Shakespeare, melancholia and japanese lanterns

David Menaker went to see Shakespeare's Twelfth Night at the Park in NYC last Thursday. He's written a glowing review of the performance, especially that of Anne Hathaway.

But to all of you out there (and I know you're there) who have forged a neural link with the net through your iPhone, blackberry or pres, Menaker writes these melancholy words.

Shakespeare uses the word "device" six times in this play—more than in any other. This is largely because Sir Toby Belch and his accomplices devise comic deceptions to a) fleece Sir Andrew Aguecheek, the romantic gull, for more money, and b) make a fool of the Lady Olivia's taciturn steward Malvolio. These devices within the play are the playwright's devices, too, to entertain the audience and make them laugh. "Device" and "divide" are etymological cousins; a good dramatic device often divides characters from what's "really" going on. And it divides an audience's attention from the quotidian, workaday world, whether at the Globe or the Delacorte. ("Widow" grows from the same root—a woman divided from her husband by death.)

Or it should. But now other devices have intruded into this self-contained world of live dramas—one that originated in solemn religious observances in ancient Greece. The Public's audience obeyed at least part of the usual injunctions by turning off the audible aspects of their cellphones, but muted iPhones, BlackBerries, Palm Pres, and other such—well, devices—lit up the outdoor amphitheater like behemoth fireflies throughout the play. As they do at almost all live performances these days. The person sitting next to me checked his email constantly. And during the intermission, digital brigadiers milled busily about the outside of the theater. The famously long lines for the restrooms looked like strings of mini-Japanese lanterns. Vapid one-sided-conversation samples littered the air, thinning the communal atmosphere of theater-going.

I do not mean to complain, really. There have been far too many complaints too repetitively written about this general matter. And many of us tend to forget that a New Thing may not be a Bad Thing but only a Different Thing. But the production of this melancholy comedy, with its bonds of love forged only hastily at the last moment and by pure luck, itself seemed melancholy, doubly nostalgic, as if yearning for less divided attention, as if culturally less left to is own devices.

I'm willing to go out on a limb here. A cell phone is a thing that may be useful on occasion. Anymore than that – a camera, a gps gizmo, a pda, an email/chat/facebook/twitter Ouija-device – is neither just Different nor just New.

As a "dividing device," it – and much of our new technology, especially anything that begins with the prefix "i" or "my" or "face" – is downright bad.

Comments

[Aaron Taylor]

Excellent post, Father. It is astonishing how people so quickly reach the point that they feel they can't live without some device that didn't even exist two years ago, and they can't abide others living without it either!

[Sea of Sin]

Oh get over it already. I don't want to hear no whining about digital devices - not a blog. :)

[Stephen]

I think that we should sincerely and intelligently test the usefulness of something and explore the consequences, many of which are yet to be known, before we embrace a new technology. Wendell Berry's essay about why he is not buying a computer is a good litmus test of sorts although many of us would need to find our own applications to his thoughts. I for one could not live without the benefits and convenience of a computer, but also realize its sociological limits. Email seems good, but in my opinion Face book limits legitimate and sincere human interaction, relegating conversations to a series of funny comments, stupid quizzes, and superficial jargon. A persons value seems to be based only on how interesting they appear to be. The cell phone is good for the sake of safety and the security it adds to life, especially being the father of small children. Other functions of the cell phone however seem unnecessary at best and I am yet to being convinced of needing
any other recent technology, except of course in the medical field. Basically it seems that we are doing things just because we can, not because of a real tangible need. I am not quite sure what the consequences of this are but I have a few ideas and intuitions, most of which would lean on the negative side.