They made me take typing in 9th grade. Manual typewriter. Office model that could not be stolen easily, though the Junior High did not chain them to the desks. I typed poorly. Fewer Words per Minute than most, but also fewer typos than most. I peeked at the paper, something the teacher discouraged. It became a useful skill. When my mother typed my term papers, the Greeks became Freeks. When I left enough time to type them myself, using high grade erasable paper, my spelling upgraded to flawless. In college I moved up to an electric typewriter, which I still have in its case, placed in a nook in My Space. I cannot remember the last time I used it. And then came Word Processing, which transformed not only how I typed and edited, but how I thought.
My typewriter served me as a tool. I composed what I wanted to express, except for the briefest of letters, on paper. Sometimes a canary-lined pad bound but tearable at the top, other times with loose-leaf paper removed from a binder. I'd also had index cards that i could sequence to create a more coherent composition. But most of my prose needing submission started on lined paper in my own marginal handwriting. Before even opening the typewriter case and plugging the machine into the outlet, I'd proofread the text. Then typing became a chore intended for presentation. Thinking always took place on paper first.
Not everyone did this, even back in the day. Journalists often carried portable typewriters to their assignments. They typed their reports on-site, transmitted them to their editors and proofreaders, who amended sentence structure, spelling, and grammar. Often the editor enhanced readability, a hint that maybe the best thinking and expression took a hit when typed. Then onto the typesetters.
Word Processing and computerized editing changed that. Now available for 30 years, I and undoubtedly a majority, now think and type, bypassing the pen altogether. Editing for presentation still takes as much effort as composition, but most output never has public readers as its intent. Is the thinking that goes into creation as discerning when ideas go directly to keyboard? Some studies and YouTube Videos suggest not. As a result, the sales of pocket notebooks and desktop journals have increased. Personal planners with 7-rings and removable pages still compete successfully with computerized personal productivity programs. There are elements that the computers have not yet matched. The electronics excel at reminding or carrying over individual tasks. It does not do as well in creating priorities or sorting goals.
While I do my best to go from mind to keyboard to create compositions, respond to the written work of others, and generate emails, some mental tasks still seem to perform better with a pen and paper. Every night I take out a marble composition book to jot down three of the day's accomplishments. My exercise attainments goes into a written log each week. Every day I write something that annoyed me into a spiral notebook, then turn back one month and six months to see how the untoward experiences of those days have largely resolved.
I've tried electronic planning. Todoist doesn't even come close to a writing pad. Weekly outline every Sunday, color coded by type of task. Every evening, that weekly outline gets reviewed with the next day's intended activities transcribed onto what is effectively a half-sheet of blank computer paper. My six month projects appear not on a screen but on a whiteboard in my line of sight to the left of my desk. Not only does it enable me to think, to discern, but my handwriting remains recognizable as mine.
I've never abandoned pen and paper. Perhaps I should use them more. On my last Amazon order, I included two pocket notebooks. The first went into my cross-chest carrier, along with a mini digital recorder. I can generate thoughts portably, in airplane or in coffee shop. Ideas and reflection still require thinking, pausing, and transcribing. Not very different than how the best of my teachers taught me how to create and record. Predictions of the computer making paper obsolete just did not materialize, and for good reason.
No comments:
Post a Comment