One general theme I got from this essay is that writing and technology are bad. I think this especially because Ong refers to writing as a technology and throughout the essay offered only negatives to writing. The part the stuck out to me the most was subsection 4 when he referred to words as dead. Ong does offer the fact that the readers then give the words life. "Yet there is a paradox in the fact that deadness of the written or printed text, its removal from the living human lifeworld, its rigid visual fixity, assures its endurance and its potential for being resurrected into limitless living contexts by a limitless number of living readers" (22). I liked this part because it was one of the few positive sentences and was something i completely agreed with. The words are there for us to interperate them in any way we want.
I overall didn't like that the majority of the essay discusses negative effects of writing, like memory loss and separation. That this technology is hurting more than helping. I love writing and the way words are such a large part of my life. I think they are definately worth the memory loss.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I thought this held a very interesting view point. I really liked the quote she picked out of the text and found her explanation of it very well written. I think the concept of the 'readers giving life to the words' very interesting. I feel the quote she choose also talks about the timelessness of written words and how that they will live on as long as there is someone to read it.
ReplyDeleteYes...the way Sarah amplified your interpretation of the quote you selected is an important, and positive, idea about writing that Ong presents. I guess, I disagree with your interpretation of Ong. I don't think he has a negative view of writing. Look at the last sentence of his essay again. Anything that makes us more human -- and he claims that writing makes us more human -- can't be bad, can it?
ReplyDeleteI had hard time reading this essay, but I liked the qoute you picked out. I liked your interperation of it. I could see were you point of view came form and agree with some of it.
ReplyDeleteTrue that it was difficult to read, a little confusing. I think that Ong meant in his paper that literates often take writing for granted. Literates couldnot think as they do withoutthe writing process. Ong says that writing was in fact unatural and was at sometimes subject of objection such as Plato (little ironic when he wrote so many philosophic stories). Nowdays writing is thought to be natural in the literate cultures. Writing technology long ago was a controversial subject and became interneliazed by the literate culture. Well, it was my understanding about.....
ReplyDeleteI find my self reading each section over and over again to understand the true meanings. When I read your Blog I, began to read Section IV again. I found your comments very interesting with great analysis. Ong said "Once reduced to space, words are frozen and in a sense dead"(22). My question to myself, is about the dead words, my writing and, what I can do to bring my written words to life.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about the enjoyment of writing. I enjoy writing a story in words of my own. Ong is saying that once the words are written they become dead; before coming back to life when read. I hope that this belief will influence my writing in the future, making my writing more interesting and true.