Not For Everyone

When I found out that the first part of TIRP 5 was a group effort I couldn’t help but sigh. And once we began working on it, I couldn’t help but sigh more. Collaborating on work has never been a strong suit of mine mainly just because it is so much easier to work alone. Also you have to take into consideration other people’s ideas even if they conflict with your own. It didn’t help that we all had different schedules that just weren’t working for getting things done without someone taking on a majority of the work. As someone who gets things done at the last second, this made me the burden in the group and I’d rather have not had to waste other people’s time as well as affect their grade. This conflict illuminated the purpose of Hoods’ article Editing Out Obscenity. If only every group had a moderator like Wikipedia does. I was also using Google Docs for the first time which made me a weak link that hindered the group because it took me forever to figure things out and even now I am not confident in my abilities with the program enough to really use it on a daily basis.

When it came to using Google Docs as a way of collaborating I don’t think it was very effective. I think the lack of effectiveness came from a lack of personal interaction. We were unable to organically express what we expected of each other and the technological medium was the cause. Because we were unable to have an organic interaction we got lost in what we were supposed to do after already not being sure of what we supposed to be doing. Also what failed at this being a true collaborative effort is that in writing our own narratives it gave us no incentive to interact with the each other especially because it was all online. Our groups’ first instinct was to try and meet in person for this project because that is what is natural. When we couldn’t meet we figured yeah, Google Docs should get us where we need to be, but it only seemed to make it more difficult due to the lack of direct communication. Some people communicate more effectively in person and none of our reading seem to address this.

Because we needed to eventually present our work, I know I wrote in a way that was slightly different from my private voice. I am much more open about my thoughts and can be more confrontational when writing for only a professor. Not knowing how others feel and not knowing how others would react I often censor myself when writing knowing I am writing for an audience. Unlike what Miller and Shepherd had to say, I am not one wot write in an effort to write as a call of action to others. In fact I would much rather no one read what I have to write, which complicates what they’ve said because it conflicts with my own beliefs. I also feel that the internet is such an insidious place that even if someone were to blog exactly how they feel they would be torn apart by an unforgiving audience. Being sensitive to criticism, blogging does not appeal to me.

            While multimodality comes out of a need, it is not a need from everyone. I could go the rest of my life without reading or posting a blog and I know I’d be just fine. I’d also much rather sit down with group members in Strozier than working through technology. When working with people abroad or in another state Google Docs would be fantastic, but if my classmate with two hours of free time on their hands, I expect to be working in proximity so that we can have a much more organic conversation that I believe leads to better quality work.