One can thank heavens when the man of the masses, Noam Chomsky, refuses to be swayed by the Twitter snobbery. The usual Chomskyan fans would have expected a roar of approval with fervent locutions from the intellectual honcho, but he is neither impressionable nor snobbish to surrender himself to such pseudo-intellect. Lifestyle gurus are pimping touting Twitter as a linguistic breakthrough. According to their pompous theories, Twitter induces creativity by forcing people to write within 140 characters; apparently, it will also render literature obsolete. As usual, lifestyle gurus are using chicanery to influence masses.
On Twitter, a person asked Madhu Trehan on her experience as a journalist during the emergency in the nineteen-seventies. She replied that it was not possible to describe that in 140 characters, and advised him to read books thereof. That sums it: everything doesn’t either “suck” or “rock”; there are layers of details, far from the reach of stunted messages.
Make no mistake, this isn’t criticism of the social networking website. Twitter serves as a good platform for sharing headlines and staying in accord with current events, but it only works at a superficial level. It’s like a trailer, not a feature film. It’s not a linguistic phenomenon. Life is far more complex to be diminished to the fleeting limits of Twitter. Imagine Noam Chomsky’s disquisitions being condensed to mere tweets. How would a superficial-level tweet entail the niceties, the intricacies, the celebrated Chomskyan reasoning and corroboration of facts in just 140 characters?
On Twitter, a person asked Madhu Trehan on her experience as a journalist during the emergency in the nineteen-seventies. She replied that it was not possible to describe that in 140 characters, and advised him to read books thereof. That sums it: everything doesn’t either “suck” or “rock”; there are layers of details, far from the reach of stunted messages.
Make no mistake, this isn’t criticism of the social networking website. Twitter serves as a good platform for sharing headlines and staying in accord with current events, but it only works at a superficial level. It’s like a trailer, not a feature film. It’s not a linguistic phenomenon. Life is far more complex to be diminished to the fleeting limits of Twitter. Imagine Noam Chomsky’s disquisitions being condensed to mere tweets. How would a superficial-level tweet entail the niceties, the intricacies, the celebrated Chomskyan reasoning and corroboration of facts in just 140 characters?
