Final - Book Groups

With the focus of Nanotexts being technology and the use of language, or rather the marriage of the two, it only made sense that book discussions were conducted online. Because the class itself was held in the first person, the assignments held online created a contrast of perspective. Interestingly, the use of in-class plurking created a larger chain of communication. The online book groups were able to take the live atmosphere of in-class discussion and combine it with the advantages of internet anonymity.
The use of the word anonymity here does not necessarily denote the ability to be entirely anonymous. However, because one is alone, there is a delay in communication. This allows an individual to gather their thoughts before sharing them with the group, creating a more focused conversation. Also, the online discussion group is automatically recorded, allowing for easy reference to any material. The online discussion group is also more democratic; there is no lecturer. This distinction was not great in Nanotexts, however, as even the in-class discussions were fairly equal, albeit with some mediation.
It seems that the only area online discussion fails to work as effectively is in allowing everyone to be heard equally, which is ironic. Though everyone has equal opportunity to share their opinion, the disconnect allows observers of the discussion to select what they will and will not read. The freedom of the internet acts as both the wings and shackles of communication. In a live group discussion, the mediator ensures that voices are heard, while at the same time, those who are uncomfortable will not speak. Online, anonymity ensures that most will speak up, while it also allows selective engagement.
When we consider the intent of technology as enhancing communication, perhaps another setting would have been more effective. Communication is not technological; technology imitates communication at varying degrees of success. A book group that was primarily in person, but utilized an online forum for elaboration of thoughts and questions that were not covered in discussion, may have spoken better to the true use of technology in literature and communication. Literature is an extension of the mind and the body. It is human, and it is full of life. We cannot make literature, or communication for that matter, rely solely on technology, much like we cannot make technology truly replace life. Thus, it should always be a secondary communication, a supplement.
Beyond this, the discussion groups show the promise of technology aiding communication in the future. If it is possible to give voice to everyone, we are as close today as ever before. The use of technology today has proven incredibly effective, from the macro to the miniscule. As we apply it to our own discussion, we can see how it creates another degree of presence; we are anonymous but collective, physically silent but given a stronger voice than we can produce with our bodies.
The future of technology and communication is much like the future of technology and anything. It is full of promise, and it is wrought with danger. We have much to gain, and we have all of humanity to lose. I believe that what will define us is yet to come, and it will likely involve our endeavors into the nano of everything. We must always cling to what makes us human, in some respect. The internet has become a haven for the fostering of our greatest ideas, and the unity of a Tech Nation. As we continue to search beyond ourselves, let us proceed with caution. If there is a meaning to life, may we never find it. And if there is not, may we always be in search.