You are what you write--well, maybe not quite...

     "Writing introduces division and alienation, but a higher unity as well. It intensifies the sense of self and fosters more conscious interactions between persons. Writing is consciousness-raising" (Ong loc 3264).


     In my last blog, I stated that memorization is important because it allows us to take what we have stored in our memory, and add them to our hearts; to our being. In that, memorization and the oral tradition are very important to our growth as individuals. Oral communities rely on memorization much more to bring them together. It keeps them together as one. Their shared memories are more important than their shared space. There is much more emphasis on community whereas in a culture which relies on writing, not only does the size of the community grow because the information can be shared quickly over a greater area, but the community is less tightly knit. Just because we have all read the same book does not mean we have had the same experience. I am not arguing that orality is better; it is just different.

     As Ong states in the above quote, writing does divide us, but when we come together, we can interact on a different level. If we all hear a poem only once we can discuss it immediately as a group. Perhaps we will remember enough of it to talk about it more a few days later, but how much will the average person remember of it? If we all read the poem, come together as a group, and then discuss it after hearing read aloud we can go much further. We have, in this case, had time to ponder the poem after perhaps several readings. We can make notes near lines that amuse or confuse us and bring that to the group. With this added reflection we are able to come, as a group, to a much different understanding than we could have if we had only heard the poem once.

    Also, while writing something such as a poem, letter, blog, etc, we look inside ourselves for answers. I can ponder what this means to me. I can record my own feelings and reactions to my subject. In oral culture this type of recording of one's self is not possible. I have, on occasion, looked back at some of my previous works and after reading them realized how my views or knowledge has changed over time. This is possible due to the fact that we live in a literature culture.

   This all sounds a bit self indulgent and solitary which it is; until we share it with others. When we bring the recording of our experience to others, we all see the story. We all are allowed our own reactions and discussion of those insights. Even when we all experience the same event, because we are now used to looking within ourselves we can immediately share our reaction on a different level than people from the oral tradition would. It would be a collection of individual reflections instead of recording of fact. As noted by researchers in Ong's book, to a person who lives in the oral tradition a tree is a tree; there is no further need to describe what a tree is. In the literary tradition, we may come across something such as...

Trees

I Tthink that I shall never see
A poem lovely as a tree.

A tree whose hungry mouth is prest
Against the sweet earth's flowing breast;

A tree that looks at God all day,
And lifts her leafy arms to pray;

A tree that may in summer wear
A nest of robins in her hair;

Upon whose bosom snow has lain;
Who intimately lives with rain.

Poems are made by fools like me,
But only God can make a tree. 

Joyce Kilmer

http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/trees/

     If we are able to take aspects of oral culture, such as memorization, to enhance our world we can perhaps bring ourselves to an even higher level of understanding.