Bolter. “Seeing and Writing”

I find Bolter’s Seeing and Writing to be discussing somewhat of the same issues that were briefly mentioned in the Ambition/Fear article of the changes and evolution of the perception and action of reading and writing from the effects of new technology. However, I find that Bolter’s writing tends to be a bit biased when it comes to assessing the values and realistic potential of the new medias whether they be positive or negative. And also when comparing the text being created and used in computer space to its prior tangible print space, I find comparison to be a bit unfair to the older technologies, and the product of printing.

I do find it interesting how through the capabilities of new media and technology, we are able to create a nostalgia for the old techniques and values of earlier traditions as a reaction against that same technology they are using; like William Morris’ techniques for production and the computer-based creation of a typeface using mathematical formulas and geometric. But there are areas of the text that seem to over generalise leave me in need of further explanation. For instance Bolter says “Typographers and graphic designers who complain about the mess their naive users make on their terminal screens are themselves children of a different technology and are apt to judge the computer’s writing and drawing space in the wrong terms.” He also goes on to say that “Typography in print begins with the letter and never goes much further.” He seems to limit the the creative forces behind print material (publications more so than magazines and ads) for the sake of his argument without the proper defence to back it up.