For several years now, researchers have realised many differences that exist between the oral and written cultures (Ong 12). Some people may prefer orality over literacy and vice versa not knowing that all these goes hand in hand. It all started by oral literature when the information was passed from one generation to another without documenting them but through the elders. The old generation believed in the oral literature since the information were safely and faithfully transmitted to the next generation without any distortion (Ong 15). The written literature, on the other hand, is believed to have emerged during the fourth millennium in Mesopotamia, Egypt though no precise records are found regarding it. Literacy began with writing what then generated into printing. The current generation may have the notion that written literature is everything and without it, the ancient beliefs may not be existing. The shift from oral culture to written culture have come with many issues as the information is distorted and misinterpreted in various ways. The current generation can no longer get the meaning of many things.
Most scholars have always assumed the existence of the oral literacy since their primary focus has been on ideological and text consequences (Ong 31). They have in most cases considered that oral verbalization is just the same as the written one and that all oral arts had the same intentions and purposes only that they were not put in writings. The shift from oral to written culture was meant to move purely from oral culture but not to the modern written culture. It just an intermediate condition whereby after the archaic period, writing developed for the first time and the most educated group heavily relied on it. The entire population then became affected with writing, and they wanted everything to be kept in writing.
The oral literature texts had chances of existing in different ways where they would be transcribed later after the establishment of a standard text. The Homeric quotations that were written by Plato and Aristotle in the 4th century showed considerable variants that came as a result of reading or hearing different versions (Ong 24). Though, the ancient orators, philosophers and historians used to quote from memory regardless of it limitations rather than relying on the written texts. From the work of these old people, memory was highly valued than the written text what may also make textual content not to be trusted by the contemporary generation.
In the past, reading was done loudly either to oneself or others. The practice went on for the transition period from roll to codex when word spacing was introduced what led to silent reading (Ong 97). They read aloud since the sounds were to compensate for the missing punctuations hence enable them to understand the text better. By then very few people in the society as oral literature was the major one. The oral literature was used in reciting the unwritten literature and also in reading the already written literature. Oral culture also continued after the emergence of written culture due to the scarcity of the written literature as well as their cost. Depending on the local educational system of a given region, the written literature was likely to be lower in some areas and higher in others. Literacy was not easily defined since it entailed many huge variations that were influenced by geography, educational system and economics among other factors that affected reading and writing directly (Ong 111). The earlier manuscripts were also difficult to read what made literacy level also to be lower.
The ancient historians expected their histories to be read loud. They relied primarily on the oral traditions as well as oral sources for their histories. They cited inscriptions as illustrations of their narratives instead of their basis. Other relied on oral sources by giving summarised speeches instead of the actual transition that was said by the speaker. The historians did not provide the exact and entire information rather gave out part of what was expected of them (Ong 121). This continued up to the fifth century where after all that the historians had done, people still relied on oral communication more than the books. By then, people were still viewing books as aids to memory but not as study objects (Ong 123). They had faith in their memories more than they trusted the information available in the books.
While the transition has come with much differences as compared to the ancient world, scholars have various views regarding the shift. Some of them believed that writing creates forgetfulness into the learner’s mind since they stop using their memories start trusting external character without remembering anything on their own. The transition seems to have created laziness in learners what used not to happen back there. The students were to memorise everything they are taught what the current generation cannot even afford to do. The transition was brought in with good intentions though modernity has ruined everything.
Work Cited
Ong, Walter J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Routledge, 2013. Print.
