Technopeasant Webscab or Print-Media Elitist

I will never forget the first computer I ever saw or my adoration of its organizational systems and its ability to hold all of my ideas in one place. I was about six or seven and my dad brought home the most hideous computer. It was a colossal monstrosity that booted up from DOS with pixelated white text on a black background. When I printed my first story, the dot-matrix printer screamed out fifty pages over the period of about two hours. I was so tremendously pleased with myself.

Since then, technology has always been an increasingly important part of my writing life: my documents in Microsoft Word, my plans in Keynote, my playlists in Itunes. Over the weekend, I picked up an article from the NWP site in which most Americans agreed that technology was an incredible aid to developing writers. Of course, I completely agree. Online communities, publication opportunities and research tools have all become readily available to the common user with the advent of the Internet and a massive information explosion.

What is most interesting to me is the widening maw between traditional print-media and the evolving front of Internet and e-book publication. An obvious stench of elitism clouds this discussion, but I find it fascinating how defensive both sides can be. According to one side or the other, Internet publishing either spells the downfall of respectable writing since "anyone" can get published or it is the hammer of justice for the "common people," demolishing those self-serving publishing houses who only favor the educated elite. I have problems with both concepts that I don't really have time or patience to develop in this post.

Just in publishing this blog, I obviously stand proudly with the so-called legion of pixel-stained technopeasant webscab wretches. But, more important (and interesting) than the debate of which is better - ebook or traditional print - is the question of why the split exists in the first place. Any thoughts?

So say we all.
Bri