In Chapter 1, “The Book as Object”, in Amaranth Borsuk’s, The Book, what really struck me was how writing, as we know and define it today, was mistrusted by the most revered scholars of the time. In the final section of the first chapter, “Reading and Writing’s Shift”, Borsuk explains that “the great thinkers of Greece, in fact, mistrusted writing as a technology that would destroy the oral arts of debate and storytelling on which they based their sense of the world” (Borsuk, 55). For the kind of reading we know today it “would have to change its context and text in form… which means literacy would have to extend beyond the elite and monastic communities” (Borsuk, 56).
What we base our entire education on, and how we define the book and our access to knowledge, was distrusted, discouraged, and feared by Socrates. He believed that transcription “is a crutch that will both hamper memory and more philosophical thought in ambiguity, leaving interpretation in the hands of the reader” (Borsuk, 56). While context is still important, how we (the individual holding the book) interpret literature and writing (separate from the intention of the author) is now the most crucial skill we learn. The transition from oral and limited transcription, to our more accessible, modern practice of writing actually “allowed rhetoric to flourish” (Borsuk, 56). The “book” as we know it today is not in its final form, just as the tablet and scroll evolved, so will our definition. Many of us express how digitized literature, media, and AI scare us, how we are fearful for future generations’ attention spans and ability to think for themselves. Past scholars’ concerns “echo contemporary anxieties about the ways digitally meditated reading and writing shortens our attention spans and ability to engage deeply with texts” (Borsuk, 58). It makes me realize that future technology has always been feared and mistrusted. As mediums of reading evolve, how we read reflects that evolution. What Socrates feared is why we are all here today, and it makes me reconsider how I view and fear future technological advancements in writing and the “book”.
Hi, Myles. I liked reading your post. It was interesting to see you discuss the future of the book and how our anxieties about new technology are a part of a repeating cycle. People have and always will fear change and technology as it evolves into new unknowns. I also liked how you noted that “the book is not in its final form.” In my post, I wrote about the evolution of the book and how it is a form of technology. Since the concept and physicality of a book have remained largely unchanged over the past few centuries, it is exciting and scary to see what the book will become as we move into uncharted technological territories.
Hey Myles, I really like how you connected Socrates’ fear of writing with our own fears about digital media and AI. It’s kind of funny to think that what he saw as dangerous (writing) is now the foundation of everything we do in school. Your point makes me realize that maybe our worries about new technology are not so unique and that every generation feels the same way.