Technobiographies and changing body techniques

As Mauss (Reference Mauss1979) pointed out, the development of a particular body technique may occur during an individual's lifecourse. By examining the ‘technobiographies’ (Henwood, Kennedy and Miller Reference Henwood, Kennedy and Miller2001) of the participants, we will now explore how the technological changes experienced during their lifecourses resulted in changes in their embodied competencies. Despite some variation by age, gender and occupation, the interviewees had generally taken up computing late in life, either near the end of their careers or after retirement. The participants described their daily work tasks and routines prior to the introduction of computers, as with cartography, calculations and statistical reports being ‘done by hand’. Before the mechanisation of various clerical tasks, as in the United Kingdom after the Second World War, calculations were carried out by clerical workers, generally women who were known as ‘computers’ (Balsamo Reference Balsamo1996; Hayles Reference Hayles2005). Women like Pearl and Betty described how they had carried out even complex calculations ‘in their head’ rather than using machines, as Pearl found in her first job as an office junior:

Many skills now associated with ‘computational machines’ were then the domain of human intelligence and craft (Hayles Reference Hayles2005). These abilities had stayed with participants like Pearl, who stated that she still does not ‘need an adding machine’. The absence of this embodied competency among younger generations was noted by Betty and John, who said ‘it makes me fear and tremble for shop assistants who have to use the machine to work out the change, 98 pence from a quid [pound], that sort of thing’. Although Pearl described such calculations as being carried out ‘in her head’, it may be that they were externalised using pen and paper (Clark and Chalmers Reference Clark and Chambers1998), as was mentioned by other participants, while John used a ‘slide rule’ to carry out calculations.

Many of the participants experienced the shift from manual to computerised work processes during the late 1980s or early 1990s. As a draftsman, Andrew described the ‘transformation from everything being done on paper’. A number of participants recalled their initial feelings of fear and apprehension when beginning to use computers, and said that they had distrusted the change from manual procedures. For example, as an accounts clerk, Brenda had continued to keep ledgers or paper back-ups ‘just in case’. It was often difficult to adapt to not doing tasks manually, and for many participants, using computers initially took longer, as Pearl described:

This illustrates the difficulties of adapting to new embodied practices, as many skills that had been learned much earlier had become ingrained (Mauss Reference Mauss1979). The initial misgivings were often followed by appreciation of the benefits of computer technologies in making manual tasks quicker and easier. For instance, Andrew found that rather than having to add up figures manually, ‘when you've got an Excel spreadsheet you can just do it absolutely automatically’, and ‘it was just brilliant compared to the way that we were doing it’. Some of the participants left work before the introduction of computers, however, and did not learn to use them until after retirement. The participants' experiences therefore differed by age, gender and class, with the older participants, housewives and those employed in certain occupational sectors, such as manufacturing or social care, being less likely to have used computers at work.

It was found, however, that with the shift from manual to computerised procedures, many of the changes in embodied practices exemplified the way in which ‘new techniques mutate of old’ (Crossley Reference Crossley2007: 92). Although the majority of the participants had not used personal computers until late in their lives, many had used typewriters, and some had used word-processors or the early mainframe computers. The skills and experiences learned on these machines often shaped their later experiences of computing, both at work and at home. Typewriters were most frequently mentioned as stepping stones, because they necessitated ‘familiarity with the keyboard’ and the embodied competency of touch-typing. As with participation in other body techniques (Crossley Reference Crossley2007), typing skills were gendered, reflecting the predominance of women in clerical positions (from the second quarter of the 20th century). Only one man in the sample had learned to touch-type, in contrast with several women who learned either in school or through clerical work. These women had generally typed letters for their husbands before the latter learned to use computers – the participants' responses indicate that while many men had learned to use the keyboard, few could touch-type. As Albert recollected, ‘If I had a letter to write in the past, I always had to get Enid to type it for me because I still work like this [mimed one finger at a time]. I am getting faster, but the amount I do I can manage like that now’. Their husbands' inept and slow typing with one finger was a frequent source of comment or amusement among the women participants.

Typing skills did not translate into computer-use skills for all the participants. While Carol and Pearl found their keyboard skills helped when learning computing, others like Enid felt it would have been ‘better to start with an absolutely clean slate’. As well as gender differences in the acquisition of typing skills, there were gender differences in the construction of these skills and their perceived relevance to computing. Men frequently described typing as unimportant or ‘not proper computing’, while women like Enid and Carol felt the computer was merely a ‘glorified typewriter’. Others like Joan had lost many of their former typing skills although traces remained. She explained:

Joan's experience indicates some limits to the transferability of earlier embodied competencies to new practices (Crossley Reference Crossley2007), not least because new technologies necessitate new embodied competencies (Hayles Reference Hayles1999). For example, neither mechanical typewriters nor the early personal computers had a mouse, and many people find this device difficult to use. As Brenda said, ‘the one thing I never liked was the mouse, I've got used to it now but, oh for ages, I used to struggle with it’. The physical difficulty of using the mouse meant that it became ‘present-at-hand’ and the focus of attention (Dourish Reference Dourish2001). Although Brenda overcame this difficulty, others like Betty, who had previously been a proficient typist, had not learned computing partly through a fear of the new technologies and also because of ‘trouble with the mouse’. While a number of previous experimental studies have noted that some older people have problems using a mouse (Czaja and Lee Reference Czaja, Lee, Sears and Jacko2008), they have generally been attributed to physical limitations rather than the difficulty of developing new embodied skills.

The participants contrasted their own struggles with adjusting to the new body task demands posed by computer technologies with the presumed and known experiences and competencies of younger people. Unlike older people who came to computing later in life, young people were described as ‘growing up’ with computers, so using tools such as the mouse were said ‘to come naturally’ to them, and did not have to be learned. As Ian reasoned, ‘they don't think twice about it, they've been brought up with computers in school and keyboard skills and things that people had to learn. I've taught people who didn't know how to use a keyboard [and who] were completely useless with a mouse’.

The collected evidence points to a cultural shift in embodied competencies as technologies have changed. For many of today's older people learning to use a computer mouse was ‘a struggle’, but the participants believed that using computers was ‘second nature’ among younger people who encountered the device at an early age. This supports the proposition that technologies encountered during the formative period of the lifecourse are more readily adapted to (Bolin and Westlund Reference Bolin and Westlund2009; Rama, Riddler and Bourma Reference Rama, Riddler and Bourma2001), and reflects the great difference in older and younger cohorts' everyday technological experiences during their formative years. Pearl echoed a widespread view among the participants, when she said that her age group ‘didn't have computers when we were younger’ and therefore ‘probably found it more difficult to pick up things’. Several participants had a keen understanding of early learning and the technological context, and compared today's younger people growing up with computers with their generation's experience of being ‘brought up’ with the radio, so that using the wireless was ‘built into’ them and came ‘naturally’. The participants' experiences confirmed that body techniques are patterned according to historical and cultural location (Crossley Reference Crossley2007; Mauss Reference Mauss1979), and reflect the different technological and social contexts of successive birth cohorts.

Acquiring computing skills as an embodied competency

So far this examination of the participants' technobiographies has illustrated that personal experiences intertwine with broader cultural shifts in body techniques, but now we focus on their experiences with computers to elucidate the embodied nature of acquiring computing skills. After the initial reservations about computing felt by many participants, the progression towards competency was described as something that could only be achieved through practice or use. Although some participants initially took courses or consulted manuals, generally they were not found very useful. As Carol explained, ‘I must have started Introduction to Computers courses so many times over the last 10 years of my working life, [but] unless you've got one in front of you, there's no point in going, because it's like pianos, you need to keep practising’. Similarly, Ian said he ‘can't learn by sitting in a classroom’ but has to ‘get in front of a keyboard on a new piece of software and plug away at it for several weeks, and then it just comes naturally’. Computing was not something that could be learned theoretically, therefore, but needed to be learned through action and practice (Wacquant Reference Wacquant2004). Although new learners like Jane and Dot sometimes needed a particular application to be explained (Crossley Reference Crossley2007), they also confirmed that it was practice that they needed to progress. This reflects other forms of embodied, practical knowledge that can only be acquired through ‘learning by doing’ (Wacquant Reference Wacquant2004). Several participants compared the practicalities of learning computing to other embodied competencies such as ‘playing the piano’ or ‘riding a bike’.

While acquiring greater competency with computing, the majority of the participants did not understand or want to understand the inner workings of computers (Lupton Reference Lupton, Featherstone and Burrows1995). As Jenny said, ‘we haven't got any interest in the box itself’, while her partner, Andrew, said that ‘it's not in my nature to want to take it apart and rebuild it again’. The tacit, practical knowledge possessed by many participants enabled them to make use of computers as tools, without being concerned in abstract terms about how they worked (Dourish Reference Dourish2001; Polanyi Reference Polanyi1966). In contrast, Ian's previous job as a physics technician involved programming and building new computers, and he found the everyday use of computers mundane. In his words:

This reflects the contrast between tacit, everyday knowledge and expert knowledge; that is, the knowledge of technicians that enables them to understand the connections between everyday practices and the inner workings of machines (Polanyi Reference Polanyi1966). The contrast also draws attention to the instrumental nature of learning computers for most of the participants. They focused on what they needed to know, rather than trying to understand how computers worked. As Jenny stated, she did not want to know about the various aspects of computing, all she wanted was ‘to be able to do this little bit that I want to do, and I want to be able to do it well’. Most participants wanted to learn only a particular set of practices. George put it like this:

For George, as for most participants, the most relevant applications were email, information searching and word processing, which previous studies have found to be the main uses of computers and the internet among older users (Hill, Beyon-Davis and Williams Reference Hill, Beyon-Davis and Williams2008; Selwyn et al. Reference Selwyn, Gorard, Furlong and Maddon2003). Most participants did not feel there was ‘any point’ in learning about social networking sites or chat-rooms, although one had used them to communicate with grandchildren. Many similarly argued that there was ‘no need’ to use the internet for shopping or banking, as these facilities were nearby and could be accessed in person. While some participants used the internet to access news, others like Jeff and William felt that although they ‘could if they wanted to’ they ‘haven't got that desire to do so’. Characterisations of their approach to computing also drew on age differences, with a tendency to associate practices such as using Facebook with younger people. As Joan reasoned, ‘I don't think they [computers] are geared for the elderly, why should they be? I think they are geared for the younger with all these Facebook and things’. The instrumental, functional approach of older people who used the internet as a ‘tool’ was also differentiated from that of younger people who used it more flexibly. As Ian said; ‘to them it is a games machine or homework machine, whatever they want it to be’.

Like other forms of practical, embodied knowledge, for those who reached a high level of competency, using the computer ‘came naturally’ or became ‘automatic’ and computer hardware, including the mouse, become ‘ready-at-hand’ instead of the focus of conscious attention (Dourish Reference Dourish2001). As Arthur said, when he first began to learn computing, ‘there were so many simple solutions that you didn't know’, whereas ‘today we just do these things automatically all the time, and you forget once you've got started that other people struggle with them’. This comment evinces a general rule, that the struggles of acquiring computing skills are forgotten once the learner attains embodied competency (Crossley Reference Crossley2007; see also Slegers, van Boxtel and Jolles Reference Slegers, van Boxtel and Jolles2009). Ian could not understand why people found word-processing difficult, for to him ‘you use that without thinking about it, don't you?’ Responding to this remark, his wife Lesley pointed out that this was not the case for beginners, and in effect argued that the embodied nature of computing skills meant initial difficulties were often forgotten:

Like other practical knowledge, Maggie's comment described the nature of computing skills as a practical, embodied competency which is learned by doing, and then becomes automatic and something that is ‘done without thinking’. She also alluded to the difficulty of putting into words or making explicit the nature of such embodied, practical knowledge. As with other forms of tacit knowledge, this instance implies knowing ‘more than we can tell’ (Polanyi Reference Polanyi1966: 4). Her husband, Ian, echoed this understanding with the phrase, ‘you don't know how you know it’. Ian had both an abstract or theoretical understanding of computers and the tacit, practical knowledge that comes with everyday use (Dourish Reference Dourish2001).

While several participants had become proficient computer users, new developments in the technologies could undermine their competence and necessitate new body techniques. For instance, while Barbara and George had ‘felt confident’ with their previous computer, they had found it difficult to adapt to a new one and their usage had reduced. Similarly, Brenda had decided not to get a laptop as to use it required a new technique for moving the cursor, and would not be ‘easy to manipulate’. As discussed earlier in relation to the transition from typewriters to computers, several participants came up against limits to their ability to transfer or adapt skills learned from earlier forms of the technologies. For example, Lesley said that while Ian found it easy to apply his computer expertise to ‘new stuff coming in’, she found it difficult to adapt to new programs. As she remembered:

In short, although practical knowledge could become encoded in embodied memory, it could be difficult to transfer to new practices (Crossley Reference Crossley2007). Knowledge could also be forgotten or displaced by new skills. Barbara, for example, found that after learning to use their new computer she was no longer able to use the word-processor because of the lack of regular practice. As she perceptively noted about recent changes in technology, ‘nowadays if you [don't] practise [you lose the skill]: it's not like riding a bicycle, you never forget riding a bicycle’.

Although some participants had reached the level of embodied competency with computing, for many it was still a source of worry or uncertainty, particularly those who had only recently begun to learn. These participants contrasted their computer skills with those of young people, for whom embodied competency was seen as the norm. Young people were described as using computers ‘automatically’, with a knowledge of computing as embedded ‘instinctively’ into their thought patterns and actions. For instance, Andrew said ‘their dexterity and mindset is completely different to mine’, while Jenny described an instinctive knowledge of computing among ‘young kids’ with the generalisation that ‘they think in a computer way, whereas we think in terms of a hard copy, a paper, a book’. As with other body techniques (Crossley Reference Crossley2007; Narvaez Reference Narvaez2006), in polarising these differences in embodied competencies, the participants constructed category differences between young and old (Woodward Reference Woodward1991). Moreover, the division was seen as hierarchical, with young people having superior technological abilities to older users. These views were encapsulated in a brief exchange between Brenda and Greg:

This exchange reflects broader cultural meanings in which computer and internet technologies are coded as the domain of ‘youth’ (Jaeger Reference Jaeger and Jaeger2005; Richardson, Weaver and Zorn Reference Richardson, Weaver and Zorn2005). Even some competent computer users like Maggie and Richard described themselves as exceptional among their age peers, reinforcing the association of technological ability with youth (Lin, Hummert and Harwood Reference Lin, Hummert and Harwood2004). Two retirees who were competent users contested this discourse, however, with Ian and Arthur saying that they had ‘informed the lower generation as well’ and helped their children with computing. Even these two acknowledged the generation gap and divisions between ‘old folks’ and ‘young people’, however, and only Carol and Jack did not refer to young/old divisions in their remarks.

Computer use, constructions and experiences of the ageing body

In distinguishing their abilities from those of ‘young people’, the participants not only reflected on different levels of embodied competency but also drew on broader discourses about the ageing body. As generally found in representations of ageing, the ‘discourse of decline’ was prominent in their accounts (Richardson, Weaver and Zorn Reference Richardson, Weaver and Zorn2005). For those who had taken up computing after retirement, it was often described as more difficult to learn because of a decline in memory and mental capabilities. For instance, Dot stated that, ‘as you are older your brain is slower than when you were younger so it takes longer for you to memorise things’. Mental decline was also a concern for more established computer users, including worries that future memory loss may create risks when conducting online financial transactions. Others, like Albert, described the difficulties when adapting to new programs. He said, ‘with age there's a certain amount that you can learn that with electronics that sort of thing, there's so many new words, and the memory won't retain the descriptions of what's actually going on’. The participants also related differences in computing ability to physical decline. William, for example, thought that difficulties with reading computer screens were possibly ‘a factor of older people's eyes, younger people may find screens easier than we do’. Some participants occasionally contested the discourse of decline, however, for instance Jane and Dot, who when discussing the difficulties of learning computing in later life agreed that ‘age shouldn't be any barrier to learning’. The clearest resistance to this discourse came from Carol, who argued consistently that, ‘the capacity to learn continues long after retirement’. She mentioned several people who had learned computing and other new skills in their seventies or eighties, and argued that while some may experience memory problems, the association of mental decline with old age is socially constructed. As she reasoned:

This comment invokes the ‘mask of ageing’ by contrasting continuing mental abilities with physical degeneration in old age (Featherstone and Hepworth Reference Featherstone, Hepworth, Featherstone, Hepworth and Turner1991). The division between mind and body was evident in descriptions of older people who were mentally active and able to use computers, while experiencing declining physical health and mobility. It also emerged in relation to the discourse of ‘positive’ or ‘successful’ ageing, which emphasises personal responsibility and the importance of ‘keeping active’ (Katz Reference Katz2000, Reference Katz2001; Laliberte-Rudman Reference Laliberte-Rudman2006). The interview responses drew on this discourse in contradictory ways; on the one hand, several participants described computer use as a way of keeping ‘mentally active’ and keeping ‘the grey matter going’, but on the other, some saw the use of the internet for activities such as shopping as creating laziness and physical inactivity, and raised the danger of getting stuck indoors. As Andrew reasoned:

This apposition reflects the division between body and mind found in many depictions of computer culture, in which the body is seen as being neglected because of long periods spent online (cf. Lupton Reference Lupton, Featherstone and Burrows1995; White Reference White2006). Several participants believed, however, that computer-based facilities were valuable for older people who were not able to get out, and that they would be useful if they became physically immobile, again linking technology use to a narrative of decline. As found by Richardson, Weaver and Zorn (Reference Richardson, Weaver and Zorn2005), therefore, discourses of ageing were drawn on in contradictory ways, and resisted as well as reinforced in accounts of technology use.

It is difficult, however, to separate ‘real’ lived experiences of the body from the discursive constructions of ageing bodies (Woodward Reference Woodward1991). Experiences of change or deterioration in bodily capacities over time can make the ageing body ‘reappear’, although these are always read in relation to broader cultural meanings (Crossley Reference Crossley2006). A number of participants described such changes in bodily capabilities, both in their general accounts of technology use, and when considering the time spent on particular activities as recorded in their diaries. Some mentioned that a deterioration in health had led to a ‘slowing down’ and to less time being spent on physically-demanding tasks and hobbies. For these participants, more time was instead spent using the television or the computer which, as Fred said, ‘isn't physically demanding. I can sit there in a nice comfortable chair. … The older I get, the less I want physically demanding things, I soon get tired’.

As others have suggested (e.g. Dickinson and Hill Reference Dickinson and Hill2007), computer use could also compensate for deteriorated sight or hearing, which could limit social interactions or the use of other technologies. For instance, Albert's hearing problems created difficulties in face-to-face communication and in using the radio, television or telephone, but computer and internet activities were unaffected. Similarly, Deidre's deteriorating eyesight meant that computer and television use increasingly replaced reading as a source of enjoyment. For other participants, however, health problems had constrained computer use. Hilda described her poor eyesight as a reason for not using the computer, saying ‘apart from anything else, I think my eyesight would go against it’. As found by studies of other age groups, more general experiences of bodily pain and discomfort can limit computer use (Lupton Reference Lupton, Featherstone and Burrows1995; White Reference White2006). For example, Andrew and Jenny found the ‘physical aspects’ of computing restricting, and described how too much time on the computer could make your ‘eyes hurt’ or your ‘back ache’. The analysis of the diary entries also revealed how computer use was situated within and constrained by bodily rhythms of sleeping, getting up and meal times (Adam Reference Adam1995).

As well as the lived experiences of bodily constraints, it is argued that consciousness of one's mortality draws attention to the limitations of purely social constructionist accounts of the ageing body (Twigg Reference Twigg2004). While we are not often directly aware of the process of bodily ageing, it is argued that the passage of time is experienced more directly in relation to an awareness of finitude and the ‘irreversibility of time’ (Hockey and James Reference Hockey and James2003). This sense of time being ‘limited’ and ‘running out’ emerged strongly throughout the interview accounts, and computer use was situated within a sense of this parameter. As found by studies of television use (Haddon and Silverstone Reference Haddon and Silverstone1996), the limited and valuable nature of time meant that participants like Lesley and Emma did not want to ‘waste’ it on the computer. As Emma reflected:

The issue of mortality also arose among couples with only one person being computer competent, for there were concerns that if she or he died, the partner would not be able to access their online bank account. It also emerged in relation to online communications. For example, Bill and Jane used the computer to contact members of Unison's Retired Members' Association and pointed out that when members died, they ‘don't let you know … and you're sending stuff out every month’.Footnote ² Another participant, Audrey, expressed concern about what would happen to her online genealogy research after she died, and hoped one of her grandchildren would carry it on. As argued by Shilling (Reference Shilling2005), online experiences are always situated within and return to physicalities, with mortality representing the ultimate limitation to attempts to challenge the constraints of the body through cyber-technologies.