Quote from a Cherokee Native on Written Language

1. 65

   Jessie L Watsonposted 7 years ago

   “Much that red men know, they forget; they have no way to preserve it. White men make what they know fast on paper like catching a wild animal and taming it.”
   
   -Sequoya
   
   The social effects of printing have been immense, making printing one of the most significant technological innovations of all time.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'd say Sequoya grossly underestimated its importance, unless he had in mind thousands of people everywhere using that tame animal and doing so for generations to come. 
      
      Yes, it ranks right up there with fire and animal husbandry.

      replyreport
      1. 65

         Jessie L Watsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I'm not sure how to respond to that.
         
         Here's the context
         
         The development of a written language is one of the hallmarks of civilization. While a spoken language is a basic element of all human societies, not all of them developed a written language. Of the approximately 5,000 to 8,000 languages that are spoken today, only a very small percentage appear in written form, and in many cases, these written languages have been recent inventions, stimulated by missionaries or other contacts with the outside world. One interesting example of an effort to create a written language appeared in the 1820s, when a Cherokee Indian named Sequoyah single-handedly constructed a written language so that his people could more effectively resist the encroachments of white settlers. A written language was an essential technology, for as Sequoyah observed, “Much that red men know, they forget; they have no way to preserve it. White men make what they know fast on paper like catching a wild animal and taming it.” After much laborious effort, Sequoyah succeeded in constructing a system of writing that could be mastered in a few weeks. Unfortunately for Sequoyah’s people, the new written language by itself could not stem the advance of the white man into Cherokee territory.

         replyreport
         1. 78

            wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry.  I just mean that yes, a written language is immensely important to any real growth of knowledge and learning.  I would put language above it (can't have writing without language) and probably fire and animal husbandry (first steps to using energy not derived from our own muscles), but that might be all.
            
            Sequoyah saw the preservation as important, and it most certainly is - what he missed is the ability to teach others far, far away and to teach thousands at once.  To pass that knowledge to thousands or millions of other people that the discoverer would never meet, people who would then build on that knowledge to discover even more.  Reasonable as his "world" was quite small.

            replyreport
            1. 65

               Jessie L Watsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Agreed.
               
               It also seems like there are populations and cultures that would not benefit from a formal written language. It's like the Arc of the Covenant, Some technologies are so powerful that they destroy whatever they come in contact with.

               replyreport
               1. 78

                  wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  I actually doubt that, for knowledge can never be hidden indefinitely.  Just like the atomic bomb, if America hadn't developed it another country would have in a short time.  Beyond that, I can't think of a single technology that has ever destroyed whatever/whoever it comes in contact with.  Changes cultures, absolutely, but not destroy.

                  replyreport
                  1. 65

                     Jessie L Watsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Well, to use your own logic about moral relativism, introducing something like digital technology to an isolated tribe might not be in the best interests of said tribe.  Because, after all, what we consider progress isn't progress to some. Its hard to divorce peoples assumption about technological progress from human progress. There is a difference and technology has certainly demonstrated that it can create more problems than it solves.

                     replyreport
                     1. 78

                        wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        I see a large range between "not good for someone" and "destroy".
                        
                        But beyond that, the less advanced people almost always seem eager to jump ahead.  While there are always some that don't, it seems like the majority, and nearly all young people, want as much tech as they can get.
                        
                        Is it up to us to flaunt it in front of them and then tell them it isn't good for them to have tech?

                        replyreport
                        1. 65

                           Jessie L Watsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           Fair enough.
                           
                           To answer your question, of course not. Bringing isolated communities onto the grid does generally have a positive effect on many things including their economy. Some villages in Africa use their phones for banking and commerce.
                           
                           I suppose it depends on the needs and culture of the community. Obviously, Amazonian tribes wouldn't be all that excited about Facebook, haha
                           
                           Here's what I mean by destroying: if it dismantles or radically alters a particular group of people or culture. If an Amazonian tribe suddenly embraced computer technology, they would, in essence, cease to be what they were prior to. Part of what characterizes them is their own form of Luddism.
                           
                           There are many deaths and rebirths in a technological society. At least that is what is required to keep moving in the direction and speed that we are. Naturalistic populations still very much resemble what their ancestors had for centuries.

                           replyreport
                           1. 78

                              wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                              Really?  I'm surprised that the cell grid goes out into the "bush" that far.  I took a trip up through Idaho last weekend and lost service nearly half the way.

                              replyreport
                              1. 65

                                 Jessie L Watsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                 Funny how that works.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 78

                                    wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                    I just figure I'm living in the "wilderness" and don't get modern conveniences.

                                    replyreport
               2. 59

                  Randy Godwinposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Yes, Sequoia was a member of the savage Cherokee tribe who could read and write and had settled farms the white man coveted. Banish them to Oklahoma and take their homes and farms.  Too bad for them I suppose?

                  replyreport
                  1. 85

                     GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Aw come on Randy, what the hell was that? You twist a topic on the importance of written language into a snide crack about somebody, (the white man of course), taking something from somebody, (the "savage" Cherokee).
                     
                     Do you have anything pertinent to contribute, or are you just bored with the Trump thread?
                     
                     GA

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        Randy Godwinposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        I was simply poking Dan with a stick, GA . He and I were having a discussion about the Cherokee a day or so ago.  I guess you had to be there?   
                        
                        Are you old or something? 

                        replyreport
                        1. 85

                           GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           Yep, I am as old as dirt Randy, and a fair 'stick poker' myself, so I guess you are right that "you had to be there" to get the "point."
                           
                           GA

                           replyreport
   2. 85

      GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I can agree with your point Jessie, and even as your Sequoya quote illustrates it -- relative to American history, there are plentiful examples dating millennia before Sequoya that make the same point.
      
      And speaking of printing -- and not speaking of religion -- look at the credit history has given to Gutenburg.
      
      But back to Sequoya, would you consider him as lamenting the failure of the Red man to grasp the importance of a written language, or as lamenting an advantage the White man brought to the conflict?
      
      ps. reading your later "context" post, I would consider Sequoya as lamenting the latter.
      
      pps. but, if your Sequoya point was to reference the impact of "printing" on societies, I would still agree with your point, but I would jump right past Sequoya and go straight to Gutenburg.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 65

         Jessie L Watsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         But back to Sequoya, would you consider him as lamenting the failure of the Red man to grasp the importance of a written language, or as lamenting an advantage the White man brought to the conflict?
         
         I was actually enchanted by his allegory about taming wild animals. Most Native American cultures regard animals as sacred or perhaps divine in their own way. It seemed as if he was comparing the command of the written word to wielding the power of the gods.
         
         Gutenberg is certainly a fitting example but something about Sequoya's quote gripped me. As lamentable as his assertion was and the circumstances around which it was formed, it succeeded in communicating the raw power of inscribed language.
         
         And, to go out on a limb, Native Americans who were literate probably fared better in a European dominated society than those who were not. But he also alludes to the importance of preserving the wisdom and knowledge of their forbearers. If they could figure that out, they might have a chance at breathing life back into their culture.

         replyreport
         1. 85

            GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            I think that's a good take-away from Sequoya's message Jessie.
            
            GA

            replyreport