Previous Post – Strength In Weakness
Years ago, when I read Gandhi’s autobiography “The Story Of My Experiments In Truth”, I was surprised by the passion with which he advocated for the importance of good penmanship:
“Let every young man and woman be warned by my example, and understand that good handwriting is a necessary part of education.”
In today’s computer age, I think it is mostly a lost battle. While good handwriting is still important, the new electronic mediums with which we write require their own set of disciplines. In particular I want to address a problem that hear about almost every week while writing online in place like this blog, Facebook and/or Twitter: The lack of tone and body language in written communication limits the depth and quality of conversation.
Without question written communication has limits. There is a great deal to be gleaned from face to face conversation in which we can hear the tone with which people talk, their gestures and body language, and have more immediate access to clarification. Online interaction has inevitable limitations, this is without question. However, I have noticed how often people overstate those limits.
For millennium people have communicated in written form over great distances where such exchanges took months, even years to participate in. Yes, this greatly limited their communication, yet they were still able to practice business, politics and even courtship, leading to meaningful marriages between people who had only ever written one another.
How were they able to accomplish this? Through the discipline of intentionality in how they wrote what they wrote. Their communication was just as devoid of tone and body language as our communication with the added challenge of long delays between exchanges. Knowing this, they took extra time and care to with what they wrote. Due to the immediacy of our electronic interactions, we have lost that patience and intentionality. In other words, a great deal of the problem is not with the medium but with our failure to use it responsibly.
Several of my friends are blind or deaf. Yes, they face limitations because of their inability to read gestures/body language and tone (respectively). Yet, through intentionality and discipline, they have learned to adapt. Their conversations and relationships are not less genuine or lacking in depth. In the same way, we need to take responsibility to recognize and compensate for the inherent limitations of electronic communications rather than simply blame (or even dismiss) the medium.
Finally, consider that much of the New Testament is made of up letters sent over great distances over long periods of time. In addition to the lack of tone and body language, we receive them a very different language than they were written, to a very different culture than they were addressed and to an entirely different era in human history. Are these limitations? Of course! However, we would never dismiss its importance, but instead take the responsibility to study and consider these dynamics into our understanding.
Let’s stop blaming technology and start taking responsibility. The discipline of intentionality will lead us to a new commitment to internet penmanship.
Tags: communication, internet
I just wrote a note to someone; I try to send out at least one handwritten note a week. Sometimes I miss the mark and other weeks I send out many.
That said, anything I send always comes with a disclaimer that states that it should be obvious that I did not go to Catholic school! My writing, poor when I was a kid in the 60’s, is truly awful now!
And on a serious note, your words about intentionality are well put. I am struggling with reading, even just with a brief headline, a lot of dark, negative words on the internet. Among people of faith, of course.
Thank you for this thoughtful and timely message – quite intentionally well done!
Thanks FRS. It does take work and patience, but I think it is worth it.
Great thoughts Jamie. I completely agree.
Additionally (notice the example of intentional language use…”additionally” subtly implies building upon an agreeable point, whereas, “however” or “but” carry connotations of dissonance), we must also commit to responsible readership.
When I receive an email or text from a friend I am more likely to “hear” positive tone than if the same exact text was received from someone I don’t like or don’t know as well. (Again, notice that by using myself rather than you or another person as the character in this anecdote, I alleviate the potential for assumed accusations…isn’t my consideration helpful??) To a certain extent, many of our communication mishaps could be lessened by assuming constructive tone until the opposite is directly stated.
In all seriousness, I think you are absolutely correct. The limitations of written communications are legitimate but are often compounded by carelessness on behalf of both sender and receiver. We need to commit to better practices on both ends because simply complaining isn’t going to change the situation.
Bret, I really appreciate the addition of responsible readership. It was something that I thought of as I was wrapping up the post, but felt my post went too long already. However, your comment adds that brilliantly. Thanks!
I have a friend who is Mohawk. Her people have a saying that essentially requires, if someone does something that upsets or hurts you, think of a several possible reasons why they might have a good reason. In the end, they may still be wrong, but your posture and assumptions (not to mention temper) is changed.
Peace!
Superb post, Jamie – thank you! You are so right when you say that the disciplines of good writing for the Internet are not less, nor even different, than the disciplines of writing for any medium.
We do need to learn to read, or listen, as much as we need to learn to write or speak. Reading the Bible patiently, responsibly, is perhaps the best place of all to start. If we can do that, then we can probably read most things.
Thank you again for such a thoughtful, and thought-provoking, post…
Peace & all blessings
Mike
Mike, every new medium of communication makes demands on us that we will naturally resist. If we study the history of most new mediums, the response was initially resistant. Thanks for the affirmation!
Not to veer off-topic, but it does my heart good to see Mike Farley here. The internet is vast, yet we all end up connected. That is surely part of intentional living, responsible reading and more.
I agree, FRS!
Imho its a Grt article. Fwiw. So much lost in 144 char lmt.
LOL! Thanks stieglitz & well illustrated.
[...] Previous Post – The Discipline of Internet Penmanship [...]
[off topic] Thanks, Fran – you too!