I think that you could make a reasonable argument that there is an optimum speed and duration for quite a few things we do, tasks we accomplish, and events we experience. As an example, if you were to be presented with a snifter of 100 year old Armagnac, if would be appropriate to spend some time savoring this rare and expensive potion. To merely gulp it down would be to miss everything that is of worth with this experience. Would this maxim apply to everything?
In a similar manner, if you were to try to summarize the biggest differences between us and anyone from the 19th century…it would be the speed with which we attempt to do things. For instance, if you live in some major metro area (like most people these days…) you might be quite inured to getting from place to place quite quickly, the idea of having to walk more than several hundred feet for anything other than exercise sounds almost ludicrous to us these days.
I think that this need for immediacy is closely related to the fact that most modern people have a much lower acceptance of boredom than our forebears. If you are impelled to walk for miles to accomplish something as prosaic as mailing a letter or to buy some food you will have plenty of time on your hands. So far I have tried to describe these two different means of getting through our lives, but with regard to my first point, is there an optimum rate with which we go through life? Is there a long term advantage in going through life in an almost frenetic pace? The differences in the quality of experiences between our modern, rushed existences and the older style of taking whatever time things take strike me as being similar to comparing a novel with its summary.
Sitting here writing this post (online) makes me wonder if the styles of interaction we see online are taking this idea of speeding up life (in a subjective manner) to even further heights. I often wonder if having immediate access to others makes communications better or worse. What would have happened if someone like former President John Adams could communicate with his wife (Abigail) via e-mail instead of his daily letters which often took weeks to arrive…? It would seem that the use of e-mail has almost driven 1st class mail into obsolescence. I wonder if this new technology has had any lasting impact upon the quality of personal communications.
If we are the sum of our experiences, what does this entail for those who have grown up in this age of speed? Are there differences (subtle or gross) in how we perceive things based upon how quickly we deal any situation? There is a simple convenience in being dismissive when confronted with something which takes longer than your interests allow. Is this a modern definition of boredom?
