Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Long Overdue

This post is going to come in three parts. In case you want to skip any of them, here is the table of contents:
1. Description of England
2. A Reply to Chris Heinrich
3. A Personal note for Paul Astin

1.

Oxford is rather crazy right now. The first reason it is crazy is that I only have one or two classes a week. Why one or two? Because one of my classes is once a week and the other is once every two weeks. What these classes consist of is the tutor reading an essay that I have written during the week, critiquing it, and then giving me a reading list. I then toddle off to write an essay based on the new books I have read/am reading. This sounds perfect for me, and it really is, but it is still difficult to keep focused when I don't have the class every day or even every other day. The fact is, I haven't actually had a class yet, just the introductory meeting of my tutors. I have to turn in an essay in my first class! There are only eight (or four) classes in a term! As you may imagine, the pressure to get each essay exactly right is tremendous. Besides which, my tutors know the subjects like they've been studying them for thirty years. Oh, that's right, they have been. So, no matter how much I read the book, they are going to know it better than I am. An example: I came to one of them with only a very broad topic in mind. Between the two of us, we hammered it down to a certain period. Then, off the top of his head and with no warning, he mentioned seven books, some of which only certain sections were relevant to my essay. I was blown away. Both of them have books out on their favored subjects. It's intimidating, but also fairly exhilarating. It fulfills my sense of ambition.
Getting used to living here was interesting. Obviously, I had less of a transition than some people, so people often came to me for advice on how to act, speak, etc. On the other hand, I've never actually lived in a town in England before, so it was still somewhat of an adjustment. I'm always surprised when people treat me differently because I'm an American. I don't remember them doing that before.
Other than that, it is very cold and drizzly and there are lots and lots of gorgeous buildings that are very inspirational, so I'm loving nearly every minute of it.

2.

First, I apologize, Chris, if you're reading this, because you've heard a lot of it before from me. Others of you might be interested in what he has to say, so if you don't know, click here: http://lifesspice.blogspot.com/2007/10/argument-in-favor-of-facebook.html This is my friend Chris' blog, and he and I, when we're in the same country, often have conversations regarding things that most people would consider unspeakably boring. He's now studying in Germany and hopefully drinking nearly as much good German beer as I am good English beer.
Chris,
You point out quite distinctly the advantages of facebook, and yes, I have to admit that, in some ways, communicating on facebook is the same as communicating in other ways. It is distinctly beneficial for long range communication, especially when e-mail is too much of a hassle. It is great for keeping track of people in lots of different areas. In the end, yes, they are all simply ways of exchanging information. From there, however, our distinctions must differ. You mention that face-to-face communication is the most intrusive, with phone calls being next most and finally via the internet. I have to ask at this point, what do you mean by being intrusive? You say "telling someone they have no time to talk when they are looking into the other's eyes is highly impolite," and while this is certainly true, I don't think most people would mind talking to another person - I think it would be very unlikely that many people would simply say that. In some ways, it certainly is intrusive. Certainly, talking to someone takes up time, time that might be better spent, oh, I don't know, composing e-mails and facebook messages. The reason why it is intrusive is because it is more personal; it makes the people involved more vulnerable towards each other. With e-mail and facebook, you can craft the response that will make you sound cool, or make you sound the way you would like, or make you sound happy and upbeat all of the time. With talking, you can hardly keep that up. It requires honesty, if not in words than at least in body language or tone of voice. You mention that you would never ask someone who broke into tears why over facebook. That is because facebook fosters relationships that are an inch deep. People have contests to see how many friends they can get on facebook, but how many of these "friendships" involve emotional commitment? How many of your facebook friends would you be willing to call when you needed real help? I submit that if it is a small percentage, then there is something wrong. Facebook takes out all of the emotional context behind a message; this makes it a convenient mode of communication that produces friends of convenience.

3.

Paul, despite what I've said in #2, why haven't you friended me yet?

4 Comments:

At 9:22 PM , Blogger Paul said...

:D

Regarding #1: Awesome. Intense. I like the sound of England.

Regarding #2: Woot.

Regarding #3: I have a facebook account. This does not necessarily mean I treat it as anything other than radioactive poison meant to be avoided. However, if I once again start using it, I'll be sure to friend you.

 
At 12:26 AM , Blogger Chris said...

And I agree with you absolutely. Facebook is a medium which demands very little of its users when communication is so easy and thus deprives the messages of emotional content, but I would go further in detailing the sins of Facebook to include "friendship contests." By my estimate, I have about 200 friends on Facebook. About two thirds I have never shared any further interaction via the website with outside of requesting or confirming our friendship. And only about ten percent of my total friends I make a dedicated effort to regularly communicate with. The others might warrant a quick question or shared link or a check of their latest photo album. Everything else is just bragging rights to how popular I am or how many people I know.

But my language was clear enough. Perhaps a better word to have used than "intrusive" would have been "demanding." Face-to-face interaction demands a lot from us in our dedication to the conversation and time. Answers must be immediate and our attention focused much more sharply than when one is taking the time to write an extended e-mail or thoughtlessly post on a Wall, "hey!!!1! i was just thinking of you! how's it goin?" Furthermore, face-to-face interaction cuts down on the possibility of multi-tasking. When you can't physically see someone, they can, and often will, be engaged in a distracting activity at the same time, say driving while on a cell phone or sending another instant messenger message between preparing ingredients for ratatouille. Clearly people engaged in these extraneous activities are not attentive to the conversation in the same way one would be when the two are in the same room.

Nice to see you post on something of substance again.

 
At 12:28 AM , Blogger Chris said...

Good grief. I missed putting a
"n't" after was at the beginning of the second paragraph, and possibly caused confusion. Egg all over my face.

 
At 7:09 AM , Blogger Maren said...

I'm glad you're having fun, Emmett! Your reaction to your tutors sounds similar to my reaction to my professors this semester. It's amazing to be around people that intelligent. :)

Facebook? I shall have to hunt you down...

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home