Response to Jim Porter's, “Why Technology Matters to Writing: A Cyberwriter’s Tale"

I frankly did not think much of Porter's argument nor of the construction of his essay, nor of him, in as much as was revealed of his personality, perspective and sensibilities while reading this essay; that is until he redeemed himself ever so slightly in creating the distinction between a formal/textual view of writing and a scenic/contextual view of writing; a distinction that ought to have been established from the onset thus allowing the reader entry into his understanding, the case he was attempting to make and the ability to follow and perhaps agree with his stance.


Having failed to do so till the end of his address, I was prone to agree with Baron who is quoted as concisely asserting that "the computer is just another in a long line of technologies - from the pencil to the typewriter to the computer. These tools foster incremental change that aids our writing process - but writing, language and communication remain pretty much the same as before". I could not see how Porter’s personal excitement over the evolution of computer technology opposingly showcased and supported the change to writing he was alleging. Quite apart from the fact that my own convictions about writing are in league with that of Baron’s, Porter did not define writing and thus left this vital understanding – the heart of his very essay - to the reader who was obliged to insert her or his own belief of attitude toward writing into the case being tried.


Having done just this, I was amused to note that Porter’s early schooling exactly matched my own. I, however, am quite grateful for the paces I was put through and attribute much of my discipline and the development of moulds through which I channel my own innate brilliance, the encouragement of my passion and my pride in writing to those early exercises. Writing is an art and the attention it was given by my teachers and the institutions I attended confirmed and embedded this ideology for life. But then I am here addressing writing as the creative form I primarily feel it to be. When Porter bothered to create a portal into his perspective, I conceded that scenic form of writing is one that I do indeed make use of…when writing academic papers for example, and I am unendingly grateful that I could lie on my bed in my ’jammies and pull research from databases without having to trek to cold, austere libraries and lug heavy, smelly books home; that I make use of when communicating my lighter, more pedestrian thoughts, experiences and feelings to friends and followers; and one I also make use of when fulfilling assignments for digital literacy classes…but Writing, ahhh, that action of (and I employ the cliché here because it fits) cutting open the vein and bleeding Self upon the page as opposed to communication, that more common aspect of writing, that technology does not impact. That Writing is still heart, soul and their authentic expression, whether it be by means of pencil, keys, hieroglyphics, the griot’s oral narrative, finger etching in the sand, or the blood of its deliverer unto the page.