I've been thinking a lot lately about why I am who I am and much of that comes from growing up as a closeted child. Of course I didn't realize it at the time, but I think on a subconscious level I constantly tried to be who everyone else wanted me to be so that I wouldn't have to face my true self and in face BE true to myself. Now that I'm much further down the path I am beginning to care less and less about the opinions of others. I remember my uncle complaining about the fact that I played Viola and that I'd probably grow to be a "sissy." Another person in my early years who shall remain nameless gave me crap about tucking my long, thick, curly hair behind my ears because it made me look like a girl. Yet another person at church gave me crap about wearing my tube socks up over my calves and looking like a sissy. Maybe I should have fought back all those years, but I didn't feel the self-worth or self-confidence to do that. In hind sight I just want to kick them all in the nuts and tell them to shut the fuck up. You're bullies and you're mean - go fuck yourselves!
Now to relate this tale to libraries (I know it's a huge switch, but hang with me here) . . . As a lot librarians frequently talk about how people don't understand us or they stereotype us as bun and knee-high wearing shushers. We have endless discussions about how to change those attitudes and whether we should change the names of our associations to make them less "libraryish." We talk about how what we do is so much more than just library work and put ourselves out there as "Information Professionals." But wait, some say that invoking the "I" word puts is in direct competition with IT departments and the work that they do . . .
Excuse me, but what the hell is WRONG with being a librarian? I may be stereotyped as such (a bit harder as a man who does NOT do drag), but that does not diminish what I do or who I am. Ok, so people didn't like the way I behaved as a child because they (rightfully) pegged me as who I really am. In truth I AM a librarian! I LOVE doing library things! I LOVE shelving books and cataloging materials and searching databases and helping people connect to information and cite things properly and teach people how to help themselves! Most people never really think about librarians until they either have a SERIOUS need for help or have a REALLY bad interaction with a librarian. Both situations prompt deep feelings of either relief or hatred and that, to me, is the crux of the problem. Librarians exist at the extremes and rarely find splendor in the middle.
People either LOVE us because we were able to help them in a pinch or HATE us because we acted poorly and thus reinforced a stereotype of someone castigating them for _______ (insert bad behavior). As an instructor of future librarians I get to read a great deal about how these students evaluate librarian interactions. One of their assignments is to play a patron with a live librarian and a virtual librarian and compare the two interactions. Part of this assignment is for them to see how different methods of interaction can affect the quality of the reference experience. The other part is to really show them how bad some librarians are. Certainly there are good and bad ____________s (insert profession), but in a profession that is already highly stereotyped and not fully understood there is an even greater problem when things go wrong.
There really is NO excuse for poor librarianship and it truly is a detriment to the profession. A single bad experience can turn someone completely off of the library and they will never return. I know, personally, that as an undergraduate I avoided the library constantly. I'm not totally sure why I felt that way, but I'm sure part of it was that the card catalog (the one with REAL pieces of paper) was confusing as hell and I was pretty much too afraid of asking for help. I was still recovering identity at that point and didn't want to stick out any more than I already did so I certainly wasn't going to give any librarian the opportunity to judge me as stupid (there's a whole other rant/blog post in this statement).
As librarians and indeed as human beings we really need to treat each other better and offer the best help that we can. Sometimes that means admitting that you don't know what you're talking about and referring someone to a different person for better assistance. So, I suppose the long and the short of this rant is that just like I had to learn to be who I am and embrace that, so do librarians. We need to embrace what we do and who we are and put THAT image forward rather than trying to conform to other standards. Let's set our OWN standards. I don't have to be "faculty" at the university to make a valued contribution and rather trying to be a "faculty" member, I'd rather be a librarian who is respected by his peers for what he can do to help them. I'm NOT like them, I'm a librarian and I think trying to be like someone else is selling both myself and my profession short.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Friday, April 8, 2011
Untelligence
I'm beginning to think that intellect and intelligent people no longer have ANY place in our society. I also think that Capitalism has been displaced by Consumerism. It seems that we consume everything, especially idiocy. Does it really matter what Sarah Palin or Harry Reid have to say? They're both politicians and neither behaves in a particular "smart" way. Everyone in politics blames in on everyone else. Personal ethics seem dead and Snooki is now far more important than Rosa Parks. Honestly, it seems that most Americans are more concerned about what happened on Dancing with the Stars than recalling any bit of American history and why they have the freedom to be completely stupid.
Politics is now driven by the media and people suck heartily from that teat. If you doubt the veracity of my claims, look at the political headlines over the past 4 months. How many states had completely stupid bills before their legislatures? How many of them actually passed? In South Dakota a woman will now have to wait three days and receive counseling from an unlicensed (mostly religious based) counselor before she can have an abortion. Where the hell is the civil liberty in that? Does someone have to wait any period of time and receive counseling to own a gun? Why no, in fact, some idiot in Pierre (that's pronounced "Pier" here) introduced a bill that would require citizens of the state to carry firearms. What the hell is wrong with this picture? Where do these people come from?
I can't answer the last answer honestly, but P.T. Barnum would be having a field day if he were alive! These people are grandstanding and trying to make an issue out of nothing so that they will look like they are doing something that their constituents think they should be doing because they saw it on Fox News the previous night that the fags were trying to take over and make everyone decorate their houses to NOT look like country kitsch so that . . . . . That is how I see the script for America these days and heads to a single finality in the media world; jumping the shark and cancellation. The reason America could be brought down is because stupid people continue to find ways to circumvent the Constitution and "re-interpret" in their own light. Or, by stating that the Constitution doesn't really say anything about beating tranny hookers to death, so it must be ok. Besides, the bible condones that, right?
The increase in stupidity in this country will be reflected in court composition over the coming decades as personal politics and idiocy creep into the legal system. The system is supposedly there to protect people, but in the end it is only as safe as the people who maintain it. If you elect or appoint judges who have agendas or hold strong political leanings, then you begin descending a mighty slippery slope which will destroy civil liberty. It can happen in Wisconsin and it can happen in D.C. I think it has already begun in both places. The law should NOT be political in it's interpretation. However, the popular media certainly pushes things in that direction. At this point, we truly are at the mercy of spin doctors who create issues from nothing and make them national crises. But hey, that really pumps up the ratings, right? Maybe we should ask Katie Couric how she feels about that.
I'm begging to truly despise the media, or at least the mainstream media because they are about profit and numbers. Journalism is, in theory, based on finding the facts, but where ARE the facts in the news? Lately, most of it seems to be about reporting what happened not analysis of what happened. Unless there is mayhem and disorder involved or the story is one that pulls on the heart strings, then it's not newsworthy and you won't hear about it. This just adds to the cult of stupidity among Americans. We come to accept that fact is irrelevant but what happened is fascinating. We don't care why it happened, but we do care how it happened. Or, at the very least, what the outcome was. Does anyone remember Haiti right now?
Life is so short and we waste so much of it on useless tripe . . . I'm going to the gym!
Politics is now driven by the media and people suck heartily from that teat. If you doubt the veracity of my claims, look at the political headlines over the past 4 months. How many states had completely stupid bills before their legislatures? How many of them actually passed? In South Dakota a woman will now have to wait three days and receive counseling from an unlicensed (mostly religious based) counselor before she can have an abortion. Where the hell is the civil liberty in that? Does someone have to wait any period of time and receive counseling to own a gun? Why no, in fact, some idiot in Pierre (that's pronounced "Pier" here) introduced a bill that would require citizens of the state to carry firearms. What the hell is wrong with this picture? Where do these people come from?
I can't answer the last answer honestly, but P.T. Barnum would be having a field day if he were alive! These people are grandstanding and trying to make an issue out of nothing so that they will look like they are doing something that their constituents think they should be doing because they saw it on Fox News the previous night that the fags were trying to take over and make everyone decorate their houses to NOT look like country kitsch so that . . . . . That is how I see the script for America these days and heads to a single finality in the media world; jumping the shark and cancellation. The reason America could be brought down is because stupid people continue to find ways to circumvent the Constitution and "re-interpret" in their own light. Or, by stating that the Constitution doesn't really say anything about beating tranny hookers to death, so it must be ok. Besides, the bible condones that, right?
The increase in stupidity in this country will be reflected in court composition over the coming decades as personal politics and idiocy creep into the legal system. The system is supposedly there to protect people, but in the end it is only as safe as the people who maintain it. If you elect or appoint judges who have agendas or hold strong political leanings, then you begin descending a mighty slippery slope which will destroy civil liberty. It can happen in Wisconsin and it can happen in D.C. I think it has already begun in both places. The law should NOT be political in it's interpretation. However, the popular media certainly pushes things in that direction. At this point, we truly are at the mercy of spin doctors who create issues from nothing and make them national crises. But hey, that really pumps up the ratings, right? Maybe we should ask Katie Couric how she feels about that.
I'm begging to truly despise the media, or at least the mainstream media because they are about profit and numbers. Journalism is, in theory, based on finding the facts, but where ARE the facts in the news? Lately, most of it seems to be about reporting what happened not analysis of what happened. Unless there is mayhem and disorder involved or the story is one that pulls on the heart strings, then it's not newsworthy and you won't hear about it. This just adds to the cult of stupidity among Americans. We come to accept that fact is irrelevant but what happened is fascinating. We don't care why it happened, but we do care how it happened. Or, at the very least, what the outcome was. Does anyone remember Haiti right now?
Life is so short and we waste so much of it on useless tripe . . . I'm going to the gym!
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Judgments
As I get older I find myself following the path of so many before, becoming more opinionated. I think it's a natural transition and in truth it just feels comfortable. However, I am also aware that with strong opinion comes and equally strong backlash of judgments. Many folks who follow me on FB and other venues will notice my increasingly opinionated posts about religion and christianity in particular. Yes, I was raised to believe a certain set of mystical facts but I now see the fallacy in those assumptions. They simply don't work for me anymore. The explanations are just not satisfying. It is difficult to let such deeply ingrained beliefs go and I do believe that there is something even deeper within the enculturation process which almost requires us to hold a spiritual belief of some stripe.
In no way is this intended in an arrogant tone, but intellectually I feel that I've grown beyond the need for religion. We all exist in various stages of development and these are not necessarily correlated within chronology. While I may personally find a strong tie to a particular religion something of an intellectual weakness, the biggest issue I have with religious adherents is that they frequently fail to question their beliefs. Perhaps it is all of the scientific training kicking in, but more than one sage human has noted that unexamined life is really not life. We are a naturally curious species and if we fail to question some of the most basic premises of our existence then we are just existing and not living.
I have many christian friends, spiritual friends, and atheist friends but the ones who I really enjoy are the ones who question. People who don't constantly ask "why" bore me to tears. I love having discussions, especially passionate ones, about religion and life. I want to understand how others construct their reality and conceive of the world in which we live. And, while it drives me crazy to hear people say that they owe this or that to god, I accept that that is their understanding of things. There have been any number of folks who have tried to convince me to believe one thing or another over my life, and sometimes I've drunk the KoolAid. However, I have found that the truest form of character is self-determination.
As a human being, I need to discover myself and my place in this world, and in that discovery I need to be true to my beliefs. I am letting go of that anger I feel towards christianity. I try to temper my knowledge of the death and destruction wrought by christians with my experience of compassion and understanding by the same group. Of course this spectrum of good and evil is not unique to this single type of religious belief, but since it is the one with which I have the most experience it is where I lay the greatest criticism. I am coming to a fuller understanding of secular humanism and the belief that we need to help each other as people without imposing our beliefs on each other. I help people because I care, not because I feel compelled to be a better [insert spiritual affiliation].
The problem with my beliefs and my opinions is that I fear others will judge me harshly and publicly. In this age of public sharing through social media, we can easily come to understand more about our friends and family than we might otherwise know. The somewhat impersonal nature of the medium coupled with its low cost and easy access can easily make anyone their own Socrates. We are increasingly open with our feelings and opinions because most folks out there will never bother to read what we write, yet we feel the voyeuristic need to put ourselves out there if for no other reason than to find like-minded folks. However, this connectivity can have large impacts in our lives and that really is the meat of my thoughts right now.
Future employers, professional colleagues, and other people with sway over our lives can view what we share and make judgments about our "worthiness." My knee-jerk reaction is to censor what I write or what images I post, and that is the same censorship I rail against as an academic. My opinions are simply that, mine and they sometimes have little bearing on how I conduct myself professionally or privately. I like to feel that I can put myself above my opinions to take the high road of life. This is not to say that I don't really believe what I believe, but that I can accept the fact that we have to work collectively. We are a social species and when conflict arises we need to move to an intellectual arena rather than an emotional arena to move past blockages.
While emotion does inform us and drive us, we need to focus on intellect to come to logical compromise so that we can proceed. When we stop and stoop to judgment of others, we have begun to slip down the slope. This focus on emotion drives more poor decisions, death, and destruction than any natural disaster. In truth, what we do in our private lives or feel in our hearts and minds should have little bearing on our abilities to perform our jobs or work collectively. Does it really matter if Bill Clinton had an affair or George Bush did drugs? Did these personal behavior affect their ability to govern? I would argue not, and that the real difference between the two is intellect and rationality. One is an archetype of the intellectual while the other is far from that mark. However, both men were judged more harshly on their private lives than on their public work.
I feel that in time Clinton will come to be seen in a far more positive light not just for the good things that he did but also for his wisdom in surrounding himself with intelligent support teams. Bush, on the other hand, will be judged far more harshly as a stupid puppet at the hands of his fathers cronies. That aside, the biggest problem I have with both presidents is not their public decisions, but the fact that their private lives received so much scrutiny. Personally, I don't really care what the president does in the bedroom or the bar as long as he runs the country well.
To return to religion and judgement (and politics) I think that too many people bring their religion into the voting booth. We are a secular society and when you vote based on your religious beliefs, you are forcing others to live by those rules. Again, I see this as a gross lack of intellect as well as compassion. I vote for things that I believe are the best for the individual and for the country. I try my best to vote for individual liberty and freedom of choice, but only because I believe we should all be able to choose to live the best life we can. When you impose your religion on me through the electoral process, I am no longer a free person. You impinge my personal liberty and my ability to make my own choices. While I do not believe that abortion is the answer, I believe that the individual must make the decision not the majority. If you don't believe in abortion then don't have one. I know that is overly cliche' but it is at the heart of the matter.
My greatest wish in life is that we could all be free to believe and live as we choose, and I would hope that my friends would accept that and choose accordingly. I may not agree with your religious beliefs, but I would not force my beliefs on you the way you force yours on me. And most importantly, I would not judge you based on your beliefs and opinions.
In no way is this intended in an arrogant tone, but intellectually I feel that I've grown beyond the need for religion. We all exist in various stages of development and these are not necessarily correlated within chronology. While I may personally find a strong tie to a particular religion something of an intellectual weakness, the biggest issue I have with religious adherents is that they frequently fail to question their beliefs. Perhaps it is all of the scientific training kicking in, but more than one sage human has noted that unexamined life is really not life. We are a naturally curious species and if we fail to question some of the most basic premises of our existence then we are just existing and not living.
I have many christian friends, spiritual friends, and atheist friends but the ones who I really enjoy are the ones who question. People who don't constantly ask "why" bore me to tears. I love having discussions, especially passionate ones, about religion and life. I want to understand how others construct their reality and conceive of the world in which we live. And, while it drives me crazy to hear people say that they owe this or that to god, I accept that that is their understanding of things. There have been any number of folks who have tried to convince me to believe one thing or another over my life, and sometimes I've drunk the KoolAid. However, I have found that the truest form of character is self-determination.
As a human being, I need to discover myself and my place in this world, and in that discovery I need to be true to my beliefs. I am letting go of that anger I feel towards christianity. I try to temper my knowledge of the death and destruction wrought by christians with my experience of compassion and understanding by the same group. Of course this spectrum of good and evil is not unique to this single type of religious belief, but since it is the one with which I have the most experience it is where I lay the greatest criticism. I am coming to a fuller understanding of secular humanism and the belief that we need to help each other as people without imposing our beliefs on each other. I help people because I care, not because I feel compelled to be a better [insert spiritual affiliation].
The problem with my beliefs and my opinions is that I fear others will judge me harshly and publicly. In this age of public sharing through social media, we can easily come to understand more about our friends and family than we might otherwise know. The somewhat impersonal nature of the medium coupled with its low cost and easy access can easily make anyone their own Socrates. We are increasingly open with our feelings and opinions because most folks out there will never bother to read what we write, yet we feel the voyeuristic need to put ourselves out there if for no other reason than to find like-minded folks. However, this connectivity can have large impacts in our lives and that really is the meat of my thoughts right now.
Future employers, professional colleagues, and other people with sway over our lives can view what we share and make judgments about our "worthiness." My knee-jerk reaction is to censor what I write or what images I post, and that is the same censorship I rail against as an academic. My opinions are simply that, mine and they sometimes have little bearing on how I conduct myself professionally or privately. I like to feel that I can put myself above my opinions to take the high road of life. This is not to say that I don't really believe what I believe, but that I can accept the fact that we have to work collectively. We are a social species and when conflict arises we need to move to an intellectual arena rather than an emotional arena to move past blockages.
While emotion does inform us and drive us, we need to focus on intellect to come to logical compromise so that we can proceed. When we stop and stoop to judgment of others, we have begun to slip down the slope. This focus on emotion drives more poor decisions, death, and destruction than any natural disaster. In truth, what we do in our private lives or feel in our hearts and minds should have little bearing on our abilities to perform our jobs or work collectively. Does it really matter if Bill Clinton had an affair or George Bush did drugs? Did these personal behavior affect their ability to govern? I would argue not, and that the real difference between the two is intellect and rationality. One is an archetype of the intellectual while the other is far from that mark. However, both men were judged more harshly on their private lives than on their public work.
I feel that in time Clinton will come to be seen in a far more positive light not just for the good things that he did but also for his wisdom in surrounding himself with intelligent support teams. Bush, on the other hand, will be judged far more harshly as a stupid puppet at the hands of his fathers cronies. That aside, the biggest problem I have with both presidents is not their public decisions, but the fact that their private lives received so much scrutiny. Personally, I don't really care what the president does in the bedroom or the bar as long as he runs the country well.
To return to religion and judgement (and politics) I think that too many people bring their religion into the voting booth. We are a secular society and when you vote based on your religious beliefs, you are forcing others to live by those rules. Again, I see this as a gross lack of intellect as well as compassion. I vote for things that I believe are the best for the individual and for the country. I try my best to vote for individual liberty and freedom of choice, but only because I believe we should all be able to choose to live the best life we can. When you impose your religion on me through the electoral process, I am no longer a free person. You impinge my personal liberty and my ability to make my own choices. While I do not believe that abortion is the answer, I believe that the individual must make the decision not the majority. If you don't believe in abortion then don't have one. I know that is overly cliche' but it is at the heart of the matter.
My greatest wish in life is that we could all be free to believe and live as we choose, and I would hope that my friends would accept that and choose accordingly. I may not agree with your religious beliefs, but I would not force my beliefs on you the way you force yours on me. And most importantly, I would not judge you based on your beliefs and opinions.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Beginnings . . . or why the heck start this now!
Why, you might ask, am I suddenly interested in becoming an active blogger? Of course the other side of that question is why the heck would I want to clutter up the Internet with even more personal insight (drivel) or risk re-sharing stuff that has been posted repeatedly? In truth, I think that there can never be too much opinion or sharing. Organisms work best with a massive number of connections, e.g. neurons connecting to make an individual operate. Undoubtedly there are those people out there who struggle with this and there are more than a few comments to be made about the intersection of politics and brain death. Whatever the case, I think it's time to share "me" with the world. Read if you wish, scoff if you must, and ignore if you're incensed.
As to the why now question. As a librarian I tend to interact with a ton of technology and information at inception. This can create quite a challenge. The novelty appeals to my inherent human, inquisitive nature, but the ageing skeptic always asks, "yeah it's neat, but how is it useful?" I think this is one of the greatest problems in libraries. Librarians are frequently eager to adopt the latest technology and to make sure that they are on top of things, but the problem here is that the people who use the library are frequently far behind the curve. This isn't really a shortcoming but more of a fact of life. Whether economic, social, or personal, most library users seem to be behind that curve that seems to be so fascinating to librarians.
This is the point where I put on the curmudgeon hat and wait. When Twitter first appeared 5 years ago and people were tweeting their location (sometimes not really fit for mass publication), or their latest inane thought, I decided to wait. It all seemed a little too immediate for me and I really didn't see how it could do much to help me or the people using my library. Now that Twitter has matured and gained a much wider range of users as well as information streams, I think it's time to get involved. So, I'm delicately dipping my toe into the bird bath. As a professional, I think it's great to have a cadre of librarians out there playing with new gadgets and services. They truly can lead the way, but it's equally important to have a second wave of librarians who are "later adopters." I am firmly ensconced in that group and I much prefer to let the "new car smell" wear off before rushing headlong into the "bleeding edge." How many libraries have a bunch of laserdiscs? I'm just saying . . .
Given the increasingly rapid pace of change in technology, I think it is increasingly important to be in this second wave. Technology will stabilize, even with the rapid pace, into larger categories of devices and services. For example, Facebook/MySpace/Friendster, etc. Not to long ago, I would have predicted the demise of MySpace as people flocked to Facebook in droves. The problem is that most folks don't have the time to manage multiple accounts. To that end, many social networking services have had to specialize to survive. MySpace has gone to music and Friendster has gone to gaming. LinkedIn continues to specialize in the working world, and Yahoo and Google are duking out for groups. For the truly overwrought, there are aggregate interfaces like Digsby and Tweetdeck which allow you to manage all of your emails, social media, and chat accounts. It helps with information overload, but I suspect there needs to be even more consolidation.
Lately the big push has been for apps on mobile devices (pads, pods, phones). This helps eliminate some of the devices that are increasingly ruling our lives. Now you can chat, tweet, talk, surf, and (insert verb) all from one device. I think this is the future. There will always be novelty, but the basic pattern is basically set and it follows a certain pattern from human history. For example, oral histories were transformed by writing which necessitated standardized spellings (dictionaries) which were eventually transformed by the technology of printing which has now gone digital. Oddly enough this transition to the digital world and rapid transmission of information is causing havoc in the lexicographical world (don't know that word? look it up!). In essence, there is a process of novelty explosion followed by consolidation and stability. I think we're on the back of the novelty wave and sliding effortlessly into the consolidation phase. However, only time will tell.
I suppose that is enough for one day. Now, on to customization and publication. Back in a week!
As to the why now question. As a librarian I tend to interact with a ton of technology and information at inception. This can create quite a challenge. The novelty appeals to my inherent human, inquisitive nature, but the ageing skeptic always asks, "yeah it's neat, but how is it useful?" I think this is one of the greatest problems in libraries. Librarians are frequently eager to adopt the latest technology and to make sure that they are on top of things, but the problem here is that the people who use the library are frequently far behind the curve. This isn't really a shortcoming but more of a fact of life. Whether economic, social, or personal, most library users seem to be behind that curve that seems to be so fascinating to librarians.
This is the point where I put on the curmudgeon hat and wait. When Twitter first appeared 5 years ago and people were tweeting their location (sometimes not really fit for mass publication), or their latest inane thought, I decided to wait. It all seemed a little too immediate for me and I really didn't see how it could do much to help me or the people using my library. Now that Twitter has matured and gained a much wider range of users as well as information streams, I think it's time to get involved. So, I'm delicately dipping my toe into the bird bath. As a professional, I think it's great to have a cadre of librarians out there playing with new gadgets and services. They truly can lead the way, but it's equally important to have a second wave of librarians who are "later adopters." I am firmly ensconced in that group and I much prefer to let the "new car smell" wear off before rushing headlong into the "bleeding edge." How many libraries have a bunch of laserdiscs? I'm just saying . . .
Given the increasingly rapid pace of change in technology, I think it is increasingly important to be in this second wave. Technology will stabilize, even with the rapid pace, into larger categories of devices and services. For example, Facebook/MySpace/Friendster, etc. Not to long ago, I would have predicted the demise of MySpace as people flocked to Facebook in droves. The problem is that most folks don't have the time to manage multiple accounts. To that end, many social networking services have had to specialize to survive. MySpace has gone to music and Friendster has gone to gaming. LinkedIn continues to specialize in the working world, and Yahoo and Google are duking out for groups. For the truly overwrought, there are aggregate interfaces like Digsby and Tweetdeck which allow you to manage all of your emails, social media, and chat accounts. It helps with information overload, but I suspect there needs to be even more consolidation.
Lately the big push has been for apps on mobile devices (pads, pods, phones). This helps eliminate some of the devices that are increasingly ruling our lives. Now you can chat, tweet, talk, surf, and (insert verb) all from one device. I think this is the future. There will always be novelty, but the basic pattern is basically set and it follows a certain pattern from human history. For example, oral histories were transformed by writing which necessitated standardized spellings (dictionaries) which were eventually transformed by the technology of printing which has now gone digital. Oddly enough this transition to the digital world and rapid transmission of information is causing havoc in the lexicographical world (don't know that word? look it up!). In essence, there is a process of novelty explosion followed by consolidation and stability. I think we're on the back of the novelty wave and sliding effortlessly into the consolidation phase. However, only time will tell.
I suppose that is enough for one day. Now, on to customization and publication. Back in a week!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)