Past and present, orality Post #2

I was intrigued by Ong’s chapter 4 regarding writing restructure. Writing always seemed a necessity rather than a technology. As Ong poignantly points out, “Plato’s Socrates urges writing destroys memory,” and that writing cannot defend itself. The paramount message screams at me as Plato had to put this to print to covey his thoughts! The fact, as he pointed out is that the debate of one cannot exist without the other is paramount. As a society, we no longer “Go tell it on the mountain” or send a rider posthaste across the continental divide, disseminating information. Writing has brought us out of isolation and has allowed the advancement of mankind if you will. The fact is stated writing is contrived from orality is not synonymous. Just as language was derived out of symbolism, it is the same progression although somewhat distinctive. Writing is truly a technology to be expounded upon and as Ong puts it, “heightens consciousness.” I like the reality that writing may be synthetic in a sense but like any technology, it can’t help but progress.


The other intriguing part of the book I found secondary orality. The electronic world has made it probable that printed information (books, journals, manuscripts) can transcend the parameters that once restricted access. A community in Zimbabwe, for example, can cultivate relationships (hopefully) with more advanced communities, thus increasing their agricultural practices or health issues. In turn, all can benefit from the exchange of the “global” universe in which we now embrace. I often listen to my Grandmother who is 95 years old. She expresses that fear of technology and the destruction of mankind if society does not learn to control the beast as she refers to it. She has witnessed the birth of many technologies, and the same fears are expressed throughout generations. She was raised in the “oral” culture of storytelling and “gabbing” on the back fence with the neighbors. She states it is a lost art. Her isolation equates to resistance to technology and she, much like Plato, struggle with conjuring up what the future might hold. She speaks of an orality that will pass with future generations and that is sad to me. I feel we need both and the interconnectivity in technology.