Matt's Times : reading response 3

Sven Birkerts is, in my opinion, a semi-confusing writer. Throughout The Owl Has Flown I could only interpret one ideal that Birkerts was trying to say. Today’s generation has so much information thrown at them that they only skim the surface of that one piece of data before moving on to the next, whereas the older generation did not have as much, and what they did have was not always available, so what they did have available they dug into it deeply to find its hidden message and so obtain for themselves, wisdom.
“When books are rare, had to obtain, and expensive, the reader must compensate through intensified focus, must like Menocchio read the same passage over and over, memorizing, inscribing the words deeply on the slate of the attention, subjecting them to interpretive pressure not unlike what students of scripture practice upon their texts.” “Access is not a problem but Proliferation is” and “The result is that we know countless more “bits” of information, both important and trivial, than our ancestors”
I believe that these passages are the essence of what Birkerts is trying to convey to the reader. Although these passages are in my opinion the culmination of the first part of The Owl Has Flown they state Birkerts idea. The essay continues to describe in fuller detail how to obtain wisdom or that a person can not have wisdom without resonance. As soon as I read this part of the essay I realized they were important passages, but as I read on I think that the passages really helped me to comprehend what Birkerts was getting at, and that is that many or even most readers today don’t dwell on what they are reading rather they read it then go on to the next piece of writing to read. That is the flaw in the system, that is why the older generation are wise because they had far fewer books and were able allow the taste of the words flow over their tongues and down their gullet, and I know this is true because at times I also just swallow the material straight up without really tasting it.
I believe that to contrast Birkerts with that of Clive Thompson’s would be appropriate for the fact that they are both arguing that about today’s generation. Thompson’s claim is that technology is helping our generation to write better, whereas Birkerts claim is that all the technology and mountains of books and papers available are ruining this gereration. I think something can be pulled out of this, that a writer needs to read to write. What I am thinking is that much of today’s communication happens over texts or social networking sites or even e-mail and that it must be read therefore much of what is read to today probably does not need to be thought about, which in reality does not help the wisdom process. However books, they can help, a reader only needs to dig deep.