Final Draft! This is it!

At last, here is the final draft of my essay, Literacy in the Internet Age. I hope it's not too boring! I did expand some of the paragraphs to help the essay flow better. Enjoy! Viel Spass!

Mary Hamilton
Honors English 105-7
Eric Leake
10/3/09
Literacy in the Internet Age
Defining “literacy” has been a quest, pursued by civilization since humans could speak and comprehend. Although history offers many perspectives of literacy, this quest continues in articles by contemporary writers. Some of these writers include Andrew Sullivan, Nicholas Carr, Chris Hedges, Clive Thompson and George Orwell. Each of these writers has a different perspective of the word “literacy,” as discussed below. Literacy in the past has been communicated through books and the spoken word, but the Internet adds a new and controversial dimension to the discussion. Since the Internet is a new form of communication, does it add to older print and spoken media, or does it replace them? In other words, can people become literate using the Internet? There is also the question of the shallowness or depth of reading. At what depth should people read in order to be considered literate? Finally, literacy can undoubtedly be political or practical, but which one should be preferred? These questions of form, depth, and purpose try to explore the broader meaning of “literacy.” Writers both historical and contemporary have attempted to answer these questions. To determine the meaning of “literacy,” we must address each of these questions in turn and see how others have answered them. Once the meaning of “literacy” has been established, then we students can apply it to our lives and strive to become better informed and cultivated -- that is, more literate – people.
The medium for communicating has predominately been writing in the form of books and periodicals. The Internet has introduced a new form of writing that challenges the traditional form. Since the Internet allows thousands of people to find and read the same text simultaneously, it creates an atmosphere of dialogue and debate which changes writers in such a way that they write in a more argumentative, self-conscious style. Clive Thompson investigated this phenomenon in his article, “New Literacy.” Describing a study conducted by Stanford professor Andrea Lunsford, Thompson writes, “[S]tudents were remarkably adept at what rhetoricians called kairos—assessing their audience and adapting their tone and technique to best get their point across.” (Thompson par. 6). Whether students are writing in a chat forum or on Facebook, they are using an argumentative, adaptive tone. In light of the Internet, traditional writing focuses thoughts by forcing writers to organize and observe conventions of grammar and structure. In his article “Why I Blog,” Andrew Sullivan commends the merits of traditional writing while wholeheartedly adopting the blogging form.
“The blog for years points of this essay, for example, have appeared in shards and fragments on my. But being forced to order [my thoughts] in my head and think about them for a longer stretch has helped me understand them better, and perhaps express them more clearly.” (Sullivan par. 40).
Even in our current Internet age, students will still curl up to a book like Harry Potter or Twilight. There is nothing I like better than reading Sherlock Holmes, sci-fi, or classic mysteries on a gloomy day. While traditional writing is more content-oriented, the Internet is more adaptable. Having the old forms available does not mean, however, that the newer media cannot add to literacy, as both Thompson and Sullivan demonstrate. On the contrary, both new and old forms of writing achieve a similar purpose: to inform and persuade. Regardless of the medium, both books and the Internet communicate one person’s ideas to another.
Books tend to represent and encourage intellectual depth. On the other hand, when people think of the Internet, what comes to mind is Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, and Google. Nicholas Carr believes that the Internet is bringing a slow, irrevocable change in human thinking. “The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.” “My mind now expects to take in information the way the Internet distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles.” “Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.” (Carr par. 2, 9, and 4 respectively). Carr fears that the Internet with its rapid pace will diminish our ability to comprehend and think deeply. Chris Hedges goes even further to say this shift in thinking damages human cognition and will bring an end to civilization as we know it now. “The change from a print-based to an image-based society has transformed our nation.” “The core values of our open society, the ability to think for oneself to draw independent conclusions…are dying.” (Hedges par. 10 and 12 respectively). Not all writers believe the Internet is destroying Western Civilization or even that the Internet is replacing books. Andrew Sullivan is convinced that Internet writing will make books more valuable than before. “There is, after all, something irreplaceable about reading a piece of writing at length on paper, in a chair or on a couch or in bed.” (Sullivan par. 42). In the study Clive Thompson relates, the students write at a higher level than first supposed. (Thompson par. 7). With magazines and periodicals going digital, readers can view and print out articles when and wherever they want. I have found that I read more when I use the Internet than when I simply read books and I often choose to read at a higher intellectual level than I might have otherwise without the Internet. Even though many people my age choose to use the Internet for social networking purposes, they have the option to read articles and news stories that are written at a sophisticated level. Even before the Internet, people weren’t always reading deep texts. They were reading graphic novels, pulp fiction, and weekly sensational adventure stories. Although Shakespeare and Tolstoy may not be as familiar today as in the past, people will still have a certain amount of depth in their lives.
Writing is a tool that allows people to communicate, but how should this tool be used? Indubitably, writing can be used as a political tool. On the Internet, one can read the news, read and write blogs, and join forums. Many literary and academic writers such as Hedges and Sullivan believe that writing is mainly a political force with some practical use. As a journalist, Sullivan believes that writing is about sharing, discussing, and forming opinions about news. (par. 7,17, 26, and 27). Hedges asserts that literacy is essential for political participation and societal involvement. (par. 1,3, and 4). But should writing be used solely for political purposes? This idea has been explored by fiction writers as well as academic and opinion writers. In Orwell’s 1984, writing is controlled by the State for political and propaganda purposes. The State’s Ministry of Truth’s primary job is to rewrite the past to support the future agenda. (Orwell p. 4 and ch. 4). This is a grim picture of writing wielded as a political weapon. On the other hand, there are purely functional uses of writing. For instance, texts on gardening, exercise, travel, hobbies, and fashion exist for people’s enjoyment and information. Fiction and scholarly works have apolitical functions in people’s lives. The question remains as to which of these two functions of writing should be considered more literate. Depending on the person’s role or job, whether he is a journalist or a dentist, both of these functions makes a person literate. A person can also read political and functional texts, not just one or the other. I read texts ranging from sports to world events to music reviews to politics in Washington. Writing can be used for both purposes, not solely political or functional purposes. The two purposes can be thought of as left-handed and right-handed uses of texts, and surely being able to use both “hands” is to be preferred to relying solely on one or the other.
The art of communicating has many facets, including reading, writing, and speaking. The combination of these facets at a high level of competence results in literacy. The form of writing, in books and periodicals or on the Internet, can affect literacy, but the presence of new, Internet-based forms of writing need not conflict with the old. In many ways, new forms can enhance the development of literacy when combined with old forms for instance, doing research, finding opposing positions, and reading a variety of length and depth. The depth of reading and writing is also a factor in literacy, and reading Internet-based texts may actually encourage interaction with all texts on a deeper level. Finally, the purpose of writing plays a major role in creating literacy. The presence of both political and practical modes of texts on the Internet insures that literacy will not be stunted.
What is literacy, then? All of these factors--form, depth, and function--are determined by society. Society sets goals and imposes expectations on its members. Students today are expected to be literate on the Internet and with books. Being literate depends on what the individual chooses to read. I can read academic theses online and read pulp fiction books from the 1920s or I can read celebrity gossip online and read a hardcopy of Dante’s Inferno with Gustav Doré’s illustrations. Society sets the basic standards and it is up to the individual to reach for those standards and decide exactly what it means to be literate beyond those basic standards. In our American society which emphasizes high economic and sociological mobility, we are free to set our own literacy goals as well as reaching for our society’s expectations. In this country with our nearly universal access to the Internet and to books, we can choose our form, our depth, and our function. Literacy is what your society and you decide it to be.

Works Cited:
Carr, Nicholas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” www.thealtantic.com. July/August 2008. Web. 12 Sept. 2009.
Hedges, Chris. “America the Illiterate.” www.truthdig.com. 10 Nov. 2008. Web. 15 Sept. 2009.
Orwell, George. 1984. 1949. New York: New American Library, a division of Penguin Group. 1977 Print.
Sullivan, Andrew. “Why I Blog.” www.theatlantic.com. Nov. 2008. Web. 31 Aug. 2009.
Thompson, Clive. “New Literacy.” www.wired.com. 8/24/09. Web. 17 Sept. 2009.