Advertisement

Qualitative Sociology

, Volume 7, Issue 1–2, pp 75–89 | Cite as

Reading, writing and word processing: Toward a phenomenology of the computer age

  • Peter Lyman
Articles

Abstract

Ethnographers “read” cultures and in writing inscribe memory into texts; in literature, a “reading” is a dialogue with a writer through the medium the text, and writing translates text into action. In a study of humanists using the microcomputer as a writing technology, changes were perceived in the phenomenology of writing, the writer's relation to the text, and the relation to the reader. Typists remarked that the computer enabled them to recover “a spoken voice” because the screen gave the text a processual and temporal form which replaced the inflexible typed page. Handwriters often remarked that the computer changed humanistic craft labor into industrial production: the screen gave privilege to the lexical in place of the graphic; the sentence replaced the paragraph as a unit of meaning; writing became a medium for transmitting information rather than an artistic performance. Humanists perceived that technical norms were embedded in technical culture and software, and that the computer marked a shift in the reward structure of their professions toward productivity and efficiency. This suggests three issues for the writing crafts of ethnographers. Electronic memory may replace the interpretive text, making fieldnotes public and treating them as information. The technical capacity to organize fieldnotes in data bases may shift the fieldworker's conception of knowledge from interpretation to information. And consuming the norms and concepts of technical culture may shift the craftlike norms of the field worker's culture.

All earthly existence must ultimately be contained in a book.

—Mallarme

Keywords

Social Psychology Data Base Industrial Production Social Issue Field Worker 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barthes, Roland 1970 “To write: An intransitive verb.” In R. Macksey and E. Donato (eds.), The Languages of Criticism and the Sciences of Man. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins.Google Scholar
  2. —— 1977 Roland Barthes by Roland Barthes. Richard Howard (translator). New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
  3. Becker, Howard S. 1984 (Forthcoming) “Freshman English for graduate students: A memoir and two theories.” Sociological Quarterly.Google Scholar
  4. Benjamin, Walter 1969 “The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction.” In Illuminations. Harry Zohn (translator). New York: Schocken.Google Scholar
  5. Cicourel, Aaron 1974 “Interviewing and memory.” Pp. 51–82 in Pragmatic Aspects of Human Communication. Holland: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  6. Clifford, James 1983 “On ethnographic authority.” Representations. (Spring).Google Scholar
  7. Cowley, Malcolm, ed. 1958 Writers At Work: The Paris Review Interviews. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  8. Eisenstein, Elizabeth 1979 The Printing Press As An Agent Of Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Emerson, Robert M., ed. 1983 Comtemporary Field Research. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  10. Feigenbaum, Edward A. and Julian Feldman, eds. 1963 Computers and Thought. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  11. Geer, Blanche, ed. 1972 “Learning to work.” The American Behavioral Scientist. 16:1.Google Scholar
  12. Geertz, Clifford 1973 “Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture.” The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  13. Geertz, Clifford 1983 “Being there: Anthropology and the scene of writing.” Harry Camp Memorial Lecture Series, Works and Lives: The Anthropologist as Author. Stanford University, May 16.Google Scholar
  14. Geertz, Clifford 1980 “Blurred genres: The refiguration of social thought.” The American Scholar. Spring: 165–182.Google Scholar
  15. Glaser, Barney G. and Anselm L. Strauss 1967 The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  16. Levi-Strauss, Claude 1967 Structural Anthropology. Claire Jacobson and Brooke Grundfest Schopf (translators). Garden City, New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
  17. Mallarme, Stephane 1982 “The book: A spiritual instrument.” Selected Poetry and Prose. Mary Ann Caws (ed.). New York: New Directions.Google Scholar
  18. Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels 1978 The Marx-Engels Reader. Second Edition. Robert C. Tucker (ed.). New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  19. McCorduck, Pamela 1979 Machines Who Think. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  20. Nancarrow, Paula Reed, Donald Ross and Lillian Bridwell 1982 “Word processors and the writing process: An annotated bibliography.” English Department, the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.Google Scholar
  21. Reinharz, Shulamit 1979 On Becoming a Social Scientist. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  22. Schatzman, Leonard and Anselm L. Strauss 1973 Field Research. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  23. Turkle, Sherry 1980 “The computer as Rorschach.” Transaction. January-February: 15–24.Google Scholar
  24. —— 1982 “The subjective computer: A study in the psychology of personal computation.” Social Studies of Science. 12:173–205.Google Scholar
  25. Zajonc, R. B. 1980 “Feeling and thinking.” American Psychologist 35(2):151–175.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Lyman
    • 1
  1. 1.James Madison CollegeMichigan State UniversityEast Lansing

Personalised recommendations