The question that stuck out to me from this week’s blog prompt was, “In an age when we manipulate devices with our hands all day long to do our work, what counts as ‘hands-on’?” First, reflecting on the visit to the library and EPI, hands-on used to mean the work required to actually make a book: setting the letters, inking the machine, pulling the press, etc. Hands-on in the most literal sense. Today, we consider that type of “hands-on” work to be craftsmanship. Hundreds of years ago, however, that was just considered typical work. Secondly, last semester I was involved in the 50 States of Grey Election Night broadcast. When people ask me to describe the class, I always say that it was a wonderful experience because it was hands-on learning. It was not hands-on like making a book on the printing press, however. To me, hands-on has become a figure of speech, not a physical description of the work. Rather than sitting in class taking notes, we went out into the field and filmed the stories that we pitched, worked with classmates, designed sets, and studied topical issues and races in preparation for the live broadcast. We solved problems and made decisions. We were involved in every step of the production, and for that reason, it was a hands-on learning experience.
I agree with your definition of “hands on work” – it’s not about how much manual labor you put into the product, it’s about how many steps of the production process you were present for. For example, creating a video game. The designer is there at every step in the process, and when they finally see the fruit of their product being sold in stores, I’m sure there is no prouder moment. However, the majority of the work was done on a computer, programming and designing and animating. Just because you didn’t sweat doesn’t mean you didn’t work diligently.