Skip to main content

Falling in Digital Love

Does real life interaction outweigh online interaction? If so, then by how much? How can we quantify the growth of a relationship, the growth of a love, in either case, and then compare the data? Is real life interaction really more significant than online interaction?

I'm not really sure. Technology has had a profound effect on the way humans communicate, and an equally drastic effect on the way we communicate privately. Email, Myspace and Facebook messaging/chat, PMs and DMs, text or SMS messaging, (dare I mention AOL Instant Messenger or, if you'll indulge me, SnapChat?) have all changed the way that we think about intimate communication. Conversations can last for seconds or for days. A story from my own experience:

When I was in high school, I went to a bakery/café with one of my friends, and her friend. Let's call them Eliza and Beth, respectively. I was meeting Beth for the first time that evening, and wanted to get to know her more and spend time with her individually, but I didn't want to make the situation uncomfortable or weird for any of us, so I didn't say anything. Until Eliza texted me under the table, "What do you think of Beth?" It probably looked more like, "wut do u think of Beht," but that's neither here nor there. I said that she was cool, or something high-school-me would say. And then she said something to the effect of, "You should invite her over later. I think she's into you." Which totally changed the situation. This all happened unbeknownst to Beth, right under her nose. 

While that's not exactly a love story, it speaks volumes about the way technology can and does influence our romantic interactions. Granted, I never invited Beth over, never got to know her, and never hung out with her again, but I could have. And I realize, too, that I could have done those things without those texts. I could have asked her to step outside with me, or waited for Eliza to go to the bathroom or something. But texting made it quicker, easier, and more efficient.

Does the addition of technology somehow diminish the integrity of a blossoming relationship? I don't think I would identify love as an entity that necessitates efficiency, but neither would I claim that it rejects it. Says Brenna Ehrlich in her CNN.com article on the matter: 

"Despite the current atmosphere of distrust, falling in love sight unseen, often through the written word, has been happening for centuries. The Web has only made it easier. Some experts say communicating online before meeting IRL (that's In Real Life) can actually foster strong relationships by helping those with similar interests come together over great distances. Potential lovers overlook superficial turnoffs, and people open up to each faster and more deeply."

I agree, but I'll admit that I still have a lot to learn. 

Further reading: 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Extended Human

Says Marshall McLuhan: "All media are extensions of some human faculty– psychic or physical." With this, the co-creator of 1967's experimental book on the philosophy of communication, The Medium is the Massage , provides some interesting food for thought. On the following two pages he makes claims about objects and the human body parts from which they extend. The wheel from the foot, the book from the eye, clothing from the skin. And this is a pretty compelling concept: The wheel is like an exo-foot, a re-imagining of the foot that preforms nearly the same function but is many times and in many ways more efficient. Written text provides us vision of people and worlds we cannot see with our eyes alone. Clothing... well, you get the point. I could not have seen Spike Jonze's Her  at a more appropriate time. First of all: excellent film. The movie's about a guy that falls in love with a computer. But the best part is that almost no-one thinks that's ...
1 comment
Read more

Here Comes Everybody

Clay Shirky, the author of Here Comes Everybody , writes, "When we change the way we communicate, we change society." This is the legend on the map. The cypher.  As I'm sitting in a library, I see form influenced by function. Book shelves are lined so that people may pass between them, scanning titles and call numbers. Each shelf has a long, rectangular space in which many books can be placed. Each book is a rectangle folded around flat, rectangular pages. The form or shape of each of these structured objects is a direct result of its function. Things are shaped the way they are because of the task they preform. Chairs must have a surface that keeps our butts off the ground, and their shape falls victim to that aspect of their function.  This opposite true of communication. The form of our communication shapes the function. For instance: a book is a medium of communication. The form of it, the pages and spine, lead to its function as shelf matter. (That's not ...
Post a Comment
Read more