Ways to Write

If you accept that the concept is an integral part of the sign, you know that the concept could be written. There's something I have already proposed, in the time I started asking about the ideogram (the number) and ideodrama (the ritual). Today I want to quickly complete the analysis I have proposed, started by telling a word of what we call the "pictogram?. I returned from Egypt, where you can admire the splendid "frescoes? and parietal adorning the pharaonic tombs. He speaks about this, "paintings? wall, which is, in my opinion, the most complete contradiction we can do about those amazing human productions. It is not painting (but "Art? With or without capital letters), but beautiful and a good way of writing. In other words, what they sought to represent, not the "object? perceived (thing or person), but the idea of ​​the thing, ie the concept. If you do not take into account this fundamental distinction between the object perceived and the conceived object (between the thing and the idea of ​​the thing), in other words, the difference between precept and concept can not reach to the junction between the painting (representation of the rule) and pictographs (representation of concept).

Look then! It is impossible to find! To be clear, I'll take an example which, however trivial it is (I hope you will forgive me) has less merit, I think, to talk to everyone. Well take those well-known pictograms in certain public places, say the bathrooms for ladies and men's bathroom. It is true that, technically, these pictographs have a certain relationship with painting. In both cases, we work the same type of signal: this is done on a support which may be identical (wood, paper, rock, wall, etc..), Even with the same tools, the same pigments, etc.. But there is one big difference: the painting is a direct signal of the object, the pictogram is signaling an idea of ​​the object. Can you tell the type of pictogram come to evoke, we should not confuse the silhouette of man with the woman. And they are right. I can answer this objection by saying that in any case, it is the precept and that every precept, is a concept. But when dealing with this question tonight, get a little further! Just imagine that in a restaurant, you ladies are sitting not far from the figure, suspended somewhere, the Comtesse du Barry represented "based on nature?, As we say.

You say: "There are the women's bathrooms!?. Surely not. Since they could not read the information. In other words, the painting is illegible. Why? Well, just because she is represented in three dimensions. The third dimension bothers as the dimension in which it is created, to use the vocabulary of telecommunications, the "noise?. That will never be the case the pictogram is intended to be read (even if you participate, brought on account of perceived natural objects), ie it is merely writing. That's what we can not understand the extent to which, for us, writing is reduced to logography, ie that privilege, in writing, is it modernization of its sound and its meaning associated with the sign (there's the reason that our writing is fonosemiográfica). Or, is a monumental mistake to reduce the appearance of writing she is when we, the Europeans of today, we wrote what we call letters. This reduction prevents us from seeing that, long before the Egyptians, that is, from the Paleolithic, the man wrote, is absolutely certain that the alleged "paintings? Lascaux cave were already writing the concept!

"We have not done better!? exclaimed Picasso, who was completely confused the nature of what we behold. Well, it is certain that Paleolithic man knew, but the Egyptians or Picasso, the third dimension. And the Egyptians backing, take the icons (which are Coptic or Byzantine), is always writing! The iconography laughs a lot to try to see if their representations are "similar?. Sure, because it is writing to him, and shoot a portrait of the Virgin Mary! He asked if the figure of King David in the window of the cathedral of Chartres is similar. The portrait, in revenge, is the painting, ie no direct representation, without the mediation of the sign. At that, the picture very well what it replaces, from the Renaissance to the early twentieth century, we will call "Fine Arts?, To the extent that appropriated the aesthetic concern, even the empirical view, namely the similarity . But that does not mean that, technically, the aesthetic concern is necessarily absent from the writing. We speak because of calligraphy (ie, as the Greek etymology of the word, the "beautiful writing?), Provided, properly understood, not to reduce the term to the application mentioned yesterday, to form our letters on banks of the college, full and delicate!

The symbol of ancient Egypt, is also the handwriting, and the Bison of Lascaux, the icon, the plea made by master Verrier, and so on. But realize that in all cases that come to enumerate the aesthetic concern is certainly present but is secondary.

That is what allows to quickly move the idea that people have no writing. Since man exists, there is writing, of course, provided, repeat, not to reduce to writing what is here, in other words, provided rid of our terrible ethnocentrism. So far, indeed, we can go back in time, we find traces, for example, ritual dances, without which we can distinguish, indeed, whether they are religious or secular (funeral, for example). That does not stop the dance is a body writing, ie writing, instead of serving as a tool either, they use this natural instrument is the body. But what does that change? Nevertheless, these dancers and those dancers do not dance as we say "dance? the bees! What does that mean? Simply that our body is able to express concepts, and linkages of concepts. In an extreme abstraction and subtlety involved in the dancer (or dancer) a virtue absolutely prodigious. See Indian dance, for example, which creates, or at least recreate the dance world, every attitude, every gesture, every pose (who asked not only the arms, hands and legs, but even the neck, lips , eyes, eyebrows and forehead) come to express the gods, the stars and all creation (when there is recitation of the Ramayana).

There's a deed of extreme complexity, which should leave the West wonder we are, that for vagueness or ignorance, we do not learn to read that script. We could cite a choreographic forms of writing found in Bali, Cambodia and choreographic forms also include writing off at the end of refinement no! Some dances are treated, we can talk, even here, in handwriting, but she is not what counts, not there: it is what is written. It is then absurd to speak of "people without history?. This idea is linked to the automation files accidentally, ie the phenomenon of writing in the sense that we modern Europeans, we understand. But before the intervention of this writing, the memory did not know: There were not only men who wrote books or parietal cave, but also other dancers. Obviously these people could not conceive that there was "history societies? and "societies without history?. These "societies without history? are a Western invention itself. Is that, to the extent that the past does not seem even more objective and that is file-tech, that is deposited in places where we can preserve the form of our way of writing, it automatically appears that history is linked to knowledge of a past dethroned.

When I spoke of writing, remember, I showed them that history is also inscribed in the experience of societies that rituals, commemorate, in other words, there is another way of writing what we have defined as a state of ritual, writing that is not linked to the sign of what is formal (fonosemiográfica our writing), but you have to conceptual. Briefly, we have shown that many companies have said they are "without history?, Actually wrote, but by what we call writing ritual. The rite is a script that also stores, but the files are stored: These are files that have no existence that are dramatic, ie they are festively represented. Under these conditions, realize that there is "no history societies?, Simply companies with a file system different from ours. It explains why a memorial feast, most of society judges (because they are not part of ours) ridiculous, always masks. These masks, limited in number, representing the Elders, the founders of the community. But why do they use those masks? Because, precisely, at the ceremony there is no creativity to put in place: they have the memorial.

The ancestors, then, had them in the strict sense, meaning that you yourself are the ancestors of which you have the masks. God knows all the savagery that has been written about that, because we have a beautiful and well-done kind of writing. Our ancestors, are on our papers. The others are targeting. In one case, we have, on the other, they have us. It is nothing magical about a case or the other, you know. In the ancient societies of which I have just spoken, the Elders, ritual live in us, just like our resources. The famous "resource? professional historian, will always find those resources in the grimoires (the historian is necessarily create an bookworm), but the historian of African people, for example, attends the commemorative festivities: these are its resources. Actually, not really about the past, because it is a commemoration, not about the past but live like this, ie the total update. Briefly, the object of history is the past, is the update of the past (and is not the same!).

In short, it has always been men who recite, in other words professional story transmitted orally the group files. That these stories are true or false does not matter, anyway, they say almost the same thing in a given society: as a consequence, these stories become founders of the origins of the group, and therefore their identity . This is what all the stories that have been and continue to be part of certain societies, touted orally, does not prevent out of writing, provided, even here, that does not reduce to writing looks like on us. These stories obey a codified ritual recitation, composition of chains of events nearly frozen, just as would be by writing. It is impossible, for example, begin to count ("once upon a time?). In other words the narrator speaks as he does until he starts saying "he speaks like a book?, In the words, ie the memory reproduces the recitation (in some cases, he dictates). Needless to say, in this perspective, the distinction we make between "oral literature? and a "written literature?, it is absolutely fraudulent.

All literature, is in fact of orality, but otherwise that is ours in oral conversations. You can see then what is disliked by most students of literature. Take an example borrowed from music. Between the music and music theory (ie writing the music), a world. How many children or teenagers do not like the music because of music theory? We say that "the French are not musicians?. Why? Because they do read or write music, and almost never hear it! But that's terrible! Well, this example is exactly transported to the literature. Let's scare the students with writing (logographic) of literature, and learn to listen, and probably to try it. That's what rampage in a theory of writing to be completely renovated. In fact, perceive a theory of writing is more complex than we think and is perhaps the reason no one dares! In any state of cause, this theory of writing, which needs to be done, should receive all writes that instead of silk, to come together and dance, happy, singing, etc..

For it is not necessary to imagine that the only way of writing is that which, for the Greeks and Latins, have inherited from the Phoenicians. Logography is but a particular way of writing that ultimately is not much in the history of mankind, ie the vast system of information are the ways that man has always tried to artificiality. We have greatly simplified the problem because we are seeing the belly button as we say we are the paragon of humanity. But today, it's over. With modern media (radio, television, etc..) The graph is replaced by something else. It is true that writing fonosemiográfica never disappear completely, in ancient Egypt, among the pictogram, hieroglyphic writing and rites (funeral or religious). As in the pictograms of Lascaux (and everyone) have remarked that the sides of the representations contained many graphic signs (dots, spirals, grids, etc..) That are truly the "legends? of these pictograms, provided you understand the word "legend? in the etymological sense: the verbal adjective legenda (from the Latin verb legere) means: "what should be read?, Now our time marks the end of the privilege of the spelling.

www.teoria-mediation.com