1. The site in which I will be critically analyzing/evaluating, is Wikipedia.
2. Although Wikipedia is an informative web based encyclopedia which gives detailed accounts of almost any subject in the world, it is not a legitimate form of writing because it is the medium by which something is presented which is important, not the content which is presents, and therefore novels and written sources provide a better medium to understand and interpret a work, than any electronic source ever could.
3. “ “ Words are still words- on a page, on a screen- what’s the difference? “ There is a much shrugging of the shoulders. But this will never do. The changes are profound and the differences consequential. Nearly weightless though it is, the word printed on a page is a thing. The configuration impulses on a screen is not- it is a manifestation, an indeterminate entity both particle and wave, an ectoplasmic arrival and departure. The former occupies a position in space- on a page, in a book- and is verifiably there. The latter, once dematerialized, digitalized, back into storage, into memory, cannot be said to exist in quite the same way.” (Birkerts, 154-155)
This quotation shows that although the words may be the same between a written source and an electronic source, they really aren’t because although they look the same, an electronic source can be changed so easily, and is only really present in cyber space, while words on a page are written and printed, there for good, there for interpretation, and there to stay. A book is much more powerful than an electronic source in this way, and no matter how hard an electronic source can try and emulate a written one, the emulation will never be the same.
4. A counter argument which I could perceive to come my way, would be that although an electronic source will never quite be the same as a written one, if they have the exact some content then aren’t they the same? I can see where this argument originates, but I would have to disagree because when you reading something online you do not feel the same connectedness to a novel or written source. Reading a book you can see the hard work and effort put into the process of writing so many pages and words, and the length and amount of time it took to create such a work. Online all you see is a few long pages of an article and realize that it took little or no work to copy the written source onto the internet. A book also has the unique ability to have a few pictures if necessary added to the novel and with all the word and pages, this gives the reader a great sense of vision, and helps the reader see where the writer was going with the work. On the internet even if an article or “novel” has pictures, it is hard to focus in on them and interpret their meaning with all the advertisements and pop ups that occur on so many websites. The bottom line is the internet is much more commercialized than a book, and takes away from the true meaning and work of literature.
