The written word has given humanity so much, but what does it take away?

The oral traditions of African religions offer insight into the cultural impact of codified rituals

The written word has given humanity so much, but what does it take away?

What happens to words when they are written down? Are there nuances from their sounds that get left out?

“In the beginning was the word.” So goes the teaching.

But if the word first comes from the mouth and not the pen, and if early books initially took shape orally, were the spoken words of Aristotle, Socrates, Plato, and ancient historians accurately captured?

Were the words the same on the tongue as on the page?

The best place to seek answers to these questions today is in certain parts of Africa.

Africa case study

In setting off on a small research project on the oral culture of literate societies, I found that various myths and modes of worship in this part of the world are still being passed down by word of mouth and have not yet been written down.

There are major differences between all religions. And there are differences within all religions, whether we are Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, or Christians. There are even differences between atheists. Each special sect has its own peculiarities and set of rituals.

But in these parts of Africa, where religions lack established texts and rites and rituals are carried only via the spoken word, the differences feel deeper and more cultural.

Beliefs and practices here seem to relate more closely to the territory of the tribe or kingdom, such as the Ashanti religion practiced by a tribe in southern Ghana, and that of the Kikuyu, a large and powerful tribe in North Nairobi, Kenya.

The religious practices of these two tribes — especially their rituals and prayers — do not resemble those of written religions at all, other than in the delivery of the sermon.

It is not really possible to practice the Ashanti religion if you do not belong to it by birth and by practice. Because it was not written down in ancient times, it has never stopped evolving.

Because the Ashanti religion was not written down in ancient times, it has never stopped evolving. Its rites and rituals have been free to change and are not the same as they were even a hundred years ago. There has been flexibility in prayers with sincerity and faith, allowing Ashanti's oral traditions to evolve.

Its rites and rituals have been free to change and are not the same as they were even a hundred years ago. There has been flexibility in prayers with sincerity and faith, allowing Ashanti's oral traditions to evolve.

This is not true of written religions. With rituals clearly dictated centuries ago, there is strict emphasis on the accuracy of carrying out rituals. 

Ancient legends, which share similarities with religious texts, were also passed down through generations by word of mouth. These stories were repeated without knowing the original, ancient source. 

These tales survived, not only because of their beauty, but because they evolved over time. They were like sermons that lived in the minds of those who heard them, presented as stories distinguishing right from wrong.

In the world of written religions, readers of religious texts can be corrected as soon as any mistakes are made. Even if it is just a single line or one sentence, everything is fixed and preserved as soon as it is written down. The devoted reader, therefore, is expected to repeat the rituals.

Unwritten African religions are flexible and can take in echoes from the outside. They are open, so that the truth for these believers is not only internal, but also external.

Impact of codified writing

Perhaps we should be aware of the potential impact of codified writing in other philosophical and intellectual spheres, and how it frames ideas within a certain time and place.  

In the economic world, the consequences could be more significant, especially in relation to understandings of ownership and transfer — methods of perpetuating domination. 

My observations on this topic are in no way intended to be an attack on the written word. Its invention is undoubtedly an invaluable tool, appreciated by all humanity. But I think it's important to understand its consequences. 

Formal grammar has a set of rules which define how we observe and communicate things in the real world, but it cannot control how we feel on the inside.

Traditional oral language has no framework, like the vast oral African religions and their concepts of faith. 

The more formal languages of today are defined within a framework and are accompanied by a sense of ownership. Conversely, the spoken word belongs to the people without being owned. 

The more formal languages of today are defined within a framework and are accompanied by a sense of ownership. Conversely, the spoken word belongs to the people without being owned.

Liberated from the tethers of the written word, it is sensory and free.

I image this is the way in which feelings were expressed by the first humans — with joy or sadness freely expressed alongside gestures in the fluency of the moment. 

And so, it's important to highlight the changes that accompanied the written word. 

While we can still appreciate its important contribution to humanity, it is also fair to ask — what did it take away? 

font change