We broke into groups for the stated purpose of percolating on epithet possibilities at the end of class today. The majority of class had been spent discussing memory systems and how they may in fact simply change from a literate from oral tradition rather than disappearing.

There's a passage from Victor Hugo's Hunchback of Notre Dame(or Notre Dame de Paris which ever you prefer)in which a medieval scholar is working in a room from which he sees the cathedral from the window, and bemoans that the book will supplant the cathedral(that is to say, the memory theatre). And this is partially true of course, since a Catholic church in and of itself is replete with images which serve as something of a memory theatre for believers(ie. the 12 stations of the Cross). Even the rosary is a mini memory system.

But is this really the case? Is it actually possible that the book can now do the job that the cathedral did, and that there is nothing really wrong with this? I shouldn't speak too quickly perhaps, being as a tradition that vests authority in "the word" or "the Book" is fraught with peril of its own in ways related if not completely similar to the perils of the institution, since the book becomes the institution or "the law". Catch-22 provides an example of this in a literary context. But enough of that.

We also passed around and read random passages from Finnegans Wake, in which plays upon the whole foundation for what written literature is supposed to be, and what levels of linguistic reality can be held(the title itself plays upon at least four different meanings for both of the words). In this book, words are not fixed or stable in their meaning.

We also had an impromptu presentation from Sutter on Ramon Lull, who introduced the concept of"movement" into the art of memory according to Francis Yates. We will be spending more time with Lullism as we go on(not to be confused with "luddism", though they are both isms that begin with an L).

It would be advisable to begin considering epithet choices, because on Friday we will break into our groups and epithetize each other.

A great deal of ground was covered in discussion of chapter 4 in Ong. According to Ong, writing is a solipsitic operation. Which is to say, it cuts one off from the community, and is oriented toward and through oneself. But, perhaps it was a such a specialized, profoundly individualistic activity, it actually turns out that when people from a state of primary orality find books and writing to be magical. In fact, the word "glamor" derives from "grammar". So "glamor girls" are really "grammar girls". Turns out there's hope for me yet.

But then, as opposed to oral storytelling, a written text "says" the same thing perpetually(I mean it is written). Unless of course it's Finnegans Wake, which actually says something different every time one comes to it. It is an instance where the concepts and precepts of orality have been directly applied to a literate product. Which is possibly why much of it very nearly resembles gibberish. As to written texts in general saying the same thing perpetually, I might suggest that we(if we are decent readers)derive sayings from the text that are different each time. But what do I know? It's also been recommended that we google an essay by Mr. Sexson entitled "Re-membering Finnegan".

There was also some discussion of the alphabet; there is and was only one, says Ong, and that is the Phoenician-Semitic alphabet which originated 14000 years ago. We then had an illuminating presentation from Chris, linking written Hebrew(which has no vowels) with personalized license plates. I found this marvellously interesting.

The majority of class was spent correcting the exam, though there were a few other items wort mentioning.

Carly came up and talked about her memory theatre(which is the International Coffee Traders where she works) and how she has already memorized her fifty items, which are characters from Ovid's Metamorphisis. She shared with the rest of us her astonishment at how ultimately simple the task was, once one had their memory theatre established. I've had some issues settling upon a space for my memory theatre and this has caused me some concern. However, I feel a renewed sense of reassurance after Carly gave her brief talk. Thank you Carly.

And we move into chapter 4 in Ong, for the rest of the week.

Today was the day of compiling questions for the test. I transcribe the material that was placed on the blackboard(by Carly with her very lovely handwriting).

Here's what we need to know.

Kane:
"moonbone" (repition)
property
agriculture
practical
white berries
Caribou, Frogs
Defines myth as: song the Earth sings to itself.


Ong:
primary orality
secondary orality
chirographic
typographic
vision vs. sound
discussion of Phaedrus pg. 79


Yates:
Simonides
Rhetoric--ethics--cosmos
St. Augustine pg 47

And the questions supplied by we the students:
7 liberal arts( GGRAMAD)
NeoPlatonism
Feb. 20--John's birthday
Anamnesis
1600- when Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake
Parataxis
Bicameralism(from the index of Ong)
Imagination as the "1 hour photo for the soul"
Scherazade(10001 nights)
Difference between artificial and natural memory
Collective Unconcious vs. Personal Unconcious
Green blood
Memory, imagination, soul
epithets: beautiful princess, brave soldier, sturdy oak

All right, I think that's probably enough listing for all of us for now.

Class began today with Kevin delivering a dissertation on chapters 2 and 3 in Francis Yates, which pay particular attention to Plato and Aristotle and their linking together of three principle things: memory, imagination and soul. In general we find that Yates is perhaps more intrigued by Plato, but she does spend time with Aristotle, connecting him to the Scholastics(scholars in the Middle Ages). Yates quotes Aristotle on page 33 as saying "Memory belongs to the same soul as the imagination." She also quotes Plato's Phaedrus on page 37--"Memory is the groundwork of the whole". Memory is a crucial component of rhetoric, for Plato. It was pointed out by Kevin, quite perceptively I thought, that you can't develop memory without an imagination. And both memory and imagination are integral components of the soul. Which leads into something that Plato certainly believes and that Yates is apparently intrigued by as well: great use of memory is ulitmately divine.

This notion of memory having divine or spiritual significance is something that carries through to many other venues. Such as Neo-Platonism, or the influence of Plato after Plato( Marsillo Ficino is an example of one, and the author of a commentary on Plato's Symposium), which in itself has links to Gnosticism in believing that there is a divine spark within human beings and that the way to nurture it is through knowledge and the exercise of memory.

It is in the Phaedrus that Plato develops the myth of anamnesis: which is recollection of everything that has been forgotten. Jung was clearly influenced by this when he started talking about the Collective Unconcious, nut-shell version of which is: you can remeber everything, even before you were born. This is in contrast to Freud who said you can remeber everything, including being born. This is essential, because we have all drunk from the Lethe, the river of forgetfullness, from which the word "lethal" is derived. For Plato, it is lethal to forget.

And Augustin, after his self-rightous conversion from a profiligate life-style, adapted the notion of memory imagination and soul into the basis for the Trinity--memory, understanding and will.

And I think I will close this long-winded blogg with a quote about eros, fitting since tomorrow is Valentine's Day. It was Dante who said "Eros drives the sun and stars."

More discussion today on the differences between oral and literate traditions. A big thing that oral traditions honor old people--because they are the ones who will have amassed the stories. And again with the repition thing, repetitively. A poetic trope along these line is repetitive parallelism, or saying one thing then saying it again. Its a big thing in Hebrew poetry, such as "David was good-looking and handsome".

We also had our attention drawn to the chapter near the end of The Odyssey , which details the encounter with Hmaeus(sp?)in which the poet enters the story himself, so empatheic and particitpatory is the telling.

We closed with noting that IQ tests do not measure intelligence, only what IQ tests were invented to measure(the taking of IQ tests), and the words of the Ghost as it leaves Hamlet--"remember me"-- and Hamlet's reaction to them.

Today's class was largely monopolised again by cliches, namely seeing how many we knew by heart. It seems that cliches are the link of the literate culture to the oral culture. And as such, they frequently corporeal in their imagery, and deal with animals(ie. keep your eyes peeled, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush etc. etc.). The oral tradition also tends toward being hyperbolic and loves redundancy(because hearing something over and over and over again helps cement it into one's mind).

And we find that literary styles were once deeply entrenched in the oral tradition, and gradually became less so as time went by. For example, the 1610 English version of the opening of the book of Genesis relies heavily on parataxis("and" "and" and "and"), while the more recent translations of the Bible add in subordinative conjunctions--therefore, than, became.

We have also been directed to page 37 in Ong, were he lists the nine primary differences between the oral and literate cultures.

And to close, a quote from Nietzche: I'd never believe in a God who couldn't dance.

A great amount of piquant ground covered today, resulting appropriately enough from Shaman Sexson asking questions about the contents of everybody's blogs. One of the first observations that came up was that 'originality' is a plot of the print culture, which frowns upon cliches. In oral storytelling cliches were a valuable aid, epithets for characters(ie. 'fleet-footed Achilles') a case in point. We've apparently been assigned to think up an epithet for someone else in the class.

There was also Zach's story of his high school teahcer turning off the lights in the room and 'performing' Plato's allegory of the cave. This notion of 'performing' is an important one in oral teachings, rather than simply telling someone something. This is something Kane is certainly aware of. It was observed that Kane's book actually has something of the "Noble Savage' idea in its romanticising of the oral history. So Kane would be more apt to line up with Jean Jacques Rousseau than with Hobbes(the misanthropic philosopher not the quietly wise tiger)? This is potentially heavy-duty territory of philosophical debate, which I choose simply to pass over right now.

Than there was Carly's interest in an idea from a Dutch writer with an unpronouncable name regarding the inaccuracy of auto-biographical memory. This posits that memory is defective, or (more positively perhaps) active imaginative construction. This is something that ought always to be kept in mind with aut0-biographical writings, however objective they may strive to be.

There was a literary critic named John Ruskin who coined a term called the 'pathetic fallacy', the giving of human characteristics to creatures that don't have them. This lead into(for me) a delightful and charming story from Chris about her three rats, James Roger and Tony, who travelled with her in the car from New York to Montana, and how Roger was disconcerted because it was a longer drive than was usual for when he and Chris would go and visit her rabbi's house. Chris, I've gotta say: this could make a great children's book.

It was recommened that we check out page 41 of The Art of Memory, which provides examples of discreet items that were memorized in classical times and by those of classical persuasion. But many of us already have ideas for our fifty discreet items in mind already: Chris plans to memorise the names of rabbis from the Talmud(which is a collection of commentary on the Torah, by the way), and Jared plans to memorise the names of superheroes. As for myself, I will probably try memorising the first fifty films on AFI's top 100 list(or perhaps some other film list, we'll see).

It is somewhat daunting, perhaps. But it is not an impossible task. Richard Burton(the translator of The Arabian Nights, not the British actor)learned to speak thirteen languages fluently. Whoa-ee.

There was also more discussion of Groundhog Day, such as the suggestion that it is actually similar to The Tempest. And how Bill Murrey's character becomes an artist, in the amount of time devoted to one day that he has.

This led into a dissertation on an early moment in The Tempest in which Miranda is prompted by Prospero into 'imaginatively actualising' her early childhood. She remembers that four or five women attended her, leading Prospero to ask if perhaps there were a few more. Is it possible that there were four others, whihc would link the childhood attendents to the Muses?

We also had a note from Ted Hughes, analysing Shakespeare's lines, which he describes as two nouns joined by "and" animating a third noun. A bit formulaic, but still intersting I thought.

*Note> I had a few errors in my previous blog. The Shakespeare sonnet with the line 'remembrance of things past' is 30, not 130. And I forgot to note the overhead projector in the list of items in the communal memory theatre*

As today was February 2, a significant portion of class was spent discussing the deep importance of the film Groundhog Day(the literary critic Stanley Fish recently published an article were he lists the Ten best American movies and Groundhog Day is one of them. I'm gonna have to read it). Not only is it an example of how ancient rituals (in this case a festival of the annuciation of the virgin)are reduced to the ordinary, and a microcosmic illustration of Nietzche's Myth of the Eternal Return; it is also an exhaltation of the ordinary day. How the most boring uneventful day of the year can in fact contain one's whole life, and in fact all the mytholgical foundations of the universe. James Joyce's Uylsseus is an paradigmatic example.

We also noted down Kyle's system for memorising the Muses for the communal memory theatre.

thermostat- Erato(heat)
chalkboard-Clio(old)
screen-Urania(astronomy class)
"quiet" desk- Thalia(comedy)
overhead- Polyhemnia(hymns)
brown desk- Terpsichore(dance)
bulletin board- Calliope(epic poetry)
snowman-Euterpe(song)
weird "F"- Melpomene(tragedy)

It has also been announced that we must have our selected 50 discreet items by Friday.