Analysis Of Should Everybody Write? By Dennis Baron

“Should everybody write?” This is the question and title of Dennis Baron’s essay about the writers of today compared to the writers of the past. He provides examples of the first instances of writing used for communication in presenting the clay tokens that merchants used for tracking inventory. He then discusses popular opinions about writing from historical greats such as Socrates and Mark Twain. Baron provides commentary on both sides of the issue and how the development of new technology has always been the catalyst for change. During the course of the evolution of writing, Baron relates that “authorship” was an honor that was limited to only a select few. Only to those who were really lucky and had the right connections were able to cast their work into …show more content…
Baron quotes many great scholars and authors in this piece who believed that if everyone wrote, it would diminish the value or what was written. It was believed that allowing just anyone to read and write would blur social lines and potentially expose people to misinformation. Contrarily, Baron also provides the opposing opinion that some in society have developed today. The overwhelming reality that everybody is writing. Well, not technically writing, but they are composing words and thoughts to be consumed by others. Moreover, he concludes that there are readers for just about everything that is being written. It does not have to be a large audience. He concludes his writing with his personal opinion on the subject. Baron believes that everyone should write. His view is that the onset of the Internet and its free flowing streams of text will increase the chances that there will be something for everyone. Baron then turns his attention to another question. “Will everyone continue to write?” He seems to be of the opinion that people will continue to write and that technology and writers will adapt to the change