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.