More from Ong’s Orality and Literacy

“Writing Restructures Consciousness”

In this chapter, Ong discusses the paradoxical position of Learned Latin. Latin was a writing-based language (there were no purely oral users), yet Latin’s roots in classical rhetoric also kept it rooted in orality. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that rhetoric, though concerned with oral speech, is a product of writing (108). Ong also notes that Learned Latin was only present in an educational setting, thus “it had no direct connection with anyone’s unconscious of the sort that mother tongues, learned in infancy, always have (111). Ong credits this distance with making possible the abstract thinking necessary for the development of modern science (112).

Ong goes on to discuss the “tenaciousness of orality” vis-à-vis rhetoric. What this means is that orality continued to have a huge influence on writing up through the nineteenth century. As Ong comments, texts were intended to be read aloud. Some well-known authors, such as Charles Dickens, read aloud selections from their works. The practice of author readings still continues today, and some of these readings can be seen on BookTV.

“Print, Space, and Closure”

There is so much information in this chapter that I am just going to list what I found to be the most important/interesting points.

• “Print reinforces the sense of language as essentially textual” (128).
• With print, there was a sense of private ownership of words. Out of this sense of ownership, we see the gradual development of a resentment of plagiarism (129).
• Print allowed us to examine our own consciousness, to think of ourselves as selves (129).
• The finality of the printed work—the physical book—encourages us to think that the text itself is complete (130).

At the end of this chapter, Ong posits that the electronic age has brought about a secondary orality. He claims, “This new orality has striking resemblances to the old in its participatory mystique, its fostering of a communal sense, its concentration on the present moment, and even its use of formulas” (134). Yet, Ong also points out “it is essentially a more deliberate and self-conscious orality, based permanently on the use of writing and print” (134). Because of the profound influence writing and print have had on society and the human psyche, we can never return to that primary orality. Like Bourdieu explains, when the old is made new it is never exactly the same, but rather is modified by what has come since. However, new technologies have enabled us to create a sort of hybrid culture in which literacy and orality interact.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• ORALITY AND LITERACY, WALTER ONG
• Orality and Literacy by Walter Ong