The Ever Changing World

A History Teachers Perspective

"Permanence of record, though essential to its power, is not always a fail-safe definitional criterion of writing, given the crucial part played in the history of writing by erasable surfaces such as the wax tablet, the slate, the blotter, correctible typewriters, and the computer screen. The history of the pencil, for instance, shows a vast realm of experimental, erasable and fruitfully nondurable writing -- what Sybille Krämer calls 'operative writing.' First drafts, architectural drawings, mathematical calculations, and engineering plans require disposable writing." (The Marvelous Clouds, John Durham Peters, pg. 228)

A Reflection On The Peters Perspective

My daily life revolves around exploring the past and helping my students navigate the complexities of history through the written word. The written word is something undeniably special, transcending years of destruction to then still come out on top.

The historical significance of erasable surfaces and tools, such as wax tablets, slates, correctable typewriters, and computer screens, and introduces the intriguing concept of "operative writing," a realm encompassing disposable and non-durable forms of writing essential for activities like drafting, drawing, calculating, and planning.

Peters' perspective challenges our conventional understanding of writing as an indelible mark left on a surface. Instead, he suggests that writing is inherently dynamic, involving a continuous process of creation and revision. This notion resonates deeply with my experiences as a history teacher, where adapting and refining is a constant endeavor. Much like Peters' concept of disposable writing, I find myself continuously revising and enhancing my teaching materials to ensure they effectively convey historical concepts to my students.

Navigating A Shifting World

The passage also prompts reflection on the evolution of writing tools. I frequently emphasize to my students the transformative impact of technology on our ability to write and disseminate information. The shift from quills and parchment to modern digital devices like computers and tablets has revolutionized not only the act of writing itself but also the methods by which we store, access, and share knowledge. Never before have we had these handy mini-computers in our pockets, practically begging to be used. Yet, this transition has introduced new challenges, particularly regarding the durability and preservation of digital records. I share Peters' viewpoint that the concept of permanence in writing is evolving, and we must adapt to these changing mediums while still accepting that the medium will have limitations that will hinder its growth.

Furthermore, Peters' discussion of "operative writing" resonates with a much wider considerations of historical record-keeping.

Permanent records are subject to manipulation, censorship, or erasure.

I must keep reminding my students that the reliability of historical documents may not always be what it seems. Peters' insights reinforce the idea that historical records can be malleable and that the true power of writing lies in its adaptability.

I appreciate the notion that writing is not confined to unalterable inscriptions but encompasses a spectrum of forms, including disposable writing that facilitates the creative and revisionary process. The shifting landscape of historical record-keeping is ever-changing. Peters reminds us that the power of writing does not solely resides in its capacity to adapt and transform in response to changing needs and technologies.