What is Literacy? Scribner, Hedges, and Carr

There is a difference between the common definition of standard literacy and literacy as a social understanding of things. The standard definition of literacy is the ability to read and write whereas the understanding of social literacy is a bit more detailed. Scribner describes literacy in three metaphors: literacy as a state of power, literacy as a state of adaptation, and literacy as a state of grace. Literacy as a state of power focuses on the ability to create change in a socio-political climate. This can be seen in most revolutions and rebellions where good citizens attempt to break out of their oppressive leader’s reign. They don’t just fight with weapons; they fight with words and texts as well. Literacy as a state of adaptation generally refers to communication and extreme rural living. During wars or conflicts, various nations create secret texts and codes based off a given language to not allow the enemy to know future plans. In terms of extreme rural areas individuals need to communicate enough to buy food, sell products, and essentially survive, so a basic form of what we would call “social literacy” is required in its most basic form. Literacy as a state of grace refers to the admiration and respect given to those who could read and write. In western and non-western cultures alike almost all have looked up to those individuals. They have seen it as a sort of blessing or a way of getting closer to God. In West Africa lives a very rural people called the Vai. They have no electricity, public water source, medical and educational facilities are nearly non-existent, and the Vai language has never been used in formal published writing, yet they have practiced literacy for over 150 years. They write letters up to 30 or 40 times a month to stay in communication with friends and family, they use their language as a record keeping system, and most importantly, they learn how to read and write in Arabic because they are a Muslim people. They say “the man who knoweth book passeth all.” They view the ability to read the Koran as being closer to Allah.

            These interpretations of Literacy by Scribner are very different from those of Hedges and Carr. They view literacy as the formal definition- the ability to read and write. They use it as a measuring stick, or a statistic, in their analysis of various nations and weigh it against that nation’s thriving or lacking nature. They are correct in most of their assertions that advanced formal reading and writing skills are necessary in a modern society, but they at times neglect the other less formal views of what literacy is.

Google, Illiteracy, and the Effects in America Today

Nicholas Carr asserts the idea in his article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” that our minds are being changed by this new digital era. The Internet is so vast and so immediately accessible that it becomes a sort of “skimming activity.” The ability to use Google is a powerful tool but other processes that inspire creativity and critical thinking must counteract it. Some research also indicates the instant-access nature of our modern Internet is causing Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). Presented with the statistics below, one should definitely be concerned.

Chris Hedges write in his article, “America the Illiterate” some disturbing facts that I’d like to show.

-       There are over 42 million adults, 20% of which hold high school diplomas, who can’t read.

-       50 million adults read at a 4^th or 5^th grade level.

-       Nearly 1/3 of the population is illiterate or barely literate.

-       42% of high school and college graduates never read a book outside of school.

-       80% of families did not buy a book in 2007.

These are just a few deeply disturbing statistics involving the lack of literacy, competence, and intelligence in America today. Hedges writes about how the illiterate barely vote, and the uneducated and barely literate, which are a large portion of America, vote based on propaganda based on stirring up emotion and false empowerment. Campaigns are now attempts to comfort and trick people with idealistic and vague slogans such as, “Yes We Can,” or, “Change.” Hedges writes, “We confuse how we feel with knowledge,” and I could not put it better my self. So often I speak to fellow votes that essentially made his or her decision by a 30 second commercial, or a slogan, or even how “cool” the candidate or proposition seemed. Hedges also goes into how the illiteracy in America effects the economy. He asserts that they do not make rational decisions when it comes to loans, payments, bills, and so on. This may have some validity to it. He goes on to write, “We ask to be entertained by clichés, stereotypes, and mythic narratives that tell us we can be whomever we want to be, that we live in the greatest country on earth…” and that for some reason we naturally possess greater moral fiber than the rest of the world. Amidst all these slogans, scams, and lies, many still believe it all. In a great line that stands testament to so much wrong-doing and negligence in this country, Hedges writes, “It feels good not to think.”

The Definition and Purpose of Reading and Writing (Roughly)

The purpose of reading is to understand the message(s) and theme(s) the writing is trying to convey, putting those ideas into context (i.e. the time and place he/she lived in and so on) and having a broad understanding of the subject the writer is writing on. This includes reading other works done by opposing thinkers, and so on. Once one has a grasp of all messages, themes, motives, philosophical view points, and so on, the reader can now objectively attempt to analyze these works and develop a solid understanding, and opinion involving the subject(s) presented. Once this has occurred, the reader can now write specifically, cite ample examples, and objectively assess the subject. This is an idealistic way of reading and writing. However, this is not always the case. It is almost impossible to obtain all the information of a given subject, one must always fill in the gaps with somewhat opinionated information, or "educated guessing". This is why the vast majority of news organizations tend to have a slant towards a specific political affiliation, or other collective groups. Regardless, the purpose of reading is to understand, interpret, and think critically. The purpose of writing is to express one's own beliefs, while citing examples, and furthermore valid counter examples, and maintaining an objective approach to knowledge of the subject(s).

Harris and Sullivan: The Purpose of Writing and the Validity of Blogging

Harris sees reading and writing as needing a broad understanding of the subject and you should be able to fall back on the authors ideas- use their quotes as proof. Writing needs specificity and proof but the problem with writing is that the original work that you read is hard to rewrite in an original way without generalizing. “The purpose of writing is to think critically, take risks, and to approach a revision as a re-vision”

Harris would most likely have both good and bad things to say about blogging. On one hand blogging is most definitely a “re-vision” of an original work and it has the most amount of risk because it is not thoroughly revised and checked for accuracy. Here in lies the problem. Harris would probably find issues with blogging because it requires no broad understanding of anything, and sentences asserted as facts, may not be truth at all. Therefore, when someone has maybe a source or two to base an entire opinion-based broadcast off of, the piece of writing tends to be incomplete. Harris sees writing as needing aims, methods, and materials. The aims are what the writing is trying to achieve. In relation to blogging, the aims of the writers can be cloudy and hard to determine. The methods are how the writer relates examples to ideas. As stated previously, when many bloggers base their writings off of only a few sources, examples tend to be lacking. The materials are where the writer goes for examples and evidence- again blogs can range from having no examples at all, to having many sources, like bloggers in the Huffington Post.

Overall, Harris would most likely equate Blogging, as a whole, to an elevated version of journal writing. It is emotionally charged, heavily opinionated, and usually lacking in proper evidence and broad understanding of the subject. Though there are validities in blogging like critical thinking and risk taking, Blogging will never be as legitimate of a form of writing as other more formal forms of writing. Blogging is like Wikipedia- it has vast amounts of information, much of it being relatively on point and accurate, but you can never fully trust the information presented because just about anyone can post in it. Whereas in a formal encyclopedia, or other historical writings, you can be assured that it is accurate because the writer cites hundreds of sources and texts, and is very well educated on the subject.

Andrew Sullivan "Why I Blog"

Sullivan uses an old example of ship captains writing in a daily log to illuminate his reasons for Blogging. This log used by the ship’s captain became a sort of story that was unintended, yet accurate because it was written in constantly. Logs were a form of human self-correction. It wasn’t until the last decade or so that Web Logging, later known as Blogging, on the World Wide Web became possible. Sullivan writes, “From the first few days of using the form, I was hooked. The simple experience of being able to directly broadcast my own words to readers was an exhilarating literary liberation.” In comparison to the old ways of journalism and writing that was revised, edited, checked through every source, reedited, and so on, Blogging became a self-publicized “literary liberation” that had many hooked, including Andrew Sullivan. He writes, “Blogging is therefore to writing what extreme sports are to athletics: more free-form, more accident-prone, less formal, more alive. It is, in many ways, writing out loud.” This is a very thought-provoking and on-point comparison. With the freedom of Blogging came the emotional pursuit of truth and expression, but with it came a higher likelihood of falsity and attack from readers. Sullivan also indicates that he Blogs because there is no last minute edits, cuts, and other restrictions presented by printed writing. He was told that, “The key to understanding a blog is to realize that it’s a broadcast, not a publication.” No one wants to read a long, intimidating post online, people want short and to-the-point information that leads to discussion, debate, and thought-provoking conclusions. To Sullivan, Blogging is a new for of creative writing that could inspire a Golden Age of writing. Writers have the freedom to write what they see fit- no matter how opinionated it may be. In his words, Blogging reveals the “imperfection of thought” and progress through rationality readers’ responses. It is also important, according to Sullivan, to have friends and family involved in your blog, and have their own. It creates a sort of online community that allows users to interact and share information, opinions, and first-hand knowledge. Even with the issues of Blogging, Sullivan Blogs for the freedom of daily writing and to broadcast his thoughts and believes to the world for the pursuit of knowledge and truth.