(no subject)

[gothwalk]

Here's an interesting blog entry. Quoting one part: "The invention of the phonetic alphabet changed us from a primarily oral culture to a primarily literate culture (starting in ancient Greek times, and accelerated by Gutenberg). The effect of this transition was, among other things, to create private, silent reading (via books), hence private ideas and therefore personal identity and individuality." (The blogger in question doesn't state this, btw, it's a po statement from a class.)

That seems to imply that personal identity and individuality didn't exist before that. While one part of my mind is calling that nonsense, I'm wary of applying modern ideas to history - we have enough trouble these days thinking in a feudal model, let alone older forms. What do people - particularly the history buffs out there - think of the idea?

Comments

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

I'm with you on the nonsense thing, particualy the "changed us" idea of an unbroken linear progression from the ancient greeks to present day. The Babylonians had a written language, the Egyptians, numerous other cultures pre-dating the greeks, yet much of their culture might be linked in with what one would expect from an oral culture. There is also the matter that by depending on the written word, rather than having a rich oral history memorised to draw on, that culture loses a certain amount - the stuff is in the books but only if you go and read them. I think its more a matter of historians being so dependant on the written word they give it ultimate authority.
I think assuming people lacked individuality until they could escape into a book is ridiculous, particularly if you consider that until relatively modern times, only a small proportion of the population of (say) Britain, the US and Western Europe were actually literate.
Very easy to say "oh those poor primitive people living in olden times had no chance to explore who they were", rather harder to apply the same to peoples of only a few centuries ago.