I was just reviewing some of Ong's book and I got hung up on a passage yet again. Ong states that, "There was no use denying the now known fact that the Homeric poems valued and somehow made capital of what later readers had been trained in principle to disvalue, anamely, the set phrase, the formula, the expected qualifier - to put it more bluntly, the cliche" (23). I find this statement n accurate critique of modern literature study as well as confusing in terms of popular culture.
For starters, how is it that music is elevated for it's "catchiness" and "cliche" while literature is broken-down for it's utilizaton of similar devices? Are literary persons just supposed to be more inventive than to use what affects the reader? Doesn't the absence of easily accessible terms to the ear of the reader distance author from audience?
I have the sinking suspicion that if we really examine every work, since they are all rehashings of older works, that everything could be called a cliche. I can appreciate that as literature students we should push the bounds and scope of the literature we read, but the fact that we still much work inside a system reveals a very Derridian conclusion: nothing is every truly outside the system and specifically the works that profess to do so. Therefore, I have determined that cliche is nothing if not essential to all human communication and especially communtication which relates memory. Instead of diminishing cliche devices or phrasing, I personally think there should be some oppurtunity to study the cliche. Every colloquialism, every introduction or epithet can be interpretted as cliche, and I believe that it is through this seemingly universal relatability that communication is even possible. If we didn't have anchors to the world and some form of collective unconscious (i.e. brains that functioned similarly while interpreting) it would impossible to relate to eachother. Cliche seems to tell us more of the foundations or first (historically as well as in terms of conversation starting) thoughts which humans function on to communicate.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Monday, April 9, 2012
Group Presentation: MAPS
The idea behind our project, atleast in my mind, was to not only relay information from the chapter but to give you guys possible representations of the story. This class has made me realize that as humans we are constantly trying to gain understanding of the world around us, but the process of relating our findings and interpretations of our understanding are extremely difficult given our limited resources. These tools of communication are speech, art, and literature and as the various material for the our course have demonstrated they often fall short. To reiterate my favorite passage from Ong, words are always symbolic of a larger picture that they can never fully express.
The chapter of Maps is important in that it highlights several elements of myth telling which attempt to help shorten the gaps between humans as conscious beings bent on answer finding and the world we live in. It seems strange to me that the main pursuit of knowledge is to essentially make the universe seem smaller. However, this chapter highlights, in my mind, the notion that our seeming predispotion toward problem solving creates more issues that need further interpretation. For instance, my section on the wisdom of plants gives explaination for the seasons and some of the various problems that arise in agrarian society. These mythological theories for existence combine elements of the physical world with elements of religion or that of a vague, alternative consciousness. Since there is no definite proof in regards to the other side of consciousness (death, god's grand design) various people's have created characters to interpret this alternate reality such as the crow who can transverse the boundaries between worlds.
It seems strange that by mapping the universe people invariably create, and instead of filling in space cultures invariably create more blank space that needs filled in with more stories. In the oral tradition, with a lack of physical evidence or concrete preservation, the emphasis is not on the literal interpretation of the universe but what one might call the consciousness of the human experience. Mapping is representative of but not specifically dependant on actuality.
The chapter of Maps is important in that it highlights several elements of myth telling which attempt to help shorten the gaps between humans as conscious beings bent on answer finding and the world we live in. It seems strange to me that the main pursuit of knowledge is to essentially make the universe seem smaller. However, this chapter highlights, in my mind, the notion that our seeming predispotion toward problem solving creates more issues that need further interpretation. For instance, my section on the wisdom of plants gives explaination for the seasons and some of the various problems that arise in agrarian society. These mythological theories for existence combine elements of the physical world with elements of religion or that of a vague, alternative consciousness. Since there is no definite proof in regards to the other side of consciousness (death, god's grand design) various people's have created characters to interpret this alternate reality such as the crow who can transverse the boundaries between worlds.
It seems strange that by mapping the universe people invariably create, and instead of filling in space cultures invariably create more blank space that needs filled in with more stories. In the oral tradition, with a lack of physical evidence or concrete preservation, the emphasis is not on the literal interpretation of the universe but what one might call the consciousness of the human experience. Mapping is representative of but not specifically dependant on actuality.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Hamlet Production
This post is reserved for my experience acting this semester in a group production of Hamlet for my Shakespeare Lit class.
I will discuss line memorization, public speaking, actor to actor repsonse, as well as character developement. All of this will center around information from this class and how the memory techniques we discussed have impacted this project.
A quick note: it is interesting that in this class we speak so much about remembering words but not movements.
The most important thing I learned from this production was that memorizing lines is just like constructing a musey-room. But, instead of having to imagine all the props in your head, you get to build them and put them in your hands or within eye sight. I found that the stage directions and set for each scene had a huge impact on my ability to remember my lines. Interestingly, in the absence of props I had to imagine them in order to remember some lines, and in other instances I had to have the previous characters line in order to remember my next line.
While I was impressed with my ability to remember everything in the play, I find it problematic that there existed a rigid structure or sequence that was necessary for my memory to function effectively. I further endeavor to examine if this is a commonality in memory or if there is a more flexible strategy for memorization.
I will discuss line memorization, public speaking, actor to actor repsonse, as well as character developement. All of this will center around information from this class and how the memory techniques we discussed have impacted this project.
A quick note: it is interesting that in this class we speak so much about remembering words but not movements.
The most important thing I learned from this production was that memorizing lines is just like constructing a musey-room. But, instead of having to imagine all the props in your head, you get to build them and put them in your hands or within eye sight. I found that the stage directions and set for each scene had a huge impact on my ability to remember my lines. Interestingly, in the absence of props I had to imagine them in order to remember some lines, and in other instances I had to have the previous characters line in order to remember my next line.
While I was impressed with my ability to remember everything in the play, I find it problematic that there existed a rigid structure or sequence that was necessary for my memory to function effectively. I further endeavor to examine if this is a commonality in memory or if there is a more flexible strategy for memorization.
traumatic events
I am going to come back and fix all these posts up in the next week or so, but I figured it would be a good idea to get some ideas down first.
We were talking in class about how retelling stories that are painful can diminish the power those memories hold over us. I got hit by a car when I was 15 but it still seems like I get into a funk after everytime I think about it. Sure, the memory is not as harsh as it used to be, but I couldn't say if that is a product of exposure or simply a result of the increasing distance between now and then. I got hit while walking by a car going 35-40 mph and I darn near had panic attachs for about 5 years afterward when trying to cross the street. I have always thought that by having a memory that could elicite such a physical response was a good thing because it lessened the distance between the brains ability to percieve information, mentally project images (memories), and physically respond. Sort of a classical conditioning inducing higher function and shortened reaction-recall. Basically, I would like to find that instant where I realized I was going to get hit with actually knowing it or being hit and tune that in.
We were talking in class about how retelling stories that are painful can diminish the power those memories hold over us. I got hit by a car when I was 15 but it still seems like I get into a funk after everytime I think about it. Sure, the memory is not as harsh as it used to be, but I couldn't say if that is a product of exposure or simply a result of the increasing distance between now and then. I got hit while walking by a car going 35-40 mph and I darn near had panic attachs for about 5 years afterward when trying to cross the street. I have always thought that by having a memory that could elicite such a physical response was a good thing because it lessened the distance between the brains ability to percieve information, mentally project images (memories), and physically respond. Sort of a classical conditioning inducing higher function and shortened reaction-recall. Basically, I would like to find that instant where I realized I was going to get hit with actually knowing it or being hit and tune that in.
Words: fall short vs. speak volumes
I have been thinking a lot about the Ong quotes I have found so far, and the one that seems to stick in my mind the best is:
"Spoken words are always modifications of a total situation which is more than verbal."
This quote gets my mind racing. I start thinking about foreign languages and how there are some aspects of culture that can't transcend language. I start thinking about mentally picturing directions as people give them to me. But, I also think about the comparison of spoken language and written language visualization.
Last Friday we were discussing how kids acquire langauge skills (well... a little bit, I was thinking about and visualizing my childhood more than anything). When I was 3 I had everyone in my family convinced I could read for about a day or so. It was because of one book by a Dr. Seuss called Hop on Pop. I had had people read it to me so often that I had memorized every word page by page, and since the drawings were depicting the words I had easy cues for recollection. It took a while but I eventually messed up and was found out. I find it funny in retrospect that everyone seemed so disappointed that I hadn't actually learned how to read when they could have been equally as impressed that I could memorize all that material.
I still remember a Shel Silverstein poem I had to memorize in 3rd grade too:
"My mother said if just once more
she'd hear me slam that old screen-door,
She'd tear out her hair she'd dive in the stove,
I shut the door and in she dove."
"Spoken words are always modifications of a total situation which is more than verbal."
This quote gets my mind racing. I start thinking about foreign languages and how there are some aspects of culture that can't transcend language. I start thinking about mentally picturing directions as people give them to me. But, I also think about the comparison of spoken language and written language visualization.
Last Friday we were discussing how kids acquire langauge skills (well... a little bit, I was thinking about and visualizing my childhood more than anything). When I was 3 I had everyone in my family convinced I could read for about a day or so. It was because of one book by a Dr. Seuss called Hop on Pop. I had had people read it to me so often that I had memorized every word page by page, and since the drawings were depicting the words I had easy cues for recollection. It took a while but I eventually messed up and was found out. I find it funny in retrospect that everyone seemed so disappointed that I hadn't actually learned how to read when they could have been equally as impressed that I could memorize all that material.
I still remember a Shel Silverstein poem I had to memorize in 3rd grade too:
"My mother said if just once more
she'd hear me slam that old screen-door,
She'd tear out her hair she'd dive in the stove,
I shut the door and in she dove."
Friday, March 30, 2012
line for line
Ong:
"When, however, (singers') purported verbatim renditions are recorded and compared, they turn out to be never the same, though the songs are recognizable versions of the same story. 'Word for word and line for line', as Lord interprets, is simply an emphatic way of saying 'like'. 'Line' is obviously a text-based concept, and even the concept of a 'word' as a discrete entity apart from a flow of speech seems somewhat text-based" (60).
As someone who sings often, I find it incredible how much I can remember but equally important to realize how each performance changes. The lines are never exactly the same, and the best I can do is to try to interpret for an audience the emotion or message of a song. This message, however, seems to change from performance to performance too depending on what I am feeling. It becomes a sort of reminiscient interpretation of conrete lines mixed with how I feel that day and therefore how those lines make me feel at the moment I sing them. For instance, if I am upset because I just lost my job I might deliver some lines more agressively or hang some notes longer than usual. I have always considered music as therapy. It allows me the unique oppurtunity to let an audience know how I feel without saying any actual words that I would usually use. Like, instead of saying I feel upset about a particular relationship issue I am having, I would say I am having said problem, but I might play some passionate songs about women who screwed over the protagonist of the song.
"When, however, (singers') purported verbatim renditions are recorded and compared, they turn out to be never the same, though the songs are recognizable versions of the same story. 'Word for word and line for line', as Lord interprets, is simply an emphatic way of saying 'like'. 'Line' is obviously a text-based concept, and even the concept of a 'word' as a discrete entity apart from a flow of speech seems somewhat text-based" (60).
As someone who sings often, I find it incredible how much I can remember but equally important to realize how each performance changes. The lines are never exactly the same, and the best I can do is to try to interpret for an audience the emotion or message of a song. This message, however, seems to change from performance to performance too depending on what I am feeling. It becomes a sort of reminiscient interpretation of conrete lines mixed with how I feel that day and therefore how those lines make me feel at the moment I sing them. For instance, if I am upset because I just lost my job I might deliver some lines more agressively or hang some notes longer than usual. I have always considered music as therapy. It allows me the unique oppurtunity to let an audience know how I feel without saying any actual words that I would usually use. Like, instead of saying I feel upset about a particular relationship issue I am having, I would say I am having said problem, but I might play some passionate songs about women who screwed over the protagonist of the song.
Derrida
Ong quote:
"Jacques Derrida has made the point that 'there is no linguistic sign before writing'. But neither is there linguistic 'sign' after writing if the oral reference of the written text is adverted to. Though it releases unheard-of potentials of the word, a textual, visual representation of a word is not a real word, but a 'secondary modeling system'. Thought is nested in speech, not in texts, all of which have their meanings through reference of the visible symbol to the world of sound. What the reader is seeing on this page are not real words but coded symbols whereby a properly informed human being can evoke in his or her consciousness real words, in actual or imagined sound. It is impossible for script to be more than marks on a surface unless it is used by a conscious human being as a cue to sounded words, real or imagined, directly or indirectly" (74-5).
"Jacques Derrida has made the point that 'there is no linguistic sign before writing'. But neither is there linguistic 'sign' after writing if the oral reference of the written text is adverted to. Though it releases unheard-of potentials of the word, a textual, visual representation of a word is not a real word, but a 'secondary modeling system'. Thought is nested in speech, not in texts, all of which have their meanings through reference of the visible symbol to the world of sound. What the reader is seeing on this page are not real words but coded symbols whereby a properly informed human being can evoke in his or her consciousness real words, in actual or imagined sound. It is impossible for script to be more than marks on a surface unless it is used by a conscious human being as a cue to sounded words, real or imagined, directly or indirectly" (74-5).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)