1. Ong uses the term interactive several times in the reading in discussing the crucial difference between chirographic/typographic media and orally based media. Given the growth of so-called interactivity on the web, the blogosphere, do you believe his statements are still relevant on this point? Do they need some qualification?
I think when he used the term “interactive”, he did not mean that the audience was truly interacting with the speaker. That is, the listener did not affect the orator’s performance in an appreciable way…whether in content or style. However, the orator’s performance may be considered interactive for the listener in the sense that multiple senses are used to internalize the subject matter. The orator not only used his voice, but certainly used body language as well. Additionally, there would have been voice inflection to provide audible cues to listener.
Actually, on further reflection I suppose one the arguments against literacy was that the written word can not be asked questions. So that is probably the most significant example of interactivity in a primary oral society.
Today’s “interactivity”, while sometimes incorporating senses other than sight, is more often about directing the content in some way. Blogs, “web 2.0″ sites, and wikis all rely strongly on community to both discuss and contribute content. This would be almost unheard of in an oral tradition as orators are often specifically trained (through repetitive listening, mnemonics, and other techniques) to recite that which was imparted to them orally. Yes there is an essence of individualism presented as well…but the basic gist remains the same.
2. Ong calls computing an outgrouth of writing. How has computing changed the consciousness in your field? What has been lost? In most cases there are those who’s crafts cease to be useful (printers, spot retouchers, typesetters, etc). But have the psychodynamics of your field changed? How?
This is a difficult question to answer, because as a web application developer my “field” is directly related to computers! However, I would say that the basic nature of digital computing, and the technologies that exist on top of it are constantly evolving. Like the languages Ong references that may have once existed but were incorporated into other languages, programming languages tend to evolve as performance and bandwidth improves, and application platforms fade (remember ATG’s Dynamo?) as better solutions come to market.
Post a Comment