person:tim parks

  • Do We Write Differently on a Screen? | The New Yorker
    https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/do-we-write-differently-on-a-screen

    But, before that, I published my first short novel, “Tongues of Flame.” I continued to write fiction by hand and then type it up. But, at least, once it was typed, you could edit on a screen. What a difference that was! What an invitation to obsession! Hitherto, there was a limit to how many corrections you could make by hand. There was only so much space on the paper. It was discouraging—typing something out time after time, to make more and more corrections. You learned to be satisfied with what you had. Now you could go on changing things forever. I learned how important it was to keep a copy of what I had written first, so as to remember what I had meant in the beginning. Sometimes it turned out to be better than the endlessly edited version.

    We had personal computers at this point, but I still wrote fiction by hand. The mental space feels different when you work with paper. It is quieter. A momentum builds up, a spell between page and hand and eye. I like to use a nice pen and see the page slowly fill. But, for newspaper articles and translations, I now worked straight onto the computer. Which was more frenetic, nervy. The writing was definitely different. But more playful, too. You could move things around. You could experiment so easily. I am glad the computer wasn’t available when I started writing. I might have been overwhelmed by the possibilities. But once you know what you’re doing, the facility of the computer is wonderful.

    Then e-mail arrived and changed everything. First, you would only hook the computer up through your landline phone a couple of times a day, as if there were a special moment to send and receive mail. Then came the permanent connection. Finally, the wireless, and, of course, the Internet. In the space of perhaps ten years, you passed from waiting literally months for a decision on something that you’d written, or simply for a reaction from a friend or an agent, to expecting a reaction immediately. Whereas in the past you checked your in-box once a day, now you checked every five minutes.

    And now you could write an article for The Guardian or the New York Times as easily as you could write it for L’Arena di Verona. Write it and expect a response in hours. In minutes. You write the first chapter of a book and send it at once to four or five friends. Hoping they’d read it at once. It’s impossible to exaggerate how exciting this was, at first, and how harmful to the spirit. You, everybody, are suddenly incredibly needy of immediate feedback. A few more years and you were publishing regularly online for The New York Review of Books. And, hours after publication, you could know how many people were reading the piece. Is it a success? Shall I follow up with something similar?

    While you sit at your computer now, the world seethes behind the letters as they appear on the screen. You can toggle to a football match, a parliamentary debate, a tsunami. A beep tells you that an e-mail has arrived. WhatsApp flashes on the screen. Interruption is constant but also desired. Or at least you’re conflicted about it. You realize that the people reading what you have written will also be interrupted. They are also sitting at screens, with smartphones in their pockets. They won’t be able to deal with long sentences, extended metaphors. They won’t be drawn into the enchantment of the text. So should you change the way you write accordingly? Have you already changed, unwittingly?

    Or should you step back? Time to leave your computer and phone in one room, perhaps, and go and work silently on paper in another. To turn off the Wi-Fi for eight hours. Just as you once learned not to drink everything in the hotel minibar, not to eat too much at free buffets, now you have to cut down on communication. You have learned how compulsive you are, how fragile your identity, how important it is to cultivate a little distance. And your only hope is that others have learned the same lesson. Otherwise, your profession, as least as you thought of it, is finished.

    Tim Parks, a novelist and essayist, is the author of “The Novel: A Survival Skill” and “Where I’m Reading From: The Changing World of Books.”

    #Ecriture #Ordinateur #Edition

  • Does Copyright Matter ?
    Tim Parks | The New York Review of Books

    « Mass markets change the equation. The cost of distribution is dropping to zero. Mass markets permit profits on micro prices. Apple has proven both in music and apps that one can sell songs and apps for a dollar and make a profit instead of CDs in jewel cases for 20 dollars. The tech age is crushing the monolithic publishing and distribution business model, copyright law is a regulation protecting an antiquated business model. (…)
    Copyright is a business tool to limit expression. We extend it at our own peril. »

    Jud Lohmeyer, en commentaire de l’article de Tim Parks.
    http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/aug/14/does-copyright-matter
    #copyright

  • La vieille cruauté de la magistrature française s’expose une fois de plus lors de la décision prise par la Chambre d’instruction de la Cour d’Appel de Versailles à l’encontre de El Shennawy. Horreur insigne, esprit de revanche toujours présent dans notre appareil de Justice : l’horreur. Cet homme est seul face à une hiérarchie de pontifes odieux pour qui seul compte d’évidence l’esprit de corps. Honte sur nous.

  • L’ebook nous libère de tout ce qui est étranger au texte | Xavier de la Porte
    http://www.internetactu.net/2012/03/05/lebook-nous-libere-de-tout-ce-qui-est-etranger-au-texte

    La lecture de la semaine est un article de Tim Parks, romancier, essayiste et traducteur. Il est paru dans les blogs de la New York Review of books sous le titre “Les e-books ne brûlent pas”. Tim Parks commence par recenser quelques interventions récentes d’écrivains anglo-saxons en faveur du livre papier : Andrew Miller, Julian Barnes ou encore Jonathan Frenzen,…