This could well be the best chapter so far.
I'm referring to Chapter 8 of John Dyer's book, From the Garden to the City. Dyer continues with his riveting use of illustrations and anecdotes to introduce his topics. The technology of language which God has given us can be used in powerful ways to communicate. At the same time, the words people use, which we listen to, can cause us to make all sorts of judgments––judgments about how we'll listen (or whether we would at all), what we deem important and so forth. Words come with packaging, and communication technology brings all sorts of packaging (and perhaps, baggage).
First, Dyer defines what a "medium" is for us: the package(s) which we use to communicate. When we wrap our words with technology, the values, identity and meaning that come with that technology are right there with the message in such a way that the two can almost be seen as one.
Examples of this might be email, text messages on our cell phones, a handwritten note, or even a Facebook wall post. "The message is the content we transmit from our minds to our audience, while everything that surrounds those words can be considered a medium" (page 118,emphasis is the author's). The mediums we use do at least three things: 1) communicate meaning, 2) create new cultures, and 3) shape our thinking patterns.
I want to explore what Dyer says about the first of these and then use subsequent posts to tackle the other two––yes, I think it's that important. For many years, churches and church leaders have gone back and forth with each other about the message and the medium, trying to determine if we can rightfully use any method/medium to communicate the gospel or whether we need to use greater discernment in how we proclaim the message since it can get buried or distorted in the medium.
Meaning comes through the medium we choose to use. If I've become upset with someone to the point of anger, I can fire off a tersely worded email or even a text message really telling them off and letting them "have it." Or, I can choose to hand write a note letting them know what their words did to me. Which do you think will come across "better" if I want to seek reconciliation?
The formality of the handwritten note will convey a different meaning than the text message or email, largely because there is a different layer of interaction with a note as opposed to a text. Dyer makes the point, "The further back we go technologically, the more layers of interaction [are] required." (page 119).
If you were to trace our communication technology from simple handwritten notes and letters up to our day's text messages and emails, you'd find that the more advanced we get in our communication the fewer layers, steps and social conventions are brought to bear in our communication. When I receive a handwritten "Thank You," I know the person has put some thought into what they've said. It doesn't mean they wouldn't have meant it if they had sent a text, but I know they wouldn't have given it anywhere near as much thought. It's even possible, if more were involved, the "thank you" could have been blind-copied in an email to all of us at one time, thus decreasing the personal meaning coming directly to me.
Using this same example of a handwritten note, I also realize more difficulty went into getting this to me than firing off a text message from a cell phone. The meaning which comes through implies more work on the part of the sender, thus making it seem more important, more personal, more special to me. Why do you think TV programs or movies highlight the utter stupidity of a girl breaking up with her boyfriend via text message as opposed to telling him to his face? It seems that there is a principle involved here: "The older technology makes the event seem more significant." (page 120) Meaning, value and identity get communicated, no matter the technology we use; it just depends on what meaning, what value and which identity you want associated with your communication. Get the point?
Finally, under this heading, Dyer explores how speed factors into the meaning of our words. we can send message so quickly now, they're referred to as "instant messages." This can be quite handy on occasion; it can also be very hazardous to meaning. Dyer references "Mail Goggles" which Google uses with their "gmail" accounts. These are barriers that come into play late at night when you send an email via Gmail which ask if you really want to send that message. Why would they do such an intrusive act? Because many people have proven to be either drunk or emotional compromised late at night, thus being more prone to send off that vicious email with little to no thought.
Granted, the speed at which a message is communicated doesn't always mean it's less important. I can send a vitally needed phone number to my wife instantly via a text message and this would be deemed important to both of us. If I had to write it down on a post card and send it to her via USPS, well, chances of it getting there any time before five days have passed are very small, thus minimizing the importance of the message I just sent.
Next time, we'll see where Dyer takes us in seeing how mediums shape culture (and cultural divides), thus seeing how important this conversation is regarding how we communicate the gospel.