http://www.howboringistheinternet.org

a while back during 1 of those pre-essay moments (where u really should b starting an essay, but instead distract urself with other things), i stumbled across this url: www.wwwdotcom.com

svendsen argues that “few types of apparatus destroy time more efficiently than a TV. There is ultimately hardly any other reason for watching TV for so many hours an evening than to get rid of time that is superfluous or disagreeable” (23). i wood argue that the net surpasses tv in this respect. this is bcuz of the nature of the net – a medium that encourages what we might call “superfluous” interaction. not only r websites created 2 be viewed by a passive audience, but the net is also a place, unlike tv, where any1 can contribute. MySpace, Friendster…even Blogger lol ;-) r websites that can produce some pretty mundane, pointless stuff. as we have seen in class, the personal lives of strangers are abundant on the net. plus, unlike tv, the net is limitless…this means the possibility of more and more crap floating around (i have a friend who spends hours on end each week looking stuff up on Wikipedia – learning things that may or may not b true).

of course, the net isnt always boring or provoked by boredom. it can often b the opposite through the sharing of (valid) information, academic message boards, etc.

but all of this is just pretense 4 what i really want 2 talk about: internet jargon. wtf is the deal with net language? does it represent some sort of boredom with the structure of the english language?

of course, poets have been subverting the english language 4 centuries – does this mean that webspeak is a form of poetry? i highly doubt it. poets go against the conventions of language because they are often highly aware of the language in the first place. someone in a chat room says “brb” merely because it is faster than typing “be right back.” if anything, webspeak shows an indifference 2 the english language.

internet jargon exists bcuz of a desire 4 convenience. i wood argue that convenience leads 2 indifference – how many peeple ask how their computer works, or how their bread is toasted?…we dont ask, we just accept it bcuz all that matters is that we can play Doom and minesweeper and that our complete-breakfast is complemented by one serving of grain. i think im fairly accurate in my assumption when i say that most peeple who use webspeak have little concern for grammar and spelling – the convenience of the language forces them 2 be indifferent 2 “proper” english (even if it is just momentary indifference).

simmel says that the “essence of the blasé attitude is an indifference toward the distinctions between things” (14). langbauer uses “boredom” and “indifference” as almost interchangeable terms 2 describe a feminist escape from masculine narratives. warhols indifference is in forgetting things and not wanting 2 find meaning in them.

indifference and boredom seem 2 be so closely tied together that i begin 2 wonder if convenience (which often creates indifference) should be somewhere in the mix…it would certainly correspond with the introduction of “boredom” as a result of the industrial revolution.

omfg this is much 2 difficult 2 keep writing in this jargon. i suppose im so non-indifferent 2 the english language that this exercise has been anything but boring 2 me and rather strenuous. im gonna end right there.