Posts
Jared ThomasDTC-375Dr. Farman2-15-09Word Count: 914
How we depend on being a literate culture
Are we a predominately oral or literate culture? Depending on the time frame in history you look at this it could be different. Currently we are a literate culture even though we are heavily influenced by and some might say headed back towards an oral culture. We are a literate culture because of our need for written agreements, how our government and business operations function, and the way society has become intellectually driven.
Not long ago if you made a deal with someone a handshake was all that it took to seal the deal. The word of an individual was all you needed; people had a sense of honor and pride in their word. If someone said that they were going to sell you a car for $500 and a someone came along and offered them more money, they would say no thanks the car is sold. Not anymore; in today’s fast paced and greedy world if it’s not in writing then there is no moral or contractual agreement. In today’s literate world words written on paper make all the difference. In order for any type of sale or agreement to be official it must be on paper and signed.
The same holds true for business and government, if it is not written down on paper people tend not to be taken seriously or be held accountable. Let’s take our government for example, every law we live by has to be written down. For example, I can tell someone that it is illegal to run a stop sign and they might take me for my word, however, if they were to break the law and receive a ticket written to them explaining what they did and how much it will cost; they most likely would have a completely different reaction. Another example is in the Senate and the House of Representatives, they have oral meetings and open forums in the form of oral communications, but even these are tracked with meeting minutes and a punch list is written down and sent out as a type of reminder of commitments that were made in the session. Without these meeting minutes and action item lists, things would not get done and people would not be held responsible for their comments. We as a society rely on the written word as our form of a moral reminder to ‘do what we said’ and ‘how we will get things done’.
Not only is this true in our highest levels of government but in our daily lives as well. At work for instance, when most people are asked to do something they require it in some form of writing whether it is in an email, memo, etc. It is a type of literal security blanked we use to make sure that people own up to their words and commitments. This is especially true in today’s society when it seems that no one wants to take responsibility if something goes wrong, they would rather place blame on someone else. Another example of how our society is very textual in nature are the stories that are told orally. It is not good enough for us to take them for their word we have to verify somehow. For example, if I were to tell you that in the old days people used to pay .15 cents for a loaf of bread you may or may not believe me. However, if I were to show you in an old paper or get online and ‘Google’ it for a visual reference there would be no doubt in your mind. As a society we do not take anything for fact unless it is written down or published in some type of media.
As we become a more technology based society, the demand for the literate individuals has increased. Jobs are shifting from labor based positions requiring high school education to a technology based which requires a college education at a minimum. People who do not have the literacy skills required often do not function well in today’s society. Take for example Barry Sanders view on the role illiteracy plays on today’s inner city youth. He states that “young gangbangers: They cannot read or write….They function in wholly new but quite predictable pattern” (53). He goes to say “In fact, to escape from their lives of craziness on the streets, they need to exercise will, but their complete lack of literacy constrains them” (53). Sanders is building upon the point that if you are illiterate in this county you are at a distinct disadvantage at a social level. In order for anyone to be successful in today’s modern world you must be literate in order to communicate in an effective manner.
It is not hard to see when you look around today that we are living in a literate world. Young people are constantly text messaging their friends, people are going on to more and more schooling, and proof must be produced in writing in order for people to believe. This is quite a change from where this society started when stories were passed down from generation to generation by word of mouth and how if you wanted to specialize in a job then you were required to learn by watching and hands on training. You always hear about how everything in time comes full circle so the question remains when and will we revert back to an oral culture? I guess only time will tell.
Works CitedSanders, Barry. “A is for ox”. New York: Vintage Books, 1995
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Electronic Orality in Youth
Jay Makki
DTC 375 w/ Dr. Farman
Feb. 19, 2009
Word Count: 983
Modern history shows that youth have been the main catalysts for change. This is especially true in terms of technology. As new generations move into power they break the social molds of generations past. Recent trends in our electronic culture are suggesting that the youth of today are reaching backwards in time to recreate themes of communication found in pre-literature times. With the advent of new electronic mediums—such as text messaging, email and instant messaging—the youth of our global village are striving to create orality in our electronic mediums.
Orality has always had a way to convey ideas quickly and concisely. While the early beginnings of oral representation through visual means, such as pictographs, could be used to represent objects, they were less effective at transcribing ideas. Later, in Sumer, with the inception of cuneiforms, the ability to document more effectively was quickly on the rise. Over time this idea was reformed, from hieroglyphs, to the Indus script, to what would eventually lead to the Greek alphabet. Written language had arrived and it would change history simply by making it possible.
Language created a way to break free from the barriers presented by preliterate people by giving them memory. Ideas could be easier documented for the use of spreading the message. Eventually orality, and the idea of the pre-historic man, would fall to the wayside to writing. Orality was useful but limited and writing answered those problems.
As technology would eventually improve, the ability to document and deliver content was sped up. When Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press history was made, allowing history to move that much faster.
Martin Luther, when he sent that famed letter to the church, inadvertently created the very first form of ‘viral media’. The concept isn’t hard to grasp when applied to modern electronic culture. The difference is that modern mediums move at instantaneous speeds where in times prior the messages could only move as fast as they could be created. Today, when you wish to spread a message you find important, there is no longer an issue with how fast the media can be created but a matter of how fast you can create the media. Luther was creating ‘viral media’ through a textual relationship to his message. Modern cultures have a faster, oral relationship with spreading our media.
Primary users of media are going to come in the form of youth. Being our digital natives, teenagers, more then anyone, understand the importance of being ‘connected’. When a culture’s children are raised with an abundance of laptops, cell phones and electronic gadgets in their everyday lives, they are going to adapt and put an emphasis on what these ideas mean in multiple facets of their lives.
Textual communication requires more encoding/decoding of ideas through language. While text can be expressive, sometimes to get down to the core of a message requires attention to detail. In a fast paced Western society, where the speed of content delivery is almost as important as the content itself, using pure textual communication can slow this process down. Those who might benefit from using orality in communication are those who don’t have preconceptions about what it means to ‘communicate’ in the first place; namely our youth.
As McLuhan says, “the medium is the message”; so perhaps a rapid fire exchange between two teenagers during class can be meaningful because of the medium being used. Never mind if the phrase “Thanks for asking, I’m in a good mood” is expressive, if it can be summed up with “good thx =)” then the answer to the question is equally valuable in the context it is being asked in. In the near future it is possible that someone noted for having the ‘gift of gab’ could be someone who can effectively text message amongst friends.
When done correctly, orality injected into a medium can transcend textual cognition and punctuate a point instantly. When looking at the modes of communication found in modern media these ‘shortcuts’ being utilized by youth cut down on the amount of textual presence of an idea. The aforementioned mindset focusing on the speed of delivery is ensuring gratification when they want it: now.
Andrew Robinson (2007) suggests that most American and Europeans, “of ordinary literacy must recognize and write around 52 alphabetic signs, and sundry other symbols” (2007: 39). While this statement is certainly agreeable to the common mean of a population, ask any teen and they might be able to identify up to a hundred additional characters compromised of ‘emoticons’ and acronyms that could very well be considered hieroglyphs.
If a texter think something is funny, ‘lol’ sums up ‘that is funny’. If someone is sad, a simple =( pictograph relays that messages. Every year, instant messaging programs incorporate new emoticons into their chat programs and the trend, which would have seemingly slowed down, is still booming. Cellular phones are now becoming equipped with keyboards. Voice chat programs, such as Skype, are beginning to do away with the need to type at all. Once textual media solved the problems of memory in oral cultures, oral media is now doing to solve the problems of speed in textual cultures.
Marshall McLuhan has stated, “The twentieth century, the age of electronic information, instant retrieval and total involvement is a new tribal time.” He further iterates he believes the tribal culture has, “the means of stability far beyond anything possible to a visual or civilized or fragmented world (2005: 59). Regardless of how youth today might have different ideas about media, if McLuhan is correct, then those differences will not mean a thing since it is these same technologies that are bringing them together as one; uniting them as a tribe. Even if older generations fail to understand the significance of this idea, this injection of oral culture into electronic mediums will ultimately bind a new generation of digital natives.
References
Marshall McLuhan (2005). Counterrevolution in cultural theory. In George Genosko (Ed) Critical Evaluations in Cultural Theory. 2005 Published by 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY: Routledge
Robinson, Andrew (2007). The Origins of Writing. In David Crowley & Paul Heyer (Ed), Communication in History (p.36-42). Boston, MA: Pearson
DTC 375 w/ Dr. Farman
Feb. 19, 2009
Word Count: 983
Modern history shows that youth have been the main catalysts for change. This is especially true in terms of technology. As new generations move into power they break the social molds of generations past. Recent trends in our electronic culture are suggesting that the youth of today are reaching backwards in time to recreate themes of communication found in pre-literature times. With the advent of new electronic mediums—such as text messaging, email and instant messaging—the youth of our global village are striving to create orality in our electronic mediums.
Orality has always had a way to convey ideas quickly and concisely. While the early beginnings of oral representation through visual means, such as pictographs, could be used to represent objects, they were less effective at transcribing ideas. Later, in Sumer, with the inception of cuneiforms, the ability to document more effectively was quickly on the rise. Over time this idea was reformed, from hieroglyphs, to the Indus script, to what would eventually lead to the Greek alphabet. Written language had arrived and it would change history simply by making it possible.
Language created a way to break free from the barriers presented by preliterate people by giving them memory. Ideas could be easier documented for the use of spreading the message. Eventually orality, and the idea of the pre-historic man, would fall to the wayside to writing. Orality was useful but limited and writing answered those problems.
As technology would eventually improve, the ability to document and deliver content was sped up. When Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press history was made, allowing history to move that much faster.
Martin Luther, when he sent that famed letter to the church, inadvertently created the very first form of ‘viral media’. The concept isn’t hard to grasp when applied to modern electronic culture. The difference is that modern mediums move at instantaneous speeds where in times prior the messages could only move as fast as they could be created. Today, when you wish to spread a message you find important, there is no longer an issue with how fast the media can be created but a matter of how fast you can create the media. Luther was creating ‘viral media’ through a textual relationship to his message. Modern cultures have a faster, oral relationship with spreading our media.
Primary users of media are going to come in the form of youth. Being our digital natives, teenagers, more then anyone, understand the importance of being ‘connected’. When a culture’s children are raised with an abundance of laptops, cell phones and electronic gadgets in their everyday lives, they are going to adapt and put an emphasis on what these ideas mean in multiple facets of their lives.
Textual communication requires more encoding/decoding of ideas through language. While text can be expressive, sometimes to get down to the core of a message requires attention to detail. In a fast paced Western society, where the speed of content delivery is almost as important as the content itself, using pure textual communication can slow this process down. Those who might benefit from using orality in communication are those who don’t have preconceptions about what it means to ‘communicate’ in the first place; namely our youth.
As McLuhan says, “the medium is the message”; so perhaps a rapid fire exchange between two teenagers during class can be meaningful because of the medium being used. Never mind if the phrase “Thanks for asking, I’m in a good mood” is expressive, if it can be summed up with “good thx =)” then the answer to the question is equally valuable in the context it is being asked in. In the near future it is possible that someone noted for having the ‘gift of gab’ could be someone who can effectively text message amongst friends.
When done correctly, orality injected into a medium can transcend textual cognition and punctuate a point instantly. When looking at the modes of communication found in modern media these ‘shortcuts’ being utilized by youth cut down on the amount of textual presence of an idea. The aforementioned mindset focusing on the speed of delivery is ensuring gratification when they want it: now.
Andrew Robinson (2007) suggests that most American and Europeans, “of ordinary literacy must recognize and write around 52 alphabetic signs, and sundry other symbols” (2007: 39). While this statement is certainly agreeable to the common mean of a population, ask any teen and they might be able to identify up to a hundred additional characters compromised of ‘emoticons’ and acronyms that could very well be considered hieroglyphs.
If a texter think something is funny, ‘lol’ sums up ‘that is funny’. If someone is sad, a simple =( pictograph relays that messages. Every year, instant messaging programs incorporate new emoticons into their chat programs and the trend, which would have seemingly slowed down, is still booming. Cellular phones are now becoming equipped with keyboards. Voice chat programs, such as Skype, are beginning to do away with the need to type at all. Once textual media solved the problems of memory in oral cultures, oral media is now doing to solve the problems of speed in textual cultures.
Marshall McLuhan has stated, “The twentieth century, the age of electronic information, instant retrieval and total involvement is a new tribal time.” He further iterates he believes the tribal culture has, “the means of stability far beyond anything possible to a visual or civilized or fragmented world (2005: 59). Regardless of how youth today might have different ideas about media, if McLuhan is correct, then those differences will not mean a thing since it is these same technologies that are bringing them together as one; uniting them as a tribe. Even if older generations fail to understand the significance of this idea, this injection of oral culture into electronic mediums will ultimately bind a new generation of digital natives.
References
Marshall McLuhan (2005). Counterrevolution in cultural theory. In George Genosko (Ed) Critical Evaluations in Cultural Theory. 2005 Published by 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY: Routledge
Robinson, Andrew (2007). The Origins of Writing. In David Crowley & Paul Heyer (Ed), Communication in History (p.36-42). Boston, MA: Pearson
Orality and its Dominant Role in American Culture Creation
Daniel Bates
DTC 375: Language, Text, & Technology
Dr. Jason Farman
Thursday 19, 2009
Word Count: 1064
Culture is an extremely difficult topic to cover and to make matters more complex, America has many mixed facets of culture. Though in this essay I will only concern myself with textual and oral based cultural characteristics, focusing mainly on school and law settings to be specific; I believe these categories are the largest and most applicable to everyday life. I wrote this essay to show in a step by step process how American information acquirement, comprehension, application, and culture creation is based on oral input.
The textual rules information acquirement, plain and simply. All information is and can be made available in written format (excluding, of course, memory of a physical experience). It is in fact the preferred learning format for every institution in America. This is because written format can be easily standardized and corrected in mass production, starting in 1455 with the production of the printing press. I emphasize corrected, because monks did a fair job at the standardization process long before the printing press. Many school books come out with a new edition every school year as a result of easy correction and printing. I will give texts this credit - They are consistent on a scale not attainable by oral communication. Speeches cannot be as standardized or monotonous as a text can be, as they depend wholly upon presentation skill and memory. Havelock (1963), once a classicalist professor at the University of Toronto, expresses similar views in saying that the non-oral, rule abounding print, started in Greece, created modern thought by giving us a certain and quick way to remind ourselves of information (Preference to Plato). Jason Farman, Assistant Professor and Director of the Digital Technology and Culture Program of WSU, brings up an interesting dilemma facing textual information gathering. He says that textual communication lacks substance, since it can't use the body and all of its gesturing and spontaneity (personal communication, 2009). What information acquirement is also missing is a finality of application; information acquirement is by no means the ends. Research by David Crowley and Paul Heyer in Communication in History - Technology, Culture, Society, gives us an applicable story written by Socrates about the Egyptian god of lettering, "You have invented an elixir not of memory, but of reminding; and you offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom," (p. 36). Much must be done to solidify the information and this brings me to my next point.
Orality dominates information comprehension. Although this concept may seem obscure, it is one we can all testify. For those of us who attended school, oral communication played a very large role in learning. Teachers may teach from the book, but they never teach by just reading. No, it is in their job description to promote understanding in more readily apprehend-able word choices and examples. Texts often limit information given for marketing sake, and thus ignore critical knowledge needs of the students, but I'm glad to say the internet may help change this with the abundance of hyperlinks and academic search engines; the only problem is not all reading is done in an academic electronic media. Also, to many teachers' credit, communication is often two ways, by this I mean, teacher to student as well as student to teacher. This creates a double door of information flow and benefits everyone greatly. Another good example can be found in the courtroom, more specifically, the witness stand. The stands are there for the interrogation and testimony of subjects; however, its placement is riddled with controversy. The subject sits quite close to the criminal or accuser and often displays wild inaccuracies due to the decay of memory over time. It is, therefore, a wonder why the court system does not just use police documentation. Yet we need witness stands due to the importance placed on the impact of live testimony. The jury needs to see, feel, and hear the defendant and accuser plea their case, because the law system values that input. The law has always served its purpose as the informative guideline to the oral judgment. Hilariously, we read about extrapolated judgments and wonder, how and why, simply because a textual presentation doesn't infer full comprehension. The class and court room are where questions are answered and knowledge created by these means, which is beneficial because it is this knowledge which creates the next step.
The third step is the creation of application through knowledge. Application being literally anything created through concept. I'm going to make a brief leap into the philosophical here, but it is the next logical step that knowledge causes through oral means. That which is naturally created has existence that precedes knowledge, which is to say the natural precedes concept of the natural. However, all manmade creations simply use the naturally created to construct new formations, such as a pyramid, dam, paper, etcetera through concept. For concept is mandatory to construct. Comprehension of this will elevate orality's importance. Textual information may assist in creating knowledge application, but orality is the key to creation. Again, all applicability demands concept, and this brings me to my last major point.
It is our applications that define our culture. Of course, if not for the oral input, our culture would be much less characteristically defined. Textual communication does little to define, where as orality turns information into application of culture, culture being the technique and system of teaching knowledge, remarks Mark Mansperger, Sociocultural Linguistics Professor of WSU (personal communication, Jan. 22, 2009). We see evidence of orality creating culture long before "historic man," as McLuhan describes it (Essential McLuhan, 1997, p. 112). We have good reasons to believe this, given the sustainability of memory through mnemonic thought patterning instead of text recollection (p. 68 Communication in History). But could historic man come to create a purely textual America? I assuredly doubt it, given the seemingly inherent importance placed on orality. We can see the inherent quality of orality in the widespread use of it as a primary means of information comprehension. Culture is a constantly changing societal behavior, however, so naturally, there will be some shifting.
I would thus make the claim - We are still a mostly oral based culture. I wouldn't deny a strong shift towards textuality with the implementation of mass print, but I also would not believe it to replace the dominant roles oral communication has.
References
Havelock, E. (1963). Preference to Plato. Harvard University Press.
Crowley, D., Heyer, P. (2007). Communication in History - Technology, Culture, Society. Pearson Edu. Inc.
McLuhan, M., McLuhan, E., Zingrone, F. (1997). Essential McLuhan. Routledge.
DTC 375: Language, Text, & Technology
Dr. Jason Farman
Thursday 19, 2009
Word Count: 1064
Culture is an extremely difficult topic to cover and to make matters more complex, America has many mixed facets of culture. Though in this essay I will only concern myself with textual and oral based cultural characteristics, focusing mainly on school and law settings to be specific; I believe these categories are the largest and most applicable to everyday life. I wrote this essay to show in a step by step process how American information acquirement, comprehension, application, and culture creation is based on oral input.
The textual rules information acquirement, plain and simply. All information is and can be made available in written format (excluding, of course, memory of a physical experience). It is in fact the preferred learning format for every institution in America. This is because written format can be easily standardized and corrected in mass production, starting in 1455 with the production of the printing press. I emphasize corrected, because monks did a fair job at the standardization process long before the printing press. Many school books come out with a new edition every school year as a result of easy correction and printing. I will give texts this credit - They are consistent on a scale not attainable by oral communication. Speeches cannot be as standardized or monotonous as a text can be, as they depend wholly upon presentation skill and memory. Havelock (1963), once a classicalist professor at the University of Toronto, expresses similar views in saying that the non-oral, rule abounding print, started in Greece, created modern thought by giving us a certain and quick way to remind ourselves of information (Preference to Plato). Jason Farman, Assistant Professor and Director of the Digital Technology and Culture Program of WSU, brings up an interesting dilemma facing textual information gathering. He says that textual communication lacks substance, since it can't use the body and all of its gesturing and spontaneity (personal communication, 2009). What information acquirement is also missing is a finality of application; information acquirement is by no means the ends. Research by David Crowley and Paul Heyer in Communication in History - Technology, Culture, Society, gives us an applicable story written by Socrates about the Egyptian god of lettering, "You have invented an elixir not of memory, but of reminding; and you offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom," (p. 36). Much must be done to solidify the information and this brings me to my next point.
Orality dominates information comprehension. Although this concept may seem obscure, it is one we can all testify. For those of us who attended school, oral communication played a very large role in learning. Teachers may teach from the book, but they never teach by just reading. No, it is in their job description to promote understanding in more readily apprehend-able word choices and examples. Texts often limit information given for marketing sake, and thus ignore critical knowledge needs of the students, but I'm glad to say the internet may help change this with the abundance of hyperlinks and academic search engines; the only problem is not all reading is done in an academic electronic media. Also, to many teachers' credit, communication is often two ways, by this I mean, teacher to student as well as student to teacher. This creates a double door of information flow and benefits everyone greatly. Another good example can be found in the courtroom, more specifically, the witness stand. The stands are there for the interrogation and testimony of subjects; however, its placement is riddled with controversy. The subject sits quite close to the criminal or accuser and often displays wild inaccuracies due to the decay of memory over time. It is, therefore, a wonder why the court system does not just use police documentation. Yet we need witness stands due to the importance placed on the impact of live testimony. The jury needs to see, feel, and hear the defendant and accuser plea their case, because the law system values that input. The law has always served its purpose as the informative guideline to the oral judgment. Hilariously, we read about extrapolated judgments and wonder, how and why, simply because a textual presentation doesn't infer full comprehension. The class and court room are where questions are answered and knowledge created by these means, which is beneficial because it is this knowledge which creates the next step.
The third step is the creation of application through knowledge. Application being literally anything created through concept. I'm going to make a brief leap into the philosophical here, but it is the next logical step that knowledge causes through oral means. That which is naturally created has existence that precedes knowledge, which is to say the natural precedes concept of the natural. However, all manmade creations simply use the naturally created to construct new formations, such as a pyramid, dam, paper, etcetera through concept. For concept is mandatory to construct. Comprehension of this will elevate orality's importance. Textual information may assist in creating knowledge application, but orality is the key to creation. Again, all applicability demands concept, and this brings me to my last major point.
It is our applications that define our culture. Of course, if not for the oral input, our culture would be much less characteristically defined. Textual communication does little to define, where as orality turns information into application of culture, culture being the technique and system of teaching knowledge, remarks Mark Mansperger, Sociocultural Linguistics Professor of WSU (personal communication, Jan. 22, 2009). We see evidence of orality creating culture long before "historic man," as McLuhan describes it (Essential McLuhan, 1997, p. 112). We have good reasons to believe this, given the sustainability of memory through mnemonic thought patterning instead of text recollection (p. 68 Communication in History). But could historic man come to create a purely textual America? I assuredly doubt it, given the seemingly inherent importance placed on orality. We can see the inherent quality of orality in the widespread use of it as a primary means of information comprehension. Culture is a constantly changing societal behavior, however, so naturally, there will be some shifting.
I would thus make the claim - We are still a mostly oral based culture. I wouldn't deny a strong shift towards textuality with the implementation of mass print, but I also would not believe it to replace the dominant roles oral communication has.
References
Havelock, E. (1963). Preference to Plato. Harvard University Press.
Crowley, D., Heyer, P. (2007). Communication in History - Technology, Culture, Society. Pearson Edu. Inc.
McLuhan, M., McLuhan, E., Zingrone, F. (1997). Essential McLuhan. Routledge.
The World of Oral Tradition to Language Literacy
Denise Garner
DTC 375: Language, Text, & Technology
Dr. Jason Farman
Thursday 19, 2009
Word Count: 762
The World of Oral Tradition to Language Literacy
I found it soon to become critically apparent that the very interest in orality, and literacy or illiterate culture is that these terminologies were not only provoked in this century, but something that already existed as far back as 3300 B.C. and even further, the Ice ages. I found interesting to know is that it was of “interest in this new form of municational competency that provoked Marshall McLuhan” an author and others to look at earlier transitional moments in the world today.(website) Come to think about, you always hear about literacy, illiterate, but do not talk much about the word orality. (Orality is defined as speech or spoken word. Human communication begins with orality. For instance, “the world of primary cultures is rich in metaphor, nonlinear creative thought, and memory of the world.” (45) Orality is a form of Homogeneity. Literacy is defined as the ability to read or write; a person's knowledge of a particular subject or field. Therefore, “readers should not assume that literate is superior to oral in terms of measure of intelligence. The difference is cultural not hierarchical.” (44) Another example is, without writing, words, as such, have no visual meaning, even when the objects they represent are visual. Moreover, “there were limits to literacy by the character of materials and methods employed by the written word.” (58) During a class lecture in the “Summary of McLuhan,” historic man is associated with writing and individual medium. McLuhan argues that this is changing with the event of cinema. He also argues that writing controls space, and mentions that we shy away from the medium. Illiteracy is defined as the inability to read or write. Illiteracy is a social problem not an individual problem. “ Fact: 1 in 5 American adults (20%) is functionally illiterate. A 1982 study indicated that about 13% of American adults 20 and over (17 to 21 million people) do not read at all belowthe 4th grade level, and 75% of unemployed adults have reading or writing difficulties. Around 13% of all 17 year olds are functionally illiterate. In 1986-87 the federal government spent $17 per illiterate adult to aid adult literacy efforts. Everybody pays for the problem of illiteracy.”) (website) Between orality, literacy, and how illiteracy affects our cultural processes is apparent to me because there is a lack of social communication within the media, the workplace, and the community.
Through the media we are often misinformed. We are often misinformed as a result of hearing information and not being able to follow up on it and verify it, because of lacking reading skills. For instance, through the media, people who are illiterate often rely on getting information from pictures on billboards, leaflets, and business posters.
While in the workplace, communication is relevant. If there is no means of social communication between yourself and co-workers in the work place, then there will be lack of production or frustration. As an example, you are a head custodian, you come to work in the morning. While doing your rounds of the building, you discover that several rooms didn't get cleaned. You wonder why this happened? The result is because your night guy did not leave you a note do to that he doesn't know how to write. It was suggested that a tape recorder be used to communicate, but who will buy it? Taxpayers, every body pays.
Meanwhile, the community has signs up that there is a crime watch in your area. You have to be able to read to know that. Other examples of social problems in the community is that all houses have addresses. Yes, you can go by visual as how to get there. But if it is on paper, or you have to write it down on an application, and you do not know how to read or write, then it becomes an illiterate problem.
Therefore, it is essential in life to have the skills of orality and literacy, and not to grow up being illiterate in the face of the media, at your workplace, and around your community.
Work Cited
“ From Orality To Teleliteracy.” Orality Resource Site. Steven Mizrach.
<http://www.fiu.edu/mizrachs/orality.htm>
Crowley,David, and H eyer Paul. Communication In History. Technology,Culture,
Society. New York: fifth edition, 2007, 2003 Pearson Education Inc.
“ Facts About Illiteracy.” Think Quest Link Site.
<http://library.thinkquest.org/J0112734/page5htm>
DTC 375: Language, Text, & Technology
Dr. Jason Farman
Thursday 19, 2009
Word Count: 762
The World of Oral Tradition to Language Literacy
I found it soon to become critically apparent that the very interest in orality, and literacy or illiterate culture is that these terminologies were not only provoked in this century, but something that already existed as far back as 3300 B.C. and even further, the Ice ages. I found interesting to know is that it was of “interest in this new form of municational competency that provoked Marshall McLuhan” an author and others to look at earlier transitional moments in the world today.(website) Come to think about, you always hear about literacy, illiterate, but do not talk much about the word orality. (Orality is defined as speech or spoken word. Human communication begins with orality. For instance, “the world of primary cultures is rich in metaphor, nonlinear creative thought, and memory of the world.” (45) Orality is a form of Homogeneity. Literacy is defined as the ability to read or write; a person's knowledge of a particular subject or field. Therefore, “readers should not assume that literate is superior to oral in terms of measure of intelligence. The difference is cultural not hierarchical.” (44) Another example is, without writing, words, as such, have no visual meaning, even when the objects they represent are visual. Moreover, “there were limits to literacy by the character of materials and methods employed by the written word.” (58) During a class lecture in the “Summary of McLuhan,” historic man is associated with writing and individual medium. McLuhan argues that this is changing with the event of cinema. He also argues that writing controls space, and mentions that we shy away from the medium. Illiteracy is defined as the inability to read or write. Illiteracy is a social problem not an individual problem. “ Fact: 1 in 5 American adults (20%) is functionally illiterate. A 1982 study indicated that about 13% of American adults 20 and over (17 to 21 million people) do not read at all belowthe 4th grade level, and 75% of unemployed adults have reading or writing difficulties. Around 13% of all 17 year olds are functionally illiterate. In 1986-87 the federal government spent $17 per illiterate adult to aid adult literacy efforts. Everybody pays for the problem of illiteracy.”) (website) Between orality, literacy, and how illiteracy affects our cultural processes is apparent to me because there is a lack of social communication within the media, the workplace, and the community.
Through the media we are often misinformed. We are often misinformed as a result of hearing information and not being able to follow up on it and verify it, because of lacking reading skills. For instance, through the media, people who are illiterate often rely on getting information from pictures on billboards, leaflets, and business posters.
While in the workplace, communication is relevant. If there is no means of social communication between yourself and co-workers in the work place, then there will be lack of production or frustration. As an example, you are a head custodian, you come to work in the morning. While doing your rounds of the building, you discover that several rooms didn't get cleaned. You wonder why this happened? The result is because your night guy did not leave you a note do to that he doesn't know how to write. It was suggested that a tape recorder be used to communicate, but who will buy it? Taxpayers, every body pays.
Meanwhile, the community has signs up that there is a crime watch in your area. You have to be able to read to know that. Other examples of social problems in the community is that all houses have addresses. Yes, you can go by visual as how to get there. But if it is on paper, or you have to write it down on an application, and you do not know how to read or write, then it becomes an illiterate problem.
Therefore, it is essential in life to have the skills of orality and literacy, and not to grow up being illiterate in the face of the media, at your workplace, and around your community.
Work Cited
“ From Orality To Teleliteracy.” Orality Resource Site. Steven Mizrach.
<http://www.fiu.edu/mizrachs/orality.htm>
Crowley,David, and H eyer Paul. Communication In History. Technology,Culture,
Society. New York: fifth edition, 2007, 2003 Pearson Education Inc.
“ Facts About Illiteracy.” Think Quest Link Site.
<http://library.thinkquest.org/J0112734/page5htm>
We Are A Text Based Culture...For Now
Eric Higginbotham
DTC 375 Language, Texts & Technology
Dr. Farman
19 February 2009
Word Count: 965
We Are A Text Based Culture…For Now
We, as human beings, have come a long way in communication since our distant ancestors cleverly invented physical motions that were used to communicate. We have passed the stages of remembering our notes and songs like the troubadours achieved with profound memorization (Burke). As we progressed we were able to create text/print, which we still use to this day in almost every aspect of our lives. We read the paper or the internet every morning so that we can inform ourselves of what’s going on in the world. Professionally and personally we use e-mail to communicate with co-workers and family. No longer is it the norm to stir up a conversation over the phone, but rather we converse with our unlimited text messaging offered by every cell phone carrier. We do still utilize some oral properties, but I’m convinced that we are still a primarily text based culture.
Today, we are progressing in technology in almost every aspect of life. We’re breaking down barriers in medicine, communications, warfare, artificial intelligence, energy, transportation, and biotechnology, just to name a few. These fields have never been more complex than now. Walter Ong says “In an oral culture, to think through something in non-formulaic, non-patterned, non-mnemonic terms, even it were possible, would be a waste of time, for such thought, once worked through, could never be recovered with any effectiveness, as it could be with the aid of writing (Crowley, 68). There would be no way for us to advance as quickly as we are if we were an orally dominant culture. Formulas, results and data would be lost within our memory and would never be put forth for progression. We would essentially be “spinning our wheels” in the technological race.
On the other hand, entertainment has always been a big part of most cultures, whether it is singing, dancing or theatrics. Our culture needs entertainment to reduce the stress that’s put forth from the pressures from the corporate office. Our entertainment is primarily oral based and is an important aspect of our society. We need our favorite singer to sooth us when we’re in need. We need to watch that hilarious movie that everyone’s raving about. We need to go see our favorite baseball team win the World Series. We need to play that video game that is ground-breaking. These orally charged media is an aspect of our society that will always be a part of our lives.
The same concept can be seen when we are teaching our children. We do teach our children orally in the beginning stages of our accepted learning systems, but we are left with no option but to use this method to do so. After we learn how to read and write from orally projected information we then transfer that information to the pen and pad. Soon after, we rely on our notes that we scribe and the books we read to meet expectations of each of the twelve learning levels. We must burn this information in our memory so that we may reproduce it when prompted. The process of “burning” this information in our memory can only be done with the help of text. It’s virtually impossible to produce information solely from orally taught information that hasn’t been preserved.
I do agree that within the near future orality will become more and more of a participant in our daily lives. I have no doubt that there is a visually charged generation that is emerging. With the rise of social networks like MySpace and Facebook people are exposing their life and personality with images and pictures. This new generation of people is also now using more and more of an informal way of communicating with one another. Emoticons and the combination of letters and words (i.e. L8r, C-Ya, etc.) are causing issues with emerging generations in the professional field. “The tech disparity between 20-somethings and 40-somethings is far greater today than it was 20 years ago, when today's 40-somethings were the young turks” (Riper). To combat this many employers are creating programs to remind the new prodigies of proper work communication…a literate based communication. At least professionally, a literate based communication level is desired and will continue to be for a very long time due to its efficiency.
Some professions could benefit from oral communication. For example, a police officer has to juggle all sorts of tasks while patrolling the streets. He has to operate radios, scanners, radars and sirens while he looks for criminals and traffic wrongdoings, but he must do all this in addition to operating a car. The New Hampshire State Police and Carlsbad, California Police Department are now implementing a system that allows these police officers to successfully communicate with each tool with their voice. This will helps these officers with doing several tasks at a time (McKay).
Technology is a means of helping people adapt easily to their environment. There will be a day where machines will recognize our voices and do the things that we want them to do with quickness and ease. We will be able to control our TVs, cars, computers, lights and showers with the projection of a single word, but until that time I am convinced that we are still a text-based literate culture.
Works Cited
Burke, James. “The Day The Universe Changed.” BBC. London. 1985.
McKay, Jim. “Voice Activated Commands.” Government Technology. (2 May. 2006) 19 February 2009 http://www.govtech.com/gt/99366
Ong, Walter. “Orality, Literacy and Modern Media.” Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Allyn & Bacon, 2006. 66.
Van Riper, Tom. “Text-Message Entering Workplace.” MSNBC. (30 August, 2006) 19 February 2009 < http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14576541/>
DTC 375 Language, Texts & Technology
Dr. Farman
19 February 2009
Word Count: 965
We Are A Text Based Culture…For Now
We, as human beings, have come a long way in communication since our distant ancestors cleverly invented physical motions that were used to communicate. We have passed the stages of remembering our notes and songs like the troubadours achieved with profound memorization (Burke). As we progressed we were able to create text/print, which we still use to this day in almost every aspect of our lives. We read the paper or the internet every morning so that we can inform ourselves of what’s going on in the world. Professionally and personally we use e-mail to communicate with co-workers and family. No longer is it the norm to stir up a conversation over the phone, but rather we converse with our unlimited text messaging offered by every cell phone carrier. We do still utilize some oral properties, but I’m convinced that we are still a primarily text based culture.
Today, we are progressing in technology in almost every aspect of life. We’re breaking down barriers in medicine, communications, warfare, artificial intelligence, energy, transportation, and biotechnology, just to name a few. These fields have never been more complex than now. Walter Ong says “In an oral culture, to think through something in non-formulaic, non-patterned, non-mnemonic terms, even it were possible, would be a waste of time, for such thought, once worked through, could never be recovered with any effectiveness, as it could be with the aid of writing (Crowley, 68). There would be no way for us to advance as quickly as we are if we were an orally dominant culture. Formulas, results and data would be lost within our memory and would never be put forth for progression. We would essentially be “spinning our wheels” in the technological race.
On the other hand, entertainment has always been a big part of most cultures, whether it is singing, dancing or theatrics. Our culture needs entertainment to reduce the stress that’s put forth from the pressures from the corporate office. Our entertainment is primarily oral based and is an important aspect of our society. We need our favorite singer to sooth us when we’re in need. We need to watch that hilarious movie that everyone’s raving about. We need to go see our favorite baseball team win the World Series. We need to play that video game that is ground-breaking. These orally charged media is an aspect of our society that will always be a part of our lives.
The same concept can be seen when we are teaching our children. We do teach our children orally in the beginning stages of our accepted learning systems, but we are left with no option but to use this method to do so. After we learn how to read and write from orally projected information we then transfer that information to the pen and pad. Soon after, we rely on our notes that we scribe and the books we read to meet expectations of each of the twelve learning levels. We must burn this information in our memory so that we may reproduce it when prompted. The process of “burning” this information in our memory can only be done with the help of text. It’s virtually impossible to produce information solely from orally taught information that hasn’t been preserved.
I do agree that within the near future orality will become more and more of a participant in our daily lives. I have no doubt that there is a visually charged generation that is emerging. With the rise of social networks like MySpace and Facebook people are exposing their life and personality with images and pictures. This new generation of people is also now using more and more of an informal way of communicating with one another. Emoticons and the combination of letters and words (i.e. L8r, C-Ya, etc.) are causing issues with emerging generations in the professional field. “The tech disparity between 20-somethings and 40-somethings is far greater today than it was 20 years ago, when today's 40-somethings were the young turks” (Riper). To combat this many employers are creating programs to remind the new prodigies of proper work communication…a literate based communication. At least professionally, a literate based communication level is desired and will continue to be for a very long time due to its efficiency.
Some professions could benefit from oral communication. For example, a police officer has to juggle all sorts of tasks while patrolling the streets. He has to operate radios, scanners, radars and sirens while he looks for criminals and traffic wrongdoings, but he must do all this in addition to operating a car. The New Hampshire State Police and Carlsbad, California Police Department are now implementing a system that allows these police officers to successfully communicate with each tool with their voice. This will helps these officers with doing several tasks at a time (McKay).
Technology is a means of helping people adapt easily to their environment. There will be a day where machines will recognize our voices and do the things that we want them to do with quickness and ease. We will be able to control our TVs, cars, computers, lights and showers with the projection of a single word, but until that time I am convinced that we are still a text-based literate culture.
Works Cited
Burke, James. “The Day The Universe Changed.” BBC. London. 1985.
McKay, Jim. “Voice Activated Commands.” Government Technology. (2 May. 2006) 19 February 2009 http://www.govtech.com/gt/99366
Ong, Walter. “Orality, Literacy and Modern Media.” Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Allyn & Bacon, 2006. 66.
Van Riper, Tom. “Text-Message Entering Workplace.” MSNBC. (30 August, 2006) 19 February 2009 < http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14576541/>
visual vs literal
Agustin Tovar
DTC 375
Dr. Jason Farman
2/19/09
Word count 878
Visual/ Orality communication is the foremost form of communication in the world today, where as literal communications are an extension of the visual and the oral.
Oral communication has been around much longer than we have. Animals have communicated with themselves without the use of words, but through gestures and body language for years. Orality predates written communication, and has made itself a tradition in the making of a communication media. It can be said that written communication has revolutionized our society, but it can always be traced back as an extension of the oral element.
Prehistory has shown us how communication may have begun. Through hieroglyphics to caveman drawings one can always look back and see these images in how we first spoke to each other without using words. How else would mankind begin to understand one another if they could not communicate graphically with each other?
Body language, movements, grunts and the ability to say something without verbally saying it is as powerful as a written document. In other words, words can turn into action, and action can become progress and progress can be completion.
Orality is a product of the environment, an evolution of a group, a group that can expand a form of communication above their surroundings and begin to increase their awareness towards other groups as well as with each other. The visual in communication is by far its strongest link to reach out to people and make something immediate.
More people in the world could probably recognize an icon of restrooms for men and women, than if it where to actually say mens and women’s restroom. That in a way is influence, since you are saying something without saying it and almost making an order of it. “While literacy extends human possibilities in thought and action, all literate technologies ultimately depend on the ability of humans to learn oral languages”.
(Wikipedia) We needed to learn how to communicate somehow, from the day we were born to our last day in high school we are always learning new ways to learn.
From sights and sounds individuals are treated to an array of different effects that shape what we see and hear, adding a dimension to our life. Everyday we are fixated more on the images from the internet, TV and magazines than the actually written content about the images that we are watching. Secondary Orality, the use of more modern equipment for communication (Ong 71-72), is an expansion of the oral, another media showing the progress of visual/oral communication. It can be argued most people would rather watch or hear something automatically than to mechanically look at something and take it in at a slower rate. We have become a lazy society in wanting the instant as opposed to waiting for it. This is not to impede the importance of orality just a
side effect of it.
An extension of orality is the textual/literary communication. This can be considered the standard in today’s manner of communication. A written piece paper can have more control to it than the person who wrote it, that in its self is power. Writing is only half of our history, how much do we really know about the past before there was writings and record keepings? Since our recorded history only goes so far back, writing is still a recent technology. It has revolutionized the way we were in the 1400’s and into 20th century. It now has a rule, a law, that it abides by and that it is abided by. It has to do with more control and standardization, a form that is structured rather than loose. It allows for legality, rule and placement, a more credible form of truths. Although this is a vast development from grunts and body movements, writing came from speech and sound, a direct evolution of media “remediation” from the prehistoric man to
post historic man.
Marshal McCluhan argues “that writing controls space and creates an inner dialog”. That holds true, but in a deeper sense doesn’t that take away from the physical, the communal part of the communication and should that not be present to fully ingest what communication is? It does, but in today’s modern world of communication you would think not because of our societies hunger for the instant and quick, and time is limited so we don’t take in enough and instead move on to the next text message. The intimacy of writing is no longer their. A complex but true statement, our societies
desire for new ways to communicate, third world countries that had traditional orality now want what Americans and other more modern countries have. Taking away from tradition if not helping making it obsolete. As a society we are always trying to find the best ways to communicate, to find the slickest way to talk etc. But we will always be like infants in learning something new, through site, sound and touch before we move on to the next stage of communication.
WORKS CITED
Crowley, Heyer. Communication in History: Technology Culture and Society
United States, 2007 Ong 71-72
”Orality”. Wikipedia. 2009. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.. 19 Feb 2009-02-19
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orality
DTC 375
Dr. Jason Farman
2/19/09
Word count 878
Visual/ Orality communication is the foremost form of communication in the world today, where as literal communications are an extension of the visual and the oral.
Oral communication has been around much longer than we have. Animals have communicated with themselves without the use of words, but through gestures and body language for years. Orality predates written communication, and has made itself a tradition in the making of a communication media. It can be said that written communication has revolutionized our society, but it can always be traced back as an extension of the oral element.
Prehistory has shown us how communication may have begun. Through hieroglyphics to caveman drawings one can always look back and see these images in how we first spoke to each other without using words. How else would mankind begin to understand one another if they could not communicate graphically with each other?
Body language, movements, grunts and the ability to say something without verbally saying it is as powerful as a written document. In other words, words can turn into action, and action can become progress and progress can be completion.
Orality is a product of the environment, an evolution of a group, a group that can expand a form of communication above their surroundings and begin to increase their awareness towards other groups as well as with each other. The visual in communication is by far its strongest link to reach out to people and make something immediate.
More people in the world could probably recognize an icon of restrooms for men and women, than if it where to actually say mens and women’s restroom. That in a way is influence, since you are saying something without saying it and almost making an order of it. “While literacy extends human possibilities in thought and action, all literate technologies ultimately depend on the ability of humans to learn oral languages”.
(Wikipedia) We needed to learn how to communicate somehow, from the day we were born to our last day in high school we are always learning new ways to learn.
From sights and sounds individuals are treated to an array of different effects that shape what we see and hear, adding a dimension to our life. Everyday we are fixated more on the images from the internet, TV and magazines than the actually written content about the images that we are watching. Secondary Orality, the use of more modern equipment for communication (Ong 71-72), is an expansion of the oral, another media showing the progress of visual/oral communication. It can be argued most people would rather watch or hear something automatically than to mechanically look at something and take it in at a slower rate. We have become a lazy society in wanting the instant as opposed to waiting for it. This is not to impede the importance of orality just a
side effect of it.
An extension of orality is the textual/literary communication. This can be considered the standard in today’s manner of communication. A written piece paper can have more control to it than the person who wrote it, that in its self is power. Writing is only half of our history, how much do we really know about the past before there was writings and record keepings? Since our recorded history only goes so far back, writing is still a recent technology. It has revolutionized the way we were in the 1400’s and into 20th century. It now has a rule, a law, that it abides by and that it is abided by. It has to do with more control and standardization, a form that is structured rather than loose. It allows for legality, rule and placement, a more credible form of truths. Although this is a vast development from grunts and body movements, writing came from speech and sound, a direct evolution of media “remediation” from the prehistoric man to
post historic man.
Marshal McCluhan argues “that writing controls space and creates an inner dialog”. That holds true, but in a deeper sense doesn’t that take away from the physical, the communal part of the communication and should that not be present to fully ingest what communication is? It does, but in today’s modern world of communication you would think not because of our societies hunger for the instant and quick, and time is limited so we don’t take in enough and instead move on to the next text message. The intimacy of writing is no longer their. A complex but true statement, our societies
desire for new ways to communicate, third world countries that had traditional orality now want what Americans and other more modern countries have. Taking away from tradition if not helping making it obsolete. As a society we are always trying to find the best ways to communicate, to find the slickest way to talk etc. But we will always be like infants in learning something new, through site, sound and touch before we move on to the next stage of communication.
WORKS CITED
Crowley, Heyer. Communication in History: Technology Culture and Society
United States, 2007 Ong 71-72
”Orality”. Wikipedia. 2009. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.. 19 Feb 2009-02-19
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orality
Kidd Essay 2
The Evolution of Pictographs
I believe we are primarily an oral culture. I will show why we prefer pictographs, and pictographic logic over textual and literate culture; and how that ties into visual communication. I will start with per-historic man explaining the important uses and meanings of pictographic logic in his oral culture. Following that, I will point out how and why pictographs were so commonplace in the literate culture; of historic man, in the ancient Near East. And finally, why post-historic man’s use of pictographs developed into a visual form of oral communication: interrelating to pre-historic man’s cultural experiences; and is revolutionizing how we view our world today. We depend on visual communication in our oral culture as our main form of communication, because we value global information immediacy, as we strive to attain the whole picture.
Pre-historic man had no writing. His knowledge of the world was derived from his immediate surroundings, including the people around him, his own memory and external experiences. In his world, tighter kinship associations and closer interactions with them were survival requisites. Body language played an important role as a descriptive tool, necessary for story-telling, spiritual practices and sharing information of short travels. Memorization was relied on to retain all knowledge, so it could be passed down to future generations.
They had to depend on each other for everything. It was all about working together and contributing to the needs of the group. Homogeneity was paramount to group solidarity. There were no cultural differences. It wouldn’t have been possible, or allowed, as there was no internal concepts of self or individuality. Everyone had to fit into society. Understanding one another through verbal or oral communication was not a problem in these tight-knit communities, because there were no language barriers.
“But man began making images and keeping symbolic records more than 25,000 years before the invention of true writing” (p. 5). (Crowley & Heyer, 1978, p. 5). Bone tools with engravings and notations have been found from France to Hungary. The earliest dates back to 30,000 B.C. Some were used for hunting or symbols of hunting. Others are thought to have been used as symbols of fertility or art. Cave paintings were more than just drawings, they were deeply meaningful. The earliest forms of pictographs were used in hunting rituals and to record the number of successful hunts, and possibly to keep track of the birth cycles of animals, such as horses. – a pre-historic form of accounting.
Historic man is defined by the invention of writing about 5,000 years ago. Some of the earliest known forms of writing are: Hieroglyphics and cuneiform found in the Middle East. Writing, itself, created an internal thought process. As a result, body language for descriptive purposes became less necessary over the centuries. Papyrus eventually replaced clay tablets and stone as a writing medium, because its light weight was easier to transport. The brush, likewise, replaced the chisel and literally reshaped the written symbols: through its speed and brush stoke, Sanskrit developed – replacing cuneiform. The pictographs of this era in human civilization, served a similar purpose to those of pre-historic man. “Most scholars now accept that writing began with accountancy” (p. 38), (Crowley & Heyer, 1978, p. 38), as pre-historic pictographs suggest. In the ancient Middle East, pictographs were used on clay tokens for counting purposes. Inevitably these pictographs evolved into various forms of signage. This made communication and commerce over great distances not only possible, but efficient.
Faster communication allowed civilizations to expand into new territories. As writing became less time-consuming and less expensive, it was expanded to the common man. No longer was it reserved for the hierarchy, priest and scribes. Writing schools opened throughout the region. As reading and writing expanded, people’s minds expanded.
Thought process evolved from the external experiences to internal dialogue. Abstract thought allowed people to think for themselves, and gain a sense of individualism. With speed of communication came increased knowledge and transmigration. People became less dependent on, and less connected to their communities, and each other, for survival and social interaction. But their humanity and morality remained intact.
Plato thought reading would make man socially introverted: changing man’s character or personality in a sense; because reading is an individual endeavor; it doesn’t require interaction with others and weakens man’s ability to remember. I agree that reading is an individual experience, but I don’t agree that it is a negative one. Textual and literate culture tapped into historic man’s greatest resource – his mind; thus changing humankind from a primarily oral culture to a literate one.
Post-historic man has combined the best of both cultures. He has successfully tied the meanings and purposes, of symbolism and pictographs, in oral culture; with the practicality and efficiency of literary culture, by standardizing the use of pictographs; in accounting, business and all areas of our daily lives. Post historic man has experienced the benefits of these precursors to visual communication. The speed of communication and information through contemporary media, and use of pictographic symbols, has increased our demand for global information immediacy.
The modern media, associated with writing, produced the cinema. Cinema gave us back narration through sound, pace, rhythm and editing. As a group experience, it connects us socially as pre-historic man was connected socially. This led the way to haptic media, which require our bodies to navigate them. Visual communication is associated with oral communication as a direct result of its global immediacy, and recognizability. Graphics are a faster form of communication and more easily understood. It is reducing language barriers, because it is broader than linguistics. It seems as though graphics with modern technology as its medium, are reinventing language itself. By doing so, we connect and depend on our global community. As our new community grows inward, man’s thought process is being drawn outward. As in pre-history, post history man will have to think externally: and acknowledge his immediate surrounding, this time, is the world. And once again we will have to depend on our global community for humankind’s survival. Therefore, as in the Ice Age, I believe our post-historic culture is a predominately oral.
In this essay I explained why we are primarily an oral culture. I showed why we prefer pictographic logic over literate culture. Using per-historic man as an example, I explained the uses and values of pictographic logic in his oral culture. Then I pointed out how and why pictographs were so commonplace in the literate culture of historic man. And last, why post-historic man’s use of pictographs developed into a visual form of oral communication: similar to pre-historic man’s oral cultural. I believe this argument leaves no doubt: we are an oral culture that is dominated by visual communication; because we value global information immediacy so highly.
References Page
Crowley, D., & Heyer, P. (1978). Communication in history: Technology, culture, society.
New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
I believe we are primarily an oral culture. I will show why we prefer pictographs, and pictographic logic over textual and literate culture; and how that ties into visual communication. I will start with per-historic man explaining the important uses and meanings of pictographic logic in his oral culture. Following that, I will point out how and why pictographs were so commonplace in the literate culture; of historic man, in the ancient Near East. And finally, why post-historic man’s use of pictographs developed into a visual form of oral communication: interrelating to pre-historic man’s cultural experiences; and is revolutionizing how we view our world today. We depend on visual communication in our oral culture as our main form of communication, because we value global information immediacy, as we strive to attain the whole picture.
Pre-historic man had no writing. His knowledge of the world was derived from his immediate surroundings, including the people around him, his own memory and external experiences. In his world, tighter kinship associations and closer interactions with them were survival requisites. Body language played an important role as a descriptive tool, necessary for story-telling, spiritual practices and sharing information of short travels. Memorization was relied on to retain all knowledge, so it could be passed down to future generations.
They had to depend on each other for everything. It was all about working together and contributing to the needs of the group. Homogeneity was paramount to group solidarity. There were no cultural differences. It wouldn’t have been possible, or allowed, as there was no internal concepts of self or individuality. Everyone had to fit into society. Understanding one another through verbal or oral communication was not a problem in these tight-knit communities, because there were no language barriers.
“But man began making images and keeping symbolic records more than 25,000 years before the invention of true writing” (p. 5). (Crowley & Heyer, 1978, p. 5). Bone tools with engravings and notations have been found from France to Hungary. The earliest dates back to 30,000 B.C. Some were used for hunting or symbols of hunting. Others are thought to have been used as symbols of fertility or art. Cave paintings were more than just drawings, they were deeply meaningful. The earliest forms of pictographs were used in hunting rituals and to record the number of successful hunts, and possibly to keep track of the birth cycles of animals, such as horses. – a pre-historic form of accounting.
Historic man is defined by the invention of writing about 5,000 years ago. Some of the earliest known forms of writing are: Hieroglyphics and cuneiform found in the Middle East. Writing, itself, created an internal thought process. As a result, body language for descriptive purposes became less necessary over the centuries. Papyrus eventually replaced clay tablets and stone as a writing medium, because its light weight was easier to transport. The brush, likewise, replaced the chisel and literally reshaped the written symbols: through its speed and brush stoke, Sanskrit developed – replacing cuneiform. The pictographs of this era in human civilization, served a similar purpose to those of pre-historic man. “Most scholars now accept that writing began with accountancy” (p. 38), (Crowley & Heyer, 1978, p. 38), as pre-historic pictographs suggest. In the ancient Middle East, pictographs were used on clay tokens for counting purposes. Inevitably these pictographs evolved into various forms of signage. This made communication and commerce over great distances not only possible, but efficient.
Faster communication allowed civilizations to expand into new territories. As writing became less time-consuming and less expensive, it was expanded to the common man. No longer was it reserved for the hierarchy, priest and scribes. Writing schools opened throughout the region. As reading and writing expanded, people’s minds expanded.
Thought process evolved from the external experiences to internal dialogue. Abstract thought allowed people to think for themselves, and gain a sense of individualism. With speed of communication came increased knowledge and transmigration. People became less dependent on, and less connected to their communities, and each other, for survival and social interaction. But their humanity and morality remained intact.
Plato thought reading would make man socially introverted: changing man’s character or personality in a sense; because reading is an individual endeavor; it doesn’t require interaction with others and weakens man’s ability to remember. I agree that reading is an individual experience, but I don’t agree that it is a negative one. Textual and literate culture tapped into historic man’s greatest resource – his mind; thus changing humankind from a primarily oral culture to a literate one.
Post-historic man has combined the best of both cultures. He has successfully tied the meanings and purposes, of symbolism and pictographs, in oral culture; with the practicality and efficiency of literary culture, by standardizing the use of pictographs; in accounting, business and all areas of our daily lives. Post historic man has experienced the benefits of these precursors to visual communication. The speed of communication and information through contemporary media, and use of pictographic symbols, has increased our demand for global information immediacy.
The modern media, associated with writing, produced the cinema. Cinema gave us back narration through sound, pace, rhythm and editing. As a group experience, it connects us socially as pre-historic man was connected socially. This led the way to haptic media, which require our bodies to navigate them. Visual communication is associated with oral communication as a direct result of its global immediacy, and recognizability. Graphics are a faster form of communication and more easily understood. It is reducing language barriers, because it is broader than linguistics. It seems as though graphics with modern technology as its medium, are reinventing language itself. By doing so, we connect and depend on our global community. As our new community grows inward, man’s thought process is being drawn outward. As in pre-history, post history man will have to think externally: and acknowledge his immediate surrounding, this time, is the world. And once again we will have to depend on our global community for humankind’s survival. Therefore, as in the Ice Age, I believe our post-historic culture is a predominately oral.
In this essay I explained why we are primarily an oral culture. I showed why we prefer pictographic logic over literate culture. Using per-historic man as an example, I explained the uses and values of pictographic logic in his oral culture. Then I pointed out how and why pictographs were so commonplace in the literate culture of historic man. And last, why post-historic man’s use of pictographs developed into a visual form of oral communication: similar to pre-historic man’s oral cultural. I believe this argument leaves no doubt: we are an oral culture that is dominated by visual communication; because we value global information immediacy so highly.
References Page
Crowley, D., & Heyer, P. (1978). Communication in history: Technology, culture, society.
New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
And the Eyes have it
Sheila Newsom
DTC 375
Dr. Jason Farman
February 19, 2009
Word count: 842
The use of graphics and stick figures, like in the ‘Stick Figures in Peril’ example as discussed in class speak to the common group and parallels our oral culture. Even if one is unable to read the words they can recognize the picture, and have full understanding of the message being sent. Visual prompts have made it possible for a person to comprehend what is being said without written words. It is these cues that appeal to our sense of belonging, our fast passed lifestyle, and furthermore our need for fixedness or continuity remains secure. Our culture has a strong desire to be part of a group; this inclusion is dependant on orality in such a way that often the desire to belong is achieved at a higher cost than the actual advantage of belonging.
When it comes to visual cues, nothing is more prominent than a ‘brand’; we put on names of others like a rancher imprints his branding iron into the side of his cattle to show ownership. We brand ourselves, and by doing so we identify as part of a group. With the right brand we feel secure, and then are recognized as part of the group. There are several brands that we ritually, and sometimes, religiously buy into. Our society has a need to be part of a group and frequently go to great lengths to get what we want, often to the point of accumulated debt.
Current branding options come at a monetary cost, but there are also social implications and a personal price to pay as well. What were once thought of as product identifiers have now become how we classify ourselves as part of a group. There are many versions of brands, they include; tattoos, logos or status symbols, and signs. Brands go beyond age, gender and race to facilitate bonding, thus creating new ways to gain entry into a visually identifiable crowd.
What was once reserved for our countries service men, inmates and bikers can now been seen on Coeds all over the country, and moreover the world. Tattoos have become commonplace; they are no longer taboo, and connect people in ways that transcend the ranks of socioeconomic class. The price is high for those who no longer want to be part of the group. For example a gang member who breaks away from his gang family to raise their standard of living, but are still visually recognized by their gang’s tag. Tattoos are a brand in their own, but also they are not something that one can give away, sell, or take off. Unless that is, they have laser surgery which can be costly and leave scars which in themselves are a lasting visual image.
Logo’s and status symbols include product identity like the Nike Swoosh, and the emblems that are associated with BMW, Porsche, and Mercedes. In order to obtain these social status symbols, one must be able to invest a high dollar amount or else go into debt in order to be acknowledged as part of this group. To be at a level in one’s life where one can pay for these high priced extensions of themselves, one must be literate. In addition the purchaser of the brand is willing to make sacrifices. However, our society remains fast paced, primarily visual, and focused on orality.
Signs like the ones mentioned at the beginning of this paper make it possible for our society to continue along the lines of orality. Street signs give drivers and pedestrians, visual instructions so our fast paced world will not have to slow down. Restaurants have pictures on their menus and even if you are in a foreign country, and do not speak the language, you can still order by using visual cues. When there are no words, one can communicate effectively and quickly.
According to Lacan from our class lecture, we are speaking ourselves into existence in a way that text cannot, furthermore, he says that speech is about being fully present. What better way to be fully present than by branding yourself? With brands we are visually bringing ourselves into reality by taking action and wanting completely to be seen. McLuhan explains in Essential McLuhan, that “[e]very culture and every age has its favorite model of perception and knowledge that it is inclined to prescribe to everybody and everything” (150). Today’s oral culture interpretations lie in brands. Not everyone in our society has a tattoo, or drives a BMW, but everyone is associated with a group by how society views them. Our society is a visual one in that we judge others by their appearance. Our judgments are based on the visual and the exterior. While some of these judgments are incorrect, our society daily puts others in groups based solely on what we see. No matter what the brand there is a cost involved, and whether it is a cell phone, a sports team, bicycle or mini dog, (like Paris Hilton has) each one of us has a unique visual identifier. What is yours?
Works Cited
McLuhan, Marshall. Essential McLuhan. Ed. Eric McLuhan, and Frank Zingrone. New York: Basic Books, 1995.
DTC 375
Dr. Jason Farman
February 19, 2009
Word count: 842
The use of graphics and stick figures, like in the ‘Stick Figures in Peril’ example as discussed in class speak to the common group and parallels our oral culture. Even if one is unable to read the words they can recognize the picture, and have full understanding of the message being sent. Visual prompts have made it possible for a person to comprehend what is being said without written words. It is these cues that appeal to our sense of belonging, our fast passed lifestyle, and furthermore our need for fixedness or continuity remains secure. Our culture has a strong desire to be part of a group; this inclusion is dependant on orality in such a way that often the desire to belong is achieved at a higher cost than the actual advantage of belonging.
When it comes to visual cues, nothing is more prominent than a ‘brand’; we put on names of others like a rancher imprints his branding iron into the side of his cattle to show ownership. We brand ourselves, and by doing so we identify as part of a group. With the right brand we feel secure, and then are recognized as part of the group. There are several brands that we ritually, and sometimes, religiously buy into. Our society has a need to be part of a group and frequently go to great lengths to get what we want, often to the point of accumulated debt.
Current branding options come at a monetary cost, but there are also social implications and a personal price to pay as well. What were once thought of as product identifiers have now become how we classify ourselves as part of a group. There are many versions of brands, they include; tattoos, logos or status symbols, and signs. Brands go beyond age, gender and race to facilitate bonding, thus creating new ways to gain entry into a visually identifiable crowd.
What was once reserved for our countries service men, inmates and bikers can now been seen on Coeds all over the country, and moreover the world. Tattoos have become commonplace; they are no longer taboo, and connect people in ways that transcend the ranks of socioeconomic class. The price is high for those who no longer want to be part of the group. For example a gang member who breaks away from his gang family to raise their standard of living, but are still visually recognized by their gang’s tag. Tattoos are a brand in their own, but also they are not something that one can give away, sell, or take off. Unless that is, they have laser surgery which can be costly and leave scars which in themselves are a lasting visual image.
Logo’s and status symbols include product identity like the Nike Swoosh, and the emblems that are associated with BMW, Porsche, and Mercedes. In order to obtain these social status symbols, one must be able to invest a high dollar amount or else go into debt in order to be acknowledged as part of this group. To be at a level in one’s life where one can pay for these high priced extensions of themselves, one must be literate. In addition the purchaser of the brand is willing to make sacrifices. However, our society remains fast paced, primarily visual, and focused on orality.
Signs like the ones mentioned at the beginning of this paper make it possible for our society to continue along the lines of orality. Street signs give drivers and pedestrians, visual instructions so our fast paced world will not have to slow down. Restaurants have pictures on their menus and even if you are in a foreign country, and do not speak the language, you can still order by using visual cues. When there are no words, one can communicate effectively and quickly.
According to Lacan from our class lecture, we are speaking ourselves into existence in a way that text cannot, furthermore, he says that speech is about being fully present. What better way to be fully present than by branding yourself? With brands we are visually bringing ourselves into reality by taking action and wanting completely to be seen. McLuhan explains in Essential McLuhan, that “[e]very culture and every age has its favorite model of perception and knowledge that it is inclined to prescribe to everybody and everything” (150). Today’s oral culture interpretations lie in brands. Not everyone in our society has a tattoo, or drives a BMW, but everyone is associated with a group by how society views them. Our society is a visual one in that we judge others by their appearance. Our judgments are based on the visual and the exterior. While some of these judgments are incorrect, our society daily puts others in groups based solely on what we see. No matter what the brand there is a cost involved, and whether it is a cell phone, a sports team, bicycle or mini dog, (like Paris Hilton has) each one of us has a unique visual identifier. What is yours?
Works Cited
McLuhan, Marshall. Essential McLuhan. Ed. Eric McLuhan, and Frank Zingrone. New York: Basic Books, 1995.
Oral/Visual Communication, The Only Communication
Matt Larson
Essay 2
Farman DTC 375
2-17-09
Oral/Visual Communication, The Only Communication
In the ancient times the communication people used was oral. They had a small sense of group or community because everything thing was done by speech or story telling to pass thoughts and ideas along to one another. The small communities did not know much about the world around them other than just outside of their little village. Then writing came along and people began to turn more inward. The communication became mainly textual. They were able to now record thoughts, ideas and history that had happened better than ever before. It wasn’t done by memory anymore, but by factual writings. The emphasis became more individualistic instead of the group. Now in today’s world, we, meaning all of us in today’s modern age, are a mixture of the two oral and textual. However, we are more oral than textual.
Have you ever gone to another country and seen a sign on the side of the road with rocks falling off a hill toward a stick figure man? How about a stick figure man swimming inside a circle with a line slashing through it? Did you know what they meant? Even though you might not have spoken the native language of the particular country you probably knew what they meant. This is because you understood the nature of the pictograph. You know that a circle with a line slashing through it means “no”, or that rocks falling on someone’s head usually inst a good thing. These signs or pictographs are a visual language, a universal one that everyone can understand. It does not need to be explained by text. It is something we can just see and understand and in turn proves that we are an oral/visual culture.
With writing being invented the sense of group or community went away. It became more focused on the individual. However, in the present day we are starting to have more of a sense of group again, only, according to Walter Ong, it is not a small group or community, it is much, much larger. (Ong) The world has become so much “smaller” because of all the technology we have. The Internet, and the phone are just two examples that have closed the gap between all of us. So we are becoming more of an oral culture again because we are gaining that sense of group that the prehistoric man once had.
So we already know that pictographs can be a visual language to everyone no matter what culture or language someone speaks. What about words, can words be a visual cue as well? The answer to this question is yes. In European countries there is a clothing company named FCUK, which stands for French Connection United Kingdom. Now what word did you see when you first saw those letters. In most cases it was a word that should not be repeated. This is because even though text is textual thing, it is still a visual language. Another example that might make a little more sense is when you write a word and cannot seem to be able to remember the spelling or it. Like you spelled friend “friend”. You notice that it does not seem to look correct in your eyes. This is because the word itself is seen a visual representation. The word needs to be spelled the correct way for it to have the correct meaning. Words and letters are visual representations of what we speak and what we see in our everyday lives. If you see the word tree, you think of a tree from real life, maybe even one you have seen. Text itself is a type or orality, so even when you try and make the argument of our culture being a textual one, it does fit because text is orality.
So in making our way from first being a primarily oral culture, then to a textual culture, we are now in a combination of both. However we are more oral in nature than textual. This because of several things our global culture is doing. First off there are pictographs that can be interpreted just by understanding what the picture is of. You do not need to know the language to understand a pictograph. Second our culture is reverting back to it’s oral roots because we are moving back towards a sense of group, only it is a global group not just a small community.(Ong) Lastly text itself is a visual communication. Although we read it, we still have to see it visually and we interpret what it says and what it looks like using visual cues, such as seeing a tree in text, makes us envision a tree. As you can see we are predominantly an oral culture. We use oral/visual communication much more than a textual.
Works Cited
Ong, Walter. “Orality and Modern Media” Communication In History Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston:Pearson Education, 2007
Essay 2
Farman DTC 375
2-17-09
Oral/Visual Communication, The Only Communication
In the ancient times the communication people used was oral. They had a small sense of group or community because everything thing was done by speech or story telling to pass thoughts and ideas along to one another. The small communities did not know much about the world around them other than just outside of their little village. Then writing came along and people began to turn more inward. The communication became mainly textual. They were able to now record thoughts, ideas and history that had happened better than ever before. It wasn’t done by memory anymore, but by factual writings. The emphasis became more individualistic instead of the group. Now in today’s world, we, meaning all of us in today’s modern age, are a mixture of the two oral and textual. However, we are more oral than textual.
Have you ever gone to another country and seen a sign on the side of the road with rocks falling off a hill toward a stick figure man? How about a stick figure man swimming inside a circle with a line slashing through it? Did you know what they meant? Even though you might not have spoken the native language of the particular country you probably knew what they meant. This is because you understood the nature of the pictograph. You know that a circle with a line slashing through it means “no”, or that rocks falling on someone’s head usually inst a good thing. These signs or pictographs are a visual language, a universal one that everyone can understand. It does not need to be explained by text. It is something we can just see and understand and in turn proves that we are an oral/visual culture.
With writing being invented the sense of group or community went away. It became more focused on the individual. However, in the present day we are starting to have more of a sense of group again, only, according to Walter Ong, it is not a small group or community, it is much, much larger. (Ong) The world has become so much “smaller” because of all the technology we have. The Internet, and the phone are just two examples that have closed the gap between all of us. So we are becoming more of an oral culture again because we are gaining that sense of group that the prehistoric man once had.
So we already know that pictographs can be a visual language to everyone no matter what culture or language someone speaks. What about words, can words be a visual cue as well? The answer to this question is yes. In European countries there is a clothing company named FCUK, which stands for French Connection United Kingdom. Now what word did you see when you first saw those letters. In most cases it was a word that should not be repeated. This is because even though text is textual thing, it is still a visual language. Another example that might make a little more sense is when you write a word and cannot seem to be able to remember the spelling or it. Like you spelled friend “friend”. You notice that it does not seem to look correct in your eyes. This is because the word itself is seen a visual representation. The word needs to be spelled the correct way for it to have the correct meaning. Words and letters are visual representations of what we speak and what we see in our everyday lives. If you see the word tree, you think of a tree from real life, maybe even one you have seen. Text itself is a type or orality, so even when you try and make the argument of our culture being a textual one, it does fit because text is orality.
So in making our way from first being a primarily oral culture, then to a textual culture, we are now in a combination of both. However we are more oral in nature than textual. This because of several things our global culture is doing. First off there are pictographs that can be interpreted just by understanding what the picture is of. You do not need to know the language to understand a pictograph. Second our culture is reverting back to it’s oral roots because we are moving back towards a sense of group, only it is a global group not just a small community.(Ong) Lastly text itself is a visual communication. Although we read it, we still have to see it visually and we interpret what it says and what it looks like using visual cues, such as seeing a tree in text, makes us envision a tree. As you can see we are predominantly an oral culture. We use oral/visual communication much more than a textual.
Works Cited
Ong, Walter. “Orality and Modern Media” Communication In History Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston:Pearson Education, 2007
History Begins with Writing
Adam Roll
Dr. Jason Farmon
DTC:375
2/18/2009
Word Count: 791
History Begins with Writing
It may be a fact that our society was once based entirely upon oral communication. However, those days have come and gone and we have ventured into a society of a textual and literate culture. With little ado, we still have to credit formal forms of oral culture for the emergence of our new advancements. As you will see, writing plays a vital role in history, education, and our everyday life.
History as we know started at the beginning of the writing system. Everything we know today and the advancements in time all go back to writing. Throughout time, events were recorded, logged and passed down. Writing was a fundamental tool used to record history and the factual events that took place. Without writing, there would be no recollections of history, just variations of stories and assumptions of what occurred. The only other options for stories to be passed on were by oral story telling or other technological ways. For one, oral story telling would be like the telephone game. It would start out the truth, but by the end, the story would be different. As far as other technological ways, years ago, there were no other forms of technology to record events, other than what had already been invented, writing or oral cumunication. For instance, Walter Ong states, “In an oral culture, to think through something in non-formulaic, non-patterned, non-mnemonic terms, even if it were possible, would be a waste of time, for such thought, once worked through, could never be recovered with any effectiveness, as it could be with the aid of writing” (69). Before the invention of writing, there were no other reliable ways of passing the stories of history along to the next generations. That just goes to show the importace placed upon a written document.
A written document carries more weight and importance than oral communication or a pictograph. For example, as Havelock say’s, “The very act of transcribing an oral composition requires an ordering. The text becomes a physical artifact that can be ’looked at, reflected upon, modified, looked at repeatedly, shown to others, etc.’” (qtd Robert K. Logan, 61). Writing can be around forever, looked at by anybody and read at anytime. An oral form of communication requires the person/speaker to be there in person. The only way to relive it is by memory, and we all know that memories do not last forever.
Writing began as an essential for various societies due to “direct consequence of the compelling demands of an expanding economy. In other words, sometime in the late 4th millennium BC, the complexity of trade and administration in the early cities of Mesopotamia reached a point at which it outstripped the power of memory of the governing elite. To record transactions in a dependable, permanet form became essential.” (Robinson, 38) Writing, for all societies, tells us their history. They used writing as a tool to keep order in their governments, remembering facts, story telling and recording factual information such as hardships, wars and other natural disasters.
We are a society based on education. Sure, oral communication does play a part, however, we rely on written communication in an even greater proportion. Students don’t usually remember a lecture just by memory alone, they write notes. Tests aren’t usually given verbally, they are written. Without text books, web sites, written notes, journals, essays, written exams, how would the students of today learn the history of the past, or the facts of life needed in order to grow in a career based society?
In the educational system we rely greatly upon literacy and textual communication. From first grade on, we are taught to read and write with a form of writing that was adopted by the American people known as the alphabet. From there on we are held at high standards of writing and reading abilities throughout school. We are graded on our papers, punctuation and our ability to write. “ It hardly needs saying that a person who can read and write has greater opportunities for fulfillment than one who is illiterate” (Robinson, 36). Our government records everything that goes on in order to not make mistakes learned from the past.
In conclusion, writing began history. History goes way back to centuries and centuries before what we know today. There is just no record of what happened in detail. The people of that long ago barely had a way of communicating orally, let alone being able to write it down as a permanent record. Once it got to the point in time where oral communication was growing, it was destined that people would begin to look for other, more permanent forms, of communicating to the people of the future. Then, history began.
Works Cited
Logan, Robert K. “Writing and the Alphabet Effect.” Communication In History-Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston: Pearson Education, 2007. 61-66.
Ong, Walter. “Orality, Literacy, and Modern Media.” Communication In History-Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston:Pearson Education, 2007.66-72.
Robinson, Andrew. “The Origins of Writing.” Communication In History-Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston:Pearson Education, 2007. 36-42.
Dr. Jason Farmon
DTC:375
2/18/2009
Word Count: 791
History Begins with Writing
It may be a fact that our society was once based entirely upon oral communication. However, those days have come and gone and we have ventured into a society of a textual and literate culture. With little ado, we still have to credit formal forms of oral culture for the emergence of our new advancements. As you will see, writing plays a vital role in history, education, and our everyday life.
History as we know started at the beginning of the writing system. Everything we know today and the advancements in time all go back to writing. Throughout time, events were recorded, logged and passed down. Writing was a fundamental tool used to record history and the factual events that took place. Without writing, there would be no recollections of history, just variations of stories and assumptions of what occurred. The only other options for stories to be passed on were by oral story telling or other technological ways. For one, oral story telling would be like the telephone game. It would start out the truth, but by the end, the story would be different. As far as other technological ways, years ago, there were no other forms of technology to record events, other than what had already been invented, writing or oral cumunication. For instance, Walter Ong states, “In an oral culture, to think through something in non-formulaic, non-patterned, non-mnemonic terms, even if it were possible, would be a waste of time, for such thought, once worked through, could never be recovered with any effectiveness, as it could be with the aid of writing” (69). Before the invention of writing, there were no other reliable ways of passing the stories of history along to the next generations. That just goes to show the importace placed upon a written document.
A written document carries more weight and importance than oral communication or a pictograph. For example, as Havelock say’s, “The very act of transcribing an oral composition requires an ordering. The text becomes a physical artifact that can be ’looked at, reflected upon, modified, looked at repeatedly, shown to others, etc.’” (qtd Robert K. Logan, 61). Writing can be around forever, looked at by anybody and read at anytime. An oral form of communication requires the person/speaker to be there in person. The only way to relive it is by memory, and we all know that memories do not last forever.
Writing began as an essential for various societies due to “direct consequence of the compelling demands of an expanding economy. In other words, sometime in the late 4th millennium BC, the complexity of trade and administration in the early cities of Mesopotamia reached a point at which it outstripped the power of memory of the governing elite. To record transactions in a dependable, permanet form became essential.” (Robinson, 38) Writing, for all societies, tells us their history. They used writing as a tool to keep order in their governments, remembering facts, story telling and recording factual information such as hardships, wars and other natural disasters.
We are a society based on education. Sure, oral communication does play a part, however, we rely on written communication in an even greater proportion. Students don’t usually remember a lecture just by memory alone, they write notes. Tests aren’t usually given verbally, they are written. Without text books, web sites, written notes, journals, essays, written exams, how would the students of today learn the history of the past, or the facts of life needed in order to grow in a career based society?
In the educational system we rely greatly upon literacy and textual communication. From first grade on, we are taught to read and write with a form of writing that was adopted by the American people known as the alphabet. From there on we are held at high standards of writing and reading abilities throughout school. We are graded on our papers, punctuation and our ability to write. “ It hardly needs saying that a person who can read and write has greater opportunities for fulfillment than one who is illiterate” (Robinson, 36). Our government records everything that goes on in order to not make mistakes learned from the past.
In conclusion, writing began history. History goes way back to centuries and centuries before what we know today. There is just no record of what happened in detail. The people of that long ago barely had a way of communicating orally, let alone being able to write it down as a permanent record. Once it got to the point in time where oral communication was growing, it was destined that people would begin to look for other, more permanent forms, of communicating to the people of the future. Then, history began.
Works Cited
Logan, Robert K. “Writing and the Alphabet Effect.” Communication In History-Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston: Pearson Education, 2007. 61-66.
Ong, Walter. “Orality, Literacy, and Modern Media.” Communication In History-Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston:Pearson Education, 2007.66-72.
Robinson, Andrew. “The Origins of Writing.” Communication In History-Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston:Pearson Education, 2007. 36-42.
Living Life In a Visual World
Alex Lasota
Dr. Farman
DTC 375: Language, Texts & Technology
18 February, 2009
Word Count: 800
New Innovations For Oral Communication
2 Melanie Erickson
Dr. Farman
DTC 375
February 17, 2009
Word Count 963
New Innovations For Oral Communication
In the beginning of time we started off with pre historic man. People talk, told stories and everything was a tight knit community. When paper came along in the 1400’s things became recorded. People would record life and have documents of events. Nowadays people are becoming post historic. People are starting to combine prehistoric man with historic man. Even though we cannot separate completely from only writing and only in our society; we are however using oral as our main communication to today’s world. In today’s world we are now using cell phones, computer, and media as our main source of communication.
Cell phones are now becoming more and more upgraded with the times and the speed of our society. We are able to do more with our cell phones such as send pictures, text and pay bills that require no paper writing what so ever. Cell phone with text messaging comes down to the fact that people want to save time and goes with the post historic man. One can confirm coffee appointments without words, just sending a picture of a cup coffee, “as images, these signs also carry a certain amount of information in their own right:” (Drucker, II), telling the other person, we are still on for coffee today. By using pictures and symbols this saves a lot time by not having to spell out all of the words. Texting and using pictures, “are active agents for creating meaning, instructions for reading, viewing, comprehending information” (Drucker, conclusion), in a fast and interactive way. If one does not want to have a long drawn out discussion with someone then texting is the best way to say what you want in a fast and straight to the point way. People do not even use Standard English with texting they use pictures and shorthand for texting messages. Cell phones are used in other ways for saving time in writing; People can now pay bills on the phone with automated tellers, and not have to write and mail checks. People used to have to spend hours writing out bills and send them out. Now with innovated system people can just call and speak their information to get the job done. Cell phones are contributing to our society in moving toward oral communication
Computers have revolutionized the way we communicate around the globe. It is a fast and cheap way to send letters to family, friends, and co-workers. People have gotten used to this method because it is a fast way to communicate to one another. People could stay in touch without having to pay for a stamp and wait three days for them to receive it. E-mails allowed one to write a letter and have the other person receive it the same minute and reply back instantly. Later e-mails got faster yet with Instant Messaging. Now, one does not have to wait for E-mails, they can have a conversation with an instant conversation back and forth instantly around the globe. ” Studies show that some 75 percent of teenagers use instant messaging, making it one of students’ primary modes of written communication” (Martineau). Today this theory was even updated with the web cam. Now, friends and family can see and speak to each other on the computer with the use of the web cam and the combination of Skype. They are able to see each other’s facial expressions and body gestures all the way across the globe, Just as well as if they were sitting right next to each other. Computers are a big reason why people do not have to have read and write and is more oral in our society and this way of life is accepted across the globe.
Media has also advanced from the historic of black and white silent movies where you had to read the movie from beginning to end; if you turned away you missed part of the movie; you also could not socialize during the movie because of this. Today not to many people I know even reads the book they wait until the movies comes out to theater or they rent movies and play them on their own movie theater; they will also invite friend and talk about the movie while it is playing. According to Rivas my friends are not alone, “there are more than 40 million functionally illiterate adults in the U.S. “ ( Rivas), this means that at least 40 million other people also are incapable of reading the print and waits for the movie to come out. The local stations are now showing reality shows that get the audience interactive with the T.V. Sometimes they have the audience log in and vote for the people that they want to win, or be withdrawn from the show. They have game shows as well that you can play at home and if you were the one that had the lucky number then that person could win a prize; Wheel of Fortune, and Deal or No Deal, has this option on their show. Media has become more interactive nowadays then it has ever been before.
In today’s world everything is fast pass and right to the second, oral communication is a faster and easier to get information across to people then reading and writing. Therefore, every day scientists are becoming more innovated to save time and coming up with new ways of getting information out without the process of reading and writing. Soon there will not be any reason to have pen and paper it will be accomplished with cell phones, computers and media.
Work Cited
Drucker Johanna, and Jerome McGann. Images as the Text: Pictographs and pictographic Logic. iath.virginia.edu. date unknown. 16.02. 2009. http://www.iath.virginia.edu/~jjm2f/old/pictograph.html
Martineau Pamela. Tapping Instant messaging. Education Weeks digital Directions.12. 09.2007. 16. 02. 2009. http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2007/09/12/02im.h01.html
Rivas, Paul. “Volunteers are working to Eliminate Illiteracy.” Villagelife.org. 1997, Feb. 15, 2009. http://www.villagelife.org/news/archives/func_illiterate.html
Secondary orality: The silent shout
Kristin Sanders
DTC 375: Language, Texts and Technology
Dr. Farman
Feb. 19, 2009
Essay 2: Orality vs. Literacy
Word count: 1,231
Modern man is devolving into his common ancestor, the prehistoric man. Though once communicative emphasis was placed on text-based systems – primarily in the age of historic man – post historic man and his collective media of choice are making the return toward a more oral culture. I will argue this point through observations of my own, as well as with evidence from Marshall McLuhan, Johanna Drucker and Jerome McGann.
For background, prehistoric society was primarily oral in nature, mostly because a written language wasn’t developed until historic man’s era. As discussed in Dr. Jason Farman’s Language, Texts and Technology course, McLuhan believed that prehistoric man could be loosely defined by the following: as having a tighter-knit community; smaller clusters of knowledge, specific to your surroundings and group; homogeneity in day-to-day living; and external memory (because things couldn’t be written down, McLuhan argues the idea of “sensuous perception,” in the sense that your senses must be heightened and the whole body engaged in keeping particular memories, not just the mind) (McLuhan, as qtd. by Farman).
Historic man, McLuhan goes on to explain, is associated with written communication. This next step in mankind’s media evolutionary path gave us written alphabets and languages. Writing became more of a personal experience with less emphasis on the group mentality associated with orality. Man was given false memory, and with the advent of Johannes Gutenberg’s printing press in the mid- to late-1400s, man suddenly had a veritable wealth of written knowledge at his fingertips, with topics ranging from religion to herbology to accounting. McLuhan’s idea of sensuous perception was taken away through books because of the lack of physical interaction with the task of reading – what’s more, if the book was good enough, your mind was transported to another time and place, separating man further from this concept of a physical, fully-embodied memory.
Presently we are in the age of the post-historic man. Collectively we are in a strange limbo-like existence between orality and literacy. Yes, heavy emphasis is placed on literacy for academic and entrepreneurial successes, but our communicative media has broken away from the restrictions of writing. How often have you known someone who wouldn’t read a book on the premise of waiting for the movie? Instead of spending hours, even days, on the novel, they can fulfill the experience of the story in a couple short hours at the cinema.
Beyond that, we as a society have become dependent on signs and symbols. Rather than the word “Hospital” on a sign with an arrow pointing toward a highway exit, we might see the same accompanied by a dominant symbol typically associated to a medical facility: a solid white “plus-sign” on a blue background. One need not even be fully literate (usually) to know that this somehow relates to the idea of “hospital, this way.” The same thing goes for interstate rest rooms (a bed), food (plate and utensils), fuel (a gas pump, sometimes with a car) and restrooms (“male” stick figure for men’s facilities and a “female” stick figure in a dress for women’s) – cultural indicators have taught us as a society what these signs mean, and we adhere to these standards of graphical representation. Appropriately, these have cut down on the need for a common language and tend to be more attention-grabbing than their literal counterparts (McGann, Drucker).
Text messages by means of instant messenger programs are a good example of the evolution from literacy to orality. The messages sent from computer to computer often were complete thoughts, full sentences and actual words. Over the course of time and human adaptation of this communication medium, sentences such as “How are you doing today?” truncated into “how r u”. Punctuation, grammar, spelling were thrown to the wayside for the sake of immediacy. One could argue even that the “r” and “u” have become symbolic representations of “are” and “you” in the English language. Just as we see the male stick figure on bathroom doors to mean “men,” we see this one character to represent the whole idea.
Orality is a system of immediacy. It takes less time to speak to convey a message than it would to write down the message and have it read – once it’s been relayed, it’s out there. Take, if you will, the advent of cinema and television as forms of entertainment over books. Granted, most of these movies and shows have their foundation in the literary world, but how many of these written tales thusly have their roots in orality?
Walter Ong argues that we are returning to a second orality – one in which there is an emphasis on community, but instead of the small group of your neighborhood, it takes into account McLuhan’s notion of the global village – we aren’t reaching out to our immediate peers; we’re making contact with the entire world. This secondary orality has been aided by the advent of the telephone, radio, television and various other sound-based electronic technologies (Ong, 71). But as Ong goes on to say, this is a more deliberate orality (one we’ve returned to on purpose) based heavily in the literate world – one should know how to read in order to manufacture and operate these communicative tools.
In our quest for second orality, the cell phone has become a popular medium for communication. Not only does one have the option of writing out a truncated text message, but one also has the option of calling a friend or family member and speaking over many thousands of miles of distance.
This notion of long-distance speaking was perhaps inconceivable in the era of original orality. But today, millions of people can experience the same films, the same TV shows, the same digital art galleries and the same Flash-based cartoons online without needing that one common language. We as a global community can see the same “curved road ahead” visual representation, the same red, yellow and green traffic lights, yield signs, “wet road” symbols, “RXR” for railroad crossings and have a similar expected reaction to these symbolic prompts.
Stick figures imperil themselves on a daily basis for the sake of symbolic communications – perhaps they may even endanger themselves more in metropolitan and tourist areas, where the need for “one common (visual) language” is greater. “Do not stick limbs in gator pit,” “do not stand under falling rocks,” “do not let your loose clothing get wrapped in the wood chipper” – these warnings and many more are communicated every day without so many words for the purpose of conveying a language-free, international message of safety.
But this international common language goes beyond the borders of signs and the edges of the silver screen. We experience orality every day, whether we utilize media or not. After all the signs have faded, the movie and TV stars have been forgotten, telephones a relic of the past, even when anthropologists take on the task of studying the Greek alphabet, we will still have ourselves and our stories to tell – about that student who fell from a chair in class; about the location of a railroad; about the dangers of standing under falling rocks; or the legend of a small boy who overcame a giant. Ultimately, this is what makes us an oral culture, and this is what will keep us an oral culture until culture itself is no more than a whisper on the lips of the last man.
Works cited
Farman, Jason. Class lecture: Marshall McLuhan’s “Culture without Literacy.” Language, Texts and Technology. Washington State University, Tri-Cities. Richland, Wash. 3 Feb. 2009.
Jerome McGann. Co-author: Drucker, Johanna. Images as the Text: Pictographs and Pictographic Logic, University of Virginia English Department. 3 Feb. 2009..
Ong, Walter. “Orality, Literacy, and Modern Media.” Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. United States: Pearson Education, Inc., 2007. 66-72.
DTC 375: Language, Texts and Technology
Dr. Farman
Feb. 19, 2009
Essay 2: Orality vs. Literacy
Word count: 1,231
Modern man is devolving into his common ancestor, the prehistoric man. Though once communicative emphasis was placed on text-based systems – primarily in the age of historic man – post historic man and his collective media of choice are making the return toward a more oral culture. I will argue this point through observations of my own, as well as with evidence from Marshall McLuhan, Johanna Drucker and Jerome McGann.
For background, prehistoric society was primarily oral in nature, mostly because a written language wasn’t developed until historic man’s era. As discussed in Dr. Jason Farman’s Language, Texts and Technology course, McLuhan believed that prehistoric man could be loosely defined by the following: as having a tighter-knit community; smaller clusters of knowledge, specific to your surroundings and group; homogeneity in day-to-day living; and external memory (because things couldn’t be written down, McLuhan argues the idea of “sensuous perception,” in the sense that your senses must be heightened and the whole body engaged in keeping particular memories, not just the mind) (McLuhan, as qtd. by Farman).
Historic man, McLuhan goes on to explain, is associated with written communication. This next step in mankind’s media evolutionary path gave us written alphabets and languages. Writing became more of a personal experience with less emphasis on the group mentality associated with orality. Man was given false memory, and with the advent of Johannes Gutenberg’s printing press in the mid- to late-1400s, man suddenly had a veritable wealth of written knowledge at his fingertips, with topics ranging from religion to herbology to accounting. McLuhan’s idea of sensuous perception was taken away through books because of the lack of physical interaction with the task of reading – what’s more, if the book was good enough, your mind was transported to another time and place, separating man further from this concept of a physical, fully-embodied memory.
Presently we are in the age of the post-historic man. Collectively we are in a strange limbo-like existence between orality and literacy. Yes, heavy emphasis is placed on literacy for academic and entrepreneurial successes, but our communicative media has broken away from the restrictions of writing. How often have you known someone who wouldn’t read a book on the premise of waiting for the movie? Instead of spending hours, even days, on the novel, they can fulfill the experience of the story in a couple short hours at the cinema.
Beyond that, we as a society have become dependent on signs and symbols. Rather than the word “Hospital” on a sign with an arrow pointing toward a highway exit, we might see the same accompanied by a dominant symbol typically associated to a medical facility: a solid white “plus-sign” on a blue background. One need not even be fully literate (usually) to know that this somehow relates to the idea of “hospital, this way.” The same thing goes for interstate rest rooms (a bed), food (plate and utensils), fuel (a gas pump, sometimes with a car) and restrooms (“male” stick figure for men’s facilities and a “female” stick figure in a dress for women’s) – cultural indicators have taught us as a society what these signs mean, and we adhere to these standards of graphical representation. Appropriately, these have cut down on the need for a common language and tend to be more attention-grabbing than their literal counterparts (McGann, Drucker).
Text messages by means of instant messenger programs are a good example of the evolution from literacy to orality. The messages sent from computer to computer often were complete thoughts, full sentences and actual words. Over the course of time and human adaptation of this communication medium, sentences such as “How are you doing today?” truncated into “how r u”. Punctuation, grammar, spelling were thrown to the wayside for the sake of immediacy. One could argue even that the “r” and “u” have become symbolic representations of “are” and “you” in the English language. Just as we see the male stick figure on bathroom doors to mean “men,” we see this one character to represent the whole idea.
Orality is a system of immediacy. It takes less time to speak to convey a message than it would to write down the message and have it read – once it’s been relayed, it’s out there. Take, if you will, the advent of cinema and television as forms of entertainment over books. Granted, most of these movies and shows have their foundation in the literary world, but how many of these written tales thusly have their roots in orality?
Walter Ong argues that we are returning to a second orality – one in which there is an emphasis on community, but instead of the small group of your neighborhood, it takes into account McLuhan’s notion of the global village – we aren’t reaching out to our immediate peers; we’re making contact with the entire world. This secondary orality has been aided by the advent of the telephone, radio, television and various other sound-based electronic technologies (Ong, 71). But as Ong goes on to say, this is a more deliberate orality (one we’ve returned to on purpose) based heavily in the literate world – one should know how to read in order to manufacture and operate these communicative tools.
In our quest for second orality, the cell phone has become a popular medium for communication. Not only does one have the option of writing out a truncated text message, but one also has the option of calling a friend or family member and speaking over many thousands of miles of distance.
This notion of long-distance speaking was perhaps inconceivable in the era of original orality. But today, millions of people can experience the same films, the same TV shows, the same digital art galleries and the same Flash-based cartoons online without needing that one common language. We as a global community can see the same “curved road ahead” visual representation, the same red, yellow and green traffic lights, yield signs, “wet road” symbols, “RXR” for railroad crossings and have a similar expected reaction to these symbolic prompts.
Stick figures imperil themselves on a daily basis for the sake of symbolic communications – perhaps they may even endanger themselves more in metropolitan and tourist areas, where the need for “one common (visual) language” is greater. “Do not stick limbs in gator pit,” “do not stand under falling rocks,” “do not let your loose clothing get wrapped in the wood chipper” – these warnings and many more are communicated every day without so many words for the purpose of conveying a language-free, international message of safety.
But this international common language goes beyond the borders of signs and the edges of the silver screen. We experience orality every day, whether we utilize media or not. After all the signs have faded, the movie and TV stars have been forgotten, telephones a relic of the past, even when anthropologists take on the task of studying the Greek alphabet, we will still have ourselves and our stories to tell – about that student who fell from a chair in class; about the location of a railroad; about the dangers of standing under falling rocks; or the legend of a small boy who overcame a giant. Ultimately, this is what makes us an oral culture, and this is what will keep us an oral culture until culture itself is no more than a whisper on the lips of the last man.
Works cited
Farman, Jason. Class lecture: Marshall McLuhan’s “Culture without Literacy.” Language, Texts and Technology. Washington State University, Tri-Cities. Richland, Wash. 3 Feb. 2009.
Jerome McGann. Co-author: Drucker, Johanna. Images as the Text: Pictographs and Pictographic Logic, University of Virginia English Department. 3 Feb. 2009.
Ong, Walter. “Orality, Literacy, and Modern Media.” Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society. Ed. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. United States: Pearson Education, Inc., 2007. 66-72.
The Speed of Our Communication
Angel Almaraz
Dr. Jason Farman
DTC 375
19 February 2009
Word count: 758
Dr. Jason Farman
DTC 375
19 February 2009
Word count: 758
The Speed of Our Communication
Fast is never fast enough. No matter how fast our communication system currently is when it is finally replaced, or remediated, by a faster system, we wonder how we ever got along without it. First, it was regular mail service replaced by fax machines and then fax machines were replaced by e-mail. E-mail was followed by text messaging and now Twitter is taking over. At first glance, our culture shows some signs of being an oral culture based on the speed in which we communicate with each other, but the basis of that communication remains literary.
To answer the question of whether our culture is an oral culture or a literary culture we must first define oral culture and literary culture. A primary oral culture is “a culture with no knowledge whatsoever of writing” (Ong 66). So clearly, ours is not a primary oral culture. A secondary oral culture is “based permanently on the use of writing and print, which are essential for the manufacture and operation of the equipment and for its use as well” (71). Our culture absolutely displays some of the characteristics of a secondary oral culture. A literary culture is one which uses letters to represent sounds and to form words (Drucker 46). A literary culture may also use logographic (a word is represented by a sign) or ideographic (a glyph represent an idea or concept) signs (48).
Our culture does display some of the same characteristics as an oral culture. The internet allows us to form our own little tribes in virtual space through blogs and social networking sites. These sites allow users to share their stories with one another. And sharing our stories with others is quicker than it has ever been. However, whereas oral cultures of the past had limited access to those outside of their tribe, we can connect with people all over the world. Chances are we will never meet the majority of the people we interact with online but we get to know one another through the exchange of text.
It could be argued that younger generations, and those who frequently use digital media, more closely resemble an oral culture, as they tend to develop their own language. But the languages they develop are based on a textual language. The shortcuts and symbols they have created and use in digital media have a meaning taken from text. And while they represent a large portion of our culture, they are not in the majority, yet.
But the foundations of our society – our legal, educational, and health care systems – are still firmly grounded in a literary culture. The written word is considered the final word because it has a physical form, whereas digital media has no form, unless it is printed. Otherwise, digital media is nothing more than ones and zeroes in virtual space. We may see more acceptance of digital media in these systems, but like all major changes, it will take time.
To answer the question of whether our culture is an oral culture or a literary culture we must first define oral culture and literary culture. A primary oral culture is “a culture with no knowledge whatsoever of writing” (Ong 66). So clearly, ours is not a primary oral culture. A secondary oral culture is “based permanently on the use of writing and print, which are essential for the manufacture and operation of the equipment and for its use as well” (71). Our culture absolutely displays some of the characteristics of a secondary oral culture. A literary culture is one which uses letters to represent sounds and to form words (Drucker 46). A literary culture may also use logographic (a word is represented by a sign) or ideographic (a glyph represent an idea or concept) signs (48).
Our culture does display some of the same characteristics as an oral culture. The internet allows us to form our own little tribes in virtual space through blogs and social networking sites. These sites allow users to share their stories with one another. And sharing our stories with others is quicker than it has ever been. However, whereas oral cultures of the past had limited access to those outside of their tribe, we can connect with people all over the world. Chances are we will never meet the majority of the people we interact with online but we get to know one another through the exchange of text.
It could be argued that younger generations, and those who frequently use digital media, more closely resemble an oral culture, as they tend to develop their own language. But the languages they develop are based on a textual language. The shortcuts and symbols they have created and use in digital media have a meaning taken from text. And while they represent a large portion of our culture, they are not in the majority, yet.
But the foundations of our society – our legal, educational, and health care systems – are still firmly grounded in a literary culture. The written word is considered the final word because it has a physical form, whereas digital media has no form, unless it is printed. Otherwise, digital media is nothing more than ones and zeroes in virtual space. We may see more acceptance of digital media in these systems, but like all major changes, it will take time.
We do not have to try to memorize all of our ideas nor do we have to create mnemonic devices to aid in the recall of some piece of information or a memory as an oral culture would (Ong 68). Today, when a mnemonic device is used to recall information, it is used as an additional way of recalling information, not as the only option. All of the information and ideas we generate are easily stored and retrieved. The only obstacle in retrieving our data is the ever-changing digital media used to store and retrieve it. As Ong states:
In an oral culture, to think through something in non-formulaic, non-patterned, non-mnemonic terms, even if it were possible, would be a waste of time, for such thought, once worked through, could never be recovered with any effectiveness, as it could be with the aid of writing. It would not be abiding knowledge but simple a passing thought, however complex. (69)
Therefore, if our culture was truly an oral culture then none of the advancements that lead to the creation of digital media or that increased the speed with which we communicate would have been possible. Mnemonic devices would not have been able to cover a simple programming code, much less a very complex one. We would still be using letters to reach people on the other side of the world instead of turning on a computer or using a cell phone. Our culture has definitely sped up the ways in which we communicate with one another but it remains a literary culture.
Works Cited
Drucker, Johanna. “The Alphabet.” Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society. Eds. David Crowley, Paul Heyer. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc., 2007. 46-55.
Ong, Walter. “Orality, Literacy, and Modern Media.” Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society. Eds. David Crowley and Paul Heyer. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc., 2007. 66-72.
Z is for exactly
Zach woffinden
Dr. Jason Farman
LLT
19 FEB 2009
819
Z is for exactly
In the Beginning
A day in the life of Prehistoric Man: arise when the sun told him to, work when there was nothing else to do, eat when the stomach spoke, and sleep when the sun went down, repetitive, uneventful and solely relying upon the direction of others. Prehistoric Man may have had an incomparable memory, but the knowledge he relied upon and the beliefs his faith grew off of all came from a source of literacy. When referring to gang members who come from a background of illiteracy, Barry Sanders (1995) stated that, “Reading and writing would blow apart that space they so fervently guard, and force them to enter a new metaphoric space where they would have to confront who they are, and ponder what they are doing” (p. 160). I would argue that our culture is a culture based on literacy, because at the core of everything we do, there is a small group of those who are literate and without them our culture could not progress.
Connecting the dots
Connecting the dots
The connections between prehistoric man, faith, and gangs are the centrality of their “government”. At the core of each is the small group that can read and write. Prehistoric man had letters read to him and history recorded for him, the church taught people from a book only they could read, a gangs hierarchy always contains at least one person who is the ‘brains’ of the operation. Although as a society we may have moved away from literacy as a way of life and have reverted back into a more of a visual lifestyle, there will always be that small group that will carry on the traditions of the written word.
The Pope Rules
During the days the Church governed, people where usually taught by one man who read from one book. The Bible was inaccessible to the general public and the culture was created by a small group of chosen persons who read and interrupted the sacred text. Pictures where used to teach and memory was used to recollect (Burke, 1985). With the invention of the printing press, knowledge was thrown into the hands of the general public and people began o think and learn independent of the opinions of their preachers. Now literacy has roared into the change that we know today, no literacy no Constitution, no Constitution no laws; no laws, no rights; no rights, no freedom. Literacy has intertwined itself into every aspect of our lives, take it away and we go back to the days the Church ruled.
Knowledge is power
During the days the Church governed, people where usually taught by one man who read from one book. The Bible was inaccessible to the general public and the culture was created by a small group of chosen persons who read and interrupted the sacred text. Pictures where used to teach and memory was used to recollect (Burke, 1985). With the invention of the printing press, knowledge was thrown into the hands of the general public and people began o think and learn independent of the opinions of their preachers. Now literacy has roared into the change that we know today, no literacy no Constitution, no Constitution no laws; no laws, no rights; no rights, no freedom. Literacy has intertwined itself into every aspect of our lives, take it away and we go back to the days the Church ruled.
Knowledge is power
As stated earlier by Sanders, reading and writing, or literacy, creates an opportunity to open the mind and ponder on things, to thrive for knowledge. Sanders (1995) questions, “What prevents a young executive from turning his carefully polished SIG-Sauer on the other patron?” (p.167). The answer is literacy. Knowledge has been gathered to create laws that teach our culture that shooting a gun at someone is wrong, that knowledge stems form either personal research or second hand knowledge. In the movie “The Day the Universe Changed” (1985), James Burke says that letters where read publicly, and scribes religiously copied text documents. The knowledge to read and write where only held by a choice few, but without their knowledge and expertise, no one could read the letters, or copy the documents, in fact there wouldn’t be any letters to read or documents to copy, literacy ran Prehistoric Man’s world.
Visually Speaking
Visually Speaking
Today, literature is something highly subjective. If a page looks too cluttered then the reader passes it by, if ‘visually unappealing’ is what comes to mind the viewer losses interest. Now in a general sense society leans towards a more visual lifestyle. In reverting back to the ways of Prehistoric Man, Post-historic Man has taken the literature and doused it in visuality causing, once again, only a small choice group to hold the talents of literacy. Graphic Designer David Carson, is an example of how the text is not as important as the presentation of the text. Rather than reading the text a viewer simply has to look at the presentation and find a feeling of what the text is about. However, without the person who wrote the text, without the knowledge the author gained through literacy, there would be no text to present and David Carson might be out of the job, most likely no though.
Wrapping it up
Grouping the idea, that our culture is a culture based on literacy may seem like far-fetched idea due to the current thriving of visuality, but take a program such as Abode Photoshop and break it down. Like the movie “the Matrix”, the program becomes a sequence of 0s and1s a computer alphabet. Take it back further and the people responsible for creating the computer alphabet based it on their knowledge of the written alphabet. That alphabet goes back to centuries of symbols and letters gathered together to create words, phrases and ultimately cultures. Flashing forward to today, everything we do is based on our own or someone else’s knowledge of literacy, although you personally may be illiterate, like the Prehistoric Man, without that knowledge of literacy our culture could not progress.
References
Reisz, Richard. Burke, James. (1985). The Day the Universe Changed. British Broadcasting Corporation.
Sanders, Barry. (1995) A is for ox. New York: Vintage Books.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)