Perceiving ‘Writing’

“Human beings had been drawing pictures for countless millennia before this [3500 BC]…It is of course possible to count as ‘writing’ any semiotic mark, that is, any visible or sensible mark which an individual makes and assigns meaning to. Thus a simple scratch on a rock or a notch on a stick interpretable only by the one who makes it would be ‘writing’” (83).

So here we have some writing. The image on the left, a stick figure of a girl, according to Walter Ong, has just as much meaning as the image on the right, a Shakespearean manuscript. But how can a simple drawing, possibly crafted by a toddler, hold just as much meaning as a famous legend written by the one of the most famous authors of all time? Ah, the wonderful tree of writing, where both of these ‘scripts’ are merely branches. Ong then exaggerates and asks when animal poop, left in the ground, becomes writing? Unless these animals are communicating with their feces, let’s just stick to these two drawings.

Meaning behind writing is what the author intends for the viewer. Let’s say hypothetically, the image on the left was drawn by a four year old who was asked to draw a picture of her hero in Kindergarten. Although slightly unrecognizable, her intention was to draw her mother. She proceeds to explain that her mother is her hero because she’s brace and beautiful and helpful and makes the best Fluffernutter sandwiches. This four year old folds up her picture and waits all day long just to show her mother how proud she is of her. Upon receiving the gift, the mother tears up and hugs her daughter as they express they’re love for each other. Adorable story, I know. But there’s so much meaning there. The emotions between mother and daughter are heightened all from one very elementary picture. The mother displays her portrait on the refrigerator until the wear and tear begins to show. Afterwards, the mother places it with her other special keepsakes. When it comes time for the daughter to leave home for college, the mother pulls out this drawing as the two family members bond over a fond memory one last time. “True writing systems  can and usually do develop gradually from a cruder use of memory aides” (84). What a beautiful story. There is love seeping through every line of that figure’s hair.

Meanwhile, we have Mr. Shakespeare over here. I can’t say I know what document this is exactly, but the idea is here. At the time of creating this, Shakespeare was expressing his meaning through his own words. Whether it was love or war or royalty, his themes always prevailed and turned potentially boring stories into tales we can never forget. But other than a genius masterpiece found between cover to cover, what else is here? What else did Shakespeare want us to interpret and take away from in his writing? Oh wait…how should I know? I never met the man. Never got the chance to ask him why he chose the literary elements he did or how he came about such fascinating and intriguing characters like Romeo and Juliet. Nope. In fact, I think a majority of the world can agree that Shakespeare is a little ambiguous. Shakespeareans can study him and his rhetoric until their hands fall off. But will they ever experience the same love and emotion that the mother from out first story felt? Probably not. Will they ever be able to relish in the thought that this ‘writing’ was intended just for them? No, Shakespeare is available to everyone and no matter where you pick it up the text will always stay the same. The only real meaning behind Shakespeare is the twisted plot that made him such a classic. Academics will study him forever, interpreting new meanings almost daily, with the actual known more or less unknown.

So Walter Ong, hats off to you. A scribble on a blank sheet of paper COULD have just as much meaning as a Medical School student’s thesis paper. This tree of writing is open to millions of interpretations, allowing every piece of writing or script or animal crap to have more than what meets the eye.

Quotes to P-”Ong”-der:

“Technology, properly interiorized, does not degrade human life but on the contrary enhances it” (82) :

Well yeah, look how far computers have come. Now the Internet can travel via Cable Television instead of hogging up a phone line by dialing a phone number. But how can we interiorize technology? Simply stated, how can we incorporate technology within ourselves? Next time you see a computer, walk over to it. Put your hand on the mouse. Do you index and middle fingers fall comfortable on the top of each button? Does the rounded middle fit snugly in your palm as you control the movement with your forearm and wrist? If the computer is on, use the mouse to guide the on screen arrow. Can you place the arrow over an object and either open it or drag it around the screen? Tada! You’ve become technology’s new friend. Each component of the mouse, the buttons, the gliding ball, the connecting cord, all come together to improve efficiency in our lives. A mouse does something that a human physically cannot do therefore degrading us is out of the question. For all you tech-savvy brainiacs? Keep up the good work. For the rest of you timid creatures of habit? Break away from your comfort zone or else the whole world will pass you by–one click at a time.

Random fact that would never fly in our world today:

“It appears unlikely that most persons in medieval or even Renaissance western Europe would ordinarily have been aware of the number of the current calendar year — from the birth of Christ or any other point past…In a culture with no newspaper or other currently dated material to impinge on consciousness, what would be the point for most people in knowing the calendar year? The abstract calendar number would relate to nothing in real life. Most persons did not know and never even tried to discover in what calendar year they had been born” (Ong 97).  Maybe this is what Jay-Z had in mind for his inspiration.

Reading and Writing Resources/Technologies

In Chapter 4, Ong talks about writing and its consciousness.  But I can’t help analyzing the quote about writing technologies. On page 80, he writes, “Yet writing (and especially alphabetic writing) is a technology, calling for the use of tools and other equipment: styli or brushes or pens, carefully prepared surfaces such as paper, animal skins, strips of wood, as well as inks or paints, and much more.” After I first read this sentence, I couldn’t help but think “Duh! How else do we write?”

With all obvious concepts aside, such as a pen writes on paper, what are we left with? Styli, animal skins, wood, and ink. Right in one sentence, Ong creates a timeline of literacy from Native Americans painting animal skins all the way to businessmen typing memos in their Palm Pilots with a stylus. The message is clear: reading and writing play integral roles in society worldwide.  Where would we be without these life skills? Could the world, more specifically the United States, survive? As one of the most powerful nations, we rely everyday on these common skills that we take for granted.

What about the select few citizens who don’t know how to read or write? These citizens usually hold jobs behind closed doors such as dishwashers, loaders, shelf-stockers, even babysitters. It is reassuring to know there are jobs available to the illiterate, but there’s not much room for improvement.  And since America is the land of opportunity, how can these individuals succeed?

Take Jahara Drammeh for example. An immigrant from Gambia came to New York City to create a new life for himself. He found a job behind closed doors and eventually began a family.  However, when his children sought his help for assistance on their homework, Drammeh knew it was time to take measures into his own hands. Thanks to the New York Public Library volunteers, Drammeh was able to enroll in the Center for Reading and Writing. From there he was assigned a tutor, one of the NYPL’s volunteers, who helped him uncover the English language–a tool that expanded his horizons to new heights. As of April 19, 2010, Drammeh reported that he can now read signs, something he used to struggle with, as well as a few books. (read the full story here)

So dreams do come true…or do they?

Let’s not focus on our own home country for a minute.  What about halfway across the globe in Africa? The entire country suffers from illiteracy, some parts only have 10% of their population unable to read and write such as Naimbia, Swaziland, Angola, and South Africa. However, travel Northwest to Sierra Leone or Senegal and find that only less than half of the population can actually read and write. And why do I have a feeling there are no public library volunteers offering any assistance…

Check out the entire globe’s illiteracy rates here.

What is Orality? + Literary Connections

Orality…

Obviously, the main word here is oral. Of the mouth; verbal; speaking; talking. One of the original traditions of spreading knowledge, information and stories. However, orality is in a category of its own. The original idea of orality pertains to the dialect and conversations had by cultures who are unaware of writing in their world such as newspapers and magazines. For example, if a storm was brewing in a small village, the only form of communication the villagers have is their voice. There is no Internet or CBS News to warn the entire surrounding area and help locals evacuate, saving lives as well as the environment.  We, as citizens of the United States, don’t even realize how lucky we have it. We don’t have to play the game “Telephone” across our home country–we have more forms of news media than we know what to do with.

And as unfortunate as it sounds (it is), the lower the literacy rate in a place, the higher the poverty rate. And the higher the poverty rate, the more the people in this place depend on Orality. A prime example of this can be seen in The Red Letter Plays by Lori Parks. The main character of the first play, Hester, tries to learn the alphabet, but only goes up to the letter A. She cannot read or write anything else but the letter A. Due to her illiteracy and her lack of smart judgement skills, Hester finds herself with nothing more than two coins to rub together and five children with five different fathers. Hester’s condition is way worse than poverty and she can only share her stories and experiences and cries for help and money by talking.  This is seen when she encounters each baby’s father with a request for help.

The Red Letter Plays are in fact fictional, but the point is clear about orality.  The oldest and most original form of communication isn’t completely out of touch yet. However with times changing rapidly, the art of orality is starting to get lost in the dust.

Modern Writing Philosophy

After reading philosopher Walter Ong’s book, Orality and Literacy, I can’t help but to try to bring his ideas into my everyday life. There is so much to be said and analyzed in Ong’s writing as he compares and contrasts the different forms of speaking and reading amongst different cultures. Since speaking and reading both go hand in hand with writing, Ong discusses writing from the beginning to the future of writing with technology.

Even the subtitle of this book, The Technologizing of the World, tells us, as the reader that the world is forever changing because technology is forever rapidly growing and changing, altering its ways in order to simplify and better the lives of the American people. It’s fascinating to see how the traditions of rhetoric have passed on from generations. These traditions, whether they be cultural or social norms, are thoroughly discussed and compared by Ong in such an enlightening way.

It’s like a history book, philosophy reading and writing manual all in one.