Glog 2 - Birkerts' Autobiographical Argument?
In this chapter of Birkerts’ Gutenberg Elegies, he describes his history with reading and writing and how his experiences at a younger age formed the writer/reader that he is today. He grew up with a mother who loved to read and had two grandfathers, both on his father’s side, who were literary. Birkerts exclaims that his ability and interest in writing grew outward from his love of reading. His description of reading shows how much it influenced him since reading for him stopped the world around him.
Compared to the first chapter, this chapter came across as if I was reading a novel. This unexpected approach came as a nice surprise and was much more compelling than his other style that was first used. However, his first chapter seemed to have a clear argument and point to the chapter as a whole, and this chapter lacked that. Without having finished the entire chapter, I am left wondering whether Birkerts will bring this chapter to a close with a clear point for this autobiographical chapter.
But without the point clear to me, I come to the conclusion that he is setting up this chapter as support for his book’s overall point regarding technology and its negative effects on reading and writing. This seems plausible since his entire autobiological story centers on reading and writing and the ‘magic’ it had on his life. Every additional description he gives seems to further explore his physical relationship with books and how it positively propelled his life. When he finds an old bookstore that others wouldn’t give a second glance to he describes it as if he had found gold. These types of recounts seem to perfectly support his overall argument.
Assuming that he is using this chapter as supporting evidence for his main argument, I would like to counter it with an idea that others can have the same type of experiences with learning and possibly reading/writhing without the need to have a physical relationship with books, but instead a relationship with technology.
Growing up I would say that I had somewhat the same experiences as Birkerts had with books, but I had mine with computers. My father was the one who had great interest for them and my mom thought it was a waste of time; my grandfather on my Dad’s side even had a technological background as a computer teacher. So like Birkerts, my interest could have sprung from my family’s interest. I remember sitting on the computer and started out playing video games like most early computer enthusiasts, which correlates with Birkerts’ description of his early reading experiences. This early fascination grew into obsession. Now I am in college majoring in Computer Science. Technology played a huge role in my passion for learning and it even helped me learn when I was able to search the Internet for explanations, tutorials, and especially e-books that covered everything I wanted to teach myself.
I understand Birkerts point of view, but I feel that it is flawed. He is purely influenced by his history with reading and the physical relationship he had with books. I had my physical relationship with computers, but I still understand the importance of physical books, and I’m not trying to prove how computers should replace them. Just because he grew up loving to read books doesn’t mean someone couldn’t grow just as passionately from reading news articles on the web, e-books, or user created blogs.
Compared to the first chapter, this chapter came across as if I was reading a novel. This unexpected approach came as a nice surprise and was much more compelling than his other style that was first used. However, his first chapter seemed to have a clear argument and point to the chapter as a whole, and this chapter lacked that. Without having finished the entire chapter, I am left wondering whether Birkerts will bring this chapter to a close with a clear point for this autobiographical chapter.
But without the point clear to me, I come to the conclusion that he is setting up this chapter as support for his book’s overall point regarding technology and its negative effects on reading and writing. This seems plausible since his entire autobiological story centers on reading and writing and the ‘magic’ it had on his life. Every additional description he gives seems to further explore his physical relationship with books and how it positively propelled his life. When he finds an old bookstore that others wouldn’t give a second glance to he describes it as if he had found gold. These types of recounts seem to perfectly support his overall argument.
Assuming that he is using this chapter as supporting evidence for his main argument, I would like to counter it with an idea that others can have the same type of experiences with learning and possibly reading/writhing without the need to have a physical relationship with books, but instead a relationship with technology.
Growing up I would say that I had somewhat the same experiences as Birkerts had with books, but I had mine with computers. My father was the one who had great interest for them and my mom thought it was a waste of time; my grandfather on my Dad’s side even had a technological background as a computer teacher. So like Birkerts, my interest could have sprung from my family’s interest. I remember sitting on the computer and started out playing video games like most early computer enthusiasts, which correlates with Birkerts’ description of his early reading experiences. This early fascination grew into obsession. Now I am in college majoring in Computer Science. Technology played a huge role in my passion for learning and it even helped me learn when I was able to search the Internet for explanations, tutorials, and especially e-books that covered everything I wanted to teach myself.
I understand Birkerts point of view, but I feel that it is flawed. He is purely influenced by his history with reading and the physical relationship he had with books. I had my physical relationship with computers, but I still understand the importance of physical books, and I’m not trying to prove how computers should replace them. Just because he grew up loving to read books doesn’t mean someone couldn’t grow just as passionately from reading news articles on the web, e-books, or user created blogs.