The Power Of Writing: Impact On Human Consciousness And Thought

1. What is mediated by Web 2.0 is less the content that users upload than the sheer connectivity that is afforded by that act of uploading content’ (Hansen 2010, p.180). Discuss.

2. Do you agree with Walter J. Ong that writing has transformed human consciousness more than any other communication technology?

3. For what reasons do some authors place so much importance on the preservative powers of print?

4.‘Digital imaging has clarified […] the fluidity of truth’ (Newton 2007, p.13). Discuss.

5.Do you agree with Romanyshyn (1989) that the photograph has come to displace the world, and now takes on the character of what is true and what is real?

6.In what ways does the mass reproduction of an image or sound affect the audience and their understanding of authenticity?

7. Do you agree with Mark Poster (2001) that hypertext is the paradigm of the digital author? 

The Emergence of Writing as a Cultural Agency

The concept of writing is one that has undergone remarkable changes in the intelligentsia of the Western countries in the past few decades. Due to the theories introduced by deconstructive critics like Derrida or that of Walter J. Ong, writing is no longer regarded simply as a substitute for oral speech. As a matter of fact, writing is not merely for the purpose or transmission or preservation of knowledge. On the other hand, writing has emerged as a cultural agency which is both powerful and penetrative. I agree with Walter J. Ong’s viewpoint that writing would restructure the human consciousness. Like Ong, I believe that literacy in human beings is not innate. Every human being acquires knowledge as part of a learning process (Ong and Hartley 2013). There is a clear demarcation between conceiving an idea and writing it down. Writing is indeed a technology that has revolutionized the field of communication. In this essay, I will be discussing that the written language has a direct impact on the mentality of an individual, transforming and restructuring his thought process in the long run. 

According to Walter J. Ong, writing has completely altered the way human beings perceive and think. However, Greenber (2014) argues that writing is not that important, as far as the human consciousness is concerned. This may be said to be in compliance with Plato’s theory. Plato had claimed that writing could potentially destroy the memory of a person. One must agree with Ong who says that a thought can only be called valid if it has been written down. He opines, 

“Once reduced to space, words are frozen, and in a sense dead…removed from the living human life world, its rigid fixity, assures its endurance and its potential for being resurrected into limitless living contexts by a limitless number of living readers. The dead, thing like text has potentials far outdistancing those of the simply spoken word.”

He also argues that the process of writing is a kind of humanizing technology that develops human consciousness. I agree with Ong, who says that although human beings ignore the importance of writing in their day to day lives, writing happens to be the most potent of the three kinds of technologies that exist in the world. In fact, it is writing that initiated the advent of printing and other technologies like electronics (Haas 2013). His basic argument would be that the practice of writing down an idea would allow human beings to increasingly express more complex and intricate thoughts. The fact that something is written endows it with a very definite meaning (Pennington 2014). This enables human beings to communicate through utterances, which would be impossible through graphic images or oral speech. Essentially speaking, the process of writing would help in altering the mentality and consciousness of an individual. This is because in the case of oral speech, the person would not actually be able to visualize or view the language he or she is speaking. On the other hand, by writing it down, the person would be concretizing his point of view in paper. 

Writing and Human Consciousness

First and foremost, it is important to differentiate between people using written word and those who rely on oral speech. According to Berger and Iyenger (2013), there is a common tendency to view the process of writing as mechanical. However, that is untrue because writing demands a more complex thought process that can be equated with technology, not mechanical skills. The way writing affects the human thought and consciousness is quite simple. The mind of a person can grasp truth only when it is presented in its entirety. When words are spoken, they lack depth and wholesomeness, which can make them seem false. However, when a person writes something down, words cease to be simply a sequence of myriad sounds. It makes the person feel that the idea or the concept he or she is writing about is real. Moreover, it must be remembered that oral speech is ethereal or temporary in nature. Thus, spoken words would not be available for analysis or scrutiny in the future. On the other hand, as Tinnel (2015) argues, writing would help a person remember better, contrary to the statements made by Plato. The written word offers more scope for analysis and critique because it is supported in a carefully monitored, conscious process (Kellogg et al. 2013). 

According to Grabe and Kaplan (2014), Plato was of the opinion that writing is negative and artificial and something that can easily be manipulated. He also claimed that the process of writing was unresponsive because it reduces scope for discussion, which was possible in the case of oral discussions. Plato also said that technology and the written word were potentially dangerous. This is primarily because once a truth has been expressed through these modes of communication, it is set in stone and cannot be erased, while oral speech is more transient in nature. He was of the opinion that the practice of writing down would make a person heavily dependent on it, thus weakening his memory. However, as Ong argues, cultures and the people belonging to these cultures are argumentative by nature. They have an inborn desire to defend their own perspectives. It must be admitted that the oral word cannot defend itself the way writings can. Oral speech would involve the practice of offering an argument or personalized opinion, without the need for elaboration or explanations. On the contrary, Bereiter and Scardamalia (2013) argue that the written word would allow an individual to support his or her argument and opinion with evidence and more rhetoric analysis. Ironically enough, it was the written word that allowed Plato’s discourse to be spread out far and wide, affecting the minds of millions across the globe. Ever since then, the process of writing has grown to be an intrinsic aspect of all human beings, which helps to further expression and thought. In other words, men and women tend to take the written word for granted.

Writing Vs Oral Speech

According to Ong, writing alters the human consciousness in such a way that it essentially becomes a part of one’s self and identity (Smith 2017). The technology of writing is so pervasive that it has become completely interiorized in the minds of people. A person who is accustomed to the process of writing would be provoked to imagine the letters and other elements of the written word while thinking of a word. On the other hand, a person who is more used to oral speech would consider words to be merely a series of founds. In a way, the practice of writing would alter the perceptions of individuals. Ong has also highlighted the difference between reading and writing, with respect to the impact it has on grammar. It must be remembered that writing is not a natural process, whereas oral speech comes to human beings naturally. While speaking, he or she would not be thinking twice about syntax or sentence construction or grammar, which would come naturally. Yet, while writing, a person needs to think, which would help in honing his analytical and critical thinking skills (Gumperz and Cook-Gumperz 2013). For example, writing something down would enable the person to step back and detach themselves from the topic. This would help them analyze the concept from a third person perspective. However, it can also be argued that the written word would never truly be different from oral speech. This is because while reading a piece of writing, human beings tend to pronounce them verbally in their minds. 

It must also be asserted that writing or the art of writing is permanent, and is timeless. Since a piece of writing can never be extinct, it lives on through the readers. Each reader has his or her own thought process and analyzes the writing according to his or her perspective. As a result, writing may be endowed a variety of meanings, based on the signifiers. This process was best explained through Roland Barthes, who was of the opinion that through writing, an author expresses his own identity (Logie 2013). The writing, in a way, overpowers the identity or the consciousness of the writer. As language and writing take over, the author’s voice ceases to exist. More than oral speech, writing gives voice to the thoughts or emotions that a person experiences. In fact, unconscious thoughts, which a person did not know existed, may also surface through written language. Thus, to claim that writing is artificial as Plato did, would be wrong. On the contrary, writing may be deemed more real than oral communication. It allows a person to work on his or her original thought and analyze it from an objective point of view. In short, writing would enlarge the human spirit, reconstruct the thought process, enrich human psyche and intensify the interior life of a person.

To conclude, it can be said that writing as a process would certainly have an impact on human thought and consciousness. I believe that writing is directly associated with the way human beings think and perceive things around them. Although oral speech comes to humans naturally, writing would help them enhance their memory. Moreover, writing something down has a lasting impression on the human mind, whereas oral speech is fleeting or temporary. Thus, Walter J. Ong’s claim that the technology of writing alters human thought is true. Writing also gives the inner life of human beings a concrete voice. 

References

Bereiter, C. and Scardamalia, M., 2013. The psychology of written composition. Routledge, pp. 22-50.

Berger, J. and Iyengar, R., 2013. Communication channels and word of mouth: How the medium shapes the message. Journal of consumer research, 40(3), pp.567-579.

Grabe, W. and Kaplan, R.B., 2014. Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. Routledge, p.84-113.

Greenberg, S., 2014. The ethics of narrative: A return to the source. Journalism, 15(5), pp.517-532.

Gumperz, J.J. and Cook-Gumperz, J., 2013. From Oral to Written Culture: The Transition: Literacy. In Writing (pp. 99-120). Routledge.

Haas, C., 2013. Writing Technology. 1st ed. Routledge, pp.22-105.

Kellogg, R.T., Whiteford, A.P., Turner, C.E., Cahill, M. and Mertens, A., 2013. Working memory in written composition: An evaluation of the 1996 model. Journal of Writing Research, 5(2), pp.159-190.

Logie, J., 2013. 1967: The Birth of" The Death of the Author". College English, 75(5), pp.493-512.

Ong, W. and Hartley, J., 2013. Orality and literacy. 30th ed. New York: Routledge, p.22.

Pennington, M., 2014. Trends in Writing and Technology. Writing & Pedagogy, 5(2), pp.155-179.

Smith, C., 2017. Rhetoric and human consciousness. Routledge, pp.50-125.

Tinnell, J., 2015. Grammatization: Bernard Stiegler's Theory of Writing and Technology. Computers and Composition, 37, pp.132-146.