Digital Natives 2 -- Stalking the Cultural Referent

by Laureen

In my last post on generally the same topic, Unschooling and the Digital Native, I talked about the concept of the digital native (DN), as it applies to my children, and how I relate to them as unschoolers. As I mentioned in that post, I work for a technology company, in the general field of technical communications, catering to software developers. And lately, there's been a lot of buzz about "the new developer," the next generation of young computer professionals coming up through the ranks, graduating from college or not, doing brilliant things with technology. Those New Developers are the up and coming Digital Natives I was talking about before. So businesspeople, as much as parents, who want to talk to those people are having to learn, and fast, how to communicate with Natives.

I'm having a range of fascinating conversations with my coworkers. By and large they're older than me, and they're poised at a different spot in their parenting paths, with generally just-barely-grown children. So the whole digital native thing catches them at a different spot than it catches me. But it is definitely worth examining again, here, because what I'm seeing at work is the result of the growing pains when older DNs intersect with DI or non-digital social structures. This is the kind of thing our own children are going to face, when they head out into the world beyond home/unschooling. This is the form, I think, of the cross-generational miscommunication of the future.

A major concern I'm hearing from my coworkers is that DNs have, like rampaging Visigoths, reduced the richness of culture into sound bites. One particular digital immigrant I work with, a man steeped daily in technology, mourns what he perceives as the loss of exposure to culture that his DN children (who are in their late teens) seem to have. He wails "They're reducing Shakespeare to a text message!"

In order to reduce Shakespeare to :-/, you first need to know the   material you're reducing. It's actually far more respectful of the   person you're talking to, because you assume they both know and are   familiar with, the cultural touch point. If I refer to someone as "Yorick", I am assuming that the person I'm talking to is conversant   enough with Shakespeare to spot a Hamlet reference, and attribute the   correct meaning to my referent.

Interestingly, the DNs value depth even more than we do, I think, once   they've determined independently that it has value. It's just that their   tolerance for nonsense is far far far lower than ours, and they want you to   communicate as fast and as directly as possible, so they can get on with   the meat of what they're doing.

DNs don't tolerate textbooks well at all, for example, because they're boring,   monolithic, and authoritarian. No hyperlinks. The opportunity cost of tracking down an author's credibility and veracity is far higher, and often not worth it, compared to the cost of getting the same information from a more quickly verified online source. But DNs tolerate   literature and film beautifully, because in order to have linguistic   shorthand function effectively, everyone has to have the same   touch points, which is what culture provides. Example: I'm in a meeting,   and someone who doesn't even have a blog is blathering on about using   the online community as a vehicle for disseminating press releases (this is, incidentally, a form of towering heresy). The   DN I'm sitting next to leans over, mutters "blue pill", and sits back up   straight. He and I both know the film "The Matrix" by heart, and in two   quick syllables, the DN has communicated to me the depth of his disdain,   and his perception of this person's utter cluelessness.

I'm seeing an unconscious valuation of culture in some forms above exactly the same items in other forms. If you are attending a play or reading a manuscript, that's culture. If you're watching a video or reading an online discussion of precisely the same material, you're an uncultured, dissolute youth, despite the fact that you are most likely covering more territory in your exploration (where's Denmark on the map? Who were other princes of Denmark? How freaky was the royal family, anyway?). Referring to classical literature, and discussing the social perceptions of people centuries dead is worthy; incorporating the buzzphrases of the icons of your own time is intellectual cheapness. With such judgmentalism going on, it's no wonder the DNs are slowly withdrawing into a world of lingo, catchphrase, and abbreviation.

It's sad and weird and a little strange when different approaches to exposure, assimilation, and reconnecting to the same cultural touchpoints results in two groups of people assuming the other set just doesn't get it. Even more, going forward, being able to suspend value judgment of the delivery method of enculturation is going to be a critical survival skill.

Laureen is a writer, a professional editor, a scuba instructor, a beginning  sailor, a traveler, and an obsessive researcher who's chiefly focused  on, and delighted with, her husband Jason and her sons Rowan and  Kestrel. She's a lifelong Californian, which lends a very distinctive  spin to both her ideas and her politics, and she's discovered, in her  peregrinations, that the world is far smaller yet far more fascinating  than anyone gives it credit for being. She holds forth her opinions on  that in her blog, The ElementalMom.

Comments

[piscesgrrl]

This is a brilliant article and observation. I have one very techy son, and both my boys love all things pop culture and technologically cutting edge. I see the disdain in body language all around us when folks realize we don't limit their access to these things. And thank you for the word 'touchpoints', because this helpfully sums up the connections that happen because of these cultural understandings.

I get the whole "but what about touching nature" thing, but we live in the middle of windswept cornfields and can't help but live a very interconnected life with nature and all its gifts and challenges on a daily basis. Even if we didn't - to each his own.

Maybe it's true that others 'just don't get it' when it comes to our method of integration - you're right that it doesn't have to be disdainful. I find it awe-inspiring instead.

[Ivy]

Here is an interesting podcast of an interview with Sir Ken Robinson, who is enlightened in matters of learning and creativity. He speaks of young people and their connection with technology, and our role as "outsiders" to guide them but allow the online flow of ideas to flourish.

http://mediasnackers.com/report/2007/June/24/385/

[Steven]

I'm glad you've posted this. This very issue has been an ongoing one with my son. Our current standard educational is decades (dare I say "centuries"?) behind in adapting to the needs and abilities of their students. Books? Bah. Online source? Yah.

I'll spare you the rant of the issues related to the perceived deficits in socialization with the DN generation as I already ranted on my own blog about it some time ago.

[Toast]

Brilliant, Laureen. As usual.

To those with DN's who are also nerds, I encourage a read of Rand's complimentary post: The Nerd Handbook http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2007/11/11/the_nerd_handbook.html

Now mind you, while all nerds are DN's not all DN's are nerds. However, there is a strong overlap in the concepts of "touchpoints" here and "relevancy" there. DN's find little patience reserved for the irrelevant. However, I find their appreciation for irreverent endlessly entertaining. I would have been hard pressed not to burst out loud laughing at the blue pill reference. In the same way I sent an entire room into gales of laughter during a bug meeting once when my as yet to be born 3rd child rolled around in my stomach and I noted, "It's got a wonderful defense mechanism. You don't dare kill it."