It should come as no surprise that I’ve got Google searches set for both “Walter Ong” and “Orality and Literacy,” so I see lots of student blog responses to Ong’s work. Sometimes I even post a response of the friendly kind, suggesting ideas for further research and the like in case they’re interested.

One thing I notice a lot of, however, is the construction of orality vs. literacy, the idea that there’s a war being fought between the oral and the written and that one can’t abide the other. (I just read that very construction on a graduate student blog. And no, I’m not linking to anyone’s blog here, nor am I suggesting that this misunderstanding is driven by teachers.) What I want to ask is that if you ever teach Ong, consider the fact, and ask your students to consider the fact, that Ong titled Orality and Literacy as Orality and Literacy rather than Oralilty vs. Literacy. His work is so much more interesting when you consider the overlappings and complications.

Thank you.