Nicholas Carr. The Shallows. I have many thoughts.

I loved reading this book because it’s exactly the type of book I would choose to read for pleasure. So as I’m going about my reading and writing for my major, reading a book like The Shallows feels like reading for pleasure, which is like a fun vacation from my field research.

I finished the book just in time for class discussion, but the discussion was not what I expected it to be. I had marked all the important parts of his argument and statistics to back up his claims. I thought I had a hold on it, but I guess I did not.

We ended up talking a lot about the medium being the message, which I thought was a facet of his argument that he didn’t spend a lot of time on. I was surprised by the amount of time we spent talking about this in class and how little information I got about this topic in the book. I think “the medium is the message” would have been a great main argument in his book and he could have kept coming back to that after every introduction of a new story about how technology has changed the way our brains work. I would have liked to see him come back to this idea at the end of every chapter or new idea. I think that would have made the book very strong.

Someone in class mentioned that the book was redundant. I totally disagree. I think he brought up new ideas and then never actually tied them in to his main argument. A book needs to drill in your brain its main point, and I think the book failed in that respect. Also, every book of this genre that I’ve read has had a great call to action or some concrete steps to take that will help you cope with the problems presented in the book. I didn’t get that, thus the book felt incomplete. It ended and I was just sitting there like…huh? He did mention that for many people these changes are completely inevitable and maybe he really did just want to talk about the changes in the brain, but the book still felt like an incomplete thought to me.

Do I agree or disagree? I agree. I have to! Do you want to know how many times I stopped reading this book to check my phone? I should have kept track, but it was easily 50 times. That would be a good exercise for someone new reading this book. Have them keep a post-it note on the inside of the back cover to tally every time they check their phone while reading the book.

Here are the parts of the book that I marked while reading and what I thought about them:

1. p. 18-19: First (and only, I think) mention of the medium being the message after analyzing the difference in writing style when using different media. “‘You are right,’ Nietzsche replied. ‘Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts'” (19).
2. p. 31: Plasticity. This idea comes up many times because it’s critical to establish how pliable our brains are when trying to argue that technology is changing our brains. Part of this point, too, plays on nature vs. nurture. I like this quote in particular: “The genius of our brain’s construction is not that it contains a lot of hardwiring but that it doesn’t” (31). I also like the point Carr makes about the taxi drivers and the hippocampus.
3. p. 44: The four categories of technology. How does a technology “supplement or amplify our native capacities” (44)? In this book, the focus is on the fourth category.
   1. Amplifies physical strength (e.g. plow)
   2. Extends the senses (e.g. microscope)
   3. Amplifies nature to serve us better (e.g. GMO crops)
   4. Extends our intellectual capacity (e.g. clock)
4.  p. 46: The debate. Do we use technology, or does technology use us? Is it a tool to enhance that intellectual capacity or is it a crutch which is making us dumber?
5. p. 86: Internet usage statistics.
6. p. 116-117: The power the internet has over our brains given the plasticity of them. “With the exception of alphabets and number systems, the Net may well be the single most powerful mind-altering technology that has ever come into general use” (116). Carr goes on to describe the effects on our senses and our psyche, as the Net delivers constant positive reinforcements. When we click, something new appears. When we message, we get a response (117).
7. p. 134-135: Eye tracking. This may have been the most interesting part to me because it was a very clear example of the effects of the internet backed up by a fascinating study. Saccades are normal while reading, but when we read on a computer screen, our eyes move in a way that resembles the letter “F.” Additionally, we aren’t really reading longer if there are more words on the site. I am definitely a victim of this trait and I will consciously try to end this habit.
8. p. 160: Google. The entire middle paragraph of this page blew my mind. I have often wondered how search engines make money. Now I know!
9. Chapter 9: Memory. This entire chapter was fascinating to me. I have long been interested in memory, so applying my everyday habit of browsing the web to my memory was amazing to read about. I marked p. 192 in particular because it shot down one of my go-to arguments which is: it’s not important to learn silly facts because we should use that “brain space” for more important things. Focus on big ideas and think big. Learn a fact and place it in a larger context. Those are skills I’ve always worked on. Now I know that “evidence suggests, moreover, that as we build up our personal store of memories, our minds become sharper” (192). And, “‘the brain cannot be full'” (192). We actually strengthen our brain as we store memories and learn new skills.
10. p. 207: The “summing up.” I put that in quotations marks because I find this part of the book extremely weak. I like that he ends with what makes us human and the social connections that cannot be replaced by the internet. He addresses the “irreversible commitment” to this intellectual technology.

Now that I went through all those points that I marked and re-read about 3 dozen pages of the book, I’m realizing that the idea that “the medium is the message” does run deep. However, I don’t think he ties his points in clearly enough to observe that idea in the first read. I wished for a phrase that articulated his thesis (“the medium is the message” would do just fine) in a concise way that he would include at the end of each point he makes.

My favorite type of literature has to do with what we do in our daily lives and how to control those things to make them work for us. I love happiness research, non-scientific psychological phenomenons, habit making or breaking strategies, personality frameworks affecting decision making, etc. Thanks to Carr, I am now very interested in the role the internet plays in our lives and its effect on our brain.

To be continued.

-Jessi Russell