Tom Hanks on Typewriters
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
I think Mr. Hanks missed one salient point of why bothering to type on an old machine still may play a valuable role to the writer in the modern age----------Silence.
I found there is a vast difference sitting in front of any computer compared to a typewriter. Mechanical typewriters are not alive. They do not have an internal CPU constantly cycling and doing things, constantly prodding you for attention with little indicators and wifi meters and clocks and things. Computers are needy. They are constantly trying to distract you, even when they are doing absolutely nothing. Typewriters on the other hand, are doing absolutely nothing. They are merely empty mechanical contraptions with no life in them whatsoever. What you find when typing is -- well, at least what I found -- is that you are left alone with your thoughts and the workings of your mind and nothing else but the silence of the room. This might be the first time in fifteen years you have experienced this sensation. It was odd at first and slightly uncomfortable. But I found that when writing narrative fiction, the words are totally uninhibited. They are not forced. You are not churning away as if you are a member of a large electronic industrial machine: society, but instead are left in quiet solace with nothing but you and the table, the stillness of the dust floating in the air and this solid bit of metal under your palms, and they are utterly quiet, and you can think, as if for the first time. It is a miraculous sensation.
I urge anyone to try it who has been steeped in tech for the last decade or two.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/write-only/id590507955?ls=1&...
Here is an interesting story regarding the app. I manually typed one of Hanks' letter (from letters of note) to serve as screenshot, and then after a few months, received a letter from Hanks' lawyer, asking me to take it down. So I took it down, thinking, how did they know. Fast forward about 1 year, then Hanks himself released one app, featuring similar typing experience. This guy really care about typewriters.
I once used a typewriter to ask a large Ranch technological Training Company company if they had any scholarships for old-time programmers ( I was one) who were out of the game for a decade or so.
I was told my letter was passed around like a novelty and - yes I did receive the scholarship and was able to learn iOS 4. (And learn about HN)
It's interesting that you say that, as I'm a consultant who does grant writing for nonprofit and public agencies (see http://www.seliger.com if you're curious). We send fee quote letters via email but we also send snailmail letters that arrive a day or two later. Potential clients often make their decisions before the letters arrive, but sometimes those letters jar indecisive potential clients into making a decision, and sometimes those letters sit on their desks for months until another grant opportunity comes along. A physical letter and card are often easier to find and sort than voluminous email.
This might not feasible for high-volume businesses, but it's been very effective for us. The email follow-up arrives the same day, and the physical letter a few days after that.
I throw so many letters "away" (UBBM) and the sender has no idea it never made it.
Plus many people don't open theor mail right away or they are away from their house for a long period Of time. A first class letter that doesn't look machine-made is always an intriguing "open"
I wonder if he's tried a mechanical keyboard? He might like it quite a bit better, even if just for the fact that you can choose your personality of keyboard with your computer, just like he does with typewriters.
It's not even in the same ballpark. Especially if your "ink tape" or whatever it's called isn't new, you really have to bang on the keys to get them to show up, not to mention the action lever to go to a new line.
In the pre-1930 Teletype machines, the keys are ordinary Underwood typewriter keys. If you type too fast, you blunt your fingers against the immovable keys. In 1930, Teletype switched over to spring-loaded keycaps, with about 1mm of spring motion in case you hit a key before the machine is ready. This made fast typing much more comfortable.
Western Union expected their Teletype operators to be able to type "blind", with no display or printer to see what they were typing. Outbound operators often used a machine with a keyboard and a tape punch only - no printer. Here's one at work.[1] The machine she's using doesn't have the 5 keystroke per second limitation - notice the loop of tape between the keyboard machine and the tape reader. That's buffering. Operators were expected to type without errors, of course.
Arbitrary key combinations strike me as harder to type fluently by feel compared to my native language. Following the piano playing analogy mentioned somewhere up the tree playing a melody in a definite key signature is easier than a 12-tone composition!
BEROM BODAD VEMAN WEGOT
Props for the scifi reference
My aunt taught typing at a girls' high school in the '80s. She was amazingly fast - she bought a typewriter with a memory, and I recall her being finished with a typewritten letter when the page was only one-third of the way through 'printing'. Had to wait for it to finish each time before loading in the next letter.
Later in the '80s she got a job as a temp and was working on a computer. Boss comes in and sees here just staring motionless at it: "What are you doing, why aren't you working?". Her response was "I'm just waiting for the computer to catch up". The boss went over to look, and sure enough, the computer was still bringing up what she typed onto the screen...
Heck, even into the mid 90's, my mother would type so fast into Microsoft Word on Windows 95 that she'd have to pause and wait for the computer to catch up to where she'd typed!
That said, maybe this could be the case if it was a dumb terminal connected to a unix server and it was buffering in the network stack?
This is one reason UNIX commands are so short (mv, ls, cp, etc.). It would have really added up to type longer commands on the 200ms teletype keystrokes.
Teletype is why the terminal in UNIX is abbreviated tty.
In the digital world so much of what we produce, consume, and interact with has no physical manifestation what we can strongly identify with. The computer is an abstract filing cabinet which can display what you're looking for on its own screen, or plays abstract 'music files', or streams 'video' from subscription apps. We're essentially asking the computer to recall these things from its "memory", and luckily, they remember with exact accuracy much more than a human would. While we can experience these things, we can't hold them in our hand; we can't share them in a self-contained, self-describing form (like handing someone a book) -- if we can share them at all.
The writing though is clear and preferable to other implements. Ballpoints are atrocious, rollerballs only slightly tolerable.
and markedly more backwards- and forwards-compatible than anything digital. We can read plays from the 1600s, or essays on how to build a government from the 1780s.
We can admire art from thousands of years ago, and people thousands of years in the future will be able to hold developed photographs of us in their hands and readily perceive it, while JPEG/EXIF file format will, without conscious intervention, will sink into near-complete obscurity.
When we die, how do we pass on our digital possessions? Do Facebook's, Instagram's datacenters, full of pictures of now-dead twenty- and thirty-somethings, will have to purge inactive accounts one day. Will our kids inherit our iTunes library even though they have their own? Do we pass 1000-game heirloom Steam accounts to our grandkids?
Morbid, I know, but the tangibility of physical, 'real-world' objects exudes a more reliable aura of permanence than that of digital content. Even if our descendants hold a garage sale the very next day, at least the world is made aware of our stuff, and it doesn't just spin away on a hard drive somewhere, forgotten.
electricsheepcomix.com/almostguy/
One example is an app that I built that lets authors sign ebooks (Authorgraph: http://www.authorgraph.com). This idea was a result of doing more and more reading on my Kindle but missing the experience of meeting authors and having them sign my books.
Some of the pictures are amazing. I got to see her a few weeks ago doing a live "typing" event drawing out pictures of children jumping around. It was amazing how fast she typed and how good he pictures were.
I think a similar thing is at play with people's love for the modem handshake squeal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV8DEJ8ydJQ
You could tell, once you heard it enough times, how well the connection was.
Nobody who can help it is going to mix with a keyboard and mouse. Faders and knobs (excuse me, "encoders") rule the day.
As I and my fellow vi fanatics can attest, this isn't limited to just outdated analog technology.
For me, the difference between a typewriter and a computer, or a slide rule and a modern calculator, for example, is like the difference between a painting and a photograph. Of course the photograph is more accurate and it is not practical to make an oleo painting to remember where I parked the car, and there are very beautiful photographs, but I will always appreciate a Vermeer and will prefer it to a photograph of the same landscape.
You can give it away. You can loan it to a friend. Your friend can have the same record and yet ... it is different.
There is something special about having an analog night -- putting on the record player and reading a book.
[1]: https://www.amazon.com/Gift-Imagination-Erotic-Life-Property...
Human to human (conversation), pen to paper (letter), metal to metal (type writer or straight key). Everything else is too impersonal and abstract. Too far removed from being human.
Furthermore, it's way more fulfilling to have created a physical form of my thoughts, that can exist as an object. It's more pleasing to handle paper, reread my work and edit it freeform with a pen. I feel more engaged, and I have a better memory of what I write on paper that what I write on computer.
I don't know if this situation has any backing research but I guess making such research would be yet another unnecessary distraction for me as a creative.
For what it's worth, when referring to a thing as outdated, one needs to ask himself, "is it, really?" Is a digital successor of an analogue or mechanical gadget able to produce a strict superset of the effects of the latter? I think, in photography, music, plastic arts and literature the answer is no. And unless the answer is yes, the gadget is not outdated. Even if ninety nine hundredths of the effects are reproduced, and many new are added, for that one hundredth of the effect, the older tool is still valid, more so if that's what the author is wanting.
Besides, today's things have less glory and object presence attached to them than their older counterparts. It's normal to want that and seek that I think.
It is the user who decides how useful something is, and really: its only a decision.
Off to write an email client for my Oric-1 .. ;)
Strangely, I'd prefer a plain keyboard (w/o a screen) where I could type (for journaling) and have what I type be saved. I suppose this could be easily done with a wireless keyboard connected to my phone. People would think I was crazy, though, seeing me type on a computer keyboard without a computer in view.
Brilliant. Great little article. Doubt it will do much to overall typewriter usage (I also don't think that is his point, really) but you have to admire his passion.
I also doubt it'll increase typewriter usage, but a while ago I saw The Atlantic's review of this device: "The Future of Writing Looks Like the Past: The Freewrite, a 'smart typewriter,' wants to liberate writers from their computers," which looks intriguing (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/05/freewr...). At $500 it seems a bit pricey, but I've talked to many writers who complain of relentless distraction from the notifications on regular computers, and I wonder if the Freewrite is a possible solution to that problem.
Myself, I'm fond of Freedom (https://freedom.to/) for quieting the temptation to log in, but I can see the appeal of alternatives.
I mean your hands really had to work hard at typing. These days, I am trying to keep even keyboard typing as low stress as possible.
I can't use it because people can hear it clear across the house. It makes the cats hide. It definitely makes your writer's block very apparent to everyone in earshot; that's embarrassing and leads to filling that silence with "All work and no play..."
That said, it types like a dream. Very few keyboards I've ever used come close (the original PC keyboard is probably the closest in feel). The problem with all of these is that your typing makes the people around you want to murder you.
I have high hopes for the KeyboardIO split keyboard. We'll see :-)
and Electratype (I was on the team that made this app): https://itunes.apple.com/app/electratype/id619414507
I believe history has it that the querty keyboard layout was intentionally designed to slow down the typing speed, because the mechanical efficiency of the first gen/early typewriters (1860/70?) was fairly low, causing the moving prongs to jam if typing was done rapidly.
I also believe the dvorak layout (which got invented later and never gained much popularity) allows measurably faster typing (never used it myself). I think the older Apple keyboards used to have a qwerty/dvorak switch on the backside. Any dvorak users/fans here, I wonder?
Read this for more info on the origins of QWERTY: http://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2433/...
Read this great blog post for more an alternative layouts: https://viralintrospection.wordpress.com/2010/09/06/a-differ...
Also read this HN discussion of the post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11883233
This is far more important for me. Even typing a couple of words on Qwerty feels uncomfortable.
Assuming your keyboard is Qwerty, try typing
"feels uncomfortable"
"yddp; flismysokanpd"
The second line is the keys you'd type if your layout was Dvorak. Notice only two letters are on the bottom row, and the top→bottom pair is an unusual letter combination (MF) rather than very common ones (UN, OM). The hand alternation is also more even, with at most two letters typed on the same hand, compared to Qwerty's four: "LLLRL RRLRRLRLLLLRL"
"RLLRR LRRLRRLRRLRRL"I guess I was a hipster before hipster was a thing. I might have to dig through my files and see if I still have any of it...
http://freesound.org/people/keithpeter/sounds/123344/#
Olivetti Lettra 22
I might record the Olympia SM9 when I get time to clean it up. The manual suggests getting some cork to rest it on to reduce the sound (it is a solid item).
For years afterwards, people would come up to me and remark on how that presentation stuck in their memory!
(I still have a mechanical typewriter. Maybe I won't throw it away after all.)
It's great that you use that technique if it is going to make your presentation clearer, if using the projector really helped your audience to get whatever you were presenting better. If that was the case, congratulations for an original idea. But if they only remember you as the annoying guy who had everybody waiting while looking for a projector, I would not feel very proud of it.
It didn't affect the content of the presentation at all.
The only issue was one of perception - I was talking about new technology, and was presenting using old technology. It wasn't congruent, and didn't really fit, although it was fun. Hence it was a one-off thing. I didn't do it again.
I doubt today one could even find a viewfoil projector, and the audio-visual staff would be annoyed because it won't interface to their recording system. Annoying the AV staff is never a good idea.
Got one remaining.