The White Whale

After reading this week's assigned chapters from Moby Dick, I really started thinking of the significance of the whiteness of the whale and what Moby Dick represents. I've had a loose idea so far that for me, the whale represented Deity. Not an original and unique idea, by any means, but I've struggled with this position because of the damage and danger that the whale brought to Ahab and those who chased it, and then with Ahab's vengeful hunt for the whale. It didn't make sense to me that if he represented God, then why were bad things happening to everyone trying to follow him? I started thinking about this and exploring possibilities yesterday when someone asked me the question of why I think bad things happen to good people (You know you're an English major when you subconsciously relate all aspects of life to Moby Dick!).

I think it's a common question for believers in a God to wonder why God allows bad things to happen to us, especially when we consider ourselves good people. I believe that Moby Dick does in fact represent God and Ahab's search for him is not for religion or mercy, but to avenge his misfortune - the bad things that have happened to him, such as losing his leg.

Ishamel describes, "But not yet have we solved the incantation of this whiteness, and learned why it appeals with such power to the soul; and more strange and far more portentous - why, as we have seen, it is at once the most meaning symbol of spiritual things, nay, the very veil of the Christian's Deity; and yet should be as it is, the intensifying agent in things the most appalling to mankind" (175).

What I interpret from this passage is that Ishmael isn't quite sure what is so alluring about the whale's whiteness. He considers it parallel with the veil of Deity, but he also deems it to be appalling and fearing. Ishmael makes other references in this chapter to the whiteness being terrorizing.

Is God not one to be feared? I think within the nature of God, He is one to be absolutely feared in His omnipotent self. Moby Dick is also to be feared; I envision him to be the omnipotent creature in the depths of the sea. He should especially be feared if he is being chased for spiteful and vengeful reasons in order to remove him from his superiority. Perhaps maybe Ahab is even trying to kill Moby Dick so that he can become the all-powerful figure of the sea. Perhaps he is trying to become godlike and feels that the rite to become such a figure is by killing the current king - Moby Dick.

I came across several different blog posts and scholarly articles arguing that Moby Dick does represent God, but an evil God with an intention and desire to inflict misery and pain, and that the sailors and harpooners have the right to hunt the whale. I don't agree with this position. I think Moby Dick does represent God, but not an evil God. I think a lot of times, bad things happen as consequences from a person's actions. Ahab has only malicious and selfish intentions, so he brings a lot of the bad situations with them. I don't know the ending of this great American novel, but I cannot imagine it will end well.

The Written Word is Evolving and We are Evolving with It

Okay, so...this might sound sort of fantastical but hear me out. Do you think we might be headed towards the world of Star Wars, Farenheit 451, Minority Report, and all of those other futuristic, high-tech, digital worlds? Do you think they may be just starting to become our reality?

An artist's representation of a future city.

 
I read a book this month called In Bed with the Word by Daniel Coleman. In his book, Coleman talks about how books and, more specifically reading, defines a culture. Without the written word, a culture remains oral. Knowledge is passed on from generation to generation by word of mouth, and knowledge typically remains that which has been experienced by that culture. If you introduce the written word though, suddenly other ideas that cultures have never been able to consider before now becomes absolutely possible. Cultures merge their ideas together and new stories are created. New technologies are invented. Ideas spread faster. The written word begins to transform the world.

Now, the written word is traveling digitally and ideas are therefore spreading faster than ever. In fact, technologies are being invented to help the ideas spread even faster. For example, eBooks can be downloaded within seconds to a digital monitor! It is the written word in its traditional sense, just faster, more accessible, and more instant.

I mean, take a look at this library that just opened in San Antonio, Texas: it is the first library to be only digital! One hundred years ago--heck, even ten years ago-- I don't think anyone saw this coming.

 

 Think about it: the digital allows people to carry literally tons of the written word in the palm of the hand, it allows them to share ideas instantly, and it allows for greater organization.

The written word is evolving and the world is evolving with it. We're beginning to ask the questions that Clifford Lynch asked in his essay The Battle to Define the Future of the Book in the Digital World: "What are our expectations about the persistence and permanence of human communication as embodied in books as we enter the brave new digital world?" While there are still those that cling to the old ways of doing things (e.g. hand-written letters instead of emails, paper flyers instead of digital flyers, and print books instead of eBooks), I think that within a few generations there will be a huge push to go all-digital, and that humanity will be living in an all-digital world by the end of the 22nd century.

Continuing with Outsourcing

So, I've been reading a lot of the posts about outsourcing and thought I would continue along that train of thought.

 

I'm sure all of us have had experiences with the bishop or our wards talking about doing indexing for New Family Search. It's a great opportunity to do service, but also gets the church a ton of free labor. Don't get me wrong, I think it's brilliant of them, especially since so many people are willing to do it. I'm just amazed that it actually works. I'm amazed that, just like Kristin said, people are willing to do so much for free. Not just with their programming, but with any of their skills.

It reminds me of what we were talking about in class last time, the fact that the majority of a random population can be more accurate than even experts. I guess we've always known this in some form or another, but it's interesting to see how it actually is true. I mean, a whole bunch of guys screaming at a TV football game claim to know better than the coach, but nobody actually believes them. Who knows though, maybe they do.

 

I think that the idea of outsourcing is incredibly revolutionary. We used to only rely on expert advice, and maybe only a little bit on our neighbors experience. Or at least that's how it would appear to be. I remember listening in one of my science classes at the very beginning of college, and hearing them say, "I don't understand why people keep arguing about global warming. It's real. We've proven it a million times. It's not really up for discussion anymore." But it still is. Of course, in that example we could argue all day over whether the population or the experts are correct (ignoring the fact that the public appears to still be split on the issue, at least last time I checked) but the idea that experts can be circumvented amazes me. And what's more, the fact that they can be circumvented and be RIGHT.

 

However, I did want to talk a little bit about the times where outsourcing can be a problem. Mainly on the issues where you really do need to have professional advice. It's easy to go online and google your symptoms and convince yourself that you have cancer, or to find a whole bunch of extremely uneducated comments about Miss America on twitter. So not all of our information and knowledge should come from the masses, but outsourcing to get free labor is good. I remember that line from MIB, when Kay says,

And who knows what we'll learn tomorrow. And who knows what people will be able to do when everyone stops following the hive mind and starts thinking for themselves. That's something that I think outsourcing does really well. It takes the collective "persons" of the population and puts them together. And instead of everyone following one leader or turning into panicky animals, they think for themselves and get things done. Like with New Family Search. Thousands of people working together to make something amazing.


Why Create Something Free?

On Wednesday we learned about CrowdSourcing and I was amazed at how many sites there are out there that allow people to collaborate and use software for free! Some don't of course, but a great majority of them do.

I very much respect someone who will use their skills and talents to develop software or a website and then let people use it free of charge. Developing something takes hours not just to write the code, but to decide on the best tools to write the website/program in. And before that, to brainstorm. And then later to troubleshoot. And finally, to get it just right! The creators have every right to charge people for what they painstakingly created, and yet they just put their stuff on the web for anyone to use.

Why?

I have a few guesses. Some are based on research, others are based on my own speculation.

(1) To Build Their Resumes

When someone is just starting out in the techie world, they usually don't have a lot of experience:
something employers really look for. Before hiring someone, a company usually wants to see what projects a prospective developer has completed or worked on so that they can get an idea of how advanced the developer is in his or her skills. Therefore, it is very common when someone is just starting out  to make free programs or websites just to show prospective employers what they know and what they can do.

(2) To Improve Their Skills 

For those who are with a company and don't plan to leave it anytime soon, building a resume is not as big of a priority. However, moving up in the company or being placed on new (and possibly higher paying) projects is. Therefore, these developers will generally continue to learn new languages and codes to be able to move up or over. Showing a project manager a project they have completed that works is a great way to get to where they want to be.

(3) For Fun

Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux, a free operating system/software system (in simple terms), wrote a short email back in 1991 declaring he was doing a new project “just for fun.” On the Linux Foundation's website, they write: "Today, Linux powers 98% of the world’s super computers, most of the servers powering the Internet, the majority of financial trades worldwide and tens of millions of Android mobile phones and consumer devices. In short, Linux is everywhere."

 And he did this "just for fun." There is more on Linux under #5 "Because They Really are Just Good Samaritans."

(4) The Company They Work for Tells Them To
Sometimes companies want their employees to get involved in open source projects.  Google, Twitter, and Netflix sponsor major open source initiatives. Why? Possibly for the tax write offs for charitable donations. Also, getting involved in open source projects encourage outsider's to collaborate on that company's code, thus making the code better. It also gives the company prestige: they get their name out there.

(5) Because They Really Are Just Good Samaritans
While there are rumors that Linus Torvalds isn't the nicest person to meet on the streets, there is no denying that he could fall under the category of a "good Samaritan." The underlying source code of Linux may be used, modified, and distributed—commercially or non-commercially—by anyone under licenses such as the GNU General Public License. What does this mean? Basically, anyone can download, use, or sell Linux and Linus Torvalds will not see a dime of it. Linux is trademarked under Linus Torvald's name, but that is it.

I have yet to find anything that says Linus Torvalds developed Linux as a public service. More of what I read tells me that he developed it for himself, for fun, and then put it on the web for others to download. Still, there is no explanation from Linus himself why he doesn't charge for an initial Linux download. He certainly could have. Microsoft and Apple did.

Other founders like Jimmy Wales (Wikipedia) and David V. Kocher and Yves Langisch (Cyberduck) fall into this category as well.


How These People Support Themselves

Sometimes free software or free websites actually do make money. Facebook is free to use, but they make money off of advertisements. The same goes for Twitter, YouTube, and Google services. Other sites, like GitHub and DearElder, are free websites to use, unless you want to use their premium site: then they charge you. Sites like Amazon, Ebay, and ODesk are free to use and buy products, but if you want to sell something, you usually have to pay them a 10-15% fee. And then there are other sites that adamantly ask for donations like Wikipedia and CyberDuck.

For Linus Torvalds, the Linux Foundation sponsors him so he can work full-time on improving Linux. The Linux Foundation is supported by corporate donations although they do not adamantly ask for donations.

Learn More

For more on this, check out these sources. Yes, some are Wikipedia, but Wikipedia is a great springboard for further research if you're interested.

Free Software vs. Open Source: Yes, there is a difference.
 
Linux Frequently Asked Questions 

Why Corporations Are Happy To Donate to Linux

Exploration

In the spirit of exploration and technology, I've been thinking about digital media that inspires us to try new things and document. Although this isn't as cool as sending something into space, its really neat to think about the new technology that is available to give us a different interaction with the world around us! 

I really enjoy the videos like the one I have posted below because they really capture the spirit of adventure. It motivates me to step outside my comfort zone and see the world differently. All of a sudden I want to do something that I've never done before.

Check it out!

It's not only amazing that this -shall I call it recreational activity- exists but it is also amazing that it can be seen and virtually experienced to create wonder. This spirit of adventure is alive and well in the virtual community and it's there for us. Recently, my husband and I have been into hiking and backpacking. It's amazing how I can go online, research trails and read reviews so that I can get the most out of my experience! Crowdsourcing has been so helpful to me personally I have been able to get information from people who have an interest in the outdoors just like I do!

My hope is that we can all explore the world around us a little better. Maybe explore a long-lost interest. Or maybe be like me and explore Tahoe, California. You'll be grateful you did!!

My view of Lake Tahoe this summer

#Structure

I'd like to enhance the argument that Ishmael's narrative is, indeed, technology. I really enjoyed our discussion of Moby Dick's structure being a form of technology. In summary we talked about:

• Chapter Headings
• Capitalization - aesthetics of the font
• Symbolism versus Metaphor

These tools build ideas, images, emotions, opinions. Just as these mediums form transitions in thought and significance, the digital culture we engage in offers similar opportunities. We can use more tools than ever to deliver the message, whether boldly or subtly. If a picture gives us a thousand words, maybe that day we're feeling Instagram. Maybe you found a hilarious video and YouTube is better. Maybe you need to message an old mission companion from Brazil and Facebook is easiest. 

The incredible nature of digital culture, as we glimpsed last week during Dr. Burton's prezi, is rooted in its endless resources. There are tools for just about everything we could ever wish for in regards to communication and information. Melville is extraordinarily ahead of his time as he structurally caters to the information he's providing. 

For example, we discussed the play-like manuscript portion in Chapter 40 where we find that the dialogue is portraying the lack of individual emotion and narrative that is missing when comparing a play and novel.

What an innovative way to explain something that we could've learned from a boring, straight-forward, historical paragraph. Bringing together the idea of the new and Moby Dick's structure we see that things we've never encountered before can make us think critically like we never have before.

The digital structures available to us issue us a challenge. Here it comes... with great tools come great responsibility. Let's use digital mediums uniquely to enhance what we're conveying.

Aren't you glad I wasn't structurally innovative enough to make you read my post like this?

Entertainment

We've been talking a lot about categories and where Moby Dick should be placed. In my previous post about it, I claimed it to be a novel because that's what I understood about it at the time, but as I continued reading it I found myself thinking over and over, "Melville could have used a good editor." I found myself balking at encyclopedia type entries, the wandering attitude of the narrator and the changing of writing style. I felt like if this book were to be published today, it would never get through. A publisher would tear it apart, cut it in half, and then tell Melville that he needs to take out another 2/3 to get it publishable. "Nobody will read it," I can imagine them saying, "it's not entertaining."

We know that Moby Dick wasn't really popular when it first came out, but somehow it started to get attention during WWI. I don't know anyone who was alive during WWI so I can only assume what they must have been thinking. Perhaps they liked the rambling, perhaps it connected to them in a way that it hadn't connected before, but now? Today? We're still studying it, yet every time I've taken it out to read somebody has commented, "Wow, you're reading Moby Dick? That book is so boring." Now, a few of them mentioned that they enjoyed the scholarly aspect of it. A lot of us commented when we first began the book that we're all enjoying it a lot more than we thought we would, but is the book entertaining? Is it enjoyable for a lazy Sunday afternoon when we're just looking for a fun, high speed adventure?

No.

So could Melville have used a good editor? During class, I compared Moby Dick to a Wikipedia article gone wrong. He was using publishing as categories for whales, jumping to theater and stage writing, along with other seemingly random dashing about, like a bunch of links that we had no control over. They just continued to be clicked. But how much information is there if we, or more appropriately -- I, had just been willing to calm down, focus a little more, and stop trying to race through it? How much entertainment can be found within those difficult, rambling passages?

I could never guess at exactly what Melville was wanting to express when he wrote the book, and perhaps he could have used someone there to tell him to cut back. But on the other hand, maybe he was trying to do something completely different. Something uncategorizable. Something that's a bit like the Internet. Or, maybe he was just trying to write a metaphor about how difficult it is to read Moby Dick.