Question Posed:
Explain why the notion that cultures can be distinguished as either “oral culture” or “written culture” (19) is a mistaken understanding as to how culture works, according to Chamberlin and your reading of Courtney MacNeil’s article “Orality.
‘Oral’ and ‘written’ are two examples of poor categorization in regards to culture, as this classification oversimplifies and ignores its own biases. In J. Edward Chamberlin’s novel If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories? he states: “We are, all of us, much more involved in both oral and written traditions than we might think. And our stories and songs draw on the resources of both” (Chamberlin 20). Chamberlin demonstrates throughout chapter one that the over simplification of defining primitive cultures as ‘oral’ and modern, sophisticated, scientific cultures as ‘written’ “encourages people to treat other societies with a blend of condescension and contempt while celebrating the sophistication of their own” (Chamberlin 19). As explained by Chamberlin, the history of each respective group of people and is not determined by whether or not they literally wrote down their history (Chamberlin 20), but by the simple existence of said history. As Chamberlin is quoted in Courtney MacNeil’s article: “Speech and writing are so entangled with each other in our various forms and performance of language” (MacNeil). Therefore, the separation of the oral and the written creates a misunderstanding in every culture’s respective story.
“This is not to suggest, of course, that we relegate orality to a culturally-specific or regionalized realm. It is worth remembering that to this day, the majority of the world’s inhabitants use orality as their primary communicative medium” (MacNeil). Therefore, it would be wrong to say: ‘because a culture maintains its’ historic records by an ‘oral’ means, that it is less legitimate’. If we look at our primary mode of communication today, we still use speech—not writing—and yet we do not find our history with those around us ‘illegitimate’. “Ultimately, the divide between oral and written history is a misconception. Writing and orality do not exclude each other; rather they are complementary” (Hanson).
In regards to the Aboriginal peoples in Canada, undermining their oral traditions and claiming that because their stories are not written down that they have no legitimacy is a primitive understanding of culture. Aboriginals have just as much history as any other culture, they have just done their record keeping differently to the majority. Therefore in this course it is imperative to remember that ‘oral’ and ‘written’ are not binary to each other but that they are intertwined–even if our ancestors did not view it that way. If we comes at the texts in our Canadian Literature Studies arguing for the legitimacy of orality over written, we lose the stories of those whose cultures write them down. Therefore, we must keep an open and modern approach to documenting history, and notice the times in our past where this was not the case.
Bibliography:
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. https://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/mediatheory/keywords/orality/
Hanson, Erin. “Oral Traditions.” Oral Traditions. First Nations Studies Program UBC, n.d. Web. 14 Jan. 2015. <http://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/home/culture/oral-traditions.html>.
Walbert, Kathryn. “The Value of Oral History.” The Value of Oral History. UNC School of Education, n.d. Web. 14 Jan. 2015.<http://www.learnnc.org/lp/pages/762>.
Hi Susie, I am passing a wonderful afternoon reading our blogs and following links. You have provided some good links and a good answer to my question. Thank you. One of the wonderful elements of working online is that you can go back and correct typos and small errors that you did not see while composing, and even better, I do not stop to evaluate your blogs until mid-term, so you have the opportunity to make these corrections before “official evaluuation” occurs. I will write more about this on my Instructors blog later today. Thank you.
Thank you Dr. Paterson! I had a little read through and found some of the mistakes… this is what happens when you stare at a computer screen for too long reading your own writing ahah! Cheers 😀
Hi Susie,
I really enjoyed reading your thoughts about the orality and written histories and what makes these terms seem so vague. I agree that whether a culture writes down or speaks about their past does not makes one better or more legitimate that the other, rather they both are used as tools to tell the present, and future generation, what occurred in the past. I also like your hyperlink to “The Value of Oral History” and it shows how oral history is just as important as that of a written one. From reading Chamerlin’s thoughts on the importance of oral culture, I also came to think about Homer’s “The Iliad” which from high school, has been demonstrated as a story passed down through speech. Many of us use this text in essays and read it in many different classes, and believe it to express history of what the Greek culture believed in (such as the array of Gods and certain rituals). Is if because this text has been translated and written down that it becomes more legitimate compared to the Native oral stories of their history? Oral and written history are complementary, as each give an account of history, but more important of the people.
Hey Alexandra,
I think your observance on a ‘written down’ oral history -such as “The Iliad” or “The Odyssey” or “The Aeneid” – becoming more legitimate once it has been printed is an excellence one to make. I think it speaks highly towards what our culture approves as a necessary form of documentation as the ancient oral tradition is no longer practiced. In another sense though, the fact that we still talk about the stories, read them aloud, and can give oral summaries (I would point out), in some way, keeps their oral roots alive!
Great feedback and I look forward to chatting with you!
Hi Susie,
Great thoughts so far! I’m loving your writing style – very approachable and informative.
I loved your point: “Therefore in this course it is imperative to remember that ‘oral’ and ‘written’ are not binary to each other but that they are intertwined–even if our ancestors did not view it that way.” I recently studied Beowulf and learned about its oral history, as well as many of the Greek and Roman myths. The reason that Hercules’ trials change number, order and substance is because of it’s oral history. While I agree that they are both important to culture, especially when learning about new cultures, do you think that the oral history can inhibit reliability? Not within the listener and the story, but between people who have heard two versions of the same story? You and I (presumably) both read the same Chamberlin, so we are able to speak about the book with a common ground of understanding. But what were to happen if one of my chapters was missing, or maybe not explained as well because the editor of my book didn’t like that part, or didn’t understand that part, or simply forgot how it related to the rest and kind of glazed over it? We would interact and realize that we both had this book in common, but two very different experiences because they actually were two different stories. I love the performative side that comes with oral history, and I value the truth found in elders, but the inconsistencies would make me nuts haha.
Hope you’re enjoying the class so far 🙂
Caitlin Funk
Hey Caitlin!
Thank you for your thoughts – I really enjoyed reading your comment! The question you asked made me think of the game “telephone” and how often that tends to not work out for the better haha! An off-shoot of your point that came to my mind was if two people experiencing the same story are told slightly different versions, or pick up on different things and then re-tell it and it changes.. is any part of history’s story reliable… and if so, how does that affect this course!? :O I think that it ties into the assignment for this Monday… if the basic ‘moral’ of the story is the same… does it really matter what version you get?
I may be going a little extreme here.. but hey- it sparks lively conversation and more examples!
Look forward to chatting with you!
Susie