Literacy: Tools of the Trade

I really have not given much thought before to the materials of literacy (other than the printing press in general terms). Thus, I found this week's readings and discussion significant for allowing me to think about an aspect of literacy that I hadn't before.

Haas writes, "...materiality is the central fact of literacy because writing gains its power--as a cognitive process, as a cultural practice,and even as a metaphor--by linking these two powerful systems" (p. 3). After reading this and thinking about it, I felt foolish for not having thought before about the materials of literacy because the material IS literacy; it is thought written down. So without materials, obviously, there would be no literacy. Or would there? Haas seems to be using the terms literacy and writing interchangeably. I would argue that writing is one form of literacy, and it does indeed require materiality.

Marx and Engels: Who knew? I was surprised to read and begin thinking about the influence their writing had on Vygotsky, thus shaping much of our understandings on thought, language, and social contexts. I would like to learn more about how their writings influenced Vygotsky, etc.

I really liked Haas' second chapter because I felt it offered a reasonable balance in terms of the impact and role of technology. As with many discussions in this field, arguments and points of view always seem to be dichotomized; it must be one way or the other, all or nothing. Technology has no impact or it is totally revolutionary. Is it not fathomable that it will have an impact, but perhaps in ways that are relatively subtle? And always tied to other factors--social, cultural, historical, etc.? I appreciated Haas' stance on this.

The point I most appreciated from Eisenstein was the idea that while the printing press did give more people than ever access to texts, it also increased communication among those already in possession of scribes and books. In this way, the divide between the literate and the non-literate, I think, actually got bigger. Those with the power now had more; the gulf widened. The one percent at the top now had access to each others' ideas, along with visuals such as maps, and this allowed them to shape thought--a small group of people influencing thought for hundreds of years to come.