On Typewriters, Immigration and Gender

The concept of a typewriter dates back at least to 1714, when Englishman Henry Mill filed a vaguely-worded patent for “an artificial machine or method for the impressing or transcribing of letters singly or progressively one after another.” – A Brief History of Typewriters

So, right now we are looking at immigration, and the development of the bureaucracy that has grown up around immigration. And the introduction of the typewriter. In Cleveland, at least at the Court of Common Pleas (where a Declaration of Intention to apply for citizenship was filed), the typewriter was introduced in 1925.  This fascinating blog gives a pretty good sense of what machines were available, with lush photos of Remingtons, British Bar-Locks, Smiths, and Blicks.

They were using the very same keyboard and glyphs that we use today on our digital monsters. Laid out almost identically.

The transition from hand scribing (a “profession” comprised almost exclusively of men) to machine writing (a “means of employment” for women), included early accomodation to existing supplies. Large legal documents needed to be inserted into the machines, so large carriages were created:


1924-25 Underwood Standard Wide Carriage, photo by Todd Wilt


Shortly after, forms were changed to fit the machines. Interesting, though, that paper and printing were still at such a premium that all forms were used until they were filled, no matter the size. I’m not sure when wholesale paper waste became common – it certainly was by the 1980s. Anyway, it seems at this time, they adjusted a few machines in order to complete all of the pre-printed forms, rather than dump the old paper.


Underwood Typewriter, c 1925, Photo, the Australian Typewriter Museum, Canberra

Gender Changes In The Office, Late 19th Century

The history of the gender shift in offices is fairly well documented, but rarely commented upon. The job of “secretary” – those involved in the daily correspondence and organization of daily activities of people in power – was held solely by men, dating back to the Renaissance. Possibly earlier. As functions and jobs expanded, the title of “secretary” began taking on it’s own power – we see this held over with such state titles as “Secretary of State”, “Secretary of Labor”, and so on.

The field was almost exclusively male, even as late as the 1870s and ’80’s. The first schools, dedicated to teaching skills for “aids to professional men” (shorthand, calligraphy, diary planning, etc) were all set up as exclusively male. But, in the ’80’s, typewriters were appearing in more and more offices in the industrialized world. By the 1920’s, the field was dominated by women, all of them using typewriters. The remaining calligraphers and scribes, all tended to be men.

One of the issues here has to do with education. Calligraphy takes long and exacting training. The typewriter took training, but it was shorter, and qualifications were generally much easier to achieve (while there was no formal guild of calligraphers, it took a lot of skill and dedication to make it in the trade. Once typewriters became part of the training in secretarial schools, passing the courses took a fraction of the time), and there is some indication of the same grumbling about loss of skills we saw when the calculator replaced the slide rule.

As business correspondence became separated from personal correspondence in the 1880s—1900 (even today, personal letters are written by hand. Business letters are on a keyboard), the trade of writing became industrialized and devalued. And it became women’s work.


I’m also looking to see if I can find literacy rates broken down by gender. When the trade of secretary was being created in the Renaissance, male literacy rates were higher than female in all classes but the nobility. Even among the nobility, education was only stressed for females headed of the highest ranks (future queens,duchesses, etc). As you move down the class structure, literacy declined for both genders, and plummeted for women.

The enlightenment brought the idea of universal education (for men) to the West. It brought the idea, but in actuality, literacy remained low among working class and rural populations until the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Getting a handle on actual literacy rates is tough, though. We don’t have a clear definition of what the term “literacy” means. People who can read only a few simple words are considered “literate” in some circumstances. Still, working with a somewhat tighter definition of functional literacy (the ability to read popular periodicals), a fascinating article was published, in of all places, The Magazinist. In Part One, they have a really well researched section on population and literacy in the late 19th century. They point out that “men were more likely to be literate than women, although the gap diminished as the century progressed (Stevens)”.

Literacy is deeply intertwined in one’s ability to do office work.

It has also been used as a club to keep people down.

So-called literacy tests were used throughout the post-Civil War south in order to stop the black population from voting. Literacy tests were also employed to see if candidates were worthy of citizenship in the burgeoning nation, and were usually used to keep people from being able to become citizens.

Immigration Regulation and Women

Shortly after the new constitution was adopted in 1787, the new congress passed the first immigration legislation, the Naturalization Act of 1790. The law was limited to ” “free white persons of good moral character”. The law excluded all blacks (free as well as slaves), Asians, Native Americans, indentured servants and children of men who had not resided in the new country. Children born to American males living abroad were automatically considered to be citizens.

After the 1855 Passenger Act, a woman could not file for citizenship seperately from her husband. She shared the same citizenship as her husband. So if she married a native born or naturalized American, she became a citizen. However if both of them were immigrants and her husband did not seek out citizenship then she could not file in the court for citizenship. Or, if she did not have a husband, she could not apply on her own. In 1907, congress passed legislation that made marriage the sole determinant of a woman’s citizenship. Under this legislation,  U.S.-born citizen women could now lose their citizenship by any marriage to any alien man. She could only regain it if the man petitioned for, and was granted, citizenship.

Women could not file independently for citizenship until the 1922 Cable Act (coming only two years after the 19th amendment, giving women the right to vote and stand for office).

Literacy, Typewriters, and the Emancipation of Women


On Collaboration, Part 1

What is the difference between crowd sourcing and one-on-one collaboration? I’m actually more interested in the collaboration of small teams, say 2—10, working on one idea. This is where you can really witness the ebb and flow of collaboration—When do we come together? When do we move apart? When is it necessary to act as one and when is it necessary to act as individuals?

Susan Cain’s editorial  in the NY Times earlier this year was one of the best pieces I’ve read critiquing the new fad of groupthink. As someone who is now dangerously “addicted” to working on teams, I’ve faced this rush toward groupthink with some trepidation. The thing about small teams, is you can create a dynamic relationship that ebbs and flows – when you need the outside push, you come together, when you need the insight that only comes from solitude, you can take that time. On crowd sourced, or institutionally-driven teams, that ebb and flow is rare.

For me, the issue is the institutionalization of teams. Cain points out how they don’t work for game designers, and I almost feel like saying, “duh”. Solitary programers, who may come together to play Dungeons and Dragons make up the bulk of the game design community. This is not the place to look at the efficacy of teams….

Wait a minute – that is a really interesting phenomenon to look at – D&D, and how it took off among normally solitary types. That is a game of pure collaboration….

More later.


Wicked Problems To Consider

For our workshop:





On Immigration

I, like every white American, am the child of immigrants. Technically, I am the the grandchild of immigrants, but I don’t believe it matters how far “back” one’s lineage goes. We are each affected by our immigrant groups. Even the “Daughters of the Revolution”, that group of Protestant Anglo Saxons that lay claim to being the first Americans, they too are affected by the group of Europeans they came from. They are the uptight, controlling and judgmental souls they are because they are Protestant Anglo Saxons.

My family is primarily Eastern European. Ukrainian, if you consider that to be exact. The borders have moved throughout it’s approximate 700 year history. The area that current Ukraine lives in was initially part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (and may very well explain why one of the 4 languages my grandmother spoke was Polish). Then, it became Cossack.

I get the Cossacks. Russian cowboys. I.E. nuts.

Ukrainians are passionately depressed. We like bread, painting eggs, drinking, dancing that harms your knees and the accordian. We are fine with grey areas, shaded truth, and let’s face it, outright lies. There is very little moral ambiguity in the Ukraine: you do what you do in order to survive. Fudging birth dates, marriages, service in the army, dates of immigration, etc, all fall under the basic law of survival: Life is hard and then you die. Might as well scam someone in the meantime.

And  this may be because the Ukraine has been scammed so many times. During the tug of war between the Austro- Hungarian empire and the Russian empire from the late 18th century well into the 19th century, my poor ancestors were mere pawns in their bizarre struggle for power over the entire mess we call Eastern Europe today. This may be a good investigation for me….my own passionately bizarre personal history (which is, at it’s root, merely Ukrainian), and the passionately bizarre history of the region. Nice.



This is the Landscape post. I am writing more to see how many words I need to make that cool home page overlay. I will now see what happens with a lot of words.

Abor autempo riasimperis etur a cuptatu riaepres resci ommos con pla prectur ad molupti bustet volori officil in repero cuptatur, coremposto ipsapic iument, enecupt atasper umenda cone inum ad qui blatum sedissi odis repella tempedisit atis estis et pro con consedist ium se dolorum aliquis corum quam, et fuga. Et enihil ium sint ad quis ma voluptat aut ommolupta deliatur sinctem solori ut et diam restia sam faccaesse as es apelia volupta tiatatur aut quis et late sam la voluptasi nesed explatem quat rescia voluptatia voloressus debitatur?

Udit autem reptur, nit quam fuga. Nam, que excepe sit, sundelliquis sum dolorepro con nem lia cust, int, cone conseque ducienisti re latem faccupi tateces nosandigenis modis as estiorest, occati volore comnisquiam fuga. Ratum quate porero voluptaspic temolupta assitem corrum vel inctotat fugiti conesed ignatur, iuntios atibus dolupti oremqua spient omniendundae dempe pro omnist utatur ma postio es et ommoles ectotatet audistiae lam everumquia sus etume sint, cuptas mi, officiame solorepero il eumque etur? Accae praerum eaquid quam, cores remqui dellamusae dolupid elecatur simusam usdae. Ed quae. As repudis cusa velenis que suntiusam quibus dolupta pel molo expelitiis dus, volore liquatur sequatibus magnis rersper chicillam fugia quam ventur? Ga. Tibus eaque omnimporem vellore nobit eos et quos vid moluptus etur? Sed qui in pel mincima nonem quunt volupta epratec earchit voluptat.

Lorempo reiciliquos re nonsequis alis volorum imporrum solo to vendam explanis consequam facerup taepudanis unt ad ut int ad magnimus.

Ad qui ommolla nderiste plantestia comniet voluptum volecta simaxim incillaut aut deniet porum inverci psanihilis el int entibuscia qui ant ium quis rehent porum nosae nost im ipsaecae nempor sin eostibusant magnate molupta tiundeliquam quo ipidi volum arupiciumquo cus et ut fuga. Quias expe mod ut moditatem laborepe et quam harit maione porerecto ipsum di dolupta quis de veliquo digenet andignimus dolupta tempor rest quunt rercill accusamus.

Hit lant ea sum es esed mi, sundisincte nonsequi de landiti tem doluptibea vid mos eum reium ut modisto to blaborp oriberum sanderum quiam, arum ut rae veliquistium alicabo rrunt.

Perferumqui commod eatque si quod maioremquos autatent labo. Id que numet autemquo bla acculli genime et derruntia nis re planis dit omnimaior andant lacessu ntistis resti archill aborum aboris quos imil enist, sitio con erci cuptaer uptiume ntiuscil eum a sequiam est quam quam laces eos nullani hilluptaspit duntiatur?

Enis et, sitat. Experum aspedi te etur aces eations entibearchit ut ut fugia de nesti consecuptam audae debitis cipsant.

Et eaque re volupta tatiae de inustibus ium ne is sitiusci ommoluptatem qui nullit quasit, tem expliberum harchil ilit eaqui consequaes molorem porupta volores dolorempor soloratur sum res corro dolorem ipit ut eium eatesti quodit omnim fugia quid qui autas ut accuptatum facersped quis explitio officipsa dolupti siminctet quae nus expedig niment quia corepeditiis nusandae ipsum et velit recusan daeria pra venditas autem dignimus et optatur sinctam nestisiti ad que preprat iberro ent volenihitam volla dia sam id qui nos adiscil ius nit laborro volo omnis re, que cus.

Oditemperit quistrume quodiae et quatio experatem. Sed quiatur sim imuscipsa abo. Nem. Et et doluptatur autas volor molorero optam vellorem re, et mo que nem remolup taquodis nobit ut aut andemqu idesequo escia con nones untio doloreped qui as experis soluptas es explab imposam estinis quodios suntiam dolorrum quo magnist eati officiis magnissumque et occum andae sunt vide nus remporio. Itatio bea velit lici nectint, est fugit, optas des estem vel inctiat archilliquis quissit restio tescienda conserum venis eliant aut rerum veliquid et eos imusci dolupta quiam, odiorporest quiam ellis evelendione dollaborpor reped minvendel magniat ionsentis erio optate volorer iberae poriam nis a seque corem si aliciatur, tem eum est, atus aut quam que laborror sit