rage rage rage

This NYTimes Franzen piece is giving me serious rage. To oversimplify horribly, Franzen claims that technology (and the consumption of technology) is like a one-way relationship, with the technology making no demands on the user, and always confirming their sense of self/power over the world.

While I have some issues right there, the ideas are at least things that I feel ought to be thought about. Because, you know, hubris, motivated reasoning, etc. But then! He claims that these shallow relationships turn love into like. That it is impossible to engage in a profound enough way with tech that you forgive it its flaws and inconsistencies. He then goes on to explain how he became re-engaged with environmentalism because of his love of birdwatching, despite birdwatching not being “cool”, and how this allowed/forced him to care more generally again about the environment.

To which I say, has he never heard of nerds? They are an entire class of people who by their very definition are deeply uncool. Or has he looked at the internet anytime the week before a Jobs keynote? People LOVE tech. I love tech. I love it when it malfunctions. I love it when I mess something up, send the wrong email, write the wrong code, leave my computer rendering so long I melt a stick of ram. I love it when I accidentally cross power and ground and somehow revive an Xbox from the dead. I love it when I find an operating system or program I’ve devoted years to learning is replaced by something new and better that demands more of my time and skills to learn.

Yes, tech is not sentient. It cannot love me back. The only way it cares for me is the general. The more humans buy it, the more of that kind of tech will be made in some pale reflection of Darwinian evolution. But it inspires my ardor and rage and delight. I understand it may not do these things for Franzen. I, for one, can take or leave birds.