Johnson reading part 2

I thought I was goofing off with a couple of friends on Friday, but I ended up with a pile of evidence in favor of Johnson's Sleeper Curve. I'll spare you the back story, since it will never be available on DVD, but suffice it to say that we found ourselves (after pizza for dinner) at an apartment chockablock with tapes, DVDs, and techno gadgets. We, in this case, equals me and two friends, all OCD (more or less), geeky, and...oh, never mind. Like I said, the back story isn't available on DVD (and you should be grateful it isn't, but I'm starting to wonder what the ratings would be if it were). Two guys, one girl, all birders, all addicted to snappy wordplay, all with issues, two into Flickr and sf, the other one a self-described "online Luddite"...I guess it's like Seinfeld with binoculars and Flickr.

We watched a few episodes of The Middleman and Land of the Lost. The Middleman is based on a comic series and came out last year (I think, I'm not the greatest scholar of tv series) and Land of the Lost was the classic version from the 70s (which I watched when a kid, but that's another story).

The Middleman has a silly faux science fiction premise, but a gaggle of interesting characters, smart dialogue delivered at warp speed, and so many pop culture references that the creator's blog has entries listing all of said references for each episode. Plus, since the dialogue happens so fast, I wanted to watch each episode again just to get it the first time (but what I got, I liked a lot).

Land of the Lost had dinosaurs (you can't go wrong with dinosaurs), no outside references, illogical plots (despite the writership of such sf luminaries as Larry Niven and David Gerrold, in at least one case) (not that The Middleman's plots are that much more coherent), 70s hair and fashion (ok, that's probably unfair), bad special effects...

The Middleman makes you work for your satisfaction so much that when an episode is done, you immediately want to watch it again. Any reference you catch the first time around is all the sweeter (hey, the female protagonist and a neighbor swap song lyrics with each other instead of conversing). Meanwhile, what you see is what you get with Land of the Lost; since you're not distracted by anything else, you can home right in on the plot holes and bad special effects.

So, the question I'm supposed to be answering is what all this means for the library and/or educational worlds. Johnson provides more evidence for the directed learning discussed by Brown and Duguid (you can learn extremely complicated things if you're motivated to do so to fill a perceived need). He also makes a case that you can learn almost without trying, if you're viewing media that encourages you to learn how to keep up with it. Certainly, the fact that libraries now are getting into gaming and stocking DVDs of movies and tv series would seem to be a step in the right direction. After watching a couple of episodes of The Middleman, I could almost see a festival showing DVDs of the series; library staff could hand out scorecards to the audience so they could play along at catching the references. You could even call it the Pop Culture Literacy Festival or something. Ok, maybe not. But that was the kind of fun I was having with my friends on Friday night, and it was quite a bit of fun.

But there are still all those books on the library shelves and as Johnson notes, "Networked text has its own intellectual riches, of course: riffs, annotations, conversations--they all flourish in that ecosystem, and they all can be dazzlingly intelligent. But they nonetheless possess a different kind of intelligence from the intelligence delivered by reading a sustained argument for two hundred pages" (Johnson, p. 186). My question is how libraries can unpackage the intellectual riches in the books on their shelves for those who have grown up in a networked world. The knowledge encoded in our books is every bit as challenging as any game; one could argue that it just suffers from a non-networked delivery mechanism.

I would suggest that it all comes down to ensuring that learning and intellectual challenge are fun, fun like a game you play with your friends. New media seem to be better at capturing that balance than "old media" at the moment, but old media shouldn't be jettisoned. We need to find ways to show that intensive attention to a prolonged logical argument, or looking through an author's eyes for 300 pages, can be as fun as playing World of Warcraft, just fun in a different way.