[OFB Cafe] HTML Mail, and Media over Message (was Re: Cafe List)

[Timothy Butler]

> Well, good for you.  From my standpoint, plain text email (or any  
> document) is the equivalent of watching TV in black and white when  
> you have the option of watching the same program in color High  
> Definition.  The deathly fear of HTML that some of you folks  
> exhibit, perhaps, is a combination of things;
>  a.. clinging to the "old ways" (unwillingness to change)
>  b.. a belief that HTML somehow has something to do with Microsoft  
> and Microsoft is responsible for Global Warming, the gradual decline  
> of email lists, famine, drought, floods, and the fact that the  
> universe is expanding
>  c.. your house is black and white, your car is black and white,  
> your cat is black and white, your dog is black and white, your TV is  
> black and white, your computer screen is black and white, you use  
> Mutt for your email client and Lynx for your web browser, you speak  
> in monotones, and by cracky - email should be like the rest of your  
> life

	My cat is black and white, a so-called "tuxedo cat." You have  
something against black and white cats? :-P

	The problem is when the medium becomes the message, something I find  
rather abhorrent as member of the professional organization of English  
majors (if you do not listen to Garrison Keilor, you won't get that  
reference).  Here is the deal. People have written words for  
millennia, and for most of that time, italics, bold, pretty colors and  
the rest were impractical or non-existent. The greatest words ever  
penned did not have a single emoticon in them.

	I recall that C.S. Lewis, amongst the greatest prose writers of the  
twentieth century, wrote in the preface to "Mere Christianity" about  
this matter. That book was derived from a series of talks he was asked  
to broadcast for the BBC during World War II. In turning them into a  
book, he was tempted to use italics and the like to help convey  
stresses he has put on particular words. He chose instead to rewrite  
his words so that the sentences naturally stressed the proper words. A  
bad writer uses italics, a good writer conveys far more punch with  
nary a single slanted line.

	I do not claim the mantle of a good writer, but I would hardly argue  
that italics are a tool for better writing. Rather, italics -- even  
while I use them -- are a tool far bad writers to convey what good  
writers would do in other forms. So much more so colors, illegible  
fonts and other atrocities that come across in far too many HTML e- 
mails and plenty of MySpace pages.

	Am I being elitist? You bet I am, but hardly in a bad way. It's like,  
learn how to, like, write a totally bad string of words, and -- well,  
duh, dude -- you won't, like, need so many awwwwesome colors and,  
like, stuff to say something?!?

	You reference black-and-white TV as if it were bad. While I  
appreciate color, I assert confidently that little or nothing coming  
out in beautiful high definition parallels the art of an "I Love Lucy"  
episode. Ten HD episodes of drivel are no match for a single black and  
white episode of that show. So much more so in photography. Recently,  
I read that while color photography in 35mm captures the equivalent  
resolution of approximately 6-12 megapixels, monochrome captures a  
stunning 30 plus megapixels. One need only look at a particularly well  
done piece of black and white photography to be reminded again that  
less is so often more.

	"More" is frequently an excuse for the lazy to capture something  
without putting in a proper effort.

	-Tim

--
Timothy R. Butler | "Friendship is born  at that moment  when
Editor, OfB.biz   |  one person  says to another,  'What! You
tbutler at ofb.biz   |  too?  I thought  I  was the only  one.'"
timothybutler.us  |                               -C.S. Lewis