HW # 14 - Second Text

GAMES

In this excerpt, Steven Johnson talks of games and how people view them V.S. how they view reading. He talks of how most people view them; they are " a colossal waste of time," while reading is a virtue and every child should be a reader. He explains that the reason why games are viewed as the worst is because they are always " contrasted with older conventions of reading." He then presents a very interesting idea, what if games had come before reading and then reading became all the rage. People would still be prejudiced he says because they would contrast it with games and how they are so much better than reading. He believes people should read but he can't expect that readers spend no time on other stuff like TV, games or Internet. Playing Games make you have better hand - eye coordination but Johnson says that’s the most you hear about the experience of video games. You usually don't hear of how it feels like playing these virtual games and how hard they can actually be. He then goes on to describing how hard games can be but for some reason we enjoy it and keep playing. And how the tasks we must do in these video games seem more like chores but we 'd rather be playing Ultima than cleaning up our room.

The part I found most interesting was when Johnson told reader to imagine if games had come before reading, we would still be contrasting except this time with games. It makes think of how maybe instead being told all time since birth that reading is the best and every one should read instead we would be told to play video games. I personally like reading but also like playing video games. But I know that some adults see us teenagers playing and automatically are like what a waste of time, they should read more then waste time playing games. Of course some just say this without actually ever experiencing playing a video game but then how can they say they are a waste of time. Johnson says this is because video games are always contrasted with reading. He says they are always seen as the worst but not how hard games are. I know for a fact how frustrating and hard video games can be; in Halo I would play and have to get through some hard missions and I remember how frustrated I would be but Johnson says these tasks we do in video games are like chores. Which is funny because I'd rather be doing a mission then doing my laundry. But I think this is because like Johnson says we are actually in control of the story or plot.

A perspective I think is useful is how Johnson talks of the good of video games than just the usual "evils" of video games presented, because helps readers see both "sides." Another perspective I believe was useful was of how it would be different if gaming came before reading. But at the same time, he still believes that reading is the strongest way to get his point then in TV or video game. Which makes me think that he still believes reading is better than TV or games, but at the same time he also say that age twenty he wasted a lot of $$ on guides for video games.

TV

In this excerpt, Steven Johnson talks about TV and why we stay up at night watching TV shows like ER or Sopranos. He talks of how can't even surf on Internet without hearing complaints about the amount of sex and violence on TV now but not of how TV actually makes you think. He then goes on to say about the two kinds of TV; one where there is multiple interweaving plots and second is where viewer's are "filling in." He talks about how the growth of the number TV shows that are doing this versus back in the day with simple shows like I Love Lucy and how when first introduced TV shows with multiple threading like Hill Street Blues they did receive complaints that show was too complex. But Johnson says twenty years later shows with multiple threading like sopranos are enjoyed because "been trained by two decades of of multi threaded dramas." Then Steven J. talks of the second type of shows where viewers fill in, like for example ER where they give you subtle hints but that they are very scarce that it has viewer going "what is happening? "For each of these types of TV shows he gives detailed descriptions of how TV shows today are like this to comparing then to older TV shows. All this is evidence to back up how TV is now actually making us really think than two decades ago.

The perspective I found interesting and useful in this excerpt was how Johnson talks of how TV has increased the work the viewer must do to watch it and understand, than it used to. TV he says used to have a more simple plot than the recent shows like The Sopranos or ER. It's useful because makes me understand why he believes that TV might be reason why or minds have actually developed because the shows actually make us think. Another perspective I found was useful was how Johnson explained the way TV had two kinds; one with multiple plots and other with viewer "filling in" because made think of shows I watch I try to see which it has multi threading or if it's filling in like ER. After reading this excerpt I think TV has become more "rigorous" with mental exercise but maybe not as much as reading a book yet.

For both I believe way Steven Johnson contradicts Feed because he argues that technology isn't really all that bad, people just view it the way most people do. Game, TV and Internet is a waste of time , it's like the prejudice toward today's technology. But he argues that Games do more than make people have better hand - eye coordination because they are actually hard and that TV makes you actually think. While Feed trying to tell teenagers that technology is bad, that we should stop, so it contradicts what Johnson saying. But at the same time I think Johnson believes that technology is really not bad but at the same time reading is still better than watch TV.