writing vs. speech

Technological advances in today’s society have furthered the traditional roles of speech and writing. While both are extremely important, I feel that oral communication is much more effective, therefore leading to its superiority over writing.
There are many differences between speech and writing. Speech is temporary and directed toward a specific audience, while writing is permanent and written for an unknown reader. The permanence of writing is often what brings people to significantly admire it, after all, it is how we have been able to gather knowledge about previous cultures. It is therefore impossible to say that writing is no longer of importance. Speech however, is what brings about impact and change. So what is more important, permanence of thought, or its impact? I do not believe that there will be a problem preserving the culture of the 21st century. Three thousand years from now, people will not be reading our papers on environmental concerns. Instead they will question what we were thinking buying a case of disposable bottles of water every week, and throwing them into landfills. It is what we do that will concern future generations, not necessarily what we say. Our actions speak louder then words, and speech significantly influences our actions.
Today, writing can be used as a shield to deflect meaning. An author may compose a work and leave its meaning open to interpretation. The meaning of a statement can be altered if looked at differently or taken out of context. This is the case with the recent political campaigns. Oral communication however, requires the speaker to think critically and spontaneously. Through speech the truth is attained, while writing can lead the reader a stray. This idea is reflected through the importance placed on job interviews. A résumé, or the written word, can only get a person so far. An interview that requires oral communication is a true test of a person’s character and intelligence. Through speech we are held accountable for what we say, and do not have time to formulate and print rebuttals if ever questioned.
I feel a recent phenomenon that reflects this accountability is “drunk texting.” In the last few years of college I have witnessed that “drunk-dialing” has taken a new form in “drunk texting.” While inhibitions are lowered people are inclined to act irresponsibly and often harass their latest crush, or mouth off to someone that has annoyed them recently. Rather then calling the person I have noticed that texting is now the chosen path to harassment. I believe this is for many reasons including: conversation can take place in the presence of others while remaining discrete, there will be a record of what was said in the morning, and there is even less accountability for what is said. The first two reasons are self explanatory, however the last is the main point. Through texting the writer is given complete power to say whatever he feels necessary. There is no argument until the next incoming message arrives, if ever. Additionally, there is always the excuse of “someone stole my phone.” If something completely inappropriate slips out of your fingertips then automatically it wasn’t you, and you cannot be held accountable. If that same inappropriate statement slips out of your mouth however, that same excuse cannot hold up.
Different forms of writing have emerged as technology has changed including blogs, aim conversations, text messaging, and e-mailing. Although blogs and e-mail are used in the professional field, they do not escape amateur writers. Each new form of writing has become closer to that of speech and farther away from traditional writing. Through conversation it is possible to hear tones underlying sarcasm, or see facial expressions that convey a message. There are now certain rules to understanding this new diction. For example: if a person writes in all capital letters they seem to be YELLING, or feel VERY strongly about their meaning. Similarly, various faces can indicate mood , while abbreviations help convey meaning. Newer forms of writing are able to show the persona of the amateur writer, opposed to just their meaning.
The expressions and tones that coincide with oral communication enable the audience to easier commit the speech to memory. I experience this first hand within the classroom. When a professor uses power points (that are often on blackboard) he tends to drone on monotonously, adding very little to the visual information already provided. Additionally, there is this notion that when word for word information is provided for our convenience on blackboard, we tend to pay attention less. On the other hand, if a professor lectures and does not allow the class to take notes, they are forced to pay attention in order to obtain the information. “A master of written Greek, Plato feared that written language would undermine human memory capacities” (Gardner 2008). From the time we were small children, we have been recording information that could be referred to later. The most learning that occurs in our lives takes place when we are very young, before the introduction of writing. When we were babies we absorbed the words spoken to us and thought about them in our little minds. We did not hear the word “daddy” and write down his characteristics in order to identify him later. We processed the information taught orally and learned from it.
In February 1942, Roosevelt urged Americans to spread out a map during his radio "fireside chat" so that they might better understand the geography of battle” (Jacoby 2008). Roosevelt used this speech to communicate with the people and impress upon them the vast distances necessary to ship supplies. If he has written this information down and sent it to every American house this information would not have had the same effect. Similarly, the spreading of Martin Luther’s 95 Thesis was greatly influenced by the printing press. However “Illiterates were attracted to Luther’s ideas through visual devices and oral communications. Personal relationships, oral communication, printing and writing, and institutions: each played a part, separately and interactively” (Harvy 2007 116). It is impossible to attribute the protestant reformation to the printing press alone. If Martin Luther had written the 95 Thesis and kept it to himself, history would be different.


WORKS CITED:

Gardner, Howard. The End of Literacy? Don’t Stop Reading. Washington Post; February 17, 2008.
http://blackboard.umbc.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_37304_1 (accessed September 20th 2008).


Graff, Harvy J. 2007. Early Modern Literacies. Person Education Inc. pg116

Jacoby, Susan. The Dumbing of America. Washington Post; February 17, 2008. http://blackboard.umbc.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_37304_1 (accessed September 21st 2008).