game about a lawyer. I’m not sure what else he was expecting.

As a writer, as someone who crafts language and bends it to my will in the name of pretentiousness, self-expression, catharsis and humour, this is sad. The English language is a powerful tool that can say many things. As, indeed, are other languages. But it seems that for many these days, the priority is for quick, snappy, “efficient” communication. And sure, there are situations in which this is entirely appropriate. But I say that shouldn’t be the norm. People shouldn’t be afraid to speak their mind in as much length as they wish.

My mind is particularly drawn to the early days of the Squadron of Shame. Long before we started producing our podcast, we ran lengthy discussion threads on a variety of games on 1up.com’s Radio forum. We’d started as a result of one of the 1up Radio features, so that was our spiritual home. Many of the people who populated that forum were articulate sorts who agreed with my thoughts above, so there were plenty of like-minded individuals there who enjoyed taking part in our discussions and posting their own “walls of text”.

But one day, the Powers That Be at 1up decided that it would be a great idea to merge all the forums into “Games” and “Not Games”. This meant that lengthy, in-depth discussion threads from groups such as the Squadron were crammed into the same space as “OMG HALO IS BETTR THAN KILZONE”. Naturally, this led to problems. In one of the last discussions we had on those boards—on the subject of the peculiar PS2 game Psi-Ops—the posting was almost immediately derailed by a particularly notorious troll who posted “OMG FUCKING MASSIVE WALL OF TEXT” in giant red letters. Said “wall of text” was maybe six or seven paragraphs long and was interesting to read, but as soon as troll boy showed his face, the discussion went off track, not helped by many people (including myself) rising to his bait.

It’s a pity that to some people the desire to speak in detail, at length and to produce a coherent argument is seen as a negative thing. Personally I would have thought that a forum—by its very nature an asynchronous method of communication in which people can take their time to consider their responses—was the ideal environment in which to have these lengthy discussions. But apparently not.

This is perhaps an unnecessarily negative picture, of course. There are still people who read books. There are still people who like to post more than five words at a time. There are still people who don’t decide to ignore all the rules of spelling, punctuation and grammar “just because it’s the Internet”—who came up with that stupid idea, anyway? It’s just a pity that, at times, they seem to be declining in number.

Oh well. If you read through all that, you can count yourself amongst the élite!

#oneaday, Day 210: Literacy

Well, tonight was the night we recorded the first episode of the all-new Squadron of Shame SquadCast. And we think you’re going to like it a lot.

There’s going to be a lot more community involvement in the whole thing, too. This is led by the Squawkbox, a communal blog where anyone with a WordPress account can contribute and join the discussion. But there’s nothing to stop people blogging about the things we talk about, either. In fact, it’d be awesome to see some lengthy written thoughts about the things we discuss.

So I thought I’d kick that off with some material related to a discussion we had on the show. Not to spoil anything, but it’s an interesting topic.

The question is that of being “literate” in a medium versus that of being “well-read”. On the podcast, we particularly focused on gaming, as you might expect. You’ll find the conclusions we came to on the podcast itself. See, I like to tease.

But it’s true for any medium, and not just books, either. My old friend Ed “Roth Dog” Padgett (follow him on Twitter just to stop him moaning, too, if you would) is most certainly well-read in the medium of movies, for example. He knows what makes a “good” or a “bad” movie. He knows about different directors, actors, genres, stylistic approaches, all manner of things I could never even begin to understand right now because I am merely literate in the medium of movies. I know what makes a decent structure of a movie, and I know what I enjoy. But I don’t watch movies that often, and as such there may be some things that I don’t appreciate in the same way that others do.

Take my recent reaction to the movie Predators. I thought Predators was a festering pile of horseshit, yet many people whom I’ve spoken to about it since claimed to rather enjoy it. Does this mean that I’m “wrong”? No; it simply means that my reaction is different to other people. In the case of a lot of those people, misty-eyed nostalgia over the original Predator films probably played a part. And in some cases, they quite possibly genuinely liked the generic, sprawling mess that was that movie. I have only ever seen Predator once and I’m not even convinced I’ve ever seen Predator 2. I think I have. But I can’t remember.

I’ll freely admit that I’m not particularly well-read when it comes to movies. I’ve never seen Citizen Kane, Clockwork Orange or Rocky Horror Picture Show. I haven’t seen the vast majority of Arnie’s output. I can name about three directors off the top of my head. I struggle to name a “favourite movie”. But I can at least appreciate a decent movie when I see one.

With books, it’s the most literal kind of, well, literacy. You can read. Or you can be well-read. If you can read, there may be stuff you enjoy. Perhaps you enjoy Mills and Boon romance novels, but only for the naughty bits. Perhaps you like the cheesiest kind of epic fantasy there is. Perhaps you like a diverse range of stuff.

In every medium, everyone has the opportunity to become “literate”, and to understand that medium on a level that is sufficient to make it accessible and enjoyable. But it takes a lot more work to become truly “well-read” and to understand what the “canonical” titles in that medium are. And in media as diverse as these, it’s entirely likely that everyone has their own opinions on what the “canon” might include.

So, anyone interested enough to comment, then: pick a medium that you feel particularly “well-read” in, and give us some examples of what you think might be “essentials”—the “canon” for that medium. I’m intrigued to hear some responses.