Reply

Alan Kay Alan.Kay
Fri Apr 18 14:54:02 PDT 2003


Thom --

At 12:39 AM -0500 3/3/02, Thom Kevin Gillespie wrote:
>  > From: Alan Kay <Alan.Kay at squeakland.org>
>>  Subject: Reply
>
>>  Thom --
>
>>  One of the necessary parts of "literacy" is fluency. So it's not
>>  enough to read a little, or do math a little or program a little.
>>  There are important thresholds that have to be crossed. As with the
>>  older thresholds of reading and writing, most children haven't
>>  crossed the ones that would allow them to be literate.
>
>Agreed.
>
>>  The other consideration is that one can get fluent in lots of things
>>  that don't confer much benefit: television watching, videogames, pop
>>  culture, etc.
>
>Not sure if this is actually fluency in a language-like sense.

They aren't -- that was part of the point I was making.

>Again the
>reading writing problem. I have a real interesting response from John S on
>the Squeak list, actually about 3 good responses from John and a good one
>from Michael Rosenblum from NYU who really blasts the illusion that
>watching TV makes anyone literate

It doesn't.

>  and the fact that we would never
>tolerate the lack of writing literacy in books that we tolerate in TV.
>Also a bunch of good stuff from Howard  Gardner, a bunch of his grad
>students and Chris Crawford who as usual comes in so far from left field
>that he changes the game completely but in a very interesting way.
>
>>  Taking both of these together, nothing really interesting has
>>  happened yet, but the technological parts of the new literacy are
>>  pretty close to being what is needed.
>
>The phrase I keep coming back to is 'mediajazz'  Since this stuff shifts
>constantly and shows no sign of not shifting  it makes a lot of sense to
>look at it in a jazz/improv frame and just add on the fact that it is
>media which is jazzing. Going back to John S I think you just shift the
>focus to the aesthetics and away from the differences among Squeak, html,
>Flash, Director, iShell, Blender, etc.

I think you are missing the difference between "productivity tools" 
whose main goal is to get something manifested, and "learning tools" 
whose main goal is for big important changes to happen in the 
learner's mind. Also, in the list that you gave, Squeak is the only 
real programming system and the only one that covers the range of 
what computers can do.

>
>Big question seems to be that there are so few people equipped to deal with
>this combination of technologies and this combination of arts (2d, 3d,
>storytelling, video, animation, sound, music and flat out spacial design.)

The technologies are generally poorly done. That being said, there 
are fewer good drawers and painters out there than one would hope. 
There are fewer people who can play musical instruments *and* compose 
than one would hope. There are lots fewer who can do all four things 
mentioned above. There are an even smaller number that are fluent in 
math and science. And an even smaller number of those who are fluent 
in the arts. Since the first thresholds of fluency in most things is 
a 5-7 year process, we have to look to our own culture to wonder why 
people don't get fluent in more that a few things in a lifetime.

Cheers,

Alan
 


More information about the Squeakland mailing list