I had missed this short, excellent note by Nathan Jurgenson, where he criticizes the idea that “phones mean not living in the moment”. I really appreciate his suggestion to problematize the whole question. Also, I must admit that I too felt instinctively close to this kind of argument: maybe because I was born and raised when smartphone, pocket cameras and social media did not exist. Who knows. Anyway, there’s a part of me who’s still unconsciously a bit close to it.
To be sure I reject the superficial idea that taking a snap of a beautiful landscape is a “second-rate experience” in place of the first-rate experience of freely enjoying it (what does enjoying really mean, by the way, and how can we tell it without imposing a prejudice?). So Nathan is 100% right in criticizing it.
I have only one thing to add. Even if we should dismiss the censory rhetoric of “this is not a real/true experience”, we also should be aware that this approach to things could carry some unwanted consequences. (Say, we should erase dualisms without erasing differences — it’ll become a common refrain of mine, I’m afraid).
My fear is not that the world will become a mere Instagram subject, nor that “we are losing the enchant”. Rather, it’s that instagramming the world could make us comply only with a form of enchant that lacks depth. To put it simply, some forms of beauty and knowledge deserve a particular form of attention — of devotion, even. If my instinct is to tweet that I’m listening to Brahms, I’m probably conceeding fewer attention to Brahms. And again, this is not an offense to Brahms in first place, even if maybe I would instinctively say it (but it would be subtly moralistic: You Are in Front of Greatest Beauty and You Dare Twitting?!): no, it’s a pity for you in first place — because you will enjoy it less than what you could. Or maybe just differently, sure: granted that you’re conscious of that.
We should find a proper balance between the idea that “digitality erodes the immediateness and purity of experience” (which has always been somehow mediated, by the way) and the gospel, sometimes Silicon-Valley-biased, of “don’t worry, nothing changes, go on and disperse your attention freely”. An honest approach should provide such a conceptual clarification, helping people to understand better our interaction with these kind of reproductive and social media, without addressing to them with a preachy attitude. Developing awaraness instead of assertive judgements.
(This is just a quick note. I’ve been working on an essay about Benjamin, aura and digitality which also talks of that — but it’s idle for months due to lack of time (job + new novel + life). I hope to catch up soon, this is a major subject.)
(25/06/13)