Journal 3 - Janecia Britt

Well in the simplest way of saying technology has created a quicker way to circulate writing. Social media is a prime example of this idea of quick or swift circulation.  As said in the OWS article. “ The brevity of twitter messages- limited to 140 characters- almost seems to be purposefully designed for quick circulation.” and that authors using these mediums are rhetorically savvy about how they can draw in their audience with just a few words, using the brevity to their advantage, anticipating future considerations of distribution.  You could argue writing loses value without circulation. It poses the question: What value does writing have if not shared or circulated?

Without modern technology movements are slow to form and evolve.  The Women’s Peace Movement relied on postcards, banners and T-shirts. Using a typewriter to type out letters. Imagine what their movement could have been if they had Instagram? Or even just Facebook.  But without circulation writing can be more intimate, this also a notion that accompanies a lack of technology. Without technology there is privacy, because as we no nothing is private on the Internet.  The Women’s Peace Movement when speaking about their newsletter mentioned this a bit  “On one level, this showed that the community was a small one. On another, the motif of the personal address emphasized intimacy and respect as an aspiration no matter how far-flung its readership.”

The movement then advanced to chain letters, which increased their circulation. It was the first means of circulation that included self-participation. And isn’t that what technology is about? Man and innovation interacting? Even though this new technology of chain letters is far from the type of social interaction we have today, it is for sure a rhetorical savvyness like mentioned earlier. They anticipated the circulation of these letters and by giving women a way to participate they created a social web of letters. Which as I posed earlier, isn’t that what writing is about? All the technological advances in writing have been more or less for the cause of circulation. The printing press, the computer, social media. We want words to spread far and wide; we want ideas to be accessible to everyone.  What value can we place on writing if it isn’t accessible? If it can’t be circulated?