There is an inherent catch-22 in the debate over word or image-based communications. Never has it been so obvious as in “Two Cultures” in which the individual who favored book learning came across as much more intelligent and eloquent (on paper) than the woman who set out to defend the television. Coincidence? I think not.
One of the major issues of the article is the question of whether or not images eliminate sacredness. This question is similar to Benjamin’s discussion of the loss of aura. Indeed, Postman cites the Hebrew National commercials that use God and Uncle Sam to sell hot dogs. He argues that images have a symbolism and a seductiveness that make them much easier to be exploited than words, so they are overused and quickly lose their value. Paglia, on the other hand, says that images actually become more powerful the more frequently they are used. Although I think that Paglia is right about images’ symbolic meaning becoming more and more concrete with repetition, this watered-down meaning is really a far cry from its original complexities.
Clearly, Postman won the debate. Because he had been trained in the word with its solid histories of logic and values, he was able to communicate much more clearly (granted: in print). Postman supplied Paglia with words and presented a much smoother, more professional line of reasoning. Maybe that’s because of the medium used, but I think that it gets at something much deeper—the natural superiority of the written word.
3 comments:
I have to disagree with you when you say that clearly Postman won the debate. I think Paglias argument over the idea of images was stronger because it seemingly cancelled out Postmans argument. The hebrew national commerical was an excellent example of how seeing god and uncle same over and over would make one want a hot dog, the repetition makes an excellent advertising strategy.
Postman, for the most part of the debate came off as an old Luddite in denial of TV's potential. His argument of TV's absurdity was hypocritical as there are many textual examples of superficial or fabricated information. Paglia came off as younger, bubbly extrovert who was able to give a refreshing outlook on TV culture. She held her ground and gave insight in history of media and the benefits of TV. TV is in constant development because societies' culture changes drastically quicker than in the past, soon valuable art and opinion can be available and accessible to the masses.
Postman even admitted that he'd be considered an "Old Print Bastard." He was raised on the book and just like our parents' generation has a hard tiem grasping the Internet, he can't realy seem to accept TV for all its worth.
I think Paglia knocked him out and got a KO when she said that the Scripture dictated and "advertised" proper table edicate.
Post a Comment