INSIDE THE GURU'S GATE - Anpere

language and society. 10 In response to the literacy thesis a large bulk of critical literature
evolved to argue against the implied assumption about superiority of Western
literacy. 11 Although anthropology in its early phase undervalued oral cultures in its
own way by treating orality as “traditional” (as opposed to “modern”), anthropologists
explored indigenous systems, functions and abilities of oral transmission in
order to demonstrate that most characteristics ascribed to literate societies were to be
found in non-literate societies and oral cultures as well. 12
In these discussions the Vedic Hinduism has often served as a case in point of a
predominantly oral culture. Comparative analyses have claimed that the Vedic culture,
unlike Western traditions, was undervaluing writing technologies and lived
through the heard sound. 13 The scribal activity of committing words to writing was
regarded a defilement of the sacred sound and by tradition a low status occupation.
Oral transmission of words, on the contrary, was in the control of the high-caste
priestly authority. 14 In more recent years scholars have re-evaluated the antagonistic
dichotomy between oral and written cultures and given way for more balanced approaches
which view both as mutually interactive: oral and written cultures coexist
and affect each other through a range of complex relationships. Even in societies and
religions that have been characterized by a literary culture (such as Islam) there are
oral cultures to be found, just as oral cultures constantly interact with the written
word. 15 In contrast to the acknowledged picture of the Vedic tradition, later develop-
10
Some proponents of the literacy thesis have argued that written texts, unlike orally transmitted
texts, were able to fix long commentaries and expositions, and thereby encouraged the development
of abstract thinking, explanations and reasoning, i.e. improved humans’ rational
thinking. Oral transmission remained concrete, particular and contexts-bound (see e.g. Ong 2002
(1982)). Scholars trained in post-colonial theory have partly adopted the literacy theory to claim
that orality was a precondition for the creation of modern and politicized representations among
colonized people. Writing was looked upon as a vehicle of authority inflicted by the colonial
rulers, which the ruled, in turn, came to use as a means for creating new self-consciousnesses
and self-representations. Oberoi’s much debated study on the Sikh reform movement Singh
Sabha is partly based on the theory about the historical shift from oral to written culture (Oberoi
1995). For references to post-colonial studies in the African context, see Olsson 2006b: 246.
11
See e.g. Gough 1968, Finnegan 1988, Narasimhan 1991.
12
See e.g. Feldman’s (1991) analysis of Michelle Renaldo’s studies of the oral culture among the
Ilongot.
13
See e.g. Graham 1987.
14
Contrary to this, supporters of the “literacy thesis” insisted on the existence of an early writing
culture in the Vedic society. Goody (1987), for instance, argued that the Vedic tradition was
indeed oral, but vested in the caste of literate specialists - the Brahmins. The redaction of Veda
took place in a society with alphabetic writing and there existed an early written culture, even if
Hindus denied this because of the religious taboo of committing the Vedas to writing. Goody
found many reason for the Brahmins’ insistence on oral transmission: ecclesiastical power and
control over religious material, its transmission and dissemination; the importance of personal
mediation and intermediating teachers; or restricted access to manuscripts and the advantage of
recalling content in absence of texts (Goody 1987: 118 ‒ 120).
15
Olsson 2006b.
7
Published on www.anpere.net in May 2008