Friday, December 25, 2009

Typewriter notes

I thought a typewriter would help me write, in that it would slow down my composition and make me think more about the irreversibility of my sentences (the ceaseless push onward, that can't really be erased like handwriting). Currently though the device is serving a different purpose: it has turned into a way for me to take notes.

I hate starting up a computer when I have something to write down. And I like seeing the words, fiddling with them like blocks. So prior to this I would simply use scraps of paper, or small notebooks. This blog I would reserve for lengthier thoughts, ones that had a series of ramifications or relationships to other thoughts--or, as was more often the case, simply needed to be spun out a little in order for them to really become clear. This back and forth has changed a bit since I got a big stack of 3x5 cards over the summer. The little thoughts were now all in one place, at least, stacked up. And so I could work a little more on them there than perhaps I was used to doing--if I ran off a card, I could just take the next one in the pile. Or I could jot something down quicker and know where it would end up. There didn't need to be any hunting down of napkins stuck in between editions of Coleridge or Pope, say, in order for them to be transcribed and collected together in an electronic file.

I knew, however, that if I kept this up, I'd end up in the crazy situation of Niklas Luhmann, who numbered and filed away all his little cards, such that his workspace basically became his externalized brain (Grant and Sand showed me this a while ago).

Now, I simply type whatever thoughts I have out on the typewriter, separating them with a slash mark. So the whole thing becomes a transcription, basically, of a day or two of thinking. Whenever a thought comes into my head, I just walk over to the typewriter and smack it a bit and walk away happy that the fragment is down there, in some basic form. This can become a bit more elaborate, however, than anything I normally scribble on a piece of paper, since the writing puts you in a rhythm and draws the thoughts out of you more than with a pen. Maybe the computer works this way for some people (perhaps older people, who have experienced the world before word processing), but not for me: the act of composition basically is caught up with your thoughts, so that you spend a lot more of your time rearranging things than working off of the device--the latter being for me what is ultimately essential. I don't want the technology to disappear: I like it when its relationship to me gets foregrounded a bit more. The typewriter in that moment provides a sort of gearing down, as it were, so that I have to work a bit more against the machine, exert a little more pressure upon it, in order for more to come out.

Regardless, I am happy to have discovered my ideal way to take notes--capitalizing on that easy slippage of the typewriter into stenography. While many of my friends have found much more sophisticated ways of computerizing their note-taking process, and while I remain still a little envious of them, this seems to me so much more... how to put it? Free, breezy, part of my everyday living. Turning on the computer means entering a space that seems both too ideal and too close to consciousness. With typewriter notes, I get to play with the letters and the words in a more tangible space, a more bodily space.

As more devices take over that bodily space, this difference becomes nil, of course. According to Grant, though (who was tweeting), Lev Manovich asked an amazing question at the recent Digital Arts and Culture conference about why ubiquitous computing has not happened yet--only mobile computers like the iPhone attached to the body. It is perhaps because the gap to be cleared is asymptotic, or can't be crossed merely by a simple notion of the "bodily," however reversible we might make the latter (Merleau-Ponty). There seems to be a difference between the bodily experience involved with the foregrounded device that works against me and the body covered with devices, however much they too try to resist us in new ways. Perhaps here is some sort of contradiction that remains to be negated...

5 comments:

kneel said...

In an interview I read with Roland Barthes years ago, I remember him saying that the means of writing, the tools we use to write, change the way write (the kinds of thought created). This goes along with strains in both Engels and Heiddegar as well. (Apologies if I misspelled those two names).

Ed Baker said...

some co-incedence..

just this past couple of days (and today) have
read

-The Pleasure of the Text (RB)
-Empire of Signs (RB)

AND
Heidegger's On The Way To Language


NOW

am about to open Trakl's Poems and Prose (and follow what Heidegger posits re: George Trakl's poems)

....just for the phun-of-it!

Robyn said...

I'm glad you found the best of all possible uses for a typewriter! I received TWO typewriters for Christmas this year, an ancient 1921 Royal 10 (more for looks and daydreams) and some 1980s monstrosity that actually works pretty well.

Unlike your initial plan for more careful writing, I always thought the typewriter would be a great way to write much less carefully, because of the impossibility of corrections and revisions. I thought it would clear creative blockages in that way, and invite beautiful spontaneous prose. Turns out it's too cumbersome for doing any lengthy work, as both machines are old and much slower than a laptop keyboard when trying to write complete sentences.

I actually ended up at a similar conclusion for what to do with my machines -- I don't necessarily take notes on them, but I write up partial thoughts that I plan to put together for something. My best papers and blog posts have always been stitched out of frantic incomplete paragraphs and sentence fragments scribbled on notebook paper in no particular order. So now I'm typing them in no particular order (since, like writing in pen in a sprial notebook, there can't be any text rearranging or card filing), and I am excited to see what some piles of typed white bond will amount to. In some ways it is still slower than using a laptop to type thoughts, but that is always so daunting for me, staring at a blank Microsoft Word page with the expectation of filling it with something worth saving. The typewriters use any scrap paper I have around, and if I really want to scrap the typed-on papers later, so be it.

The Royal is incredibly slow and probably not practical at all (and I still haven't found the "1" on its keys), but you mentioned stenography -- these beasts are a great reason to learn some type-able shorthand, or make up your own.

Michael said...

You're going to have to find out a way to type on both at the same time, you know.

My question is always why that virtual sheet of paper is so much foreboding than the real one--and I guess you're right... it's because I love the fact also that I can write on napkins alongside the 8x11 in the real world...

Ed Baker said...

my old typewrter and I
produced lots

here is link to Points/Counterpoints

http://fact-simile.blogspot.com/2009/06/pointscounterpoints-reader-review.html

more on my site

here is model of my original typewriter:

http://notebloc.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/underwood-typewriter.jpg


at one point in my life I could type 60 wpm! and passed the Civil Service exam with a 55 wpm score with 3 errors!

several ways to correcr t errors

white out,
korrect-o-type, correct white press on strips

my old underwood rusted away need a "new" one