This is part of the reason that burning man is so meaningful for many people - without phones we have to connect with those around us and be present in the moment. When everyone is like that, it's amazing!
Nathan Jurgenson wrote an interesting piece about how phones are a sort of microaggression- using it is a subtle act of protest against present company. It's a kind of shield, a buffer that says "I'm afraid to fully commit."
The beautiful thing about Burning Man (I'm guessing- I've never been there) is that it's a self-selecting audience. And self-selecting audiences are the easiest to work with. Think about a comedian facing a tough crowd vs. a comedian facing a friendly, hometown group.
I'm pretty sure you'll find the same sort of cameraderie anywhere that's hard to get to. A mountain summit. A backpacker's hostel. A track meet. Military boot camp. The distance between the self and the other is diminished, and everybody gets along beautifully- so there's no need for phones.
I saw this video on Tumblr of gymnasts at the Olympics- Russian, Chinese, American- none of them speaking the same language- giving each other hugs and thumbs-ups. You probably wouldn't see them on their phones much even if they had them with them- there's too much to take in.
Nathan Jurgenson wrote an interesting piece about how phones are a sort of microaggression- using it is a subtle act of protest against present company. It's a kind of shield, a buffer that says "I'm afraid to fully commit."
What I don't get is how that's totally acceptable even to otherwise educated people. From what I can remember, reading the paper or watching TV during a conversation was considered rude and often censored, yet cellphones seem to be exceptional. I find it puzzling.
If your manservant brings a telegram during a soiree your guests expect you to pause to read it and respond. Someone casually reading their phone like a newspaper would I think deserve censure, but responding to an incoming notification feels acceptable.
