Self Publishing changes the paradigm of human culture

By Wreybies · Dec 31, 2013 · ·
  1. Culture, in a short and dirty version of its anthropological definition, is the accumulated knowledge one generation passes on to the next, via language and its outgrowth media, which continues to propagate forward through time. Humans are not the only creatures to have culture under this paradigm. There are other primates and also cetaceans that we know to participate in this tradition. They are more than just their hardwiring. But once there is a medium of recording the information, writing, which we alone possess, there is an explosion of culture because it allows for the accumulation of much more information than any one mind could ever hope to hold.

    From the plains of Africa to the Moon because of writing.

    One thing that anthropologists must always be wary of is sampling error. When digging up the remains of ancient cultures, we are often left with only small parts of that culture that, if one is not careful, could easily lead one to believe that the day to day life of the average person from that era was focused only on certain things, the things you find left behind, the temples and goddess figurines, the fetish idols and the well buried rich (who appear from the beginning). Most of the writing that comes to us from ancient times is filtered through processes that leave only certain subjects intact. We find scripture quite often and strangely also things having to do with accounting come to us in profusion from the ancient past. There is more, but when found, it often gets held back from us, like the fact that pornography has existed since humans first possessed the capacity to draw boobs and a wiener. ;)

    Once we come into times where the record is less archeological and more historical, we find again that the culture of the day is filtered through the hands of those in possession of writing. Scribes painstakingly wrote books by hand that took lifetimes and are today national treasures in many countries. And again, the writing seems to focus on paradigms less in touch with day to day life. The printing press came and for a time the written word was available to, for, and from anyone who could read. Then, as humans are wont to do, things got organized, categorized, and privatized. In short, the few took control of what our culture (the many) says to the future by controlling what gets printed as regards our thoughts, our feelings and our imagination. We're back to where we were when we first chipped away the crust of a rock to reveal the flint blade within. We leave behind only tiny, hard facets of what we, as a culture and a species, are at this moment in time. All the soft tissue is gone and the bones can tell us only so much, even to the trained eye of forensic anthropologists.

    Self publishing is a bigger deal than I think anyone realizes. Never mind success. Never mind making money and a living at writing. Never mind all of that for a small moment, I beseech you. Self publishing, for the first time, gives humans a way to allow anyone to deliberately give a small piece of themselves, the individual, small, singular self, not only to anyone with technology in hand today, but also to the future in a way that doesn't physically erode with time and get lost amongst the atoms and molecules of everything else that happens in the world. The individual voice can speak to the future, unfiltered by the hands and minds of others, and give a window into a singular life, a singular mind, a singular human paradigm. That's huge. That's as huge as the discovery of fire, of writing, of the opposable thumb. It means the future gets to know you, not someone else's version of you, not some filtered, altered, strained you, but just you and only you. And through the many yous who make deliberate use of this medium, the future gets to know a greater and more real us.

    Think about it.

Comments

  1. jannert
    The future lasts about 10 years these days, then the technology becomes irretrievably obsolete. God help you if you stored important archive material on a floppy disk, and didn't upgrade it every time you upgraded your computer! If you don't upgrade you don't last!

    I think we're losing our future at the moment, not joining it. This will hold true for online self-published books, too.

    Where will our present family photos be, 50 years from now? You know, the ones we take by the dozens with our mobile phones, every time we visit relatives, have a birthday party, etc. The ones that are shared on Facebook, but don't get printed out on long-lasting photo paper and are left languishing on our computers until they become obsolete or stored online somewhere—'safe'until the storage company goes bust?

    I think we've never been more ephemeral as a species than we are just now, and our individual creations are going to evaporate almost as soon as we do. I heard somebody say, the other day: 'Oh, but the past isn't going to matter to future generations. They won't be looking backwards the way we used to do.'

    But that's the glass half-empty view.

    The glass half full view says: 'We'll find a way. We always do.'

    Okay ...bet ya...
      obsidian_cicatrix and Wreybies like this.
  2. Wreybies
    I think that's a bit pessimistic, Jan, especially from you! :) You've always seemed quite the optimist to me. :) What we hold to ourselves, in our personal data banks, isn't the same as what we put out into the data world. Ebooks (be they traditionally or self published) are ever convertible to new and different formats. I have an application on my Mac called Calibre that happily turns almost anything into an ebook version and makes versions that are compatible with pretty much everything out there, and this ap is free. Perhaps the lack of tangibility is what makes it feel ephemeral. I think future archeologists will deal not in rocky strata, but in data strata.

    I think this is a sentiment that has always and forever been on someone's lips throughout time.
      obsidian_cicatrix likes this.
  3. jannert
    I keep alternating between filling and drinking my glass... :)
      Wreybies and obsidian_cicatrix like this.
  4. Andrae Smith
    Wow, I never really thought of it that way, but I think you are right. With the huge boom in the internet and now self-publishing average life, average identity is becoming publicized and preserved like never before. I was just talking about how much you can find on youtube these days. There is a man who filmed his brain surgery... He had a brain tumor removed and he had a friend film the whole process. Now it's on youtube. With many more people self-publishing, the variety in type and quality of literature that is preserved will be unprecedented, and with it, our cultural interests and identity.

    Oddly, this whole blog reminds me of a Keats poem, "Ode on a Grecian Urn".
    Here's the link for those who have not read it:
    http://www.bartleby.com/101/625.html
      Wreybies and obsidian_cicatrix like this.
  5. jannert
    Hmm. I still think there is a big difference between 'distributed widely at the moment' and 'preserved for posterity,' but that's me, glass half empty. Actually my glass is TOTALLY empty after last night! Hope y'all had a lovely New Year.:)
      Wreybies and obsidian_cicatrix like this.
  6. obsidian_cicatrix
    Food for thought.

    I can't really subscribe to Jan's glass half-full notion. I concur with Wrey... that's a bit pessimistic, eh Jan? :p (Just wait 'til my mood swings and I'll be proud to stand beside you waving a placard. ;))

    I have very few photographs of my daughter when she was young. This was down to lack of disposable income, (let's face it... food and a roof over one's head comes first ;)) and a lot of moving around. It's something I'm regretful about and have decided the same is not going to be the case with my grandson.

    If anything, the fact that I don't have to commit every pic to paper has been freeing, both financially and from a quality control perspective. Back in the day, I might have run off a roll of film and ended up with a few good quality shots, but I would still have to pay for the development of the iffy ones too.

    I find that I have pics I'm content to let sit on my hard drive, pics that get carried about with me on my Kindle for when I want to play the gushing Gran, and then there are those that just cry out to be printed. It's actually easier than it used to be, as most supermarkets and chemists have stations set aside for this very purpose. I remember when I was young, the negatives were sent to labs via the local chemist or a prepaid envelope—took a while, now it's done in a matter of minutes and competitively priced. As a means of recording for posterity, it's more accessible to me now than 30 years ago, even though there has been a considerable advancement of technology.

    As for the potential loss... I personally don't have a hard copy of the ms of my novel. I trust that my backup systems won't let me down.

    Love this, Wrey. As someone who has always felt a little out of the loop socially speaking, I've always been drawn to personal accounts. Even when it comes to writing, I learn better by having access to the unfettered thoughts and opinions of others, and then by finding my own way through. It makes me feel like I'm living life according to my own needs and desires rather than what some nameless, faceless beaurocrat is forcing upon me.

    That's true, but so much of what has been recorded for posterity in the past has an overview made palatable for sections of the masses. There are many historical notions that were set in stone, accepted as such, that went on to be proved wholly incorrect. Putting it in print doesn't make it so. That said, every line I read, no matter where it is sourced from, I take with a pinch of salt, anyway. Taking 'the man' out of the equation has got to produce some interesting ripples for future generations. I firmly believe in the right to self expression. Not every expression will touch or move me, and won't necessarily change my world view, but I find something comforting in knowing that people who need to get their thoughts out there have the means to do so. (Even if I staunchly disagree with what has been said.)

    Thinking further on it, is the whole notion really that different than that concerning my old roll of film? My discerning eye tells me shots which are worth keeping. It doesn't matter to me what the assistant thinks are the worthwhile shots. He does not have the relationship to the subject material that I do, and so his opinion is a moot point as far as I'm concerned. And isn't that ultimately what it's all about? We will naturally select and cherry pick what we need to sustain us in this life.

    And there's ma girl! ;)
      Wreybies likes this.
  7. jannert
    Oh, I can't disagree with either of you. And I, too, love the convenience of digital photography (and computers and the internet.) It's just that it's not stood the test of time. And I do wonder what our great-grandchildren will be able to access about our lives. Everything seems so ephemeral. Maybe that's beneficial—some folks I've spoken to think so. I don't know. But my inner self resists the notion that not knowing much about 'the past' is a good thing. At least we still have photos of ours, printed on long-lasting paper with images that don't fade much ...well, some of us do.

    I think my biggest concern - and it's not something I've made up, just ask anybody who is working as an archivist these days - is the lack of backward compatibility in these digitally-stored photos, documents, etc.

    Technological developments seem focused on the 'next big thing' and don't care that the 'last big thing' can get lost in the shuffle. The contortions I have to go through right now, just to keep my older work accessible on my newer machines is a window on the problem. Floppy disks, DVDs, CDs, all are now obsolete. It'll be the turn of flash drives next. And 'the Cloud?' Well, that puts ALL our individual efforts in the hands of some faceless corporation, doesn't it. Yes, it's very convenient, but if/ when it goes down, or changes direction, everything we've ever done on a personal level will go with it. And it will be too late to change direction then.

    I'm still a half-a-glass gal. Whether it's half-full or half-empty depends entirely on my Mood of the Day.
      Wreybies likes this.
  8. obsidian_cicatrix
    I do understand what you mean about the lack of backwards compatibility, but what some see as fugacious, and transient, I view quite differently. If the Library of Alexandria had been recorded in this form, and made available to the pubic, Julius Caesar wouldn't have been able to put it to the torch, would he? (Nor Aurelian, nor the Pope) ;) You might be able to raze a library to the ground. So much harder to enter each individual home and destroy an idea.

    The Christian church actively went out of their way to prevent ordinary people having access to scripture, even going as far as to prohibit the saying of mass in local tongues, as a means of controlling their input and hence the belief structures of the populace. If everyone had access to their own copy, it would have made it so much harder for fallacies to be perpetuated.

    Necessity, they say is the mother of invention. When it comes to archiving, I'll cite an example. The microfiche. What would have happened if archivists had rejected the idea by sitting around moaning that such tiny documents might be easily lost? Or that something might be invented in the future that might make the system obsolete. It's part of human nature to whinge and complain. I can only speak for myself, but it's often when I'm feeling most disgruntled that I get up off my ass and make a positive contribution. ;)

    Sometimes I think the backward compatibility issue is trolleyed out as an excuse by those with no wish to adapt to current ways of doing things. I do understand the reservations, and I appreciate that proven is better, but there can never be advancement without challenging older ways of going about things. If I were to show a butane gas lighter to someone used to using char cloth, steel and flint, they might well have reservations, but there is no denying that it is a safer, more efficient, less labour intensive way to produce a flame. (Okay, okay... I realise the same might have been said of energy produced by harnessing nuclear fission, but I suspect that, just like learning to write, trial and error comes into play, and mistakes must be made in order to learn from them.)

    Who knows... a recovered flash drive, might end up being as big a find as the Dead Sea Scrolls, or the Rosetta Stone, in days to come.

    I do also accept what you say about cloud storage. Whilst I use the Cloud, I am always mindful that it is not under my control. (I'm actually still a bit paranoid to be honest.) I don't give my valuables over to strangers for safe keeping. I consider my important data 'valuables' and I go out of my way to protect them, just like I would any tangible resource.
      Wreybies likes this.
  9. jannert
    Hmm. Eastern North America just had huge power cuts in the middle of sub-zero weather that lasted nearly 2 weeks in some areas (one of my friends works for the Lansing Board of Water and Light and he confirmed on Thursday, 2 January, that all the power had finally been restored) ...the power that went off on 22 December!

    Guess what? Lots of people I know are now looking to install woodburning stoves in their homes, because the 'electricity' they depended on isn't ...errr...so dependable after all. Folks couldn't even use their smartphones because they couldn't charge them up during the cuts.

    In adopting all forms of new technology, willy-nilly, you may well be making your life easier under normal circumstances, but you might be making it impossible under less-than-normal circumstances if you've chucked out the old stuff as well.

    I'm not against modern technology, and certainly don't want to go back to candles and woodburning stoves as my only source of heat. But I'm damn glad to have them to hand in emergencies, though. And I still make paper copies of everything that I really can't stand to lose.

    Okay, paper can be destroyed, too, but it's not likely to be wilfully destroyed every 10 years or so, just so big corporations can make money selling you stuff that does what you can already do with the stuff you've got.

    By the way, microfiche is a good example of what I mean. My best friend back home is a librarian, and her daughter is now an archivist ...both of them confirm that microfiche is becoming obsolete to the extent that some of these stored documents are already unreadable, because the machinery has been removed as libraries extend their computer-related hardware.

    Archivists are hard at work transforming microfiche to digital, but the task is huge, not well paid, and lots of stuff is already being lost. And that's all happened within my own lifetime. What's the chance of stuff from today still being around 100 years from now?

    All I'm asking is that the backward compatibility issue as related to data storage needs to be JUST as important to the companies that manufacture the hardware and software as any other aspect of it. Once this happens, I'm totally on board.
  10. Wreybies
    ... and conversation is sparked! My inner Ganesh is fat and happy. :p

    [​IMG]
      obsidian_cicatrix and jannert like this.
  11. jannert
    Always happy to help fatten a happy ganesh...
  12. Wreybies
    test post
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice