Explain why the notion that cultures can be distinguished as either ‘oral culture’ or ‘written culture’  is a mistaken understanding as to how culture works, according to Chamberlin and your reading of Courtney MacNeil’s article ‘Orality’.

The notion that cultures can be distinguished as either ‘oral culture’ or ‘written culture’ is a mistaken understanding as to how culture works, because it creates a dichotomy between two fundamental cultures throughout human history that are in essence, one in the same. The written culture abides by many of the same rules from the oral culture. Scripture evolved from orality and has many of its key principles and ideas associated with it. The same goes for oral culture in the sense that it contains ideas that predominantly belong to the written culture.

In If This Is Your Land, Where Are Your Stories?, Chamberlin suggests that the idea of written and oral culture “divide(s) the world into Them and Us” (8). He writes about the conflict that this brought in history, and how people created their own communities based on how they communicated with each other. The conflict that struck me “had to do with the babbling barbarians and the written languages of civilized people” (Chamberlin 18). Chamberlin attacks the idea that oral and written cultures are different, and claims that it “encourages people to treat other societies with a blend of condescension and contempt” (Chamberlin 19). Chamberlin argues that written and oral cultures are intertwined with each other, since many oral cultures are “rich in forms of writing” (20), and the trademark institutions that form our written cultures are “arenas strictly defined and highly formalized oral traditions” (Chamberlin 20). Without orality, scripture would not exist. As Chamberlin also points out, “Just as we learn how to read, so we learn how to listen” (Chamberlin 21).

Chamberlin brings the reader’s attention to an Italian pun on “traduttore and traditore. The first means “translator”; the second “traitor”. (Chamberlin 14). I am thankful that this custom is not followed by our society today because even though I am not able to understand the oral culture of this beautiful composition, I am able to read the translation and intertwine both components of oral and written into one culture.

After I fully grasped Chamberlin’s message about the danger that a distinction between oral and written culture presents to our society, I was reminded of a book I read titled The Acoustic World of Early Modern England: Attending to the O-Factor, written by Bruce R. Smith. In the first chapter, Smith explains to the reader that orality can be a “sensory experience” (Smith 6). He argues that speaking is a physical act, because it requires a listener and once a word is spoken, the “Thereness of sound becomes the Hereness of sound in the ear of the reciever” (Smith 8). This physical idea of oral culture makes me think that it is similar to the physical tool of written culture that is used when an individual transfers their own sound (the private words in our brain) to a another platform (physically writing our thoughts on paper or on the computer).

In the article titled “Orality”, Courtney MacNeil agrees that oral culture and written culture should not be distinct from one another. She argues that both are a means of communication and that “oral and textual society need not be viewed from a hierarchical perspective” (MacNeil). The main reason she believes that these two cultures are intertwined is due to the influence of the internet, as well as our society’s immersion into the “multi media world” (MacNeil). She cites Walter J.Ong’s definition of orality and his distinction between primary and secondary orality. She concludes her article by stating that “the study of orality must recognize all means of communication” (MacNeil). Oral culture and written culture both communicate messages in a fashion that is paramount to our history and future, and thus should be recognized as one in the same.

Works Cited

Chamberlin, J. Edward. If This Is Your Land, Where Are Your Stories? Finding Common Ground. Vintage Canada. Toronto. 2004. Print.

MacNeil, Courtney. “Orality”. The School of Media Theory. The University of Chicago, 2007. Web. 15 Jan, 2015.

Ong, Walter. Orality and Literacy. Routledge. New York. 1982. Print.

Smith, R.Bruce. The Acoustic World of Early Modern England: Attending to the O-Factor. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. 1999. Print.