Ariana Pia
8/13/18
IB HL2
Ms. Hendricks
Ms. Hendricks
Written Response
Prior to reading The Age of Earthquakes I was skeptical not only because of the book’s length
but because of the abundance of pictures, blank space, and definitions. However, I quickly changed
my mind because not only was the book engaging to read but the concept interacted with my brain in
a different manner from say The Awakening. I found it interesting in the almost biased approach the
authors took to challenge the very real way in which technology has changed our human patterns,
brain-work, and even social skills. I was mostly left with a feeling of confusion because of the
philosophical tone of the book that questioned every aspect of how humans define themselves in
social groups, or as being unique individuals. Also, the large and wide use of made up words
such as: Smupid, stuart, cyphoria, zwischendingen make it seem as if it were a children's book
or fiction novel. Moreover, I felt like the book with lots of pictures, and short phrases was a sad
attempt by an older generation (43-56) to connect to a “younger generation” the kids who are so
“disconnected” that they felt the need to write prose that at some time makes no sense at all.
Additionally, it is my opinion that though this book does provide some thought-provoking questions
on human identity it also insinuates that its target audience (adolescents) are a group of people who
cannot function without technology and much less focus and understand a real piece of literature
(ie. Shakespeare, or Dickens). My questions would hence be to the authors this text: Was this text
intended to have demeaning connotations? If so was it to force self-reflection? Finally, Humans have
consistently proven throughout history that we define ourselves through other “things” what make
technology special why should people care now and why is this any different from the past?
but because of the abundance of pictures, blank space, and definitions. However, I quickly changed
my mind because not only was the book engaging to read but the concept interacted with my brain in
a different manner from say The Awakening. I found it interesting in the almost biased approach the
authors took to challenge the very real way in which technology has changed our human patterns,
brain-work, and even social skills. I was mostly left with a feeling of confusion because of the
philosophical tone of the book that questioned every aspect of how humans define themselves in
social groups, or as being unique individuals. Also, the large and wide use of made up words
such as: Smupid, stuart, cyphoria, zwischendingen make it seem as if it were a children's book
or fiction novel. Moreover, I felt like the book with lots of pictures, and short phrases was a sad
attempt by an older generation (43-56) to connect to a “younger generation” the kids who are so
“disconnected” that they felt the need to write prose that at some time makes no sense at all.
Additionally, it is my opinion that though this book does provide some thought-provoking questions
on human identity it also insinuates that its target audience (adolescents) are a group of people who
cannot function without technology and much less focus and understand a real piece of literature
(ie. Shakespeare, or Dickens). My questions would hence be to the authors this text: Was this text
intended to have demeaning connotations? If so was it to force self-reflection? Finally, Humans have
consistently proven throughout history that we define ourselves through other “things” what make
technology special why should people care now and why is this any different from the past?
(312) :)
Pastiche
No comments:
Post a Comment