On page 9 in Track Changes you say that with electronic word processing one can “always change the text today instead of tomorrow.” Why is this exclusive to electronic processing? It is unclear to me why this point is about the relationship between writing and word processing and not just a point about procrastination on a general level.

In terms of George R.R. Martin’s (among others’) unwillingness to change the way they write to newer forms, is this always to make sure the writing is in its purest form, or can the writing benefit from changing the formula and allowing access to maybe different ideas? Can maintaining the same tool cause a rut?

Are the ideas of tacit knowledge and materiality inherently linked, or is tacit knowledge more based in physicality?

In Track Changes you reference how George R.R. Martin prefers the word-processor WordStar to more current and advanced word-processors due to WordStar’s bare interface that leaves little to no room from one to get distracted from writing. Do you think this same type of mode of thinking can be applied to other programs and software in that older versions of current software can in some senses be more efficient when it comes to the task the user wants to accomplish despite these programs being less efficient technically speaking?

Also, I was wondering who were the unresponsive authors that you reached out to in the process of doing research for your book and why did you reach out to them in particularly?

You reference tacit knowledge in Track Changes and how it applies to a writer’s workflow, specifically that of George R.R. Martin. Do you think that one needs to have a tacit knowledge of a program they use for their works in order to be successful in their profession and output of works? Furthermore, do you think that a person with tacit knowledge of a program has more creative sessions than a person who does not possess a tacit knowledge of said program? Does this mean that we should devote ourselves to understanding the ins-and-outs of every version of every software we use for are writing purposes or any processes of value to us we undertake for that matter?

In your preface, I find it quite interesting that you point out how ‘Text” has actually evolved into a verb, along with an expansion of its noun form. Is this change empowering to text as a form of communication or deteriorating? What implications does this transformation have for the history of other manners of communication (such as speech, sound, and the moving image)?

On page 5, you discussed how the personal computer and word processing were so very everpresent by a certain point that they were essentially inescapable. Is this true for most (or even all) popular technologies and new media? Even if we are granted a choice, is avoiding new technology a viable option of living cohesively in a constantly developing world?

The process of revisions seems to be something that is continuously revised. Is there a point at which we will reach an optimal state for this process? Or will there always be more room for increased speed and convenience?

1. Do you think the portrayals of word processing in film, literature and the arts are accurate? If not, what sorts of biases do they hold? Why do these stereotypes about the technology exist?

2. What is the justification for an author adhering to an old word processor just to stay in his “zone”? It is probably more costly and wasteful to pursue 80’s tech rather than adapt. Isn’t it a bit frivolous of Martin as he could simply never connect his computer to a network and run a WordStar emulator?

3. What comes next? Would more functionality in a word processor be enough to take us to the step in digital literacy or do we need a more major overhaul?

4. Since we didn’t read the whole book, who was the first??

You have discussed writers such as George R.R. Martin who use obsolete word processors such as WordStar. You justify this in terms of its practicality for the authors, but what about the issue of sentimentality? Some writers can also use a certain writing format because of their attachment. To what extent is our use of certain word processing technologies related with sentiment?

Writing is considered a tool of self-expression. But it is also true that certain tools we use to write are also forms of self-expression. Therefore, to what extent is our word processor a mode of expressing ourselves?

We have become intrinsically connected to technology. As you mention in your article, even though Martin may be considered old-fashioned in his use of WordStar, he is still connected to the technological world (13). Is it truly possible for us to disconnect ourselves from the technology that surrounds us?

1. A topic that has come up in our class a couple times this past week is the inefficiency of the keyboard. Do you think there is a likelihood of a new keyboard system replacing the current QWERTY one, and if so, would some stick to it the way George R. R. Martin sticks to WordStar?

2. Are there any technologies or forms of writing that you think are so outdated, or so inconvenient, that no authors have or will ever go back to them as technology continues to develop?

3. You address the element of gender in the history of the typewriter. Do you think the association of the typewriter with the female secretary is dead or still present? Do you think gender standards plays any role in how we view certain forms of publication or media today?