![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Bibliographic Data: Lurie, David B. Realms of Literacy: Early Japan and the History of Writing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2011.
Main Argument: "This study is, first and foremost, a history of writing in early Japan, but as the subtitle suggests, it also aims to rethink the wider history of writing in general" (2). "By insisting on the multilingual nature of the 'Chinese' script, which crossed and complicated language boundaries in real time as well as over long periods, this book presents an unfamiliar picture of writing in Japan and the wider region around it. Attention to the history of reading, and to the varied ways in which writing has been linked to language, shows that there are overlaps and intersections between uses of writing that have traditionally been separated into categories like foreign and native or Sinitic and vernacular" (vii).
Historiographical Engagement: History and theory of writing and history of writing in Japan.
Introduction: Argument, Sources, Examples "Deeper understanding of early Japanese inscription will transform comparative discussions of literacy and reading practices, and remake our sense of the wider patterns of the world history of writing systems" (1). Lurie discusses the difficulty of defining what it means to say that writing ever "begins," and he argues that the explosion of writing in Japan in the 7thC, although obviously connected to accelerating state formation, is in fact quite varied: "Rather than a uniform transition from orality to literacy, these materials reveal different modes of writing appearing around the same time and coexisting in a variety of configurations. …different social groups are simultaneously using texts in radically different ways" (4). Lurie also criticizes the implicit "alphabetism" of scholars of writing, who, he says, "should do more to avoid teleological assumptions about progress towards photography, assumptions that are often implicitly linked to claims about the (Greek) alphabet as a guarantor of cultural superiority" (5). He argues, moreover, that the process of kundoku, "reading by gloss," "dominated all modes of literacy in early Japan, from at least the mid-seventh century on. This means that we cannot describe texts arranged in accordance with Chinese vocabulary and syntax as being written 'in Chinese' (no matter what their origins, a conclusion that has profound implications for Japanese cultural history, which has been framed by a linguistic opposition between Chinese and Japanese" (ibid). Moreover, considering Chinese writing as the "East Asian writing system," for example, and early Japanese reading and writing systems, "threatens widely held assumptions about the place of phonographic adaptation in the world history of writing" (6). The history of these questions assumptions about the "historical development of inscription and also more technical discussions of the relations between script and language" (7).
( Literacies and writing systems )
Critical assessment: This is a really excellent book that I am sure these notes have not fully captured. I need to think about everything that Lurie says some more, but I think a lot of his arguments could be profitably applied to technologies other than writing in Japan, such as states. And of course, there's the arguments about the history of writing, which seem to me, from what I know about it (I did some research on the development of the Greek alphabet for a while once, so I know some things; in fact, when it comes to the Greek alphabet, I actually know many things), to be right on the money.
Further reading: Tom Lamarre, Uncovering Heian Japan; Tomiko Yoda, Gender and National Literature
Meta notes: Techno-determinism is as much at work in how we think about writing as it is in how we think about computers.
Main Argument: "This study is, first and foremost, a history of writing in early Japan, but as the subtitle suggests, it also aims to rethink the wider history of writing in general" (2). "By insisting on the multilingual nature of the 'Chinese' script, which crossed and complicated language boundaries in real time as well as over long periods, this book presents an unfamiliar picture of writing in Japan and the wider region around it. Attention to the history of reading, and to the varied ways in which writing has been linked to language, shows that there are overlaps and intersections between uses of writing that have traditionally been separated into categories like foreign and native or Sinitic and vernacular" (vii).
Historiographical Engagement: History and theory of writing and history of writing in Japan.
Introduction: Argument, Sources, Examples "Deeper understanding of early Japanese inscription will transform comparative discussions of literacy and reading practices, and remake our sense of the wider patterns of the world history of writing systems" (1). Lurie discusses the difficulty of defining what it means to say that writing ever "begins," and he argues that the explosion of writing in Japan in the 7thC, although obviously connected to accelerating state formation, is in fact quite varied: "Rather than a uniform transition from orality to literacy, these materials reveal different modes of writing appearing around the same time and coexisting in a variety of configurations. …different social groups are simultaneously using texts in radically different ways" (4). Lurie also criticizes the implicit "alphabetism" of scholars of writing, who, he says, "should do more to avoid teleological assumptions about progress towards photography, assumptions that are often implicitly linked to claims about the (Greek) alphabet as a guarantor of cultural superiority" (5). He argues, moreover, that the process of kundoku, "reading by gloss," "dominated all modes of literacy in early Japan, from at least the mid-seventh century on. This means that we cannot describe texts arranged in accordance with Chinese vocabulary and syntax as being written 'in Chinese' (no matter what their origins, a conclusion that has profound implications for Japanese cultural history, which has been framed by a linguistic opposition between Chinese and Japanese" (ibid). Moreover, considering Chinese writing as the "East Asian writing system," for example, and early Japanese reading and writing systems, "threatens widely held assumptions about the place of phonographic adaptation in the world history of writing" (6). The history of these questions assumptions about the "historical development of inscription and also more technical discussions of the relations between script and language" (7).
( Literacies and writing systems )
But the broader point remains: in terms of their functioning in society and development over time, it is difficult to find deep, qualitative differences across various systems of writing. As visually and structurally distinctive as many features of Japanese writing are, it seems that they neither produced, nor were determined by, sharp cultural or social differences. In a sense, this means that although writing in Japan (and to some extent, writing in general) does not work quite in the way that has often been assumed, that difference itself turns out to be less consequential than might be expected. Many scholars and theorists have taken an integral developmental logic of writing to be a key to the history of humanity; but such a logic may not even be a key to the history of writing itself. … Writing's connection to natural language and its catalytic effect on so many other historical developments make it seem to be a special case. Perhaps it is. But in its multifariousness and malleability, it is as resistant as any other human practice to monocausal, deterministic explanation. (363-64)
Critical assessment: This is a really excellent book that I am sure these notes have not fully captured. I need to think about everything that Lurie says some more, but I think a lot of his arguments could be profitably applied to technologies other than writing in Japan, such as states. And of course, there's the arguments about the history of writing, which seem to me, from what I know about it (I did some research on the development of the Greek alphabet for a while once, so I know some things; in fact, when it comes to the Greek alphabet, I actually know many things), to be right on the money.
Further reading: Tom Lamarre, Uncovering Heian Japan; Tomiko Yoda, Gender and National Literature
Meta notes: Techno-determinism is as much at work in how we think about writing as it is in how we think about computers.