It is possible to trace much of what is oral in texts that have come down through the
centuries, as well as recently recorded texts. Milman Parry (Parry 1971) developed a
method for identifying texts (such as The Iliad and The Odyssey) that were recordings of
oral performance. His work has been expanded by subsequent scholars, and most
‘epics’ have now been scanned and studied using the method he suggested. Okpewho
(1979), for example, finds that African oral epics use musical rhythm and formulaic
language in much the same way Homer did.
Eric A.Havelock (1986) synthesised a theory that has gradually gained strength in
many academic circles: that the effects of writing systems were so profound, that they
created different brain (thinking) patterns. In Havelock’s view, cultures using the Greek
alphabet as the basis of writing had the simplest system to learn and manipulate; it
could record human speech and thought in such a way that even little children could
learn to decode the messages. The human brain did not have to use most of its space for
memory, but was free to think of other things. This resulted, he contended, in a
complete change in the mode of thinking among humans using such writing systems, the
so-called ‘logical’ or ‘categorical’ mode of thinking. Havelock himself did not claim
superiority for this mode of thinking over any other mode, but a number of other
scholars and writers have used his theories to do so.
McLuhan (1964) put forth the theory that it was not the process of merely writing
down things, or composing in a written form, that changed human ways of thinking;
rather, it was the technology of printing that brought about a visually based way of
thinking. And, in the present age, he believed that similar drastic changes were occurring
with the spread of modern media such as radio, television, film and video, because
orality had returned in these media, often simultaneously with visuality of a direct type
only partially mediated by print.
The effect of narrative picturing on the permanence of cultures has not been studied
much, apart from the early forms of picturing that led to alphabets or other language
symbols. This is especially true for ephemeral forms such as Napaskiak story-knifing or
Australian Aborigine story drawing in the sand. More permanent forms such as the
tessellated cloth scrolls of India or Chinese picture scrolls have probably had an
enormous impact, historically, on literature and orature for children in Asia, but they
have hardly been mentioned in that light. Victor Mair’s review (1988) of some of these
widespread forms of picture story-telling or ‘recitation’ is one of the few studies that even
mentions their impact on children. One has only to note the special forms of Indian film-
making, and the widespread popularity of viewing films in that country, to realise that
the cultures of India represent very special cases of visual response to story. However,
there is only limited published research on the Indian child’s response to all this
visuality.
The study of the present-day child’s response to printed picture books, with or
without text, is just getting under way in developing countries. Segall et al. (1966) and
Kennedy (1974) reviewed and summarised early research on the human response to
pictures, and part of that research included the child’s response. Later studies tended to
include more children as subjects and most often came to the conclusion that these
children see or ‘read’ pictures in very different ways (Fuglesang 1982; Bellman and
Bennetta 1977; Fussel and Haaland 1976; Forge 1970). Forge, for example, points out
658 THE WORLD OF CHILDREN’S LITERATURE