Chapter 3 argument: group one

This prezi had an ingenious path design to help accent their argument. The group views writing as a never ending path, and argues that writing will continue to advance. Although I believe many of their examples had many layers of analysis, the group failed in my opinion to demonstrate their knowledge of Bolter's text. For example, the yellow book example they used in attempt to show printed text cannot easily be re-arranged fell short for me. I liked their interpretation, because it is true print text does not have the accessibility of electronic text; however, the example was absurd. I found it ironic that one of their videos could not be embedded into their prezi. Just a few slides after mentioning the interconnections of the electronic writing space, a glitch in the advanced technology appears. I think it is important to note that without an issue, the remediation of print would likely not occur. They showed an example of an issue with print text (the immobility of the writing space), yet I highly doubt that they intentionally tried to show a glitch with the modern writing space. This small issue itself may never be fixed, but it shows the writing cycle and advancement of writing is a never-ending process. A final point in their argument that caught my attention was the idea that it takes time to appreciate the current state of writing. They used Van Gogh's art as an example, but I would consider using text messages as an example. Many people today may argue that their lives would not be the same without text messaging, but when it first was invented, a majority of phone users failed to use texts, and those who did, likely did not recognize their future potential to change society. Overall, this group selected great examples, but the viewer must take the time to further analyze their never-ending path argument to fully understand the power of Bolter's text.