Due 1.31.06 9:20am: Reading I
Folks:
As described in class and on WebCT, you are asked to respond via the "Comments" function to ONE of the questions about the reading. Please complete this "Comment" response to one of the following questions by Tuesday 1.31.06 9:20am.
Glassie: Ch. 4 “The Next Day”
We spoke in class about "history" as it works in an oral culture; refer to your class notes on that discussion. In addition, please respond on the blog with 1 comment to at least 1 of the following questions (e.g., pick 1 of the following questions and post 1 comment containing your response):
"Also in this chapter, we get extended examples of Glassie’s method for transcribing (e.g., capturing on the page) “oral history”—that is, history which is conveyed in speech and conversation."
- What specific orthographic (e.g., structure, grammar, and writing style) choices does Glassie make in these transcriptions? And why do you think he makes them?
- What are the advantages to the rather peculiar orthography which Glassie employs?
posted by CJS @ 11:47 AM
5 comments
5 Comments:
In this chapter, Glassie transcribes Nolan's story in a very unique manner that I find to be quite interesting and beautiful in its own way. When Hugh Nolan begins talking about Black Francis, the words on the page are more spaced out; they aren't clumped together into paragraphs. By grouping the sentences and words together in this pattern, I believe Glassie is trying to give the reader a sense of how the story was originally told. As you read down the page, you can almost hear what it might have sounded like as Hugh Nolan told it. The story is spaced out along the page almost to space out the time in re-telling it. Obviously Nolan wanted to put the facts in an order that the listener would be sure to follow.
i agree with the comments that the orthographic choices make the story seem like poetry. i believe he does it like that because, as he says in chapter two, that it's really about how the story is told, how it is conveyed one person to another. and a lot of that kind of experience is lost in writing, and glassie is overcoming that by making the story more like how it was told to him orally. i think that's really interesting because the same goes for the music tradition as well. you can only get a sketch of a tune from a piece of paper; it gives the outline of the melody, but the soul--the ornamentations, the underlying pulse, the impromptu variations--can't be written down. it's something that comes from watching and learning from someone demonstrating it.
Glassie is obviously attempting to reveal to the reader the very essence of the "way" these stories are conveyed. If one uses their inner voice (yes, the little one that talks to you), and transforms the voice from our familiar American accent into the voice of an old Irish man sitting in his home with a friend, Glassie's goal will be accomplished. I feel that Glassie uses the awkward indentions and spacing to slower the reader down. Perhaps he realized that one's mind gets into modes of speed-reading. Well, the whole chapter is dedicated to how the "historians",namely Hugh Nolan, took precious time to memorize the accounts and tales they heard. I wasn't sure myself how I should approach these "oral histories", but when I stopped and read each line as if Mr. Nolan himself were facing me, the orthography made complete sense! There are certain places where Glassie makes several indentions almost past the middle of the page; and I think that Glassie is trying to portray the great thinker as he rattles his memory for the exact account. To me, I see Mr. Nolan sitting in his chair, pipe in hand, speaking at a contemporary pace that takes the listener to the very scene where Corrigan leaps the Sillees. My interpretation of Glassie's writing style shows how Glassie doesn't desire for us to be readers, but rather listeners...to a miracle in the works.
This is just a side note. I really enjoyed this chapter. As I was reading, I was also looking for some patterns that Dr. Smith had mentioned we do. I found a beautiful one. If you read it again, you'll see that Glassie uses three word sentences often. "History is beyond." "Land obliterates chronology." etc. In my perspective, Glassie desparately wants this chapter to be an honorable salute to the men who have "waged the war of a lifetime." The locations where Glassie places these three word sentences strikes me when I read them because, as I mentioned in the previous comment, they are persuasions to slow down and appreciate what is taking place. This chapter was very moving to me because I felt that Glassie in his profession admired Nolan in such a way that he would never be able to express in words the compassion and respect he had for Nolan. I don't know if Glassie meant for there to be a pattern of 3-wrd sentences, but I feel blessed to have these aspects show me the reverence of the "historians" Glassie has. I encourage you all to read it a second time through, and just...listen. :)
Glassie has not only expressed his work poetically in this chapter, but throughout everything we've read so far. Even the Preface was surprisingly eloquent and all he was doing was basically dropping names. Most scholarly books are tedious, but Glassie is able to convey all of the necessary facts in an interesting fashion by intermixing them with beautiful syntax and prose and a sufficient amount of narrative. In this chapter, he describes everything in perfect detail...so much so that when you really get reading it's easy to imagine yourself there with them. He always regards Hugh Nolan with a tremendous amount of respect and it is really reflected in the style of his writing and the specific diction choices he makes. Also, in the transcriptions of the conversation, he not only sets them up well, but writes them dialectically. This gives it authenticity.
Post a Comment
<< Home