Literacies Lost

In education and technology circles there has been much talk in recent years of multiliteracy - the ability to communicate in different technological media that has become as vital as reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic in today's world. Like the traditional literacy that went before, multiliteracy vastly expands one's platform for receiving, processing and sharing information. There is a lot to be said for the ability to read, write, blog, vlog and tweet one's way through life. Yet having unboxed all these shiny new skills, it is worth checking the bill: what price have we paid? 

Pitfalls

A mind no less great than that of Socrates once warned against the dangers of the written word. He argued that writing would be inflexible to subtleties of meaning, blunt the powers of memory and, most dangerously, lead to the risk of superficial understanding. Whatever the virtues of writing (and my own insatiable indulgence in the written word), I can't prove him entirely wrong. Since Socrates' day, similar objections have been raised about all manner of innovations - not least the new media. In fact, as the power of the media expanded from stone tablets to tablet computers, so did the potential for problems. If Socrates was concerned that writing would tarnish the memory, I shudder to think what he would say of the multiliterate shopping list, which could be anything from a quick photograph of the refrigerator to the Out of Milk smartphone app. (Not to mention the fact that I had to Google the app's name, having forgotten it. Googling is another vital multiliteracy, of course.) 

Reading the Word and the World

Education icon Paolo Freire, in his work on adult literacy, referred to "reading the word and the world". His take strongly emphasised the empowerment that came with literacy. However, it is the skill of reading of the world - those fine details that do not translate into print - that seems to me to be the literacy we increasingly misplace when we learn to read... and may be permanently losing with our nonstop-hyperactive-always-on multiliteracies. 

The Life Literates

I am honoured to have known a good handful of people who do not read or write words - so-called illiterates. And time and again I have been humbled to find that I am the one who is lost in their deep, focused, enveloping presence - a presence that is not disturbed by text or tweet or notification. They are the ones who have read the thoughts I had not dared to cross the threshold of awareness. The ones who analyse the codes of Nature. They are the ones who write in gardens with immortal evergreens, in crafts that far outlive them, and in the stories that they retell from memory and embellish in the heat of the unrecorded moment, never to be rewound, paused or replayed. They are the ones who, rather than reap the words of those gone before, or sow their own for the future, flourish in the ever-evasive present. 

Yes, there are injustices in this. Literacy as we know it is the usher for opportunity, and multiliteracy perhaps even more so. Today literacy is theoretically a basic human right, and one nobody should be robbed of it. But how much of the full spectrum of human experience has the modern multiliterate become unable to read and write? 

Work Ethic: An Inside Job

Image: David, Petrol Attendant
and Work Ethic Master, via mtcleroux

I have come to the conclusion that fears of a zombie apocalypse may be perfectly justified. With a small modification. It is not the Walking Dead that are to be feared. It is the Working Dead. 

Defining Work

A dear mentor of mine used to intone, mantra-like, that work is to the soul what food is to the body. And I agree. I love to work: work is my play and I approach it in that spirit. Work, here, is defined as meaningful, constructive activity. What is meaningful? The answer to that question is personal and profound. I am often struck by the intelligence and zeal that some "unskilled workers" bring to what they do. One example in my neighbourhood is the radiant petrol attendant David, pictured right, whose professionalism, dedication, integrity and genuine kindness would be an asset at any level of any organization. His work is meaningful because he makes it so. 

But there is another kind of work: the "daily grind" that societal structure requires in exchange for the currency that is said to make the world go round. Work, in this case, does not necessarily have meaning. It does not necessarily involve scope for initiative, and performance (which tends to be mediocre at best) is driven by punishment rather than intrinsic reward. Maintaining acceptable levels of mediocrity is rewarded extrinsically with a pay cheque. Even in a world where MBAs are as common as weeds, this Working Dead model still persists. In fact, it has undergone a renaissance since the advent of call centres. And, if I may risk the pun, it simply doesn't work. 

Defining Ethic

The most suitable definition of ethic in the context of work is that of a guiding philosophy. When it comes to work ethic, the fundamental question would be: 

What is my guiding philosophy about work? 

Then again, the entire implication of work ethic is that work is unpleasant. Why would anyone need to be ethical about something they simply loved doing?

Work Ethic that Works

I don't have a final answer on the problems of the unpleasant work that needs doing in this world, or the masses of people who claim they need jobs. There are, however, three sources that offer interesting perspectives on how work ethic can be fostered from within. 

The Play Ethic is musician-author Pat Kane's "Manifesto for a Different Way of Living". Kane takes play seriously: seriously enough to have devoted this tome and a second career to its study. The book is no light read, but a delightful shift in perspective on play as meaningful and productive - remarkably similar to my earlier definition of work. 

Philosopher Alan Watts investigated the nature of work with a rare and courageous perspicacity. His  thought-provoking lecture What if Money Was No Object lays the deadening paradox of working for money bare, and has become vastly popular online. In it he even constructs a logical explanation why choosing an occupation that brings you joy has the potential to be more profitable than anything else - but of course, profit is not the object of the game. It is simply a side effect. 

The Venus Project, a radical proposal for a functional society, offers yet another perspective. In the organic sci-fi cities proposed by founder Jacque Fresco there is would be very little "work" to do. Scientific knowledge and intelligent design would take care of most of the nitty-gritty, while many of the profitable industries of today would be obsolete. Without poverty, disease, dishonesty and inefficiency (not to mention the monetary system), what demand would one supply? Even if this concept calls for some suspension of disbelief, it is worth considering how one would pass one's time in a world like that. 

These three bold perspectives may run wildly contrary to societal values, and of course many whip-cracking bosses and listless employees will dismiss them as idealistic. Idealistic they may be, but are they any less realistic than the model of grudgingly working (or even being exploited) only for money and out of fear of punishment? In the final analysis, true work ethic cannot be forced on anyone, but grows out of a sense of meaning. It simply is an inside job.