Page 173 - Literacy in the New Media Age

162 LITERACY IN THE NEW MEDIA AGE

graphics of the game. When one watches a reader of these pages reading, one is
struck by the similarity between the reading of the screens which are here
discussed, and the reading of this page. The guiding principle is that of
‘following relevance’, according to principles of relevance which belong to the
reader – and perhaps are shared (already) by his community. The reading path is
not ‘regular’, in the sense of a traditional page, but nor is it regular in an easily
described other way. It is established by the criteria of relevance which the
reader brings to the page. The elements which are read – images are certainly
attended to first or in preference to word – are each very carefully examined. The
reading path is not regular in spatial or linear terms – there is no clear sequence
which might be circular or linear or have some other form. The reading path is
established according to the principles of relevance of the reader. Of course, as I
mentioned, the page is already designed with this kind of reader and these kinds
of reading principle in mind.
But here lies an absolute and I think profound difference between the
traditional page and its reading path, and the new page – derived from the
principles of the organisation of the screen – and its reading path. The former
coded a clear path, which had to be followed. The task of reading lay in
interpretation and transformation of that which was clearly there and clearly
organised. The new task is that of applying principles of relevance to a page
which is (relatively) open in its organisation, and consequently offers a range of
possible reading paths, perhaps infinitely many. The task of the reader in the first
case is to observe and follow a given order, and within that order to engage in
interpretation (where that too was more or less tightly policed) the task of the
reader of the new page, and of the screens which are its models, is to establish
the order through principles of relevance of the reader’s making, and to construct
meaning from that.
It is clear to me that these are utterly different principles. Of course each of
these belongs to vaster social forms of organisation. They do not exist simply as
inexplicably different forms: the one fits into the social forms and orders of the
preceding era; the other exhibits some of the social forms and orders, requirements
and tasks and demands, of the present and the future era. It is, I believe, simply
impossible now to expect young people to read in the older manner, other than as
a specialised form of learning, where clear reasons will need to be given about the
constitution of that difference and the purposes of maintaining it. Where that is
not done, the tasks of that learning are made difficult for many and impossible for
some. The screen trains its readers in certain ways, just as the page trained its
readers in its ways: the latter had its uses and functions and purposes, which
were the uses and functions and purposes of the society in which it existed. The
new form has its uses and functions and purposes in relation to new social,
cultural, political and economic demands. It is not the task of the young to puzzle
about and discover that, and it is not surprising if they treat with
incomprehension and disdain that which makes no sense and cannot be made sense