Notation and the Art of Reading

In our class reading, "Notation and the Art of Reading," Karl Young explores the idea of writing as a codified form of speech--a means of documenting oral language--and its progression (or deterioration, depending on your viewpoint) throughout various regions and eras. He tracks notation as a more animated means of conveyance than it is in modern society, dependent upon gesture and vocalization in order to derive its full meaning.

Young also seems concerned about the loss of that gesture and vocalization in modern notation. He displays a reserved, but nevertheless present, hostility toward more modern media, as well as "speed reading," for which he seems to hold a particular distaste. He documents his concern over modern notation's tendency toward being "ephemeral."

I should probably make it clear that, while his essay is a charming record of some portions of writing history, I disagree with his assertion that notation has been bastardized to the point of simple data transference. I feel in fact that his exhortations on the state of modern notation smack of single-minded adherence to antiquity. Young seemingly casts aside commonly held notions of progress within the English language, the modern state of which allows for both more specificity in notation and a broader range of subject matter, and favors older, more ambiguous forms of writing that rely heavily on the performance of the reader(s) and slow reading to understand them. Personally, I feel like written works haven't suffered at all as a result, and I certainly don't see modern poets as some saviors of noble notation, which Young so readily insinuates in his essay. At the very least, the idea that old forms of notation were somehow more tangible, or were a more important representation of the author's experiences, is an affront to modern authors of all genres.

Even given the amount of media available to the masses in 1983 (significantly less than now, given the advent of the internet), I feel like Young has looked over the actual performance value of television, which offers today the same engrossing performance value that reading aloud, artful script and colorful gesture must have offered in earlier times. He also ignores the specialization that has created so many different genres (including the one, ironically, that Young uses to tout the merits of older forms of notation: the essay) and allowed for more efficient means of data transference, a term that, given the context of Young's writing, may as well be a four-letter word.

That being said, I can certainly appreciate the intricacies and beauty that occur in the old forms of notation that Young wrote about. Our views on the dreariness of reading and the amount of creativity and thought that go into both the reading and writing of modern notation, however, differ.