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.

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?

I think it shows awareness on a few levels. First there's the self-awareness, that feeling that our lives are important enough (whether or not they actually are) to make note of. Then also, it seems to indicate an awareness that history contains lessons that are applicable to other lives, even if the lessons inherent are most applicable allegoricaly. There are tiers to that second level. Because I think to realize what has happened in the here and now might be important to people of the future involves a recognition that we have learned from the past, or realize that had we "known this" things could have been different or better. Apart from that, there are elements of caring--caring that someone knows we were here, but even more, caring that what we learned now, can someday help strangers.

Is this more important than leaving buildings, or art?

I don't know. I am more comfortable accepting that they're different from each other. What do you think?

Architecture serves an immediate purpose. It's shelter. At its most base level, the crucial elements of a building's design are matters of function. But at some point, when it meets all the physical needs it can, it drifts into the land of convenience. I see that drift as a cultural advance. There is recognition of an extra that's awful nice to have, and may free up some resource (time, money, whatever) such that I can devote it to whatever else.

At another level, design is also art. All of these elements (elements of function, of convenience (above basic function--I don't have the vocabulary for this, I think), and of art) are important. They just are each important to different parts of me. If my basic physical needs are not being met, convenience and pleasure aren't even an issue for me. But once they are met, the parts of me that need convenience and pleasure wake up, or something.

Art as a whole, to me, is an emotional record, if that makes any sense. On the part of the artist, it's the I-thought-of/I-saw/ I-want/I-love/I-hate/I-dream THIS. And I want people to know it, or at least, I need to tell it in this medium. On the part of the consumer, it involves a willingness to let something exert influence over us.