The agony of being obsolete

[amberleadavis]

In my pen pals letters I have found that it is far easier for me to read what is written when it is larger. This is not just because I have to grab my glasses, but the letters are farther apart.

[kazoolaw]

59 minutes ago, LizEF said:

Won't do any good - the floppies go bad, even just sitting there.   So far, our current (or recent) technology has not proven to be readable for nearly as long as ancient technology has been found to be...

Yup, funny thing about thet thar progress stuff.

[A Smug Dill]

2 hours ago, kazoolaw said:

How very like the dominators to think that the individuals can't cope with both the old and the new,  berating them for not pushing past their inertia while ignoring the fact the old and inert are engaging in a discussion  occurring in an online computer forum. 

 

30 minutes ago, ParramattaPaul said:

I have to admit that I for one resent anybody -- dominant group or otherwise -- telling me what I can say, think, or write.

 

There are at least two logically separate factors in being obsolete: what constitutes obsolete, which is externally ‘imposed’ by one's operating environment that is shared with others, and being in that condition. Everyone who lives long enough will lose their control and/or influence over what constitutes obsolete in turn, at which point their choices are: (i) to be something different (and not obsolete), however onerous or painful that may be; (ii) attempt to renew one's control or influence, and likely having to seize it from someone else in the process, such that what/how one chooses to be gets to be no longer considered obsolete by the groups of one's peers that matter; or (iii) just give up and reconcile oneself with being obsolete, at which point one could still manage his/her own feelings, as to whether they make for agony or tranquility.

 

Removing oneself from that shared operating environment, such as choosing writing in a way and a purpose that are no longer premised on their value in communication with one's contemporaries and future generations, means one need not observe anyone else's definition of what constitutes obsolete. Others can't tell you what you (cannot) do, in that regard, but only snuff out the value you hope to achieve with your endeavours, if it takes others — in particular, dominant groups of the day — to play along for that value to be realised.

 

[Aether]

1 hour ago, LizEF said:

Won't do any good - the floppies go bad, even just sitting there.   So far, our current (or recent) technology has not proven to be readable for nearly as long as ancient technology has been found to be...

 

Carved in stone, and all that?  Nothing lasts forever. 😁

[LizEF]

24 minutes ago, Aether said:

Carved in stone, and all that?  Nothing lasts forever. 😁

Stone, metal, even parchment (properly kept) has lasted longer than any magnetic media I know of...   Whether our "solid state" or write-once CD/DVD tech will last, who knows - the bigger question is whether we'll maintain the ability to read it or whether one day someone will have a CD that could be read, if they had hardware and software wherewith to read it.

 

Meanwhile, the only thing required to read stone, metal, or parchment is knowledge...

[ParramattaPaul]

45 minutes ago, A Smug Dill said:

There are at least two logically separate factors in being obsolete: what constitutes obsolete, which is externally ‘imposed’ by one's operating environment that is shared with others, and being in that condition. Everyone who lives long enough will lose their control and/or influence over what constitutes obsolete in turn, at which point their choices are: (i) to be something different (and not obsolete), however onerous or painful that may be; (ii) attempt to renew one's control or influence, and likely having to seize it from someone else in the process, such that what/how one chooses to be gets to be no longer considered obsolete by the groups of one's peers that matter; or (iii) just give up and reconcile oneself with being obsolete, at which point one could still manage his/her own feelings, as to whether they make for agony or tranquility.

 

Removing oneself from that shared operating environment, such as choosing writing in a way and a purpose that are no longer premised on their value in communication with one's contemporaries and future generations, means one need not observe anyone else's definition of what constitutes obsolete. Others can't tell you what you (cannot) do, in that regard, but only snuff out the value you hope to achieve with your endeavours, if it takes others — in particular, dominant groups of the day — to play along for that value to be realised.

 

What you offer here is true if one's credibility, personal esteem, or value derives from one's peers or society.  

[A Smug Dill]

1 minute ago, ParramattaPaul said:

What you offer here is true if one's credibility, personal esteem, or value derives from one's peers or society.

 

The value of written communication can only be realised if the intended readership (which could indeed be limited exclusively to the author himself/herself, by design or intent) can, and chooses to, read it, quite independently from anyone's credibility and personal esteem. If one just wants to, and enjoys, putting down on the page marks arranged in particular patterns or according to particular logic, that's great, but then it wouldn't written communication and therefore the value of such marks would not lie in being reviewed and understood by someone else, and thus should cause neither agony nor angst should others choose to reject ‘reading’ and making sense of those pages.

 

[ParramattaPaul]

3 hours ago, A Smug Dill said:

 

The value of written communication can only be realised if the intended readership (which could indeed be limited exclusively to the author himself/herself, by design or intent) can, and chooses to, read it, quite independently from anyone's credibility and personal esteem. If one just wants to, and enjoys, putting down on the page marks arranged in particular patterns or according to particular logic, that's great, but then it wouldn't written communication and therefore the value of such marks would not lie in being reviewed and understood by someone else, and thus should cause neither agony nor angst should others choose to reject ‘reading’ and making sense of those pages.

 

Would you agree that Blackletter script as used in the 13th Century is archaic, rarely read, that few people can read it, and therefore it is 'obsolete'?  Would you agree that some calligraphers produce various items -- documents if you will -- using it, gain satisfaction from it, and enjoy doing so?  So, tell me does it matter to the calligrapher if it is unreadable to those not familiar with Blackletter, and how is it not 'communication'? 

 

Are you the arbiter of what constitutes 'communication'?  Some cannot read cursive,  I cannot read Cryllic, Greek, Arabic, Chinese, Hebrew, or Japanese.  Does that mean they are not communication?

[inkstainedruth]

4 hours ago, Aether said:

 

Carved in stone, and all that?  Nothing lasts forever. 😁

How does the poem go?  Ah yes:

 

          "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings;
          Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
          Nothing beside remains. 

 

 

(Yes, I looked it up online, but pretty sure I have it in a book somewhere in my house, too.... )

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[A Smug Dill]

9 minutes ago, ParramattaPaul said:

Are you the arbiter of what constitutes 'communication'?  Some cannot read cursive,  I cannot read Cryllic, Greek, Arabic, Chinese, Hebrew, or Japanese.  Does that mean they are not communication?

 

I'm not the arbiter. However, if @brokenclay would like his daughter to even entertain the idea of reading someday the contents of what he has handwritten, then logically that must be communication from his perspective, and realisation of the value of such as communication then hinges upon its appeal and legibility (or readability).

 

[ParramattaPaul]

14 minutes ago, A Smug Dill said:

 

I'm not the arbiter. However, if @brokenclay would like his daughter to even entertain the idea of reading someday the contents of what he has handwritten, then logically that must be communication from his perspective, and realisation of the value of such as communication then hinges upon its appeal and legibility (or readability).

 

Indeed, and if the daughter wants to appreciate what her father has written, then it also hinges upon her  learning to read what he has written, be it in cursive or whatever.  Communication, after all, requires equal effort by both the speaker (writer) and the listener (reader).

 

I will add an observation, one I have accrued by formerly being a child, and currently a parent, grandparent and great grandparent, parents will want what they like, and children will do what they please.

[A Smug Dill]

1 minute ago, ParramattaPaul said:

I will add an observation, one I have accrued by formerly being a child, and currently a parent, grandparent and great grandparent, parents will want what they like, and children will do what they please.

 

Hence my posit that it relies far more heavily on him and/or the artefact to appeal to his daughter (and/or others in his lineage) to make the effort, as opposed to the prospective reader organically decides it's something worth seeking out to read and understand and act on her/his own initiative accordingly.

 

[amberleadavis]

2 hours ago, ParramattaPaul said:

Indeed, and if the daughter wants to appreciate what her father has written, then it also hinges upon her  learning to read what he has written, be it in cursive or whatever.  Communication, after all, requires equal effort by both the speaker (writer) and the listener (reader).

 

I will add an observation, one I have accrued by formerly being a child, and currently a parent, grandparent and great grandparent, parents will want what they like, and children will do what they please.

 

 

Oh yes, that is experience.

[Misfit]

I can understand a mother hoping her daughter would be able to read cursive.  
 

It seems to hinge on the child wanting to. I can relate in that my brother is not willing to come back to help my Mom. He has no constraints. So it seems it comes down to deliberate choice. And he is a 60-year-old!

 

I’m helping my 85-year-old Mom all by myself.  It would be so much easier on her to have two people help with toileting instead of me and the Sit and Stand unit. But he has convinced himself one person can do it. (My oldest brother doesn’t think so, my second cousin doesn’t think so. More importantly the physical therapist doesn’t think so.). The hope is a person, let’s say BrokenClay’s daughter can change her mind. I hold out more hope for her than my brother. 

[Pointyscratchy]

Your daughter's a tough judge and they talk about parents screwing kids up! If she only knew.

 

 

[brokenclay]

2 hours ago, Pointyscratchy said:

Your daughter's a tough judge and they talk about parents screwing kids up! If she only knew.

 

 

Ha, good point! Having her living here for the last two years has in some ways tipped the parent/child dynamic and I'm starting to see what old age is going to look like...

 

Luckily we like her and her ideas and thoughts are generally good ones :-).

[Misfit]

Maybe you could convince her it’s like a secret language her friends won’t know. 

[Estycollector]

Content is king!!

[fireant]

I found most of it very legible. I had problems with a few letters but that's because I am not used to your writing if that makes sense?

 

You have a lovely script.

[amberleadavis]

13 hours ago, Estycollector said:

Content is king!!

 

 

You have totally motivated me!  I also had to read about how we have multiple copies of the Gettysburg address.  I thought your version was so perfect as to color and paper that it had to be an original.