Yes. Browsing on Amazon will never be quite the same as wandering through the stacks of a university library. Bibliographies have the same difficulty as Google: They don't list wonderful books on a topic one never thought of looking for. I've discovered many books in that way over the last 70 years. Well, not in the last six.
From: T. S. Eliot Discussion forum. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nancy Gish
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 4:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Sir Edwin Arnold
I think this is a major reason we need to see the internet not as a substitute for books or see books as obsolete. I prefer most of the time to sit in a library, find the most recent few books on a major topic, and follow the notes and bibliography. I realize this dates me, but the fact is that one only finds on the internet what one looks for. Serendipity never occurs. A great example is a paper I did on Eliot letters in the National Library of Scotland. I assume they are now in the new prose, but a few years ago they were unknown. I found them just by sitting on the floor by the very old handwritten catalogue in the manuscript room and pulling down all the indices with E. They were fascinating and not on the internet.
When I started working on Craiglockhart, none of that was on the internet either. Now the Hydra is, but not with the cartoons and some other material. So these tools complement each other.
If you want to look for what you don't have the key words for, browse: it works in a quite different and equally important way.
>>> Tom Gray <[log in to unmask]> 12/5/2014 3:23 PM >>>
>We have the access, but who knows where to look & for what to look?
I suppose that that is the reason that blogs and mailing lists like this one exist. The Internet and Google in particular does not connect devices together. It connects people with people, people with information and information with people, it is the shared community that knows where to look and what to look for there.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 12:18 PM, P <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
We have the access, but who knows where to look & for what to look?
Tom Gray <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
But Google also provides us access to the shared cultural meanings that Eliot so emphasized. With Google we are not independent but encapsulated both receiving and submitting to this shared cultural history.
With these shared cultural references, did Eliot anticipate the idea of cool put forth by McLuhan? Is modernism inherently cool in its objectives?
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Rickard A. Parker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 23:37:08 -0500, Tom Gray <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>If Eliot were alive today, what would he make of Google?
This gives us a clue:
"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
Love the below:
>Google is present for all of our Internet exchanges
>Who is the third who walks always beside you? When I count, there are only
>you and I together* 360*But when I look ahead up the white road There is
>always another one walking beside you Gliding wrapt in a brown mantle,
>hooded I do not know whether a man or a woman —But who is that on the other
>side of you?