May 2 — Übergang zur Schriftlichkeit

This week we continued our discussion of what communication is. We discussed the model in which communication consists of the sender (der Sender), the message (die Bodschaft), and the receiver (der Emfänger). The message can further be divided into three parts: medium, code, and context. Today we focused on medium and code, considering primarily the nature of oral communication.

The medium of oral communication is the voice (die Stimme), the body (der Körper), and memory (das Gedächtnis). When we speak of memory, there are two different types: communicative (kommunikative) and collaborative (kollaborative). Communicative memory is the direct experience of an individual, whereas collaborative memory is how we keep the communicative memory once the original experiencer is gone. Memories are kept alive in the collaborative memory through stories and rituals, which are repeated and structured. These are kept by teachers (Lehrer) and Shamens (Schamane) poets and minstrels; the narrators (Überlieferer). Thus, not everyone has to remember — certain people keep track of certain information. There are also momuments and sacred sites, whereby people remember events tied to certain places.

When discussing oral literature, it’s important to remember that there are always versions, but that’s actually what was good and expected. It is only in our era of print media that makes us think that we must have a final, correct version. Versions and variations always include repetitive, structured forms (Formeln). For example: fairy tales in German always start with “Es war einmal,” and the literature of Homer consists of recombined parts (like Legos!).

We transitioned to written memory by listening to das Lautgedicht. This was an example of how seeing something on paper changes our interpretation of it. If we see something written down, if we see a title and an author, and if someone tells us something is a poem, we are much more likely to consider it to be literature. This particular Lautgedicht as well as the poem Karawane were examples from the Dada movement of the early 20th century. These artists doubted everything including the nature of language itself. They were anti-structure and resisted being called a movement at all. They sought to push boundries and to find the source of language itself.

We finished the session by taking a look at the excerpt from Plato, and looking at the arguments for the value of writing/letters (die Schrift). The god claimed that having written language would help the people with memory and wisdom; the medium being an extension of the man. The king, however, replied that having writing would enable man to forget (vergessen), that writing would not really be the truth (nicht die Wahrheit), but reminiscence. In terms of memory, it would be collaborative, not communicative. The medium would be external, not internal knowledge — passive.