[thibaulthalpern]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

thibaulthalpern, I hear the things you're saying... and I realize it comes down to the organic experience of putting pen (or pencil) to paper, which I do not argue is a useful way to work. But you seem to be overlooking the fact that you can be equally as organic on an electronic device... that is, writing manually on its surface. The Hanvon video demonstrates this pretty well, and of course, if it allows you to write handwritten notes on top of a document, surely it can call up a "blank page" and let you write freely there. And it is not the only device that allows you to do that... such devices have actually been around for years. (Heck, my Casio Zoomer could do it in the nineties.)

That means that a device can be used "in the field," "on the run," "vertically," if desired. I've done that with lesser devices (like the Zoomer, and others) for years. That's why I don't need notepads, nor do I depend on switching from keyboards to paper to "undo a writer's block" or get fresh ideas down. About the only thing many of the existing devices are missing might be better power sources for field applications, and with the latest hand-cranked generators and solar cell rechargers, I wouldn't consider that much of an obstacle today.

(Random thought: How well did those notepads work in the driving rain? An electronic device in a clear protective cover can still be worked on... even with a touchscreen.)

I don't need to take notes in the rain (and you're dreaming up of scenarios that are very rare and abstract. I've done fieldwork numerous times and I haven't had to banish paper because of rain). There is weatherproof paper, by the way, and scientists are generally the ones who use them. For me, electronics are too delicate to be used during field situations. There are some scientists who do need to use electronics in their field situations but they are typically not in the business of studying people where people are finicky and have social protocols. Anthropologists have to deal with social situations and in many situations, being dependent on an electronic device for notetaking means needing to charge the device up, be careful with it when moving around in the field. And, depending on the culture and society you're in, having a tablet PC or laptop that you lug with you could be drawing attention to yourself in ways that you don't want. These are chances I do not want to take when out and about in the field. The tablet PC and other writing electronic devices are not good for my situation.

When electricity is finicky in the field situation, heavy reliance on electronics is a bad idea unless it can't be helped such as recording audio stuff and taking pictures. In my case, I carried with me a fieldnote book, paper, digital voice recorder (which I hardly ever used) and a digital camera (which again I hardly used). What I used most of was my brain (for keeping mental notes) and my fieldnote book and pen.

This is what I'm saying: That electronics can effectively reproduce all the advantages of paper (plus added advantages of their own); it's just a matter of thinking about what you want/need and applying the right technology; and the point is, all of those needed technological elements are not still under development, existing in science fiction only... they are here today.,

And that's where I disagree with you. Electronics cannot reproduce all the advantages of paper. For one thing, it relies on electricity. Paper doesn't. Sometimes when I run out of paper in my notebook, I grab newspapers, scratch paper etc. This was rare, but it has happened. Furthermore, sometimes I wanted an informant to write something for me and they're familiar with pen and paper but not familiar with a tablet PC or laptop. Believe me, those laptop/tablet PC electronics can draw attention in ways that one wouldn't want to. It can signal snobbish-ness (again, depending on what culture, society and people you're working with) just like driving around with a Mercedes Benz in Togo, or it can signal a desire to maintain a social hierarchy between haves and have-nots.

I've personally met many people who, like you, would not be convinced that an electronic device could replace their traditional method of doing things. Then, either at someone else's urging, or because of their own changing needs, they tried it... and found the electronic device could, in fact, do what they wanted/needed to do very effectively. My personal axiom has always been: "You get used to what you want to get used to." This axiom applies to all devices, old or new, and it comes not down to the technology's capabilities to adapt, but down to your ability to adapt yourself to them.

Perhaps you're being a little over zealous with your idea that electronics should replace all? I'm saying that yes electronics can replace many but not all. For instance, I'm not going back to using the typewriter to type up fieldnotes.

I do use the following electronic devices when doing field research but not necessarily when I'm actively in the field running around:
laptop, digital voice recorder, electronic transcription foot pedal, digital camera, extra hard drive.

So we can agree to disagree. On the other hand, you must honestly give the other side a try, or you can't know for sure that the others are wrong...

Have I not? Are you reading me as if I'm anti-electronics?

I've already mentioned that I do use a laptop to re-record my fieldnotes but not (and not a tablet PC either) when I'm running in the field socialising with informants, conversing with them, taking notes etc.

I'm not the one to say to hell with electronics.

Instead, you're the one saying banish paper. I'm saying, give me both paper and electronics.