Umberto Eco on Paper vs. Electronic Memory
joabj writes "Paper was itself a technology at one point, this essay
from Umberto Eco, author of "In The Name of the Rose," reminds us. Eco holds forth on the differences between paper and electronic memory. He doesn't come out in favor of either, rather he talks about the advantages each has, in technical terms. Some fascinating ideas here...."
Real title is "Name of the rose" not "In the name of the rose".
double plus good scrotch.
even if you dont' manage the whole article, just this paragraph is worth reading:
"Yet, there is a difference between implementing the activity of producing infinite and unlimited texts and the existence of already produced texts, which can perhaps be interpreted in infinite ways but are physically limited. In our same contemporary culture we accept and evaluate, according to different standards, both a new performance of Beethoven's Fifth and a new Jam Session on the Basin Street theme. In this sense, I do not see how the fascinating game of producing collective, infinite stories through the Net can deprive us of authorial literature and art in general. Rather, we are marching towards a more liberated society in which free creativity will coexist with the interpretation of already written texts. I like this. But we cannot say that we have substituted an old thing with a new one. We have both."
The presumption that paper is better for extended reading is increasingly less valid. Since a got a large LCD display a few years ago, I find that I seldom print pages anymore. I still like and buy some physical books (fewer than before), but I miss the features afforded by accessing stuff in a digital format. Paper still has higher resolution and physical portability, but this relative advantage is waning.
I'm sure that paper vs. clay arguments raged in the early days of paper. Paper was flimsy, flammable, and cheap. Clay was solid, serene, and worthy of keeping. A similar set of arguments now embroils the screen vs. paper debate.
In a few decades, I'd bet that most people will consider paper an anachronism -- hardcopy being too inflexible, bulky, and expensive to use in everyday life. Better screens and from-birth exposure to the advantages of virtual access will lower people's nostalgia for and use of paper. Paper will never go away (after all, we still carve stone tablets) but paper will be marginalized. The percentage of content read on the screen will only increase.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Where also sits an x86 computer running Windows that has a fully operational version of the BBC Digital Domesday Book since June 2003. It took about 3 years to retrieve the data and write an emulator that could run the software, which originally ran on the BBC Micro computer, but they did it.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
He wrote "Foucault's Pendulum", which although not as well known as Rose, is a superior book. Lots of interesting digressions on the nature of knowledge...