Wednesday, April 13, 2011

"Writing Space" by J. David Bolter Chapter 5, "The Electronic Book"

This prezi on Chapter 5 was extremely well organized.  It had light blue, pink, and white writing on a dark gray background.  The points made flowed from one to another by arrows.  The physical arrows from one point to anther helped the viewer to organize the points in his or her own head.  The prezi itself was also not as zoomed in as most of the other projects. When the presenter had one specific quote from "Writing Space" on the screen, you could still see the other points because it was zoomed out.  I feel as though this was a weakness because it did not make the viewer solely focus on just that point.  This prezi also did not include as many examples.  It only had one example which was a YouTube video that discussed the difference of eBooks vs. printed books.  More examples could have helped explain the presentation.  Some of the presentations strengths included its extreme organization.  Also, it was almost theatrical in the way it was "presented," or shall I say, "performed!"  The presentations were very well prepared and they presented the information very well.

 1.    1. How is a codex different from a modern-day book?
2.     2. Is a web page never ending with no closure, like a papyrus roll?
3.     3. Which is more authentic? The eBook or the book?
4.     4. Are electronic encyclopedias or text encyclopedias more useful?
5.     5. Will physical libraries not exist in the future?
6.     6. Will people stop finding information they need in printed books?      


This presentation begin and ended with the same quote from Bolter's "Writing Space."  This quote was, "They are writing in and on the world."  This quote refers to how all writing spaces are important and utilized in today's society.  The beginning of the presentation discussed how the book has changed throughout time.  The papyrus roll was the first form of the "book."  Papyrus rolls were about 25 feet long and were cut after the author was done writing them.  They were scripts that story tellers would use.  Papyrus rolls then developed into codexes.  A codex was a cousin to today's modern book.  Codexes replaced papyrus because they were more complete and bound together.  They protected and delimited writing and made written work a complete verbal structure.  They were different from papyrus rolls because they had to fill predetermined space.  Codexes also closed off other works because they were only one story long.  Then the prezi discussed the chnages that "books" have made throughout time.  The shift goes as follows: papyrus->codex->book->eBook.  eBooks seem like they are close to the papyrus rolls because they can scroll up and down, like a papyrus can roll.  Lastly, the encyclopedia was a new invention that took all information and put it into one place.  The encyclopedia became one of the first books to not read all the way through.  It became a benchmark to hold all credited facts and sources.  Britannica was one of the first printed encyclopedias, but it also became electronic to fit with the modern times.  The presentation ended by saying that cyber space will become the universal book, encyclopedia, and library all in one.

2 comments:

  1. I feel as though the classic book is more authentic then an ebook. While ebooks have many benefit, authenticity I feel will always stay in it's paperback form. As much as writing spaces change, I feel like the classic works will always be referred to in their "authentic" or original form: paper books.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When it comes to the eBook-versus-Book debate, pro-Bookers often bring up "authenticity" as something that eBooks lack. But what is authenticity?

    If we take "authenticity" to mean "not copied, or original," than eBook readers certainly are authentic—they are the original products of a technological generation. If eBook readers are supposed to be mere copies of physical books, then maybe they aren't the most "authentic" because they trade some physical properties for electronic benefits. Does that make them worse? Maybe.

    ReplyDelete