There is always a need for tools to get a job done. No matter the job, like Apple’s app store, “there’s a tool for that!”
But how much of the work is the tool responsible for? Specifically in a creative endeavor. Does it matter if you’re working with a scrap of paper and a Bic pen, or a Pixar-level Mac Pro or something in between, or can the same work be done with anything?
I’m inclined to believe the former. To some extent, the tools inform the work. The method by which something is done seems like the sort of thing that would bleed in, like a lot of external stimuli. Or maybe that’s just me. But I don’t think so.
George R. R. Martin insists in hacking away on a decrepit copy of WordStar – though I don’t know if he uses the truly relic-worthy Commodore 64 version – and Stephen King claims to have written Dreamcatcher on “one of the finest writing tools,” a Waterman fountain pen. George’s work – to me, at least – frequently feels reptilian, neolithic, a relic of an older era where the lizard brain and the id were in charge. Dreamcatcher was long, pretty and frequently, pretentious. But that’s just my opinion.
I can see it in my own work; if something was written longhand, it tends to be quick and terse. Probably because it hurts like hell to hold a pen for any length of time, and my handwriting is almost illegible after twenty minutes or so. If I take to the tablet, I’m liable to be fairly wordy, but stick to short words and avoid made up ones. Fighting with cursor positioning and Siri being overly insistent with the autocorrect just isn’t my idea of a good time. Move to the desktop? My full vocabulary might is unleashed… much to some folks’ dismay, I’m sure.
What about you folks out there? Do your tools change the final work, or do you think it’s all hogwash? Let us know down below!
Insomniac Nightmares 
0 Responses to “Tools”