Before regular mail service the best and fastest way for two people to communicate or interact was to do so physically- direct physical presence and speech. Thus developed (among the rich in any case) the tradition of “calling.” One would not simply arrive at a friend’s house expecting a chat. A calling card would be left, and if they returned a similar card to your house, the invitation to truly visit would be open. This method allowed people to screen the people with which they communicated- those with whom one did not wish to speak would simply have their cards ignored.

One could also draft a note and send it by courier, but this was costly and usually used by the government or the military, but sometimes the aristocracy too.

Regular postal service was a written piece of the American Constitution, with Benjamin Franklin the key player in the United States Postal Service’s foundation. However, it would only move mail between post offices or within cities. More rural people would have to physically walk to the closest town in order to receive mail. Only in 1902 did the USPS introduce a rural delivery service for mail.

A letter’s physicality and clearly marked sender almost demands it be read. It marks itself as an invitation to communication- it is its own calling card. Refusing to read a letter is a deliberate act, just as reading it and refusing to respond is.

Time goes on, and from a few select people the telephone spreads to be a national phenomenon. Every household has one.

They are expensive, however. Short distance calls tend to be simply used as a means to arrange physical meetings, while long distance calls tend to be longer, and used as a substitution for physical meeting or letters. Students call home to their parents. Siblings call each other from across state lines.

A phone number denotes a specific place, maybe even a specific phone. Until answering machines are invented, they are either a direct line to a person, or entirely severed. If you call someone who doesn’t pick up, you can be assured they are not actually home. Phones also can’t be screened- few have Caller ID, and so every ring has the same urgency- it could be a useless call, or the most important call of your life.

Answering machines allow for some delay and screening. Many people let the machine pick up, figure out who is calling, and answer half way thru the person’s message, or call back after listening to the message. Caller ID becomes widespread just as cellular technology takes off, such that it is an integral part of cell phones from their infancy.

In light of the above methodologies of communication, the cell phone is a new creature in almost every respect. Unlike physical presence or landlines, cell phone communication is not tethered by geography- one can make and receive calls anywhere. When once your phone would only ring within one’s private domain, now incoming calls can disrupt a person in public too- ring tones spoiling movies, dinner dates, etc. Calls can last arbitrarily long- you might make a short planning call to someone in another state, or have a three hour conversation with your next door neighbor, as you are keeping an eye on the cooking and cannot visit them physically.

Socially, people are leading more physically private lives- spending more time alone or at work. Cellular technology and voice-at-a-distance are replacing physical meetings, which now seem too time consuming or out-of-the-way. More friendships can be maintained (albeit at a more superficial level of friendship) in less time- to establish a line of communication takes under a minute, rather than a half hour’s walk to a café, or an hour drive to the next city over.

Such maintenance implies a certain level of successful communication establishment- when I call you I expect you to pick up if you can. Those who consistently do not answer their phone are seen as flaky or inconsiderate, especially as Caller ID is built in- one knows who one is snubbing. But unlike the era of calling cards, one cannot simply let the phone ring and do nothing- picking up or returning the call is almost socially required.

What is this doing to the society? First and foremost it is making us more interrupt-driven people. Fast, easy communication implies that information spreads more quickly. When in the past one would plot an evening well in advance, and stick to those decisions, now plans for an evening can go through half a dozen iterations- the decision-making process expanding to fill the available time and ease of communication between the appropriate parties. True, this allows for much more flexibility, but it also allows for sloppy thinking, inconsiderate but mask-able behavior, and general lack of precision or care.

This lack of care extends to the use of cell phones in public places. The phenomenon is so new that very few social rules have actually fallen in to place. It is generally accepted that cell phone conversations are rude in places where fellow passers-by cannot escape from overhearing the conversation or where conversation at all is inappropriate- movie theatres, restaurants, churches, while in a car with passengers, etc. Beyond that, however, the rules get hazy.

Unlike the finely honed theatrics of calling cards, it is only vaguely possible with cell phones to explain motive when making a call- a person who calls might want to have a thirty second conversation, or a thirty minute one. The culture has not gotten to the point where abruptly ending a cell conversation is not seen as rude, when in fact to NOT hang up would be irresponsible or rude (such as when driving, receiving another call, encountering a second friend physically, etc).

This vagueness of responsibility, politeness, and use gets far sloppier when the newer multimedia features of cell phones are added to the mix. Text messages, instant messaging, email, all of these written communication forms are accessible via phones, and add a layer that I will only briefly discuss.

Texts seem like a reasonable alternative to calling cards- they are slightly more discreet, and certainly quieter, than calls; and can replace short, direct question calls entirely. This behavior should be encouraged, although on most phones the apparatus for entering text is awkward. Dictionary-word-completion programs make this easier, but not easy enough.

The ability for phones to make, send, receive, and view visual media (photographs and video) only increases the strangeness. What are the social boundaries for sending funny videos of coworkers, or horrifying videos of executions? When showing someone a picture is as easy as speaking to them (easier, even, as distance allows for a certain lack of discretion or thought of repercussion), where will the lines of taste be drawn?

To me cell phones mean an era of uncertainty and sloppiness, ending with a much brighter future as the social ramifications of the technology finally settle out; not unlike our current era here on SF0, INTERREGNUM. As they currently exist they and their usage represent they irrational way humans react to change- the irrationality of how they are used causes much stress, but what they represent (ubiquitous communication and exchange of information between any and all parties) will far outshine that stress, long enough for social barriers and particular styles of use to be raised to shield us from unwanted/unneeded usage.

That is to say, cell phones mean pain, but progress too.