Literature Leads to Abstraction

From reading through the chapters in the second half of the book and using parts of the first half of the book I have found an interesting thought; the more we advanced in literature and writing the more abstract thought becomes. This interests me because of the ideas of story and learning.   

            The first thing that comes up in the second part of Ong is the Analytic thought (89, 90 Ong). The idea that we were able to analyze things more effectively and make ideas is very interesting. This goes with the idea of abstract thought because be able to think in an abstract zone lets us applies ideas and criticism to certain parts of speech and writing.            

            Another part I find fascinating is the idea of the character (101). Ong describes it as the idea of writing to someone else. I think this is interesting, you never think of the audience as a reader, but as a writer you are constantly thinking about the reader. With orality you can see reactions of the audience and gauge their reactions, something you cannot do with writing. Therefore you have to come up with that reader, that audience, in your head to really write and have it received the way you want. This implies the abstraction of ideas of people.

            Visual description is something that has always puzzled me. It is hard to use words to describe a house or forest to someone. This is probably because it did not come naturally to humans. Pre Romanticized writing did not have much description, writing abstracted even the idea of sight, describing things that weren’t within a thousand miles of a person or something that didn’t even exist (125 Ong).