
What would our world look like without writing? From establishing communities to the endless scrolls of texts on our phones, it is easy to overlook that writing has an insurmountable presence in our everyday lives. Media theorist Lydia H. Liu’s chapter, Writing, reminds us that writing is more than a writing tool for recording speech. It is a material technology and symbolic system, tracing its influence from the rise of civilisations to the digital age. In her discussion, Liu poses six central questions: the origins of writing, its role in governance, the relationship between scripts and systems, its evolution across different media, writing as a visual representation of speech, and its place in the digital age, to highlight how writing expands beyond being a tool for speech. The chapter ultimately demonstrates how deeply writing is intertwined with power, communication, and human imagination.
Origins of writing
Liu first focuses on the discourse on the ‘origins’ of writing to explain the first influences of writing in social systems and innovation. The first traces of scripts were found to have been invented separately in four different parts of the world, where each was characterised by urbanisation, division of labour, and a surplus economy. It is clear that writing was not just a product of culture, but also a practical innovation that emerged out of increasingly complex societies.
Each script is tied to material media (such as clay tablets, petroglyphs, and papyrus), highlighting how writing is also deeply technological and evolving alongside infrastructures of communication. Before these early scriptures, however, emerged semasiographs, or the use of iconic signs as a means of writing and communication. These forms of communication were first disregarded as writing by German linguist Florian Coulmas, who argued that all forms of graphic meaning, such as visual movement, syntax-like patterns, or rhythm, were not considered as being tied to writing. However, this classification evolved through the widespread use of the rebus principle, where a picture can be used to represent the sound of its name, rather than the object itself, marking a conceptual progression to non-language instances of illustration as writing. The chapter thus argues that there is no exact origin point of writing.
However, it is clear through early scripture that writing has evolved out of broader conditions of labour and communication. French archaeologist Andrè Leroi-Gourhan’s palaeontology of writing best supports Liu’s argument. In Gesture and Speech, Leroi-Gourhan studies early human ancestors to understand how their behaviour may relate to language. Here, he emphasises the neurological connection that the same parts of the brain are involved in tactile activities and using tools and also in the face and language. He uses the term ‘graphism’ to highlight this tactile, non-verbal form of communication to conclude that tool-making and language evolve alongside each other within human social life, where gesture and speech are intertwined, rather than being mutually exclusive.
Writing in Governance
Connecting to Liu’s previous argument, it is clear that the early development of writing enabled new forms of organisation beyond oral traditions, easily seen as a symbol of knowledge and power across civilisations. Even early forms of storytelling prove that early civilisations understood the significance of writing through myths, legends and religion. Stories would characterise it as a ‘magical power,’ which later came to fruition as those who were literate and had access to writing held a monopoly on religious and political power in the form of Priests of the church. With this power, writing often allowed for the creation of new spatial and temporal configurations, as empires could easily sustain large colonies across far distances through written communication. This type of mass media production, as mentioned previously also in Chapter 18, ‘Mass Media’, can be seen in the monarchies of Egypt, Persia, and the Roman Empire. China’s first emperor, Qin Shi Huang of the Qin Dynasty, first proclaimed power through writing and scripture, where he imposed a standard script, orthography, and bureaucratic procedures for centralised rule. This started China’s long imperial history, and clearly would not have been possible if standard written script systems had not supported imperial rulers.
Writing & Mathematics
The development of ancient writing had strong early ties to predate methods for accurate tracking of numerical notation and record keeping, including weights, measures, and currency. Within the means of predated numerical notation, the earliest recorded transactions, dating back thousands of years, used pebbles, tallies, tokens, and clay containers or “bullae” — used in ancient Mesopotamia to show the marks of sealings indicating ownership to anything that was attached to it. In turn, this has led theorists to consider mathematics as the earliest precursor to writing.
Though the consensus remains that writing has gone from pictographic to syllabic, and then to phoneticization, there remains the possibility that writing systems may have come from more semiotic scenarios rather than solely to record human speech. The etymology of the Phoenician word “spr” traces back to the English word “scribe.” The early meaning of the Phoenician word meant “to count”, but only later did it adopt the meaning of “to write.” The mutual ancestry between these words suggests that the alphabet and alphanumerical systems were the same. The ancient Greeks’ alphabet was already made up on the foundation of mathematics with its 24-letter system plus 3 alphanumeric signs of “digamma, koppi, and sampi” as well.
The Global Evolution of Writing
Throughout time, the concept of writing has undergone extraordinarily vast changes from what we knew of it then to now: going back from using natural materials such as bronze, shells, or papyrus to the invention of print or electronic chips. Examining the global evolution of writing can be divided into the various empires throughout history. For instance, Ancient Egypt’s hieroglyphs were chiselled decoratively onto stone monuments, whereas writing on papyrus allowed for cursive of hieratic forms for quicker writing — the latter writing medium causing a large change in manuscript culture that shifted the forms of political organisation in history. The Roman Empire’s tradition of using papyrus “supported an emphasis on centralised bureaucratic administration,” whereas parchment in medieval Europe “helped give the church a monopoly of knowledge through monasticism,” according to Harold A. Innis.
In Ancient China, the spread of Buddhism in the nation also prompted the invention of woodblock printing in the eighth century, where the mass production of printed books assisted in global socioeconomic transformation. Around the eleventh century, movable type was invented, a technology adopted in the printing of the earliest paper currency, which was used to hold control over the early economy in Asia as a whole. Over in Europe, around the fourteenth century, block printing and paper manufacturing came about as a result of the Mongol Empire’s westward expansion. This breakthrough translated into a rise in universal literacy, newspapers, advertising, and new forms of politics.
Marshall McLuhan had observed the grand impact of printing on life in Europe and beyond, writing in the Gutenberg Galaxy, “the invention of typography confirmed and extended the new visual stress of applied knowledge, providing the first uniformly repeatable commodity, the first assembly line, and the first mass-production.” Thus, writing, in a sense, was the catalyst for all industrial practices to come after it, from its process of repetition to create a product for mass distribution.
Counting, notation, procedure: the road to algorithms
A second origin runs through numbers. Place-value numerals and operator symbols compress messy realities into portable strings. That compression invites procedures, do-this-then-that recipes someone else can repeat. In Liu’s telling, counting and inscribing were never far apart; even the word histories of “scribe” and “to count” cross. The point isn’t romantic; it’s practical: notation is writing tuned for calculation, a crucial bridge from tablets to code.
Materials change the message: paper, print, silicon
Writing’s substrates, bone, clay, papyrus, parchment, paper, type, and chips, aren’t background scenery. They reset speed, cost, and sameness, and with them, institutions. Paper and printing (in different historical paths) widened access; movable type accelerated repeatable precision and the rise of news, advertising, and mass politics. In the digital turn, text becomes addressable strings: searchable, sortable, and automatable, governed by file schemas, encodings, and protocols rather than just by clerks and courts.
Code is written—with machine readers
Alphabets loosely map signs to sounds; code maps signs to exact machine actions. In digital systems, a letter like “A” is an encoded value that can be copied without drift, checked for error, and executed in logic. Liu shows how modern information theory recasts “writing” as a statistical alphabet (including “space”) that machines can transmit and transform. Once marks are standardised for machines, the politics of writing shifts toward standards and interfaces, which set the fields, defaults, and labels that shape what’s sayable and searchable.
Tensions & connections (what ties the theories together)
Speech-first vs. writing’s autonomy. A familiar hierarchy puts speech above writing. Our line, following Liu, flips the emphasis: writing has its own powers, coordination, inscription, calculability, that don’t depend on sounding like talk. This helps explain why ledgers, forms, and code can rearrange life without saying a word aloud.
Meaning vs. transmission. Engineering models treat writing as signals under noise, so messages travel reliably. That’s perfect for networks but thin on meaning; the trade-off is that standards (encodings, protocols, moderation rules) become the new chokepoints. The connection: what keeps symbols moving also decides which symbols move.
Media materials vs. institutions. Tools and substrates (brush, type, chip) shape what can be stored and processed; institutions harden around those capacities (schools, archives, platforms). This links McLuhan/Kittler-style media arguments to Liu’s core claim: writing is a world-building technology, not a transparent mirror.
Why this matters now
Change the format and you change the world: a new field on a platform form, a new label in a database, a tweak to an encoding, all are tiny acts of infrastructural authorship that decide what appears, what counts, and who gets heard. That’s writing’s power, from clay to code.
Summary:
- No single origin. Writing didn’t just copy speech; it stabilised agreements and memories so complex societies could form.
- Power needs paperwork. Standard scripts and formats make populations legible—and governable.
- Notation – procedure – algorithms. Compression invites repeatable methods; that’s the seed of software.
- Media matters. Substrate shifts (paper, print, silicon) rewire institutions and publics.
- Code extends writing. Machine-readable marks turn literacy into a fight over standards, schemas, and interfaces.
Hi Ela, Meha, and Victoria,
Thank you for this educational post! It was such a journey reading through your essay and following the thread of writing through history. I particularly enjoyed the arbitrary definition of ‘writing’, and the fact that each origin is heavily debated. I am reminded of my Chinese dad’s stubborn insistence that all writing (at least within East Asia) developed as a byproduct from Chinese characters. This makes me contemplate the experience of writing the Chinese language in particular; each character is a complex combination of strokes that seems to replicate the process of drawing more than Western ‘writing’. Even if we go further in history, hieroglyphs and cave drawings were methods of communication that served their purpose and helped our modern scholars decipher what life was like during their time. Does this still count as writing?
To fast forward to our current day, different forms of code, binary, and art create their own unique languages, or a set of syntax rules that must be learned in order to communicate with different people or things. As we instinctively type on our keyboards using a memorized standard for how to represent each letter, does anything I am creating now count as writing? If I write a line of code that will get encrypted, translated into binary, and then return a result, does this count as writing? Your research seems to bring up more questions than answers for me, but it is a wonderfully curious experience to reflect on how this medium has shaped my life.
Thanks for the comment, Dea! The debate on what counts as ‘writing’ is a rally interesting one, and the chapter does mention how hieroglyphs, writing on clay tablets and even on the walls, or other forms of semasiographs and symbols can be considered as writing, as Leroy-Gourhan emphasises how language and the body are essentially intertwined, where writing and communication-making is tactile and very active. The question about code is fascinating and reminds me of a different reading for this class, “Making,” wherein theorists describe typing and writing as two distinct things, as typing on a keyboard involves very different movements and interactions between language and the body compared to writing straight on paper by hand. Especially how you described typing as a ‘memorised standard,’ it is almost as if we are in a way programmed to know the mechanics of typing and writing code, therefore, the classification of typing by scholars is rather ambiguous!
Hi ladies! I think your post really captures the width of Liu’s argument, especially how writing isn’t just a way to record speech but a technology that actively structures societies, economies, and even thought itself. I like how you emphasize the materiality of writing, from clay tablets to silicon ships, and how those changes in medium reshape institutions and power. Your connection between writing, counting, and algorithms was especially striking, showing us how the logic of inscription evolves into the logic of code. The tension you highlighted between meaning and transmission also feels very relevant to the digital age, where standards and protocols often silently determine what can be expressed. Do you think that the shift to digital writing concentrates control even more in the hands of a few, also opening up new spaces for resistance and creativity? Great read, y’all!
Hello!
This was a great read, thank you guys for putting together such a informative post.
It was eye-opening to learn about the various forms of record-keeping that evolved throughout the development of writing, from stone-carving to writing on papyrus, with each form expressing a distinct impression of the message. As an avid language learner, reading about the numerous origins of writing inspired me to think about the connection between cultures and their respective language, and how their style of font embodies that language. As highlighted in the summary, writing did not merely copy speech; it took form on an entirely solitary basis, which came to embody communication that could be kept record of. Writing and speech, the two major but not the sole components of language, it’s inspiring to consider how they will continue to evolve and the many more forms they will eventually take as humanity and culture progress.
What a captivating blog! Writing is truly such a powerful medium and I think that writers’ talents are so often overlooked in today’s digital age. Writing has evolved so much and has undeniably left a huge mark on the way we communicate to each other, the way we learn. and the way society is shaped. I think you guys beautifully summarized this chapter and encouraged me to really reflect on the impact writing as a medium has had beyond paper formats but also on digital formats.
This is a very meaningful blog post! Your words have reminded me of the countless changes and upheavals that writing has endured over the ages. And the media used to carry writing are constantly evolving. It reminds me of how people in ancient China used tortoise shells as a medium, which evolved into metal, bamboo slips, silk handkerchiefs, and finally paper. Now, with the advancement of time, we’ve uploaded our writing to the internet, further neglecting the significance of handwriting. But we can’t ignore the fact that all media, regardless of the medium, help humans communicate and record.
This was such an awesome and inspiring entry!! You did such a great job of showing how writing is not just a method of communication but an influence that literally shapes civilizations, technologies, and even our own self-conception. I loved how you started with Liu’s six basic questions and then expanded each one through clear examples, going all the way from clay tablets and papyrus to algorithms and code. It really brought to the fore how writing had always been a material technology that evolves with society. The “writing and mathematics” part was most appealing to me. I never knew that counting and writing had their fate tied together until you explained how notation gradually turned into “writing tuned for calculation.” It is astounding how the very same process of making marks, initially for exchange or possession, would finally become programming languages. You also connected this nicely to the fact that changing a medium or a format literally changes how the world functions. I also appreciated the discussion of how “materials change the message.” Your explanation of the evolution of writing from bone and clay to paper and silicon was so strong. It made me realize that even in the digital age, the medium is still dictating meaning, but instead of ink and parchment, it is now interfaces, file systems, and code. In general, this blog post effectively summarized Liu’s argument that writing is an active process of world-making rather than a passive apparatus. It made me realize that even such a small digital movement, such as tagging, formating, or encoding something, is part of that exact same long tradition of how human beings have always written the world into being.