It is a sunny Saturday in Sydney and an immaculately-attired family of five are standing as one to photograph their lunches in a posh seafood restaurant.

... and then he Twitpiced it. Photo: Supplied

Mother is inspired by a spray of fluorescent caviar over curled cucumber slices. Father is attempting to frame the table’s human subjects as well as its plates (quite a feat when everyone is hovering and squinting behind their smartphones).

Daughters one, two and three, meanwhile, are less impressed with the beauty of the haute cuisine than with the digital tricks permitted by their phones’ extensive collection of photo manipulation software. They are amused (understandably) at their ability to digitally decapitate their parents and replace their heads with spanner crabs.

Technology has a conspicuous presence at this meal but it does not curtail the confabulation. There is an enthused discussion about angles and lighting. A brief argument about the pros, cons and ironies of retro iPhone applications which use cutting-edge technology to produce photos which look like faded 1970s Polaroids.

Then, last but by no means least, the inevitable request of a fellow diner to take a group happy snap using a range of filtering “lenses” and all five of the family phones – just in case. 

Only after this lengthy, contemporary take on grace is complete, does the iFamily finally sit down and do that other thing people sometimes do in restaurants… you know, eat the food.

So what are we to make of this oh-so-21st-century scenario?

Roasting technology is certainly the routine response. It’s killing conversation, comes the condemnation from the critics. It breeds brutish manners, bad taste and lax parenting.

A common claim is that impressionable youngsters should be entertaining themselves via old-school methods such as practicing their penpersonship or balancing piles of coins of their elbows, rather than fiddling about with widgets.

Another recurring – and interestingly Zen-esque – case is that our increasing overreliance on technology means we can enjoy only mediated rather than authentic realities.

Daniel Sieberg, the US author of a new book called The Digital Diet: The 4-Step Plan to Break Your Tech Addiction and Regain Balance in Your Life, writes gravely of those citizens who feel something hasn’t really transpired until they’ve posted it on Facebook.

This begs the question of what happens if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to microblog about it. Those Middle Eastern tyrants who occasionally try to outlaw the internet certainly seem to think summary executions don’t count if they can’t be Tweeted.

But the geopolitical ramifications of cyberisation have received plenty of press. What I wonder is whether adequate attention is being paid to the many, quotidian pleasures of new-fangled doodads.

Technological breakthroughs such as smartphone photography are certainly a nouveau way to experience life and engage with others. But that doesn’t mean they should automatically be written off as illegitimate.

Let’s return to our seafood restaurant and consider a less gloomy purview of those documentary-minded diners.

As the fellow luncher recruited to assist their meticulous visual chronicling, what struck me was the way that – despite drawing some sniffy looks – technology added to the occasion rather than subtracting from it.

It prompted conversation. It stimulated laughter. It insisted on interaction with a stranger. And it produced images which could be savoured later when the comestibles were less glamorous and more sausage casseroley. 

Artistic endeavour was also required – though the creativity involved in high-tech contexts is often overlooked or dismissed for reasons of cultural snobbery.

If this family had chosen express their aesthetic interest in their meals by rendering them in sketch or verse form, I suspect it would have been seen as charmingly Jane Austen-esque.

None of this is to deny that technology has its downsides. When it comes to interpersonal communication, the preponderance of text-based interaction risks a paradoxical combination of dehumanising alienation and sticky co-dependency.

Face time – defined by Wikipedia as “contact between two or more people at the same time and physical location in ‘real life’ or meatspace’” – now requires its own term and is no longer the default of human contact.

Many such “meatspace” encounters are also disrupted by distracted punters who check their dinner during emails, Facebook their update statuses on dates and web the surf when they’re supposed to be working. The juggling of hundreds of Words With Friends games further fragments attention spans.

Yet despite our lack of presence in the presence of others, separation anxiety consumes many of us within seconds of friends or lovers leaving a room. “Wish you were here” (though more likely “wuwh”), we text with our failing, RSI-ridden thumbs.

It’s tempting, therefore, to frame new fangled gadgets as inherently unhealthy and requiring absolute abstinence. But I think it is more productive – and also more realistic – to embrace an ethos of responsible use.

After all, even exercise, books and raw carrots can be insalubrious if their consumption involves excess and compulsion rather than moderation and considered choice. So let’s leave the electro-fasts and digital crash diets and instead consider a set of basic ground rules for techno-etiquette. These could include:

* talking at normal volumes on mobile phones on public transport instead of replicating fleets of revving 747s.

* remembering that electrified conversation is still conversation and, as such, it’s rude to conduct too many at once.

* choosing to broach difficult subjects – especially those relating to sackings and break-ups – in person rather than skulking cowardly behind an SMS or email.

* refraining from texting or Tweeting while under the influence (aka TUI).

* restricting one’s misrepresentations on online dating sites to no more than a one per cent increase in height, salary and emotional IQ.

* avoiding multi-tasking in situations where mono-tasking would be more appropriate (driving and intimate exchanges, as just two examples).

* punctuating – or at least maintaining the average daily allowance of vowels – in all mobile communications.

* accepting that with great anonymity comes great responsibility, and

* gazing at significant others and offspring with the same passion we direct towards our devices.

Despite my defence of amateur food photography, I also think it is polite to keep the digital group portraiture demands made on outsiders to a minimum. By the time that restaurant family allowed me to return to my sashimi that day, it was completely cold.

Fortunately it still photographed a treat and currently holds pride of place in my own gallery of Meals I Have Adored and Also iPhoned.

No plain Jane - see more of Emma’s work here at The Australian.

Most commented

24 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • acotrel says:

      08:16am | 13/06/11

      The technology is being wasted on idiots. It would be interesting to know how many people can actually programme a computer in any language?  Or even use more of the software other than Microsoft Word?  How many can make a movie, edit it and put it up on Youtube? Or make a DVD from their downloads.  Playing computer games is no different from playing with plastic Lego blocks, but less constructive?  We have fully accredited engineers who cannot use Microsoft Project or convert an Excel Spreadsheet to database format.  The technology has so much potential which is not being used.

    • marley says:

      09:14am | 13/06/11

      Oh come now.  Just because I can’t program a computer, doesn’t make me an idiot.  The computer, like the automobile,  and the wheelbarrow for that matter, is a tool to help me achieve the things I want to achieve - whether that be communications, travelling further than a day’s journey by horse, or moving soil from one part of the garden to another. 

      I’m interested in reading, doing a bit of research into subjects of interest, keeping in touch with friends, and, of course, commenting on blogsites.

      I use Word to write letters, reports, and to store thoughts;  I use Excel for keeping track of assorted financial matters;  I use Outlook to keep track of my incredibly busy social life (well, maybe not that busy).  I could do all these things by hand, with little notes, ledgers and a diary, but the PC makes these things easier.  That’s all.

      I don’t want to download DVDs - I own exactly 6 DVDs, two of which I’ve never watched.  Why would I want to download more?  I certainly don’t want to edit one. 

      Technology is great as far as it goes - but learning a computer language is not very different from learning a new spoken language - it’s pointless if you have nothing to say.

    • nihonin says:

      09:58am | 13/06/11

      I can programme in 4GL, C, C++, cobol, visual and pascal. I don’t use Microsoft product (at home but at work I do), I use Linux (Ubuntu) on my main laptop, but I do have an older laptop with 6 different distributions of Linux on it (why I don’t know, maybe because I can).  I pretty much do everything you’ve listed and no I’m not a geek or tech head or even an IT admin, I actually have a life, 5 beautiful kids and a Grand daughter.  I just happen to like computers.

    • Fiona says:

      09:59am | 13/06/11

      I learnt BASIC computer programming language at school, but that was the days when my sister used to come home from with uni with a fistful of punch cards, all in COBOL or FORTRAN. Interesting that now technology is infinitely more complex, most of us couldn’t do any programs. I can make a DVD from downloads though.

    • Bilby says:

      10:06am | 13/06/11

      I tend to agree with Marley. Right now I’m involved in developing a new kind of monitor to be used by doctors on critically ill patients. These doctors don’t need to know how to program a computer (some of the older ones can hardly turn one on), and I don’t need to know how to save lives, but together we form part of an advanced society.

      The fact that people now use technology for relatively trivial reasons is a triumph for all the people that dreamed that it might one day be this way. Technology is not an end in and of itself.

      On the other hand I agree that there is more potential untapped than tapped. That’s part of what makes it such an interesting field to work in.

    • acotrel says:

      10:35am | 13/06/11

      ‘Technology is great as far as it goes - but learning a computer language is not very different from learning a new spoken language - it’s pointless if you have nothing to say. ‘

      So we shouldn’t teach other nations’ languages in school?

    • acotrel says:

      10:52am | 13/06/11

      @Marley If you’ve got kids, you might try making a movie about their exploits.  It’s really good fun to achieve this sort of thing:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9rWQppj2oI

    • marley says:

      11:08am | 13/06/11

      @acotrel - yes, I think we should teach foreign languages in school.  But I once knew a guy who was fluent in six languages, and fool in all of them.  It’s not knowing the language that matters, it’s what you use it for.

      And if computers turn your crank, that’s fine. I have no interest in the finer points of computer technology, because all I want from it is a service (just like I don’t want to know how to rebuild an engine, I just want to be able to drive the damn car).  My point is, that those of us who think of computers as useful tools and no more, are not idiots.  We just have other priorities in life.

      As for movies of the kids, I’m a bit past that stage.  Got lots of old technology photograph albums though - and you know what - haven’t looked at them in years.  No one has.

    • acotrel says:

      11:23am | 13/06/11

      @Marley I’m also past the kids stage.  However my wife and I went to Europe in 2008, and took thousands of photos.  I’ve made slideshows for each country, added the music of Nigel Hess, put it all onto DVD.  While my wife is away caring for her old mum, I sometimes watch it on my flatscreen TV.  The nostalgia trip is fantastic. I have my old stereo hooked up to the TV so the sound is also great.

    • acotrel says:

      11:29am | 13/06/11

      @Marley ‘
      ’ My point is, that those of us who think of computers as useful tools and no more, are not idiots.  We just have other priorities in life.’
      But would you have a lathe in your shed, or a loom in your lounge room and not use either to make something beautiful?  You don’t keep an overlocker just to take up hems? Have you ever considered taking up painting?  An artist’s brush is just ‘a useful tool’?

    • marley says:

      02:34pm | 14/06/11

      Ah, Acotrel - you’re missing my point.  I’m not interested in programming a computer or weaving a rug or turning a table leg.  That doesn’t make me a fool, it just means I’ve got other interests. 

      I’m not in any way belittling your interest in computers, or your desire to make DVDs.  But those aren’t things I want to do, so why would I waste my time learning how to do them?  I’d rather read a book or go look for whales or try out a new recipe.  Different strokes, alcotrel, different strokes.  Doesn’t make me smarter or dumber than you, just different.

    • acotrel says:

      10:45am | 13/06/11

      @Bilby I’m appalled that most engineers have no formal training in project management.  I worked for a company with 8 engineers all engaged on projects, and all self-taught.  Any wonder there were stressful stuff-ups? The potential of computers associated with the educative powers of the NBN have immense potential.  I worked with the first mini-computers in 1971, and we wrote our own software in machine code.  I’d never ta ke a job in IT, although I have installed networks in one workplace.  Been there done that!  But I love making movies, slide shows from photos, MP3s from vinyl, uploading to Youtube.  I’ve been digitising all my old motorcycle racing VHS tapes and uploading them, in the cause of promoting motorcycle sport.  The applications are endless, and the available software is beautiful. Most of it is free to download.

    • non-warmist says:

      12:34pm | 13/06/11

      @acotrel Whenever I see “I’m appalled…..”  I don’t go any further.  Sounds like Malcolm Fraser
      And “the technology is wasted on idiots” ?  I’m picking up here that you aren’t one of the idiots.

    • Dr. Larry Goldberg says:

      12:06pm | 13/06/11

      Emma, just for future reference, if you want debate on an article then you need to make your opinion clearer. And especially, you need to add a twist to it, if your thesis is going to be “Kids these days… so spoiled” (or whatever your thesis actually was… it’s a very vague article).

      In reply to your ‘begging the question’, as a physicist I think i can explain the fallacy of this riddle to you. Firstly, when a tree falls, some of its kinetic energy is converted into sound as it hits the ground, Now, sound waves need a medium to propagate through, provided conveniently by our atmosphere: air. For this reason there is no sound in space, so if a tree were to fall in space, nobody could hear is regardless of being present or not. As we, or rather, everybody is under the same atmosphere as i’m assuming this hypothetical tree falls under, air as a medium exists as every point about the globe. Every sound propagates indefinitely until the medium that it propagates through ceases to exist. So technically, (wind currents provided: perfectly stationary) if you stood on one side of the Pacific and yelled to the other side, your sound wave would travel all the way across the pacific and reach someone on the other side, although our aural senses are not finely attuned enough to hear it. Hence, unless the is a spherical vacuum around the falling tree, the sound waves would propagate indefinitely until they reached the ears of some living thing, regardless of whether the hearing senses of such living thing are finely attuned enough to hear it. And if the soundwave hits said living thing, then it certainly has the potential to blog about it.

      Therefore the answer to your question is yes.

    • stephen says:

      01:39pm | 13/06/11

      Kinetic energy is a force that is not affected by gravity, is it, as in a falling tree ?
      Which makes your yes, a no.
      Yes ?

    • Dr. Larry Goldberg says:

      02:11pm | 13/06/11

      Kinetic energy isn’t a force, it’s energy. Hence the name.

      Are you 12?

    • stephen says:

      06:52pm | 13/06/11

      The initial inertia is a force, and the subsequent output is measured as energy.
      Are you 9 ?
      A falling tree is not kinetic.

    • stephen says:

      07:24pm | 13/06/11

      And ‘initial inertia’ and ‘subsequent output’ , being here maths terms, are exempt from tautology, (as all maths is).

    • Tim says:

      12:23pm | 14/06/11

      Anything in motion has kinetic energy, that is in fact the very definition. So yes, a falling tree, whilst falling, has kinetic energy. As energy can be neither created nor destroyed, it is merely transformed into the aforementioned sound energy, among others, upon its motion being stopped.

    • stephen says:

      06:00pm | 14/06/11

      Yes yes Tim I know the greek root of the word denotes motion - any kind - but considering the inertial reference equations why doesn’t kinetic mean a motion that has an external force acting as its ‘impulse’
      Another word should be used to describe mere gravity-energy.

    • Bikinis On Top says:

      01:01pm | 13/06/11

      in Asia, one prefers yen to zen as zen does not buy much.

    • nihonin says:

      01:59pm | 13/06/11

      I’ll meditate on that.

    • stephen says:

      01:33pm | 13/06/11

      A writer on this site a while ago, and to do with photography, explained that taking photos is an excuse for non-experience : that in the act of technologizing, (sorry !) a moment, we lose the experience to metaphor, e.g. the instant historisizing of the present via the camera.
      Same with this, Emma.
      Technology is a en excuse, and for some a reason, not to think. It’s only metaphor, (to take a broader brush to it) is in the sense that the time you learn processes of techo-transmission - and is technology good for anything else : the passing and describing of thing, rather than meaning - it’s utility becomes more important than the message.
      To put it blunty, computers and all the ancilliaries are an aspect of not science, but capitalism.
      And especially in eduction for the young, that’s its problem.

    • Outraged says:

      06:06pm | 13/06/11

      Since when did eating food become a national past-time that needs to be appreciated and meditated over?

      Eating is a bodily function. The sooner people realise this, the sooner we will have less obese people! Just because you can over-intellectualise the “cuisine” you are shoving into your gob, doesn’t make it anymore classier!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

@GerardDaffy Yeah, it was silly. Still, going on comments readers are liking it. It was a shockingly violent news day. People need relief

ToryShepherd

RT @GrogsGamut: QUESTION: But in terms of that discussion though, is he misquoting you with that?TONY ABBOTT: You’ve had your say. http://t…

tory_maguire

LOL ... @pollietrackerhttp://t.co/Q8xviQJ7f6

Anthony Sharwood

Of all the stupid stories I've written, and there have been plenty, this is definitely in the top 10 http://t.co/otUKnjq2C3

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter