Continuum & Literary Formats
This post is a little late but my questions and understandings still ring true. In “Literary Formats from Manuscripts to Electronic Texts”, the timeline and explanation presented clear ideas and were helpful in putting the pieces together. There were a few key ideas I would like to highlight.
In early literary formats, literacy was not a universal idea or right. Production and purpose were centralized in two places – church and state (Keep, McLaughlin, & Parmar, 2000). As a result, literacy was considered a privilege of the upper class. I think this idea, while not prominent in the 21st century, has still been permeated in certain societies and cultures. When literacy is defined simply as reading and writing, there are many adults and children who believe they can’t or don’t need to be literate to be successful or achieve their personal goals. What I would argue is not that they are right but based on a simplistic, inaccurate view of literacy their rationale makes sense. What is true, and I believe is explored and explained in this text, is that literacy or being literate is not that simple. While it is fundamental and the foundation of all skills and understanding, it is much more complex and intricate than “just” the ability to read and write well.
As production began to expand, so did literacy. The more literature and text that was being produced, the more people there were able to read it. It is interesting to think about this experience as supply and demand. The more supply there is of a product, the higher the demand is. It made me wonder, if the ability to mass produce text had developed much more slowly, would we have seen the same results? If publishing still meant one or few intricate, elaborate or simple copies of text, what would our view of literacy be today? How would this journey have changed?
The following quote really made me pause to think: “ The glosses, learned commentary, border designs and other decorative materials did not “illustrate” the text so much as reveal its inner qualities; text and decoration existed in a kind of continuum that was the truth of The Word” (Keep, McLaughlin, & Parmar, 2000, p. Illuminated Manuscripts). I can’t make up my mind about the continuum that has been described and I’m hoping you can all help me make sense or at the very least, share your interpretation. Is the continuum based upon how many decorative materials there are and their influence on the truth or authenticity of the words themselves? Simply put, more or less decorative materials make the words or the message more or less true or valued. More decorative materials = more value on the word or more decorative materials = less value on the word?
When I think about the reading we have been doing in Bolter’s book, I wonder about the visual aspect of text. As humans we are drawn to visuals first, I believe. It is why we judge books based on their cover. So are the values on the continuum constantly shifting? Is the pendulum swinging back and forth between more and less decorative materials and their value?
Keep, C., McLaughlin, T., & Parmar, R. (2000). Literary formats from manuscripts to electronic texts. Retrieved from The Electronic Labyrinth: http://elab.eserver.org/hfl0261.html
Hi Allison,
The term continuum has gotten my interest and made me think about its connection to literacy. Literacy is indeed has continuum (a continuous extent) and series of writing or communication technologies have been facilitating literacy since advent of human civilization. Literacy continuum has been growing with space, time and regional values. In my view, it is like an infinite time series that never go back.
As you mentioned that ” literacy was considered a privilege of the upper class”, my argument for the statement is that a new technology is always expensive adapted by rich or upper class and gradually it transfers to other level of society. Cheap writing material and instruments used to write made books and education affordable by wide range of society(i.e. middle and lower middle class) Ability to read and write was new at that time and media used was not common. This is the reason of the low production of educational material and not available to lower class.
In fact, it has continuum which does not resemble pendulum continuum. The demand of decorative, more or less decorative depends on the choice of customer that affects the production and distribution market. Pendulum swing resembles market trends (Bull or Bare trends). Your post has given new angle to view history of literacy as ” literacy continuum” .Thanks for sharing.
Rakhshanda
Hi Allison and Rakhshanda,
I found your post very interesting and I really enjoyed the way that you structured questions for consideration in your text.
The development of mass-produced text changed the way in which we communicate information around the world. It was a defining moment that allowed information to be shared despite geographic barriers. It is hard to identify the exact effect that mass-produced text had on the development of literacy, as we are unable to go back and develop a study with sample groups measuring outcomes. It is however possible to identify that the mass production of text created access to information which in turn empowered individuals, encouraged them to participate, to have a voice and to be informed (to mention a few).
Finally, I found your question concerning the continuum of text to be of particular interest. Keep, McLaughlin, & Parmar state that the décor of text “did not ‘illustrate’ the text so much as reveal its inner qualities” (2000, p. Illuminated Manuscripts). This brought me to think of the relationship that we have with text. Specifically, the way in which, if we are able to read comfortably (legibility of writing, spacing, font size), it allows us to have a more direct and focussed relationship with text. This, in my opinion, provides the interconnected relationship with décor and text as explained above (Keep, McLaghlin, & Parmar, 2000, p. Illuminated Manuscripts). I do not believe they are saying the décor necessarily is the key factor that determines value but it does help the reader to uncover the important elements.
Bolter’s Socialbook facilitates this shift of interacting with text and providing the individual the power to participate. This creates a more genuine relationship with text as individuals are given a platform to share comments and reactions about text.
References:
Keep, C., McLaughlin, T., & Parmar, R. (2000). Literary formats from manuscripts to electronic texts. Retrieved from The Electronic Labyrinth: http://elab.eserver.org/hfl0261.html