Summary class 15 February 2011

The class started with a discussion of the novel ‘When Eight Bells Toll’ by Alistair MacLean.  Ajay said that he saw inadvertent value judgments being provided by the narrative.

Ajay also pointed out that there is some seemingly inaccurate detailing in the way one of men was murdered. It is impossible to imagine that a man had been murdered with a wood chisel being used to sever his spinal cord. More importantly, how did the murderer locate the gap in between the lumbar vertebrae and push the chisel in? And if the lumbar portion of the spinal cord had been injured how did the heart stop?

The narrative is gripping and holds your attention. This is a quality of this genre of writing.

The narrative seems unreal because of the detailed descriptions of the observable. The narrative possesses seemingly technological accuracy despite the fact that death is staring the protagonist in the face. The protagonist is quite the anti-hero and there is very little emotion or drama in the narrative. The author has a dispassionate documentary style of writing.

Knowing all this, why then do we then accept the narrative?

In some sense what we do is regard the detailed descriptions that the author provides us with as proof of implicit knowledge that he may possess. We thus acknowledge his authority and buy into the gimmick of the narrative.

We assume that since he has knowledge of the gun and its functioning that he also possesses knowledge of human anatomy.

It is also possible that since the reader empathizes with the anti-hero that the details are absorbed without the slightest hesitation.

We then asked a question pertaining to technology - “What do you look for in a car?”

Answers included mileage, aesthetics, cost effectiveness etc. But who evaluates these parameters?

Coming to communication strategies, we discussed advertisements. Does the model dressed in a dentist’s white apron for a toothpaste advertisement assess the toothpaste quality? Does the engine in your car work the same way it does in the formula one sports car because they are manufactured by the same company? The answer is obviously NO! However, the consumer is led to believe that a brand ensures quality. We assume some precision went into making our car engine on the lines of the precision required to make a so called “technologically advanced” (note that the notions of advanced are under review and hence the inverted double quotations) engine. WHY?

Again reiterating the question of communication and information sources - What is on the internet is never complete information. There is quite a disbalance between kinds of information available, how deep you must dig to get various parts of the information, what kinds of research is promoted, and so on.

We went on to discuss the history of Ultrasonography as an example of technology.

It was obviously inspired by SONAR. But the idea of using waves to monitor distances is as old as the late 18^th century when Spallanzani noted that bats maneuvered through the air using their hearing. It was later used in the Second World War for submarine navigation. In the area of medical imaging it was first used to visualize internal organs and only later for obstetrics. However today we associate it solely with obstetrics. Why? Knowledge of how to use the ultrasound machine to generate a correct image representative of the internal environment of the womb is a science and one requires training to do so.

In our understandings of technological discoveries and inventions we must approach the subject of analysis of the said technology considering the following aspects

a)     Is the invention a product of Individual thinking? And the answer is… not always.

b)     Do technological advances follow an incremental linear history?

c)     Is necessity the motivation for invention?

d)     Is eccentricity the motivation for invention?

Another point worth mentioning is the fact that ultrasounds are so common nowadays and primary care physicians advise it at least three times during the gestation period. Has there been any elucidation of the ill effects of repeated exposure to ultrasonic waves on the health of the foetus?

Why is the language used to describe the ill effects of repeated ultrasonography on foetal health so guarded?

If very little is known about the ill effects of repeated ultrasonography, why is it being made compulsory?

Part of the fee paid for the sonography goes into the pocket of the doctor who prescribed it. Hmmmm… Chew on that! The idea being that there are links between various players in the field of technology; it might be easy to look for and find a scapegoat – the unethical doctor, the unscrupulous pharmaceutical company, the slick advertiser … and so on. But the point is to see the subtle connections that go into the control over technology, and that are not always visible.

Thanks Ajay for this summary. Others do add your perspectives.