How we structure the writing process shapes not only how we articulate our ideas to the world, but also, how we work through those ideas ourselves. Writing software is more essential and intimate than any of these, because writing is thinking. I regularly cycle through new email clients, task managers, note-taking applications, data analysis tools, and image editors.įor clues about the potential impact of a purpose-built writing tool, just look back a few decades to the emergence of the word processor. I am a bit of a software junkie, so there’s nothing unusual about me trying out a new app as part of my endless quest for productivity perfection, or returning to an app I’ve tinkered with in order to take it for a more dedicated spin. The impact of our writing environment is on my mind because my writing process has just been transformed by Scrivener, an writing application I purchased several years ago but have only begun to properly use. That’s why it pays to think about what we want from our writing tools: not just as individual writers and communicators, but as readers and human beings with a stake in the ongoing evolution of our written culture. It’s not just the keyboard that shapes our prose, of course far more influential is the software in which we do our writing. Email alone ensures that most of us distribute more words per day than our grandparents might have sent forth in a year.įor all the time we spend cranking out words at a keyboard, however, we rarely stop to ask how all that keyboard time affects the way we write and communicate. And who isn’t a writer these days? From academics and students to corporate bloggers and analysts, there are few professionals who don’t spend at least some of their time cranking out paragraphs. Is it really so different for current-day scribes? It’s not hard to goad writers into drawing virtual blood by asking them to expound on the relative merits of Ulysses and Bear, Markdown and rich text, or Microsoft Word vs Google Docs. “ntil the history of their tools is adequately described,” Shelby writes, “the achievements of medieval masons cannot be properly evaluted from a technological point of view.” Shelby locates the geometry of these iconic buildings in the specific types of compass and square that masons had access to in the medieval era. Historian Lon Shelby wrote extensively about the building practices of the medieval masons behind the creation of such cathedrals as Chartres, iconic buildings that owe their creation and execution to the specific tools masons adopted for measurement and layout. I have a theory that for writers, digital writing tools are just as influential as the mason’s choice of a particular compass or square. The icon indicates free access to the linked research on JSTOR.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |