It seems to me that one overarching theme in the evolution of technologies through the centuries is that every new version further closes the gap that exists between activating the technology’s function and it fulfilling its function. In other words, modern technology tends towards a minimum amount of steps from starting its function to its fulfilment, with an ideal maximum reduction of steps to only one.
For example, as mass printing evolves, the development of this practice has spanned from the printing press to modern all-in-one wireless jet printers. The first mass printing device, Gutenberg’s printing press, required at least 5 steps to print one page and then a repetition of every steps for each subsequent page. The types had to be carefully arranged on the plate to compose a single page, the ink had to be prepared, the ink had to be laid evenly on the type to achieve a uniform result and the paper had to be set on top of the type at the proper angle. Then, the screw of the press had to be operated so that pressure was applied on the paper against the ink so that the arranged types transferred the text on its surface. Lastly, the fresh print had to be set aside to dry and the entire process repeated for the next page. It goes without mentioning that many things could go wrong in any step of this process.
Nowadays, to print a set of pages, all we have to do is select the text that we want to print on a computer, send a command wirelessly to the printer to print it and wait a few seconds until it is printed. The amount of steps for a whole set of pages has been reduced to only 2 steps, which are of such a simplicity that few things can go wrong.
Not only have we reduced the amount of steps and their complexity, but we also have reduced their physical presence. It seems that the ideal state of things for the future of humanity is that technologies that automate practices become simpler, faster and smaller, which means that rooms can be filled with a wider array of technologies that only take up a small space, and that most of these devices are easy to transport from one place to another.
Additionally, I think that it is worth pointing out that as the number of steps from activating a function to fulfilling it decrease, what also decreases is the participation of other domains of materials and action that are not directly related to the essence of the technology’s purported function. To put it more simply, if a printer’s purported function is to print ink arranged in a specific predetermined arrangement on paper, then its ideal, essential domain of action would be that of transferring ink to paper and its essential domain of material would be ink, paper and a support for the paper to be fed to it and to land on after being printed.
This simplification of the process down to its essential purpose both in action and material is not a trivial phenomenon. It expresses an underlying notion that technology is for shortcutting the path from setting our minds to achieve something and realising it. It seeks to erase the path between the starting point and the destination. And not only that, but if taken on a global scale where the advancement of civilisation continues to overtake and rearrange the planet to its needs and desires, it suggests a slow but steady headway towards a simplification of all objects and processes around us to their ideal forms. That is, a rational substitution of each object deemed outdated for its highly technologically advanced counterpart which represents the simplest and most efficient manifestation of what they were meant to do, all other ‘superfluous’ elements erased.
What I ask myself is what we are losing every time that we remove all these intermediary steps between activation and fulfilment, where other domains not essentially connected to our ideal notion of the technology disappear. It could be that in these intermediary steps, where, to use the printing press’ example again, we work the types, we press the wood, we use our bodies and we create breathing room in this long process where we can enter a meditative state and a sort of slow-motion exposition to the printing process. Many other domains, such as the tactile feeling of the materials, the manipulation of the ink for uniformity, the selection of the paper and the bodily effort of turning the screw disappear in the context of the modern printer. In effect, to take it a step further, the webs of interconnections between human activities where domains overlap where there are commonalities begin to break down. What I mean by this is that knowing about proper paper quality or the use of ink overlap with other activities such as painting, drawing or stationery. Additionally, for example knowing how to maintain and understand the printing press overlaps with activities related with wood such as furniture repair. Then, the whole process also creates overlaps with primary abilities such as thorough preparation in anticipation of delicate process, fine motor skills, an eye for detail, consistent procedural precision and the understanding of an entire production process from beginning to end.
To be clear, this is a descriptive observation, not a judgment of value. I’m not trying to criticise the current state of our technology to promote a return to a more grounded but enormously inefficient to our standards way of living. What technological advancement is allowing to do is becoming more and more akin to magic, and that is not a bad thing at all. However, I do think that it is worth to keep what we are losing in mind, and that thinking about possible versions of highly advanced technologies as deliberately creating a longer path towards their functional destination to provide opportunities for overlaps with other domains, breathing space for the mind and bodily involvement with the entire process can open very interesting possibilities on the ways in which we conceive our activities moving forward.
As a last note, I would say that by continuing our march towards the simplification of objects and processes to their ideal essential (almost in a Platonic sense) we are not necessarily robbing the world of its organically grown, interconnected complexity. First of all, because as stated above, both types of technologies (objects and processes) can coexist if we choose to be aware of this pattern. Secondly, in the bigger picture, as we clean up these objects and processes of superfluous, non-essential steps when thought of in their functional essence, and as we reduce their size and transportability, they may become seamless components of more efficient, larger wholes. While one activity can be simplified to its efficient extreme, this means that it can become the component of a wider, more ambitious technological/functional assemblage. Just as for example corporations, states and other collective structures have done in the last century, by automating more and more processes to achieve bigger goals, single assemblages of functionally essential technologies we can create new beginnings and new destinations filled with intermediary steps composed of all these technologies.
✵
Leave a Reply