For those of you intrigued by yesterday’s article about writing as a technology – here I’ll attempt to balance it with another fascinating article supposedly providing an “opposing view” to Walter Ong, et. al.
Drawing, Writing and Calligraphy by Tim Ingold
what do you think?
Is writing “technological” artifice natural or unnatural?
I’ll tell my thoughts in time…
Polysemic Stupor 
Interesting subject/post dear N Filbert, I wonder your thoughts. And also I want to understand what means this technological” artifice natural…. the word “technological” doesn’t come normal to my mind…. with natural… But I wonder is there something I don’t know… And what means technological writing… so I need to read your thoughts 🙂 Thank you, have a nice weekend, love, nia
Thanks Nia. The “technological” aspects of the human capacity to write was set out in the previous article – see yesterday’s post – Walter Ong’s “Writing is a technology that restructures thought”. Ingold, in this article, argues that writing does not fulfill or match Ong’s proposed characteristics of “technology.” I’m curious what others think, then I’ll share my own teensy-weensy perspective on it 🙂