I don't have time to read the article right now, b/c I'm headed out the door, but I have the post bookmarked. On the subject of depression in that article, though, Andrew Solomon is the author of The Noonday Demon, a hugeass book about depression, including his own. (Which the article might say, making my know-it-all-ness redundant.) So, despite not having read the article yet, I'm not surprised that topic is touched on.

Having a written language is one of the things that marks us as an advanced society. Historicly it's an indication of a culture's advancement.

I haven't read the article yet, so just commenting on the snippet -- walking upright marks us as somewhat unique, and I'll be damned if you catch me doing that for fun. I do it when I need to, to enable the other things that are needed/fun. Other people actually like it, and I think they're weird.

Maybe reading's like that for others.

I am always very iffy when people equate technology with "advanced" culture. Like culture has any forward motion. (For this discussion, I will posit writing as a technology, since it requires invention and application in addition to tools.)

Is singing a song any less advanced, culturally-speaking, than recording the same song?

Is singing a song any less advanced, culturally-speaking, than recording the same song?

Yes, but it is probably not much more culturally advanced than performing a song. I allow for a little more advancement, because to me, the idea to hear something that has already been said (sung, played), and/or to allow someone to hear something you've already said—to keep and exact record, and elevate it beyond memory—seems somehow more advanced.

Actually, I take back that "not much more" or offer it more hesitantly, and I think the same is true for writing something down, as opposed to just speaking it. To give words the kind of import, such that they merit saving them seems a cultural advance. I don't know how I'd qualify it though, because I am way over my head in this discussion.

To give words the kind of import, such that they merit saving them seems a cultural advance.

Oral history saves too. To give words the kind of import, such that they merit remembering them.

And they've discovered that oral history is usually incredibly accurate and often the story remains the same for hundreds of years.

Ironicly, I'm a pretty bad writer. It takes me a good while to write anything more than a brief sentance for the board, which is why I've been lurking for awhile now.

I guess maybe what I was trying to say was that a society with written language can pass on more to the future even if those who wrote it are gone. I think oral tradition is facinating, but we don't know as much about ancient people who used it exclusivly. I'm reading a book about celtic spirituality, specificaly celtic christianity (awesome stuff), and according to the author we don't know many details of pre-christian celts and druids worship rituals because it was all done through oral tradition. Written language insures a society will have an impact in our world now, even though we are largely disconnected from our past.

(edited so it would make more sense sorta)

Oral history saves too. To give words the kind of import, such that they merit remembering them.

Oh, yes. Excellent point. The desires and attempts to preserve history (in any form) is the crucial leap, isn't it?

Oral history saves too. To give words the kind of import, such that they merit remembering them.

Oh, yes. Excellent point. The desires and attempts to preserve history (in any form) is the crucial leap, isn't it?

The only thing is that oral history is so fragile... in just one generation of imposed silence -- takeover and oppressive rule by another culture, genocide, even something like a catastrophic flood or earthquake that wipes out a region -- it can be gone, forever. Written history gets saved, squirreled away, copied, reprinted, sometimes entirely forgotten but still there, available for rediscovery.

I'm not saying that oral history isn't better for us -- but is it a sign of an advanced culture to want to represent itself verbally after its own death? Why? Is this more important than leaving buildings, or art?

A good pillaging genocide can wipe written records out too, or a flash flood if they're on papyrus or unfired clay. Or you could always burn the pages to stay warm.