I wasn’t going to write another blog again so soon; but, alas, I could not resist the urge, not after some of the student papers I had to read today. Why? Well, because those papers started me thinking about how most people today are so dependent upon technology. Moreover, they are downright lazy; and dependency mixed with laziness creates a lethal brew, at least when it comes to writing.

Don’t get me wrong. Obviously, I own a computer, and I will admit that I absolutely adore its word-processing program. But then, I grew up during the Dark Ages—that technology-devoid era when people had to rely upon an instrument called a typewriter, at least they did if they did not wish to handwrite whatever it was they needed or wanted to write at even given moment in time. And for those readers out there in cyberspace who are unfamiliar with typewriters, let me enlighten you: typewriters make writing much more difficult and time-consuming than you could ever possibly imagine.

First, if you get careless and create typos, either you must use Whiteout (a thick, gooey white concoction, rather like Elmer’s Glue, but without the adhesive), which can leave the document looking quite messy if you aren’t extremely careful; or else you must retype the entire page, praying all the while that you will not create another typo. Second, you cannot cut text, which means if you decide to delete even one word, let along a sentence or, heaven forbid, a paragraph, you must retype the entire document. Third, neither can you copy and paste; therefore, if you wish to make significant changes to whatever you are writing, you must retype the complete document, whether it’s a memo, letter, paper, article, or 500-page manuscript. Fourth, typewriters do not provide their users with either Grammar Check or Spell Check. As a result, the user must possess at least some rudimentary knowledge of spelling as well as the rules of grammar, that is, unless the user doesn’t care if he or she comes across as a total ignoramus to the reader of the typewritten document.

And that brings me back to computers. We writers today, unlike in the past, have all these amazing tools at our disposal. We can correct typos with a keystroke or two. We can cut, copy, and paste, thus deleting or adding or even relocating entire passages and, in the process, saving ourselves valuable time. Plus, we can use Grammar Check and Spell Check to help ensure that we come across as at least semi-literate to our readers. 

The problem, however, as I said in the beginning, is that even with all these amazing tools at our disposal, some writers have allowed themselves to become too dependent upon technology and, in the process, also become downright lazy. That is why I see statements like the following in student papers:

1. Mother Teresa was of Spinach heritage. (I think this student meant to say “Spanish” heritage.)
2. The greatest architectural achievement of the 20^th Century was the Umpire State Building. (Unless some structure by this name has recently been erected in Yankee Stadium, I think the student probably meant “Empire State Building.”)
3. In the United States if we speak out against the government, we don’t have to worry about being shipped off to Suburbia. (Did the student perhaps mean Siberia?)
4. I once read that most of Egyptian inhabitants were temporary structures that were rebuilt during the next Pariah’s reign. (I think perhaps the student meant “habitats” or perhaps “habitations,” as well as “Pharaoh’s” reign.”)
5. Did you also know that the Romans also invited metal horseshoes? (Invited? Invited the horseshoes where? To dinner or perhaps a movie? Then again, I think the student probably meant that the Romans “invented” metal horseshoes.)
6. Is there a way to say that I don’t expect U to whole this against the entrée paragraph that I write on my compassion? (I really don’t even know where to begin when it comes to deciphering this question. Do you?)

Yes, technology is a time-saver. Yes, word-processing programs are amazing tools. And, yes, being a writer, I am just as dependent upon my computer as anyone else and probably far more dependent upon it than the majority of people. However, unlike many people, I realize these programs are not infallible. They are, in fact, merely programs and, therefore, inherently flawed. They do not possess eyes. They certainly do not possess brains (No, I do not consider a hard-drive a brain). And that is why it is my responsibility, as the writer, to proofread and edit what I have written. I must ask myself if it is coherent, logical, and intelligible. Are there careless errors that might detract or else totally confuse the reader? Are the words the right words, or are they words I did not intend to use at all? Will the reader understand the point I am attempting to make or wander about in a desert of incurrence and ambiguity, one that I have created? Will he or she view me as being someone literate and at least fairly well educated, or will the reader scratch his or her head and mumble, “What on earth is this idiot trying to say?”