It's interesting that this week mentalist Marshall McLuhan's reading The Spoken Word: Flower of Evil?" really challenged me to think about the distinction between spoken words versus written words. McLuhan argues that spoken word is much more powerful in allowing response, engagement and understanding over written words. Where words don't give back a reaction or it can fall flat and not produce more than one meaning. Now for some people they read a book and it can be one of the great books of their lives because the words speak to them in a way, not another book can.
Whereas, some people can watch a theatre play adapted from a famous play, and the spoken words are much more understanding and distinct than the writing itself. That great example can even be with Shakespeare. Or even reading Oedipus Rex, words that may seem flat on paper.
I feel that there's an equal correlation with reaction/ response between spoken words and written words, not one goes over the other. Also it depends on the context/ language. Some people for example poets, can write in ways that make you feel emotions, helps you understand what they're saying. It gives you an emotional response to it. And some people can read something out loud and you can still leave saying, what the hell did they mean?
Comments
Post a Comment