I'm reminded of Neil Postman by this essay. Different forms of media are different technologies that have an ethic that is inherent in their form. We evolved for the oral ethic, and I would argue that our minds have adapted well to the ethic of typography. Everything after? Not so much. My question for you would be to ask what kind of media consumption is appropriate. Can we read books without being corrupted? Or would only certain types of books produce this effect?
Rather than Postman, I am most heavily influenced by Lewis Mumford and Heidegger. Heidegger, in his lectures on Parmenides, put forth a devastating critique of typewriters. Now, I do agree with you that we have adapted fairly well to printed media, but the rot set in fairly early, leading to advocates of the beauty of the printed word, such as William Morris, Eric Gill, and David Jones. If all books were as beautiful as Morris' or medieval manuscripts, there would be no problem, but as the printing press took hold, books ceased to be valuable items to be cherished, and started to become utilitarian objects to pass along knowledge. A hundred years ago, an educated person may have been able to discern the true, good, and beautiful works from worthless texts, but now we are flooded with millions of trash books, which are hardly read, and even the good books out there are harder to discover than ever, and are printed on-demand in the ugliest and cheapest ways possible. So, to answer your question, I would say that one should try to immerse oneself, as much as possible within today's world, within oral culture, but since so much has disappeared, I would say that books can be immensely useful so long as one uses discernment. It is better to have a collection of ten great books that you read a hundred times to gather new fruit from, rather than have hundreds of books of questionable value that are read once, then thrown away or forgotten about. Ancient authors are often a worthwhile read, but even some modern authors are greatly edifying to one's mind, heart and soul: I think of Lawrence, Nikos Kazantzakis, Georges Bernanos, R. S. Thomas, and others. These authors speak to us in a direct and vital way because they understand the times we are living in, so they can help us, but we should always remember that the greatest book is the book of Nature, and we can always learn far more from a living tree than from a dead one with ink printed on it.
I will also add, a book cannot corrupt a person who is not receptive to the corruption. The Machine must be asked to enter one's soul. We all can live without technology, but few of us choose to do so. Now, all of this is speaking of books. As for television and other modern media, it rewires our brains and is qualitatively different, and a great evil. I, myself, am engaging with this great evil by typing this now. I read your comment on the screen of a 15 year old computer that I got for free, and which was going to be junked, then I wrote out my response with pencil and paper, and have now transcribed it back into the virtual world. Have I crossed over into evil by doing so? Yes, I have, and I would prefer to be a hermit in the woods of Alaska like Seraphim Rose, but I am trying to get a message across to people, and the printed word and oral storytelling no longer have the reach they once did. All of life is a compromise, but I beg the forgiveness of the dark God and the spirits of the forests.
I'm reminded of Neil Postman by this essay. Different forms of media are different technologies that have an ethic that is inherent in their form. We evolved for the oral ethic, and I would argue that our minds have adapted well to the ethic of typography. Everything after? Not so much. My question for you would be to ask what kind of media consumption is appropriate. Can we read books without being corrupted? Or would only certain types of books produce this effect?
Rather than Postman, I am most heavily influenced by Lewis Mumford and Heidegger. Heidegger, in his lectures on Parmenides, put forth a devastating critique of typewriters. Now, I do agree with you that we have adapted fairly well to printed media, but the rot set in fairly early, leading to advocates of the beauty of the printed word, such as William Morris, Eric Gill, and David Jones. If all books were as beautiful as Morris' or medieval manuscripts, there would be no problem, but as the printing press took hold, books ceased to be valuable items to be cherished, and started to become utilitarian objects to pass along knowledge. A hundred years ago, an educated person may have been able to discern the true, good, and beautiful works from worthless texts, but now we are flooded with millions of trash books, which are hardly read, and even the good books out there are harder to discover than ever, and are printed on-demand in the ugliest and cheapest ways possible. So, to answer your question, I would say that one should try to immerse oneself, as much as possible within today's world, within oral culture, but since so much has disappeared, I would say that books can be immensely useful so long as one uses discernment. It is better to have a collection of ten great books that you read a hundred times to gather new fruit from, rather than have hundreds of books of questionable value that are read once, then thrown away or forgotten about. Ancient authors are often a worthwhile read, but even some modern authors are greatly edifying to one's mind, heart and soul: I think of Lawrence, Nikos Kazantzakis, Georges Bernanos, R. S. Thomas, and others. These authors speak to us in a direct and vital way because they understand the times we are living in, so they can help us, but we should always remember that the greatest book is the book of Nature, and we can always learn far more from a living tree than from a dead one with ink printed on it.
I will also add, a book cannot corrupt a person who is not receptive to the corruption. The Machine must be asked to enter one's soul. We all can live without technology, but few of us choose to do so. Now, all of this is speaking of books. As for television and other modern media, it rewires our brains and is qualitatively different, and a great evil. I, myself, am engaging with this great evil by typing this now. I read your comment on the screen of a 15 year old computer that I got for free, and which was going to be junked, then I wrote out my response with pencil and paper, and have now transcribed it back into the virtual world. Have I crossed over into evil by doing so? Yes, I have, and I would prefer to be a hermit in the woods of Alaska like Seraphim Rose, but I am trying to get a message across to people, and the printed word and oral storytelling no longer have the reach they once did. All of life is a compromise, but I beg the forgiveness of the dark God and the spirits of the forests.