Hyper-readers and their Reading Engines, James Sosnoski

Sosnoki’s article breaks down the different (and changing) elements of using “computer-assisted reading (CAR)” (162). In the eight parts he describes the constructive aspects that differs from printed texts. As I read this article I was interested in how naturally this technology has been incorporated into the “classroom” as I was growing up. Even today, as I am analyzing this mode of reading with the use of the web, I see it as an ingrained part of how society uses technology.

1)      Filtering:

Reading is a process of selection: No matter where you align yourself in the debate about how much the text influences the reader over against how much is the text a subject of the reader’s imagination the text is usually understood to provoke the selection of the details. In constructive hyper-reading, the selection criteria employed often govern the reader’s interests before the texts are even found (Sosnoski 165-1660).

The web—the search engine allows the reader to search for a text with an intention in mind. We were taught at a young are that “Key Words” were necessary to bring up an article that we were looking for—whole sentences with unneeded words wouldn't give us the correct results.

2)      Skimming:

To find only the information relevant to the issue discussed

Hypertexts are designed so that such intelligent skimming is the norm which helps readers who have too much to read (167).

In a classroom setting, Skimming is a sin. Skimming means that we won’t be getting the whole “point” out of a text; however, when online skimming is seen as necessary to get through the whole text in a reasonable manner. (Does that get back to how we construct time today? We must skim because we don’t have time to read everything available to us on the Web)

3)      Pecking:

The coherence of the text in constructive hyper reading is more the result of the reader than the writer. As consequence, pecking is an entirely suitable technique (168).

Personally, I feel like this relates back to skimming rather easily, however it’s like we jump around in a text, and then we determine what type of meaning to get out of the jumping back and forth we do.

4)      Imposing

The information available on the web holds little significance until a hyper-readers search it for items relevant to their inquiries—readers assimilate the items to their interests and hence render them significant in the context of their concerns (169).

What I really like about the idea of imposing is that it is based on searching with the readers own outcome in mind, and not the writers. It begs the question, is the web a reader’s tool more than anything else?

5)      Filming:

“…but I saw the film”

Graphics often play a more meaningful role than words (169).

Are you guys paying attention to the text, or are you more drawn in by the images and videos that I am posting? 

The idea that graphics hold key to the Web makes me question the role of print comics, which is a image-text hybrid. If a comic is image and text does it hold more attention than just a text that doesen't have images in print? I feel like that is a very subjective concept. I personally get more out of a novel than I do a graphic novel because I am more in tune with text than images. The same is online: I read a text before I spend time on the images on a website. (I must be weird).

Comics aside, Sosnoski's reference “…but I say the film” is very relevant in the classroom today for one) people always tell me (an English Lit major!) to forget reading all my texts for class--get them on tape or "watch the film". The best example i have of this is The Scarlet Letter in the movie Easy A. In the movie she makes a joke to a teacher about not reading the book, but reading the move. Essentially, "I saw the movie…isn’t that the same thing?"

I believe that the answer is no. If a picture says a thousand word, I would rather read those thousand words because I, as the consumer, would get more out of it. (However, I'm not all that innocent of that line of thinking. When I was younger I took a reading quiz on a Harry Potter book when i hadn't read up to that point in the series--but I had seen the movie!)

6)      Trespassing:

Textual burglars- break into electronic texts and once they have found the source codes hidden from sight, steal them away with their cut&paste tools and reassemble them in their own home pages (170).

Honestly, I think that the concept of “textual burgling” or plagiarism in the classroom has always been “a big deal”. Therefore, in a class setting, a student must directly reference where we get information.

Outside the classroom: if google sees that anyone is using copywrite information on Blogger, it will get shutdown. Textual burgling is a concept that goes back to “owning intellectual rights” and is very visible on Youtube as well as other sites.

7)      De-authorization:

Dismiss the authors’ intentions by replacing them with their own (170).

When I search for information on the web, I don’t pay attention to what the author’s intentions are because I have my own intentions on reading/skimming/picking that article/site. Growing up with the web, we would search for information with our own intentions in mind

8)      Fragmenting:

Organizing textual features in patterns relevant to their own concerns weather logical, topological, or associative (172).

I feel like we are taught the constrains in how to write. I specifically remember my teacher in grade school telling me that i must know the rules of writing before we break them. However, i think that even the Web has a general rule to organizing information--even if it is different than what we are used to.

For example: I laid out my post in a very logical order (numbered). It is the same order that Sosnoski used. I was curious to see if anyone just skimmed my post, if the order helped you jump around the information. My idea was to see if my reader would think I was just rewriting Sosnoski’s chapter and respond to just a point or two.