The decision to define culture as either oral or written, is great generalization. As both categories are branched down into sub categories, that are often contradictory to the other and depend entirely on the societies privileges. Which places the two form of cultures at odds. Courtney MacNeil, in their article “Orality” writes “The framing of orality as a “preference” or “tendency” encourages its place within the paragone of the printed and spoken word, and suggests a single-sensory conception of media – that orality exists in a dialectical relationship with literacy, and that communication is a competition between eye and ear.” (MacNeil,P.1)
It is this competitive understanding of culture, that creates what MacNeil, references to as “the notion of orality as a primitive or undeveloped medium.” (MacNeil, P.2) Which leads into a greater social bias, that lack to acknowledge the importance of both cultures, instead of a purely aesthetic viewing of “oral culture” which is seemed from a position of a privileged society. It furthers the academic understanding of trying to define the undefinable, through a rather prejudice lens.
As orality, is in direct connection with cultural knowledge, it is able to be manifested through out time and to overcome the barriers of media and communication. It provides a voice to those woh have experienced hardships and suppression, to express their stories, and call for reflection onto society. While written culture serves as a means of preserving these stories. The two cultures rely on each other to be able to preserve cultural heritage. As MacNeil point out, civilization began with orality, it serves as the primarily means of communication for humanity.
Perhaps a simpler means of understanding culture is to refer to J. Edward Chamberlin, who explains culture as stories. Which can be defined as either oral or written. Chamberlin, definition of stories as something which “give meaning and value to the places we call home,” and “they bring us close to the world we live in by taking us into the world of words” is not limited to a singular form of communication, and rather than looking for an analytical definition, it relies more so on the human experience. Chamberlin, does not set out to define culture, but rather by explaining stories, they subsequently define culture. As stories are a more flexible means of communication between human beings, they make it possible for a multitude of disciplines to be experienced.
Stories cross the social boundaries and bias, and allow for both social and individualistic understanding. Much like Chamberlin points out in his introduction, everyone understands stories, even if they do not understand the language that is used to dictate the tale. This is why there are such strong cultural ties to myths and history. These stories are understood, because of their morality, rather than the means they are communicated through.
Cultural preservation depends on both orality and writing, to survive and prosper. Which is perhaps why it is easier to understand culture through stories.
Chamberlin, Edward. If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories? Finding Common Ground. AA. Knopf. Toronto. 2003. Print.
Courtney MacNeil, “Orality.” The Chicago School of Media Theory. Uchicagoedublogs. 2007. Web. 19 Feb. 2013.http://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/mediatheory/keywords/orality/
Downs, Mary, and Sarah Lepinski. “Preserving the Cultural Heritage of the Ancient Near East and the Mediterranean World.” The National Endowment for the Humanities, 7 July 2015, www.neh.gov/divisions/preservation/featured-project/preserving-the-cultural-heritage-the-ancient-near-east-and-t.
Franchi, Elena. “What Is Cultural Heritage? (Article).” Khan Academy, 2015, www.khanacademy.org/humanities/special-topics-art-history/arches-at-risk-cultural-heritage-education-series/arches-beginners-guide/a/what-is-cultural-heritage.
National Geographic Society. “Storytelling and Cultural Traditions.” National Geographic Society, 24 Jan. 2020, www.nationalgeographic.org/article/storytelling-and-cultural-traditions.