Power of Text
“Print encourages a sense of closure, a sense that what is found in a text has been finalized, has reached a state of completion.” (Ong, 1978, p. 129)
I found that this statement made by Ong resonated with me as this sense of closure gives print an inherited power over readers since this finalization means that readers are unable to not only discuss the ideas divulged in the text, but also are unable to physically change the print with ease. The ink that marks the paper is as almost as permanent as words being cast into stone. Combined with the ability to “enclose thought in thousands of copies of a work of exactly the same visual and physical consistency” (Ong, 1978, p. 129), print has attained a new form of authority over the individual without the usage of force. The individual willingly trust that the error-free mechanization of text implies absoluteness. This trust means that the readers accept the written word as truth and do not go to the trouble of critically examining the text. This may not have started out this way in the 1500s but I find that it is especially true of the generations who grew up in an era emerged in mechanized print. In my opinion, it took the digitalization of text to help individuals to reconnect the human element back into the text. Children born in the digital age are more prone to critically examine the sources of text and question the ideas revealed in the text because the nature of print become more changeable and dynamic. I find it interesting that the digitalization and globalization of text helped fuel what Ong called a “secondary orality” as individuals form virtual communities like google hangouts and chat rooms to discuss ideas and learn from each other. I believe that there are a lot of similarities between the current online secondary oral culture and the face-to-face primary oral culture of the past that warrants further investigation, but perhaps in a different post.
Although the printing press imparted unforeseen power to the text, with this power came the creation of modern science. This came about because the printing press changed the way people related with the text from a very social, oral experience into a very private, textual one. Instead of going to large gatherings like the church to have a text read aloud, individuals have the freedom to read the books individually whenever and wherever they choose. I believe it was through this private experience that individuals were truly able to reflect on the meaning of the words which stimulated a freedom of thought. With a freedom of thought came a freedom of expression where individuals were able to write down sensory observation and ideas to exact precision with more ease and more efficiency. Unconventional and heretical ideas spread like wild fire as the publication of these ideas printed in millions became too difficult for the any authority like the Church to control. Individuals were able to use the words to expand ideas of medicine and science, and build on the spreading knowledge as a community. The emergence of collective thought was created and with it came a rise in literacy. The literacy rate in European adults increased from 30 percent in 1641 to 47 percent in 1696 which amounts to an impressive 4.7 million adults who can read and write in Europe alone (Schlossberg, 2011). Before this, only a privileged few had the access, time and resources to hone literacy skills. The improved access to print has created a newfound democratization of print and shifted the power to the average citizen. People no longer looked to authoritative figures such as the church to access knowledge and free, individualized thought formed which created the foundation of modern Science to which we are still reaping the benefits from. It is however strangely ironic that after gaining the power to read and write, the individual gave up the power to think critically or perhaps I am being to critical.
References
Ong, W. (1978). Literacy and orality in our times. Retrieved from http://www.ade.org/bulletin/n058/058001.htm
Schlossberg, T. (2011). The state of publishing: Literacy rates. Timothy McSweeney’s Internet Tendency. Retrieved from http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/literacy-rates
I really liked your point about how digital text promotes more critical thinking than print based text. I think this is very true because teachers have been working hard teaching students to evaluate websites since I was in school. So students know about how to judge internet resources and determine their reliability, but our culture is so sure that the printed word is accurate that we have forgotten to evaluate books critically as well. I think the quote that you started with from Ong really hits to the heart of this matter. Since there is a sense of finality and closure to a printed work we take it as being an authority on its subject. I expect this also links back to the earliest written works which would have been rare and rather serious in tone.
The printing press and then the mechanization of the printing press had a huge effect on society. The change from oral to literate increased our solidarity. I agree that reflection help to spur on further thought based on the text of the reading. Additionally, you can reread printed materials, this would let people think more about the content of the material. You would be looking at the exact same words instead of trying to recall what you had heard. Of course this lead to one of the earlier points about how we assume the authority of the printed word. Perhaps as the digital world continues to change our understanding text we will learn to be more critical of our sources.
Catherine
I too, found this specific quote made by Ong to be extremely thought provoking. I remember completing my undergrad at University and feeling so overwhelmed and daunted by the amount of readings needed to be completed, for various subjects – that I never once thought to question the validity of the text itself. The mere fact that it was written on a page or in a book, which someone (an educated person) had prescribed for me to read, gave me all the background information I thought was necessary. For it is as Ong stated: “The printed text is supposed to represent the words of an author in a definitive or ‘final’ form. For print is comfortable only with finality.” (Ong, 1978) As technology developed, and the World Wide Web developed, I agree with you, that we as a society became slightly more resistant to being spoon-fed that everything you read on the web is fact. Our culture started to develop 21st century thinking skills and began to question what we were told to digest. I find it interesting that part of the curriculum I as a Grade 5 teacher have to teach next year, is media literacy, with the goal to enhance 21st century skills directly linked to operating technology. Just as the printing press brought new advance and consequences, so does new technological advances in media.
The printing press is arguably one of the most important inventions that mankind has created. I agree, that it allowed greater access to print and the opportunity for reflective thought to be evoked in individuals. However, I would argue that just as print was at times restricted to the wealthy and elite – we as a western culture have some what isolated those without access to the resources or technology necessary for them to become or increase their own literacy. Therefore, I think it is necessary for better promotion of organizations such as One Lap Top Per Child (http://one.laptop.org) a non-profit organization, whose mission is to: provide each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop. To this end, we have designed hardware, content and software for collaborative, joyful, and self-empowered learning. With access to this type of tool, children are engaged in their own education, and learn, share, and create together. They become connected to each other, to the world and to a brighter future. Again, just as the printing press did, access to technology and information in these underdeveloped areas would shift the power from authoritative individuals and empower the ‘average’ individual.
References
Ong, W. (1978). Literacy and orality in our times. Retrieved from http://www.ade.org/bulletin/n058/058001.htm