Thursday, February 03, 2005

Hold On To Your Horses: It's Journal Three

Geez, Don't you guys have anything better to do?
All right, I'm not really sure what to write about in this journal, so I'll wing it. Actually I know exactly what I'll talk about. I'll talk about what I underlined in Ong. On page 22-23, Ong talks about a study done by Parry in which they broke down the works of Homer into pre-fabricated plots. The book said that this idea was threatening to "far-gone" literates. Now, I don't claim to be a "far-gone" literate, but I found this to be very interesting. It seems as if they are discrediting Homer, and making him into an average Joe. Could this be? The book says, in regards to the Iliad and Odyssey, that only a tiny fraction of the words were not part of formulas, and to a degree devastatingly predictable formulas(Ong 23). Now I can understand that there may have been formulas, but it seems that you could say anything has a formula. I'd like to see this study by Parry. Maybe I'll look it up and get back to you on that, but the Asteroids game is calling my name from the gameroom. Just kidding. I would like to know you guys' opinions on this subject. If we do agree that it's formulaic, so what. You must not undermine creative genius if it is there. Is it? Let me know.
PS. I'll get back to you on that Parry thing one of these days.


Post a Comment

<< Home