Thoughts on Ong & CMC

As I waded through the pages of Ong, I pulled out two pieces of information that correspond to what we have been discussing in reference to CMC.

CMC and the “heavy figure”
Ong emphasizes that oral memory preserves the status of characters who do great things and are “memorable” and “monumental” in every way (1982, p. 70). But with written culture, and specifially in our age of technology and communication, anyone can make themselves an important character in their own story. “The heroic and marvelous had served a specifice function on organizing knowledge in an oral world. With the control of information and memory brought about by writing and, more intensely, by print, you do not need a hero in the old sense to mobilize knowledge in story form” (pp. 70-71).

If we can construct our personality online, we can certianly make ourself as heroic as we want to be. Examples of this can been seen on social networking sites, blogs, and web pages. Fifteen miutes of fame can last for an eternity on the Internet.

Groups – oral culture and beyond
The Verbomotor Lifestyle, Ong tells, is focused on oral communication and words. He says that these are the characteristics that bring people together, not the written word. “Oral communication unites people in groups. Writing and reading are solitary activities that throw the psyche back on itself” (p. 69). He goes on to say that teachers and students working in a class together, speaking, are much closer than those who work alone reading (p. 69).

This made me also reflect on the question we were asked in last week’s module. Are we closer through CMC than compared to communication in a traditional F2F classroom? Ong would argue that speaking F2F brings people together because oral communication unites. If we add sound to our blackboard discussions, rather than relying solely on seeing the written word, do you agree with Ong that this may add to the experience (p. 72)?