Christopher Farris

The statement “writing is not natural” can be rephrased as “writing is technology.” The argument for the non-naturalness of writing is that, while all human societies have some form of speech that is relatively easily learned by most children and willingly taught by the community of adults (Dryer), not all societies have developed a written language. Furthermore, the creation of a written language and its spread is dependent upon tool usage (i.e. drawing in the dirt with a stick, using stylus and wax, pen and paper, typewriter, word processor, etc.) while typical human anatomy is inherently capable of speech without supporting tool use. Technology, in this argument, is defined as “any cultural artifact that mediates activity…including those that have become invisible through long use: roofs, coats, hammers, electric lighting…” (Dryer) Further strengthening the argument that writing is non-natural is writing’s lack of meaning-clarifiers, clarifiers so readily found in natural speech, such as: gesture, expression, pacing, register, and silences. Writing is limited only to the use of drawn symbols or images to represent sound. (Dryer)

As a technology, writing has both pushed and been pushed by the wider worlds of society, science and business. All organized and progressive undertakings have by necessity and desire undertaken to document their processes and to track their resources, people and material. Writing as an inherent support to the governance of Western Civilization has been widely understood since the 18th century with the advent of the term “bureaucracy,” or “rule by writing desk,” created by French political economist Jean Claude Marie Vincent de Gournay. (Hull) Writing, the preeminent tool in managing both business and government, has led to the rise of a steadily growing clerical class and ever improving writing technologies. (Hull) Simple writing technologies such as the wax tablet, pencil, pen and paper, allowed for more organization but, as organization grew, these tools became proscriptive for reasons of speed, reproducibility and readability. (Johnson and Sides) Later developments, such as the typewriter, the block stamp, carbon sheets and a growing clerical staff (i.e. stenographers and typists) led to an explosion in documentation that supported growth in both business and society. (Yates and Cuff) A similar boom in documentation and writing accompanied the advent of the modern word processor and business computer. (Selfe and Selfe) Writing-supportive technology (i.e. pencils, pens, typewriters, word processors, copy machines, software, etc.) continue to grow in sophistication and create an ever-evolving barrier to entry for non-English speakers and for those who are lower on the socio-economic scale. Computer operating systems and writing softwares are typically designed by predominately white, middle class businesses in support of other predominately white, middle class businesses. Default interfaces are, representative of business imagery, male whiteness normativity and hierarchical logic structures couched almost exclusively in English terminology. This creates an American, and worldwide, “technological underclass.” (Selfe and Selfe) Continuous improvement of technology, rapid updates to hardware and software, and a percolating business and social environment require a constant retraining that becomes problematic for users who have overcome previous obstacles to entry. The replacement of email software, for example, sets off a ripple effect of changes in a typical user’s environment that may require retraining, re-acquisition of supporting hardware and an accompanying realignment of day-to-day tasks, thus creating new barriers that must constantly be overcome to maintain parity with other writers. (Speculative Usability - Nathaniel Rivers, Lars Söderlund, 2016) Continuous adaptation to writing-supportive technologies further defines writing as a technology and, thus, not a natural activity.

Dryer, Dylan B. “Writing Is Not Natural.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concept of Writing Studies. Hull, Matthew S. “Documents and Bureaucracy.” Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 41, Annual Reviews, 2012, pp. 251–67. JSTOR.

Johnson, Carol Siri, and Charles H. Sides. The Language of Work: Technical Communication at Lukens Steel, 1810 To 1925. Taylor & Francis Group, 2008. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uark-ebooks/detail.action?docID=3117830.

Selfe, Cynthia L., and Richard J. Selfe. “The Politics of the Interface: Power and Its Exercise in Electronic Contact Zones.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 45, no. 4, National Council of Teachers of English, 1994, pp. 480–504. JSTOR, JSTOR, doi:10.2307/358761.

Speculative Usability - Nathaniel Rivers, Lars Söderlund, 2016. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0047281615600635. Accessed 28 Sept. 2020.

Yates, JoAnne, and Robert (REVIEWER) Cuff. “Yates, JoAnne. Control Through Communication: The Rise Of System In American Management Review.” Canadian Journal of History, vol. 26, no. 1, University of Toronto Press, Apr. 1991, p. 139.