Communication is an integral part of society. Technologies of communication, be they as basic as language or as complex as E.M. Forster’s elaborate machine, can often be indicators of the nature of social interactions at any given time. What Forster’s short story, “The Machine Stops”, hints at though, is that these social interactions risk being sterilized and homogenized by advancing technologies of communication.
Reading the two incredibly disparate readings for this week, I was struck by the thought that the ever-evolving nature of communication technologies is often but a natural manifestation of the similarly ever-evolving structures of society. This became especially evident to me when reading James Gleick’s chapter on “Drums That Talk”. In it, he mentions the gradual evolution of the African drum language over time. He contrasts this with the example of Morse code, a language developed with calculated intention. Both of these languages served as a useful means but each was used to different ends. Gleick ends this chapter with what I can only read as an ominous conclusion:
To me, he seemed to be echoing the messages that Forrester’s story left me with. Where the talking African drums had been culturally rich and uniquely suited to the place where they came from, the mobile phone had interrupted, modernized, sterilized, and homogenized.
Which brings me to the question at hand of what communication & technology mean to me. I think the two are inextricable in so far as any communication is reliant on a medium or technology of expression. To me, communications technologies present the very risk that Forrester highlights. That of homogenization, a risk only exacerbated by the indispensable and pervasive nature of such technologies.
No Tech Journal
Week 2 Homework
My six hours without tech was a six hours that I looked forward to a good deal in the few days leading up to Friday. Coming back to campus for the semester was in and of itself an aggressive onslaught of stimulus and information. Being back at college also brought with it the subtle pressure to be more on Facebook, more on Snapchat, more on email, and more online. Spending six hours with all of that turned off was something I needed and having the excuse to do it as homework made it seem all too good to be true.
Going long periods of time without tech isn’t a foreign concept to me anymore; six months ago it would have been much more so. This, unfortunately, means that my journal entries reveal very little of note and bear no resemblance to the accounts of epiphany that other class members recounted on Saturday. What I do find interesting in rereading my journal entries is how closely I link my sense of purpose and productivity to my machines. Turkle addresses this quite a bit in her writing, saying that time without the obtrusion of these machines is crucial time spent in silence.
It makes me wonder if I should spend more time in silence. In fact, silence was one of the things I struggled with most during my no-tech time. Turkle speaks of technological connectivity breeding a discomfort or unease with silence. I felt this discomfort very acutely when I was in my car driving to campus. I was used to filling that uncomfortable silence with the radio at low volume or a podcast that I may or may not listen to. I wasn’t comfortable, Turkle might say, with the idea of being present with no one else but myself.
Another thing that particularly struck me while reading Turkle was her explanation of the predictability of technology. This reminded me of a number of times this summer when I tried to similarly stay off my phone or at the very least stay off of social media. I found myself, in the bustling city of London, having some of the most rewarding, exciting, and unexpected of conversations with strangers in coffee shops. This only ever happened when I was tech-less; what I find further intriguing is how in all the instances when this happened, I was carrying a book. While a book is comparable to a phone in that they are both diversions, a book seemed to signal an invitation to conversation whereas a phone definitely did not. What was ironic about these conversations that I did have, though, is that almost every time these exciting conversations happened, I found myself leaving them and then immediately reaching for my phone to tell someone about them. As if doing so actualized the conversations.
What is a conversation with a stranger for if your friends don’t know it happened?
Week 3 Homework
As I set out to decide what three emojis I wanted to draw I took my time considering who I wanted my audience to be. My dilemma was that anyone who I could message from my specific hometown in Lebanon was either over the age of 70 or would be unresponsive if not given a 3-week forewarning. I also realized that I know very few Lebanese people outside of my family or my family’s friends and that the instructions I would need to give to these adults would need so much explaining that the instructions themselves would be lost in translation. I then considered making my emojis about the Levant. I have a good number of Levantine friends who would be more than eager to give me their thoughts and feedback. The issue with that was it felt like a cop-out. I didn’t want to reduce the assignment to making Pan-Arab emojis that anyone could relate to.
In the end I decided to go for Lebanese emojis. I figured in the worst case I could just message my Levantine friends and cross my fingers that they knew enough about Lebanon to understand the implications of my emojis. Then the tricky part of coming up with emojis came. A lot of my experience of Lebanese culture has been centered around family, food, and community. I found myself rattling off dozens of Lebanese food emoji ideas and justifying them by claiming that for the Lebanese, food means more than just sustenance. But it wouldn’t have been very original of me to have my three emojis be a manakish emoji, a hummus emoji, and a kibbeh emoji.
So I started to consider larger forms of community and community organization in Lebanon. Which is when I arrived at my sectarian emoji. I figured why not immortalize the single most defining aspect of Lebanon (the coexistence of religions) in an emoji. And then the second most defining aspect of Lebanon, its corruption, its chaos, its unorganized nature. Epitomized by the trash crisis that everyone in the world knows about. So I drew my third emoji as a trash bag and to make it symbolic of the trash crisis and the chaos it involved, I put the logo of the trash collection company whose corruption was what led to the rivers of filth in Beirut.
After drawing my emojis and taking a picture of them, I decided that my safest bet was to message them to my uncles. Both definitely Lebanese, definitely tech-able, and if I was lucky they might respond in good time. I sent them a brief explanation as follows:
They both agreed almost immediately, at which point I sent them the following picture of my emojis and waited three days for a response:
What I got from both of them was the same exact response. Maybe they sat together when looking at them or maybe it’s just because they’re brothers. They both identified every emoji, though the manakish emoji was a little difficult because it wasn’t in color and was relatively non-descript, but they couldn’t understand a bigger meaning behind the emojis, they just saw them as pictorial representations of quintessentially Lebanese things. Their mutual feedback? They told me to add color.
So I did and this was my second draft:
My main change was in trying to make the manakish more identifiable as not-a-taco. The next challenge I had was finding two people to respond very quickly to this second draft because at this point I was really running out of time. So I messaged two of my friends from NYUAD who are from the Levant. I asked them what they understood and whether or not there was something meaningful about these emojis.
My first friend had not too much to say. She identified the trash bag and upon pressing her for potential implications she connected it to the trash crisis. The sectarian emoji was incredibly obvious to her. But the manakish had her stumped, probably because a folded manakish is something very unique to Lebanon. Her conception of manakish did not match my emoji but that was because she wasn’t Lebanese.
My second friend similarly recognized all but the manakish. She even made the larger connections with the logo being the cause of the trash crisis and symbolic of the ubiquitous chaos that Lebanon is. She also took the sectarian emoji further by making it an emoji about government. In Lebanon our government is divided by religion (for example our president must be Maronite Christian, our prime minister a Sunni, and our speaker of parliament a Shiite).
In the end I think the most important takeaway from all my feedback in this assignment was that only the Lebanese know how to make manakish.
Week 4 Homework
The Phoenician civilization took root in what is modern day Lebanon and the areas that surround it. One of the Phoenicians’ biggest contributions to mankind was their alphabet. The Phoenician alphabet is the oldest verified alphabet in the world. Before it came the cuneiform alphabet that was developed by the Mesopotamians who also lived in modern day Lebanon. From it evolved the Greek alphabet which was the direct precursor to today’s Latin alphabet. Because of this direct lineage of language evolution, the Phoenician alphabet is undeniably instrumental to the world we live in today. It spread widely and quickly because of the many trade routes that the Phoenicians used. The widespread use of the language made it an effective form of communication technology because it was widely understood by a good number of people.
https://www.omniglot.com/writing/phoenician.htm
Semaphore Competition
We started off our brainstorming with two different ideas. Our first idea was to create a pictoral alphabet and set of numbers to encode. We would then make large placards or signs with each of these encoded letters and numbers and use those to send the message letter by letter across the space. Our second idea was to do something very similar, but instead of using placards with symbols on them, we would use colors to encode the letters and numbers. We thought that this might be a good idea because recognizing colors was much easier and quicker to do over long distances than recognizing more intricate symbols or shapes.
Keeping in mind that a part of the criteria was creativity and design, we decided to go for our second idea as it was the more visually exciting and different idea of the two.
The first challenge we faced, was finding 36 different colors for the 26 letters (a-z) and the 10 numbers (0-9). We went to the costume shop to speak to Judi about this because we knew that we wanted to use fabrics as the means to send our message. With the help of Judi we were able to find 36 different colors of fabric that allowed us to encode each number/letter individually. The first issue we encountered, though, was that in order to be able to have 36 distinct enough fabrics, we needed to include patterned fabrics. So we decided that of the 36, 10 would be patterns (the numbers) and the remaining 26 would be solid colors for letters.
For each of the 36 fabrics we cut out a large flag (around the size of an A4 sheet), a number of thin strips, and two samples. The flag was to be used by the person transmitting the message, and the thin strips were for the person receiving the message so that they could visually reconstruct the message in front of them. The two samples were used to create a decoding board for both the transmitter and the receiver. These decoding boards had a sample of each color labeled with the letter or number it encoded. We decided that it was important that this decoding board be easy to read because it helped us work quickly in transmitting the message. Our system worked on a pretty simple mechanism. The transmitter would raise the flag corresponding to each letter of the message. The receiver, on recognizing the color of the flag would hang the corresponding strip on a rope, continuing this process until a word was completed. The completion of a word was denoted by a hand signal. This process was repeated until the sentence was completed at which point the transmitter would signal the end of the message with a different hand signal.
In deciding the number of thin strips to cut of each color, we did some research on the frequency of different letters in the English language. We found that letters were ranked in frequency in the following order (from most frequent to least frequent):
We decided that it would be wise to make at least 5 strips of the top 5 letters, and that for less common letters we could reduce the number of strips. This research was also useful in deciding what colors should be allocated to what letters. We made sure that the most frequently used letters, such as the vowels, were encoded with bright and easy to notice colors. Another issue we faced was that some of the 26 solid colors were very similar to each other, or at the very least they would seem very similar from such a far distance. To solve this problem, we devised a system of strategically allocating the letters to colors so that the hard to distinguish colors would encode the most infrequently used English letters, and that letters that had similar colors (for example, c and m) weren’t interchangeable in English words.
Additionally, we played with the texture of the fabrics. Some fabrics were stretchable and in transmitting those letters we would signal that the fabric was stretchy to make it clear that it was different from another similar fabric. Some fabrics (like velvet or suede) had a fuzzy texture which we communicated across the distance by stroking the fabric to indicate the fuzziness.
It was also very important to us that our system incorporated a method of checking the message once it had been transmitted. To achieve this, we decided to hang a line between two columns and the receiver would hang the message along the line as they received it. This served three important functions. It allowed the receiver to keep visual record of the message throughout the full time period of transmission and read it in its entirety at the end. It also served the transmitter because it allowed them to make sure that as each letter was being transmitted, it was being correctly received. Finally, the transmitter was also afforded the luxury of making sure that at the very end of the transmission process, the message had been correctly received in its entirety.
After building and deciding on a system, we thought it prudent to test our system out to check for any fallibilities. What we discovered in the testing of our system was that the receiver was frequently able to guess the word before it had been completely transmitted, if they decoded as they went. This helped because it saved time but it also brought to light a new issue. If the receiver, for example, received the letters “a-n-i-m-a” they might be led to believe the word being transmitted is “animal” when in fact the transmitter might have been trying to send the word “animation”. This showed us the danger of autocompleting without having a system of error-correction. This is when we decided to have a mechanism by which we could backtrack and solve any miscommunications. We brought in a Darth Vader mask which would be held up by the transmitter if any error had been noticed. The receiver would then proceed to backtrack step by step until the error had been fixed at which point the normal process would continue.
What most excited me about our semaphore was the end output. The string of fabric was aesthetically satisfying and seemingly innocuous to a bystander. Without a decoding board the sequence of strips meant nothing but it still looked “pretty”. It also worked in that the message could remain behind for however long we left it there. The physical trace of it meant that while it had originally been intended to be communicated from one individual to another, it carried the potential to be communicated to so many more people.
Radio Broadcast
Interrupted by 02-Breaking News
Angel 1: We interrupt this morning broadcast to bring to you the breaking news of Eve approaching the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. This is Angel 1 speaking and with me in the studio is Angel 2.
Angel 2: Angel 1, isn’t it exciting that we are witnessing this extraordinary event?
Angel 1: Yes indeed! Do you think Eve will eat the apple, Angel 2?
Angel 2: Wait, first: a bit of background for listeners who just tuned in to Angel Radio for the first time. The tree we are talking about is forbidden to Adam and Eve because it gives them the ability to conjure the negative and destructive concepts of shame and evil.
Angel 1: We’ve been watching Eve for years now, is this going to be the moment that changes her life?
Angel 2: While we’re waiting for our special correspondent on the ground, Angel 3, let me tell you a joke.
Angel 1: Let’s hear it.
Angel 2: So a little known fact about the Garden of Eden is that there is a computer there.
Angel 1: Really?
Angel 2: Yeah, it’s an Apple, but it’s a pretty bad computer. It only takes one byte for everything to crash.
03-Crickets Sound
Angel 2: Oh, it sounds like we’ve got some crickets tuned in today!
Angel 1: Uh, ok, moving on before people tune out… it seems like our correspondent Angel 3 is ready to talk to us. Angel 3, what’s happening in the Garden of Eden?
Angel 3: Thank you and God bless you Angel 1. As we speak, Eve is gradually moving away from the goal. Oh wait, look, here comes the serpent, intercepting Eve as she tries to walk away from the tree. They seem to be having a conversation, it’s getting more and more intense over here, Angel 1!!! The serpent looks like he’s about to score, Eve looks like she’s being convinced, does this mean she’s going to eat the apple!!!??!?!?! This looks like it’s going to be a waiting game.
Angel 2: Thank you and God bless you Angel 3, we’ll come back to you in a minute, but before we do, a word from our heavenly sponsors.
04-Sponsor SFX
Sponsor: Are you having problems with your wings? Are you shedding out of season? Do your feathers itch? Be concerned no more, fellow angels, we here at Jim’s House of Wing Lubricants bring you the best solution. Our all-new Divine Wing Lubricant Genesis 5000. Better than the iPhone 10. If you don’t believe me, hear from one of our real-life customers!
Customer: Flying used to be so hard before I discovered Jim’s House of Wing Lubricants. Now, it feels heavenly!
Sponsor: Dial in today at 1-800-24-324! First 20 callers get a blessed bottle absolutely free! Just pay separate shipping and handling. Thank you and God bless you all
05-Breaking News
Angel 1: And we’re back in the studio. It’s me Angel 1, I’m joined here today by the celestial Angel 2. Just to get you up to speed, we’ve been waiting for Eve to make her next move.
Angel 2: Let’s go back to the ground, Angel 3?
Angel 3: Yes, I’m still here Angel 2! Thank you and God bless you. It seems like Eve is going to do it! Oh my God she’s reaching for the apple!!! This is it!!!! This is the moment!!! Dear Lord -
Angel 2: Angel 3? Are you still there?
Angel 1: Angel 3? Is everything ok?
Angel 3: She took a bite. SHE TOOK A BITE.
Angel 2: SHE TOOK A BITE!!
Angel 1: OH LORD, where’s Adam, though?
Angel 2: Angel 3, any news on the whereabouts of Adam?
Angel 3: Yes, I see him approaching the tree too now! WHAT IS HAPPENING!!! Oh wait, he’s stopped next to Eve, it looks like they’re going to share the apple. (2 second silence). Adam just ate the apple too.
Angel 1: What now? Any more updates?
Angel 3: I don’t see them anywhere! I think they’ve disappeared into thin air. Let me look around, maybe they’re behind the tree. They’re not here, oh, but wait, the serpent is still here, maybe he knows what’s going on.
Angel 2: Yeah, let’s try and get an interview from him.
WHISPERING
Angel 1: But what about the media release form?
Angel 2: He can sign it later!
Angel 3: Ok, I’m approaching the serpent, the apples look really tasty by the way.
Angel 2: Angel 3, don’t eat the apple. I repeat, don’t eat the apple.
Angel 3: Ok, so I am standing next to the serpent. Mr. Serpent can you explain what happened?
Serpent: My name is Satan.
Angel 3: Oh, sorry Mr. Satan. God bless you. Can you please tell our listeners on Angel Radio, what just happened?
Serpent: I’ve been trying to get Eve to eat this apple for years.
Angel 3: Why’s that, Mr. Satan?
Serpent: Because Apples make you think differently.
Angel 3: Uh, okay. Are you worried about the backlash, Mr. Satan?
Serpent: No, invoking God’s wrath is none of my concern.
Angel 3: Uhhhh, anddd back to the studio!
Angel 2: Oh, ok, back to the studio I guess.
Angel 1: We’ve just received some news from correspondent, Angel 3. He says that the Serpent has just been cursed, and Adam and Eve have been banished from the Garden of Eden.
Angel 2: What a shocking turn of events!
Angel 1: Indeed!
Angel 2: This was Angel Radio, bringing you breaking news. We now return to our regular broadcast.
Angel 1: Thank you for tuning in, God bless you all.
06-Locked Out of Heaven begins
Stack Exchange
My experience with Stack Exchange is one that I feel weirdly uncomfortable about (uncomfortable with?). When I first opened the link to all of the Stack Exchange sites, I looked at the many little squares on my screen with admiration for the immense variety of sites on offer. There was something for everyone. Or so I thought.
I closed the site, deciding that this assignment would be easy and that I could come back to it later and pick from all the options in the world. I came back to it on Sunday morning and as I started reading through the little squares more carefully I realized that I was, to put it informally, screwed*.
I read through the most popular sites realizing, with a sinking feeling in my stomach, that “Ask Different” wasn’t a site for people that asked “different” questions, but rather a site for Apple users; that “Ubuntu” wasn’t a site about African theories of human ethics, but rather an eponymous site about an operating system; that when it came down to it, I didn’t really know how to answer any of these questions. As I started to click through the more ~lifestyle~ sites like “Seasoned Advice” (the cooking site), “Pets”, “Literature”, and “Arts and Crafts”, I began to get nervous. Even though I cook, have 5 pets, read a lot, and do some arts and crafts (not really but kinda) I didn’t know how to answer a single question on any of the sites. I felt absolutely useless.
I started to get a little more adventurous with my clicking, because I knew that I had to find at least one question on one site to successfully complete this assignment. I decided to click on the “Interpersonal Skills” site because I figured that I had pretty okay interpersonal skills and that perhaps in this subjective field I had some useful advice to give. As I read through the questions, though, I decided that I couldn’t bear to take the responsibility of ruining someone else’s relationships with my potentially faulty advice.
I decided that I couldn’t risk ruining Dave’s cross-Canada road-trip with my bad advice about radio volume requests.
And that if I gave Tim the strategies I would use to confront a cheating friend, he might never talk to that friend again.
Growing increasingly frustrated, I switched tracks completely and started clicking through the Culture/Arts sites because maybe I’m cultured enough to have something to say there. I saw that one of the biggest sites was the “English Language & Usage” site and I knew I had found my match. I know how to speak English and my grammar is pretty solid most of the time (this blog post notwithstanding). I scrolled through the questions clicking through the ‘easiest’ ones I could find and trying to get a feel about the conventions of asking and answering on this site. I learned that I couldn’t just answer a question without doing my research and that if I could justify what I was saying with an “n-gram” I would fit right in.
I tried in vain to find at least one question that I felt credentialed enough to answer. It took me an hour. I finally summoned up the courage to answer one question, I read my answer five times before posting it, checking myself for grammar mistakes and appropriate diction. I don’t think I’ll ever answer another question on that site, only because it has made me realize that in the grand scheme of things I know almost nothing about the English language (and cooking and pets and literature and arts and crafts). I started writing this blog post and with every sentence I wrote I worried about the placement of my comma and the tense I was using and whether my idioms were used frequently enough to even appear on an “n-gram”.
These sites, I learned, were made for clever people who had deep knowledge of their interests. They weren’t sites where the questions asked had Google-able answers.
*
