After the interesting conversation about the way ipods each one of us individually and how they affect how public places in general, I proceeded to loose my headphones that afternoon. After being in my room, freaking out that I had to walk to my classes without my ipod, I decided it might be a fun experiment to walk to see what classes were like without my ipod. As excepted, I was a bit more aware of my surroundings, but also I legitimately had more interactions with people coming to and from class.
Without my personal music selection blasting in my ears, I had more time to myself to think and observe. As the ipod culture pointed out, while wearing my ipod I truly did never "willingly interact with others while listening".
So, sure walking to class changes when you can't listen to music , but my question is, does our ipod culture really inhibit the way cities interact and develop? I made a little more small talk with some acquaintances , and a wasn't able to drown out my worries with High School Musical or Shakira, but is this enough of an argument to say that our hustling bustling ipod culture has a significant impact on the dynamics of a city?
I am sitting on the fence with this one, my ipod keeps me focused, in my zone, and destination oriented, while lacking my ipod I find myself more gregarious and even a more leisurely walker.
I feel there are arguments for both sides! I am interested to see what everyone thinks.
I similarly question the impact that the ability to generate personal space anywhere, anytime will have, not in cities, but on cultural mores. Obviously, I'm not talking about anyone in particular and there are still many, many good and nice people around, but we seem to be a very self-absorbed, self-entitled generation. We've been raised to believe that each person is a special snowflake, and that our demands should be met without question at all times. We should always "have our way" and to hell with what anyone else thinks, 'cuz what do they matter?
ReplyDeleteTechnologies like the iPod allow that to be taken a step further: no longer do we have to be publicly-minded even when we're out in public. We bring our own world with us no matter where we go. There's no "public" anymore - just us, in our own selfish worlds, filtering out anything that doesn't interest or agree with us.
I don't think we're doomed, and I don't think common courtesy is a thing of the past, but the capacity for self-absorption is greater than ever, and I wonder what the result of generations and generations of such people will be.
My question, basically, to open the other side of the debate: "What right do I have to filter so much? What makes my own experience so sacred, so important, that I feel justified in cavalierly drowning out my fellow man?"
I also think that both sides have good arguments. And I also question whether or not the ipod is actually changing the development of a city. Like I said in class, I ALWAYS listened to my ipod when I was walking to class. And since I haven't been walking as much, I haven't been using my ipod as much which has led to more interactions with strangers.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if the technologies are changing peoples' behavior or if it just aids in behavior that is already (and has been) present. It's like the question: what came first, the chicken or the egg?
I believe it is a trade off, technologies do shape people's behaviors, but let's not forget that people's behaviors also shape technologies. People's desires to put up a barrier may have helped to develop something like the ipod...
ReplyDelete