Conversation

Ignorance of computers could also be a literary asset. William Gibson wrote Neuromancer on a typewriter because he couldn’t afford a computer, and when he finally got one it demystified a lot of what computers could do
Image
1
6
But he was incredibly prescient that personal computers, once networked, would form a virtual unified universe he dubbed cyberspace
Image
1
3
Gibbons later worked with Bruce Sterling on The Difference Engine (1990), which ushered in steampunk as a genre. They developed a completely new way of working uniquely enabled by their matching Apple II computers, sampling and borrowing and reworking outside sources
Image
1
3
It was a surprise to many that writers seemed to be adopting personal computers at a faster rate than scientists. Especially sci-fi writers. I think this is due to the level of imagination required to see their usefulness at that time
Image
2
3
Interestingly, it was the less glorified and more populist sci-fi writers who adopted word processing sooner, because they were less preoccupied with “bastardizing the craft” than literary elites
Image
2
21
Early accounts struggled to articulate what these new devices were, including the term “TV Typewriter” prominently in advertisements such as this one for the Homebrew Computer Club
Image
2
2
Replying to
Fits my priors. Genre fiction early adopted the web and ebooks too. Literary types are the ones still attached to paper books. Scrivener (the name is revealing)does a good job catering to literary conceits in an online era. I use it despite those pretensions rather than because.
1
3
Replying to
I feel like there are a ton of gems in this thread for you. Nexus of computing, writing, & sci-fi feels rich for the kind of thinking you do. There’s some theorizing & model building needed in this area I think. Or at least I would love some to help with digital notes advocacy😂
1
2
Replying to
Also direct interest in document-technology history retained from my time at Xerox which included one deadpooled product in the space 🙂 Reproduction and iteration technology is interestingly coupled to editing technology via proofing/correction processes.
1
1
Replying to and
Making n copies of 1 polished doc is a very complementary problem in some ways to making 1 polished copy after n iterations on a draft. In perpetual beta with an expanding circle of prosumer-reviewers of any text, they two become the same process.
Replying to
Ah interesting. Is this how you came to the collaborative distributed feedback way of writing, across social media, Slack, FB groups, IRL, etc?
1
Replying to
That sounds planned. I’d say it’s more like the natural base state of human communication that you tend to default to if you get lazier faster than technology gets better/more natural. I’d guess sufficiently advanced textuality is indistinguishable from orality.
Replying to and
Version N of a doc has f(N) “copies” and g(N) bugs, and we hope f(N)>f(N-1) and g(N)<g(N-1) Word processing and word distribution tech has historically been a sort of co-evolutionary tradeoff between functions f and g
2