Published: Sunday, June 10, 2012 at 6:01 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, June 8, 2012 at 6:33 p.m.
Last week, I confessed my sin of being a “techno-skeptic.†I’m not always keen on switching to a new technology, especially when I cannot see a greater value in it than existing technology. Some people are technophiles who adopt a new technology as soon as it arrives on the scene, but I have to be convinced a new technology is better.
That being said, I’m not a Luddite â€" a person who completely rejects new technology.
Last week, I talked about the downside of reading the Bible on smartphones or Kindles. For me, the reading experience is simply not a good one. I much prefer physical Bibles.
However, there are new technologies that I adopted quickly.
Music on compact discs is far superior to music on cassette tapes or vinyl records, for example. As soon as I heard the clarity of a CD, I started buying them exclusively, never to purchase another cassette or record again. Anyone who grew up listening to the scratchiness of vinyl records can attest to what a miracle the clarity of CDs seemed like when they first appeared.
There are vinyl purists out there who think that analog recordings on vinyl records sounds better and richer than music recorded digitally. They’re correct. I have sat with friends and listened to the same recording on vinyl records and then on CD, and there is a noticeable difference in the richness of the tone. Jazz music in particular sounds much better on vinyl to me than it does on CD.
However, the difference is not enough for me to invest in an expensive collection of vinyl music. I still have records, but I don’t much listen to them. In fact, I’ve gone over to having all my music on an iPod, one of the technological wonders of the age.
The iPod is a great example of technology done well. I could never have imagined when I was a teenager that one day I could carry ALL the music I own around in one small, instantly accessible package. The thought boggles the mind. When I bought an iPod, I was hooked so completely that I cannot remember what I did before.
A world without the iPod is completely unimaginable to me. So, sometimes the new technology is more than worth it.
Sometimes the new technology is worth it if it is used correctly. I’ve often talked of my love for science fiction in this column, and the two biggest science fiction franchises out there illustrate this point. Star Trek and Star Wars producers have taken quite different tacks in regards to how new technology can be used. As newer special effects technology emerged, both franchises used it to re-imagine their earlier films, but the two franchises could not be more different in approach.
A minimalist approach was taken with Star Trek. When new special effects were added to the re-release of the original series from the 1960s, newer, better effects were substituted for the older ones. The subtle approach amazed me. The effects weren’t so much redone as they were enhanced. Instead of completely changing the look of the USS Enterprise, for example, it was made to appear cleaner, sharper and more detailed. The storylines, however, were not affected at all by the new special effects. Star Trek fans were delighted.
When Star Wars producers redid the special effects for their re-released original films, however, the results weren’t as impressive. Some of the scenes were enriched by adding texture and visual detail, like when they added computer-generated creatures to natural scenes.
Oddly, the artificial creatures somehow made the natural scenes look more natural. However, the major changes the Star Wars team made actually changed the storylines or characters in ways that many fans consider detrimental. Get any group of Star Wars fans together these days, and I guarantee an argument will break out about those changes.
Change isn’t always for the best, and it takes a certain amount of wisdom to know when it is and when it isn’t. Technophiles often make the mistake that new technology is a good thing, in and of itself. Luddites make the same mistake in reverse, believing that all change is bad, no matter what. Judging the difference is often more difficult than it might appear to be.
The person that helped me learn to discern those differences most effectively is my father. Dad and I have differing opinions on the role of technology, but he taught me a few principles about technology back in the day that I still use today.
The first time I remember Dad and I having a discussion of any sort on the topic of which technology was best happened when I was 12.
More on Dad and technology next week.
David Murdock is an English instructor at Gadsden State Community College.
No comments:
Post a Comment