22.02.2013 Views

Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word - Monoskop

Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word - Monoskop

Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word - Monoskop

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

SOME THEOREMS 173<br />

mind’. This is <strong>the</strong> paradox <strong>of</strong> human communication.<br />

Communication is intersubjective. <strong>The</strong> media model is not. <strong>The</strong>re<br />

is no adequate model in <strong>the</strong> physical universe for this operation <strong>of</strong><br />

consciousness, which is distinctively human <strong>and</strong> which signals <strong>the</strong><br />

capacity <strong>of</strong> human beings to form true communities wherein<br />

person shares with person interiorly, inter-subjectively.<br />

Willingness to live with <strong>the</strong> ‘media’ model <strong>of</strong> communication<br />

shows chirographic conditioning. First, chirographic cultures<br />

regard speech as more specifically informational than do oral<br />

cultures, where speech is more performance-oriented, more a way<br />

<strong>of</strong> doing somethingto someone. Second, <strong>the</strong> written text appears<br />

prima facie to be a one-way informational street, for no real<br />

recipient (reader, hearer) is present when <strong>the</strong> texts come into<br />

being. But in speaking as in writing, some recipient must be<br />

present, or <strong>the</strong>re can be no text produced: so, isolated from real<br />

persons, <strong>the</strong> writer conjures up a fictional person or persons. ‘<strong>The</strong><br />

writer’s audience is always a fiction’ (Ong 1977, pp. 54–81). For a<br />

writer any real recipient is normally absent (if a recipient is<br />

accidentally present, <strong>the</strong> inscribing <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> message itself proceeds<br />

as though <strong>the</strong> person were somehow absent—o<strong>the</strong>rwise, why<br />

write?). <strong>The</strong> fictionalizing <strong>of</strong> readers is what makes writing so<br />

difficult. <strong>The</strong> process is complex <strong>and</strong> fraught with uncertainties. I<br />

have to know <strong>the</strong> tradition—<strong>the</strong> intertextuality, if you wish—in<br />

which I am working so that I can create for real readers fictional<br />

roles that <strong>the</strong>y are able <strong>and</strong> willing to play. It is not easy to get<br />

inside <strong>the</strong> minds <strong>of</strong> absent persons most <strong>of</strong> whom you will never<br />

know. But it is not impossible if you <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y are familiar with <strong>the</strong><br />

literary tradition <strong>the</strong>y work in. I hope that I have somewhat<br />

succeeded in laying hold on tradition sufficiently to get inside <strong>the</strong><br />

minds <strong>of</strong> readers <strong>of</strong> this present book.<br />

THE INWARD TURN: CONSCIOUSNESS AND<br />

THE TEXT<br />

Since at least <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> Hegel, awareness has been growing that<br />

human consciousness evolves. Although being human means being<br />

a person <strong>and</strong> thus being unique <strong>and</strong> induplicable, growth in<br />

historical knowledge has made it apparent that <strong>the</strong> way in which a<br />

person feels himself or herself in <strong>the</strong> cosmos has evolved in a<br />

patterned fashion over <strong>the</strong> ages. Modern studies in <strong>the</strong> shift from<br />

orality to literacy <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> sequels <strong>of</strong> literacy, print <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!