theinferior4

Stop Reading This. NOW.

« previous entry | next entry »
Jun. 16th, 2008 | 02:21 pm
posted by: [info]lizhand in [info]theinferior4

From the Atlantic Monthly, Nicholas Carr on how the internet is rewiring our brains so we can no longer focus on literature more taxing than that Vanity Fair profile of Lindsey Lohan. 

Or was it Lindsay Wagner?  Richard Wagner?  William Wegman???

Whatever.

Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle

I think I know what’s going on. For more than a decade now, I’ve been spending a lot of time online, searching and surfing and sometimes adding to the great databases of the Internet. The Web has been a godsend to me as a writer ...

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google

Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend

Comments {20}

(no subject)

from: anonymous
date: Jun. 16th, 2008 09:41 pm (UTC)
Link

This is the same stuff my mom used to tell me about television. dg

Reply | Thread

lizhand

(no subject)

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 16th, 2008 11:49 pm (UTC)
Link

Also comics. And rock and roll.

I gotta say, though -- my attention span is definitely shorter than it used to be. But that's probably not Google's fault.

Reply | Parent | Thread

trinfaneb

(no subject)

from: [info]trinfaneb
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 01:25 am (UTC)
Link

Mine is too. I think it might be something that happens to some people as they grow older, but I also think that spending at least 4 hours a day reading things on the computer for the past 13 years has something to do with it too.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Andrew Macrae

(no subject)

from: [info]andrewmacrae
date: Jun. 16th, 2008 11:12 pm (UTC)
Link

Oh man, an article about the dangers of technology that opens with a quote from 2001, that's original. Wow, it even cites a study that shows people skim information on the internet to find what they're looking for, gee who woulda thought? Nietzsche's typewriter changed the way he thought? Awesome! Where can I get one? I'd like to say I got to the end, but I didn't finish reading it because it was crap.

Reply | Thread

lizhand

(no subject)

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 16th, 2008 11:53 pm (UTC)
Link

Yeah, I keep waiting for the article by some guy who explains how the internet has refined his sight so he now has X-ray vision. I mean, when is the technology going to enable us do really useful stuff?

Reply | Parent | Thread

Andrew Macrae

(no subject)

from: [info]andrewmacrae
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 12:23 am (UTC)
Link

Hopefully the Atlantic will pay that guy a shitload to string together some reactionary clichés and questionable analysis so we can all understand x-ray vision better.

Reply | Parent | Thread

lizhand

(no subject)

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 12:37 am (UTC)
Link

Wait — wait! It's finally starting to work! I can see his underwear!

Reply | Parent | Thread

Andrew Macrae

(no subject)

from: [info]andrewmacrae
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 01:03 am (UTC)
Link

Oh my god, I'm seeing it too! It's as if there's nothing essential to the category of the human that transcends our use of underwear! It's as if wearing underwear itself is changing us!

Reply | Parent | Thread

lizhand

(no subject)

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 01:07 am (UTC)
Link

It's greater than that . I's the singularity — and WE ARE ALL NOW UNDERWEAR.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Andrew Macrae

(no subject)

from: [info]andrewmacrae
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 01:22 am (UTC)
Link

I gotta go google some underwear fetish pr0n so I can understand our new masters.

Reply | Parent | Thread

lizhand

(no subject)

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 11:53 am (UTC)
Link

Yes: our new overlords. Er, underlords.

Reply | Parent | Thread

(no subject)

from: [info]paulwitcover
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 12:00 pm (UTC)
Link

Underwear. You change it. It changes you.

Reply | Parent | Thread

lizhand

(no subject)

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 12:16 pm (UTC)
Link

Ha! Good one!

That will be our motto in this brave new world.

Reply | Parent | Thread

(no subject)

from: [info]parttimedriver
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 05:43 am (UTC)
Link

For: Neuroplasticity--the ability of the brain to rewire itself based on environmental input--is quite real. Against: whether or not a decade or so of surfing the Internet is enough to rewire the brain strikes me as a highly debatable point.

I will say, though, that my own attention span isn't what it used to be.

Reply | Thread

mystrymonotreme

(no subject)

from: [info]mystrymonotreme
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 06:52 am (UTC)
Link

Leonard Shlain, in his controversial "Alphabet Versus the Goddess," posits a certain 'rewiring' as society at large has embraced the interweb and it's non-linear architecture. I'm not going to try and summarize what he presents in his book--it's riveting and truer each day--but I will say this: when the book was first released, all my uber-biblio co-workers we adamantly against the premise (this was at a *bookstore* no less) until they read the book, and then they changed their stance.

I don't think it's about lack of 'concentration', as opposed to content: We're all trawling the net, it's just such a multimedia tool that blocks of text rub our minds raw; we crave an image, a youtube post, in the middle of text... Frankly, the interweb may help solidify the need for the book, the magazine, the zine, because when people are full up with electrons and light beams, they'll turn to the printed page.

Also to consider: information as addictive 'drug'...

Reply | Parent | Thread

lizhand

(no subject)

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 17th, 2008 11:54 am (UTC)
Link

Obviouisly, the answe to all this is to make like Cass Neary and raid our kids' medicine cabinets for their Adderrall & Ritalin Rx.

Reply | Parent | Thread

da_linz

But I just subscribed to Vanity Fair!

from: [info]da_linz
date: Jun. 19th, 2008 01:30 am (UTC)
Link

Now what?

Reply | Thread

lizhand

Re: But I just subscribed to Vanity Fair!

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 19th, 2008 11:42 am (UTC)
Link

Vanity Fair, my preferred airplane reading! When I was in college I used to read Cosmo on the Amtrak between Stamford & DC: it had everything, sex, advice ("What those little white dots on your fingernails really say about YOU"), quizzes, plus a condensed novel at the back. Vanity Fair isn;t quite up to that gold standard (no quizzes), but it's close ...

Reply | Parent | Thread

da_linz

Re: But I just subscribed to Vanity Fair!

from: [info]da_linz
date: Jun. 20th, 2008 12:27 am (UTC)
Link

Dear Liz,

Are talking about the same rag?

www.vanityfair.com

I always that these folks were in the same league as the Atlantic, New Yorker, GQ, Esquire, etc.

Please advise! This is not a quiz!

da Linz

Reply | Parent | Thread

lizhand

Re: But I just subscribed to Vanity Fair!

from: [info]lizhand
date: Jun. 20th, 2008 12:54 am (UTC)
Link

Oh, I was joking! I was reading VF today.. But you won't find your horoscope in it.

Reply | Parent | Thread