Seems like you're in a pinch Andy. The way you've phrased the problem
makes it something of a riddle to me, for a number of reasons. How do
you pass things by word of mouth but not with texts? Unless by "texts"
you meant written words, in which case, what do you make of oral
"texts" passed down through generations? There are other sorts of ways
in which thickly culturally mediated words and practices, similar to
the things that Lucas mentioned, are passed down through the
generations. So I'm with Lucas that there are lots of examples of
cultural practices (activities?) that get passed on from generation to
generation without necessarily having land or artifacts tied to them.
But I also disagree with your "protagonist."
I'd locate the problem somewhere in the notion that words of the mouth
are unmediated expressions of subjectivity. Two big problems here,
first, words, second subjectivity. Taking the second first (b.c. you
seem to suggest that he is positing that "words" are unmediated - more
on that later), if subjectivity has thickly social origins, i.e. is
mediated by culture and place, then aren't things issuing forth going
to be mediated by culture. Volosinov and Bakhtin provide some of the
best thinking about this (I'd strongly suggest Volosinov's Chapter 3
of Marxism and the Philosophy of Language, titled Language and
Objective Psychology).
For me, Andy, the problem arises when you accept your protagonist's
claim that language simply and straightforwardly brings what is inside
out. You skim over language as a mediating artifact. I think there's
been some talk about this lately (some in disagreement with my
position), but I just don't see how you can leave language out as a
mediating artifact.
But maybe you can give some convincing examples?
And maybe I'm missing the larger point of your position.
But I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of the times as one in
which people don't see the mediating artifacts around them (I
regularly teach about my favorite mediating artifact: language!). I
think the success of the American TV show Survivor provides good
evidence of the Robinsonade-like fantasies of people today who imagine
themselves as great heroes surviving in the wild. (and I'd add that
Volosinov's other well-known book, Freudianism, speaks very well to
the fantasies of the bourgeousie during times of crisis).
-greg
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
<mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
My point is, Lucas, that I doubt that this can be done in fact,
without reliance on one kind or another of enduring artefact. I
need a counterexample to be convinced.
Andy
Lucas Bietti wrote:
Dear Andy,
Can these customs be related to ways of behaving according to
specific social contexts? In a broad sense, 'politeness' in
the pragmatic and discursive sense (to say the right things at
the right time) could be a way of behaving handed down from
one generation to the next based on imitation and correction
by verbal communication among members of the same epistemic
community. This also depends on what you are referring to by
'cultural memory'.
Lucas
On October 15, 2011 at 1:54 AM Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
<mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> I need some help. I am having a discussion with a supporter
of Robert
> Brandom, who was at ISCAR, but is not an Activity Theorist.
on the
> question of cultural memory.
>
> One of my criticisms of Robert Brandom is that he does not
theorise any
> place for mediation in his theory of normativity. He
supposes that norms
> are transmitted and maintained down the generations by word
of mouth
> (taken to be an unmediated expression of subjectivity), and
artefacts
> (whether texts, tools, buildings, clothes, money) play no
essential role
> in this.
>
> I disagree but I cannot persuade my protagonist.
>
> I challenged him to tell me of a (nonlierate) indigenous
people who
> managed to maintain their customs even after being removed
from their
> land. My protagonist responded by suggesting the Hebrews,
but of course
> the Hebrews had the Old Testament. Recently on xmca we had
the same
> point come up and baseball culture was suggested, and I
responded that I
> didn't think baseball-speak could be maintained without
baseball bats,
> balls, pitches, stadiums, radios, uniforms and other
artefacts used in
> the game.
>
> Am I wrong? Can anyone point to a custom maintained over
generations
> without the use of arefacts (including land and texts as
well as tools,
> but allowing the spoken word)?
>
> Andy
> --
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
<http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
<http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
<http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
--
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar
Department of Communication
University of California, San Diego