Reading some 1850s biographical sketches of earlier 18th century thinkers such as Rousseau and Frederick the Great, I’m struck by something I’m often struck by when I read materials written prior to the advent of the kinds of technology from the TV to the smartphone, (the one I’m using right now to dictate this post!).
Prior to these technologies, facility with and immersion in *the word* was the defining characteristic of the truly cultured person.
You not only pick this up from reading their torrents of sophisticated and vocabulary-rich sentences, but just from the more intangible sense that for them, there wasn’t much of an intellectual nature that was or even could be engaged in or expressed by a higher mode than *the book*.
I like to think I’m a fairly well read person as these things go in our brain-rotting media technology-soaked day and age. I can read from and enjoy a wide variety of much older books from that much earlier time, though I admit to my great shame that Shakespeare still nearly totally defeats me and much of Dickens is actually quite hard for me to maintain extended focus on. Even something as recent as certain writings of Jack London, barely 100 years ago, can leave me feeling intellectually weary, not because it was unpleasant to read but because it was just simply so dense and rich.
I was given several years of opportunity to study closely classical rhetoric in college, so I read a ton of ancient speeches about political and religious and historical and social matters. I’ve been fortunate enough to have to bury myself in some of the best translations of Plato and Aristotle and Homer in order to teach certain Humanities classes over the last few years.
And of course, I’ve been neck-deep in teaching Latin, and less occasionally, Greek, for multiple years, which experience has often made it necessary to think a good bit more deeply about English itself than I otherwise might have.
Which all is precisely why I can see sometimes when I read these older materials like what I’m reading now how very terribly much has been lost in our time. I said earlier that it was traceable back to the rise of technologies such as TV, but maybe it was earlier than that. Maybe the moment electricity was harnessed and led to such (for us) primitive marvels as the telegraph and the original telephone the handwriting was on the wall.
The baneful effects of TV itself are easily driven home simply from reading Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 and realizing that the exact same envious and lazy attitude that caused the rise of the “fireman” to burn all the books actually exists in the minds of many dull-witted, dopamine-junkie non-readers today. And then you find a remark by the sci-fi master Isaac Asimov in the early 50s to the effect that he did not want his stories adapted for television under his own name because he thought the then-new medium was going to make everything he had done overly simplistic and shallow.
Fast forward to now, when even blogs have so radically changed in the last half a dozen years such that now almost nobody does long form text blogs anymore, because almost nobody has the patience to actually *read* anything, but instead prefers very tiny blocks of text composed of only a few very simple sentences interspersed liberally with embedded videos that, surprise!, actually are unbelievably simplistic and shallow in content and delivery.
Contrast “vlogs” with these remarkable, lengthy word-feasts from C.A. Sainte-Beuve’s biographical sketch on the philosophe Denis Diderot:
You seclude yourself for a fortnight with the writings of some illustrious dead man – poet or philosopher; you study him, you turn him this way and that, you question him at your leisure; you make him pose for you, so to speak;.. each feature in turn comes forward and of its own motion takes its place in the countenance you are striving to reproduce; just as one star after another becomes visible and begins to shine in its appointed place in the panorama of a lovely night. With the vague, abstract general type, which alone was apparent that the first glance, becomes blended and incorporated by degrees a real, well defined individuality, more and more accentuated, shining with ever increasing brilliancy; you feel the birth of the likeness and watch its growth; and on the day, the moment, when you have seized the familiar trick, the revelatory smile, the imperceptible blemish, the secret and distressing wrinkle which hides itself in vain under the hair already growing thin – at that moment analysis vanishes in creation, the portrait speaks and lives, you have found a man.
“There is always pleasure in this sort of secret study, and there will always be a place for the works which a keen and sincere enthusiasm reproduce as a result of such study. Always, in our opinion, good taste and art will give opportuneness and some lasting quality to the briefest and most specialized works, if, while setting forth but a narrowly restricted portion of nature and of life, they are stamped with that unique seal of the diamond, the imprint of which is recognisable at a glance, which is handed down unchangeable and perfect through the ages, and which one would try in vain to describe or to counterfeit.” – Portraits of the Eighteenth Century, Volume II, pp. 89-90
and
“…it has seemed to us that, despite all that has taken place in the world and all that is still taking place…a portrait of…one of those men whose peers are in all ages very rare, would be no more a puerile matter today than a year ago; and by turning our attention at this time to Diderot, philosopher and artist, by following him closely in his attractive private life, by watching him speak and listening to his thoughts in his most unreserved moments, we shall at least have gained, in addition to the acquaintance of one more great man, the pleasure of forgetting for a few days the distressing spectacle of the society in which we live, so much poverty and turbulence among the masses, so much ill-defined alarm and such consuming selfishness among the higher classes; governments devoid of ideas and of grandeur; heroic nations sacrificed; the sentiment of patriotism dying out and nothing broader to take its place; religion falling back into the depths from which it must conquer the world anew, and the future becoming more and more veiled in mist, concealing a shore which does not yet appear.” – ibid, p. 91
If you’ve made it through this very lengthy post, perhaps you yourself can feel the point I was driving at.
My, how very terribly much we have lost in our frantic and unwise rush for ever- increasing mastery over the means not only volumes of, but more importantly for us, *speed* of communication and *immediacy* of understanding.