Get documents about "From Oracle Bones to Computers - DOC
Document Sample
From Oracle Bones to Computers:
A Rhetorical History of Writing Technology Development in China
(A Book Prospectus)
By Baotong Gu
Dept. of English, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia 30303
bgu@gsu.edu, 404-651-2900 (O), 770-953-2467 (H)
Abstract
The proposed book, From Oracle Bones to Computers: A Rhetorical History of Writing
Technology Development in China (hereinafter referred to as Rhetorical History), would
be the first book to examine the history of writing technology development in China in a
systematic fashion and the first book to examine this history from a rhetorical perspective,
i.e., how the meanings of each particular writing technology was rhetorically constructed
by participants in each development and how such rhetorical negotiations between
different participant groups shape the use and development paths of each writing
technology. Rhetorical History traces such major writing technology developments in
China as oracle bone inscriptions, Bronze inscriptions, the brush pen, ink, early forms of
paper (bamboo, wood, and silk), paper of the modern form, printing (block printing and
movable type), the Chinese typewriter, and the modern computer. Based on the
assumption that technology development is essentially a rhetorical process of knowledge
construction, of conceptualizing, negotiating, and communicating meanings about
technology (Stephen Doheny-Farina, 1992, Rhetoric, Innovation, Technology), this book
explores the interrelationship between writing technology and culture, with a focus on the
impact of rhetorical constructions on the development of writing technologies.
Introduction/Context of the Book Project
Let me begin with an absurd depiction by a scholarly Chinese of his first
impression of white men in his country:
These “Ocean Men” [foreigners], as they are called. . . are tall beasts
with deep sunken eyes and beaklike noses. The lower part of their faces,
the backs of their hands, and I understand, their entire bodies are covered
with a mat of curly hair, much as are the monkeys of the southern forests.
But the strangest part about them is that, although undoubtedly men, they
seem to possess none of the mental faculties of men. The most bestial of
peasants is far more human, although these Ocean Men go from place to
place with the self-reliance of a man of scholarship and are in some
respects exceedingly clever. It is quite possible that they are susceptible
to training and could with patience be taught the modes of conduct
proper to a human being. (Quoted in Oliver, 1971, p. 5)
The absurdity of such a perception is alarming yet interesting. That somebody should
view a fellow human being, though of a different racial species, in such a manner is,
however, by no means a uniquely Chinese phenomenon. I suspect that similar perceptions
existed in some Westerners when they first encountered their Oriental counterparts. But
mere ignorance cannot adequately explain such a phenomenon. Nor was the observer’s
possible prejudice to take the blame. What is at work here is the observer’s enculturated
consciousness, which is facilitating, albeit to a woeful effect, his reconstruction of the
white men based on his experience of the human species, which unfortunately is
extremely limited.
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 1
What does this have to do with writing technologies?
The answer lies in people’s perception and subsequent rhetorical construction of the
meaning of a particular phenomenon, ideology, artifact …, be it a foreigner or a new
technology. What a writing technology is, what it means, how it should be used, and how
it should further develop all depend, to a large extent, on how people (the participants of
technology development) perceive and define this technology. It is, therefore, the main
purpose of this book to explore how the different writing technologies in the 5000-year-
history of China were rhetorically constructed and how such rhetorical constructions
shaped the respective fates of these technologies.
Several aspects about Chinese writing technology development make this study
meaningful and worthwhile:
1. The writing technology development in China represents a rich collection of
various forms of writing technologies and spans a history of over 3500 years,
from the first uses of turtle shells and other animal bones for oracle inscriptions
in the 16th century B.C. to the use of computers today. Writing technology
development is a big part of the history of science and technology development
in China. Out of the four most well-known technologies commonly attributed as
Chinese inventions (paper, movable type, compass, and powder), two (paper and
movable type) were writing technologies. Unfortunately, these important
developments have largely escaped the attention of researchers in most fields.
2. The development of writing technologies in China has been very uneven
throughout its history, with the earlier periods (16th century B.C. to 12th century
A.D.) flourishing with various forms of writing technologies at different points
and the middle to modern periods (13th to mid 20th century A.D.) impoverished
with virtually no breakthroughs. What caused such uneven developments must
therefore be revealing in deconstructing the social and rhetorical contexts behind
such development and is thus an important aspect worth exploring.
3. The writing technology development in China also represents a mixture of
indigenous inventions (oracle inscriptions, paper, pen, printing, etc.) and foreign
transfers (the computer and the Internet). How these two different kinds of
development went through different processes will be revealing and helpful in
our understanding of the rhetorical factors shaping writing technology
development.
4. The Chinese language is a unique, mostly pictorgraphic system that represents a
radical departure from the Roman-based scripts of the Western civilization. How
the unique characteristics of the Chinese script have affected the writing
technology development in China is another interesting aspect worth
investigation. For example, the typewriter, which was a major milestone in the
history of writing technology development in the Western civilization, is a
missing link in the Chinese history. Can we imagine a history of writing
technology development in Western countries without the typewriter? We
probably never can, but that’s what happened with the Chinese history of writing
technology development.
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 2
Significance/Uniqueness of the Book
Rhetorical History would be the first book of its kind in several aspects and would, I
believe, make a unique contribution to several writing/communication-related fields.
1. As mentioned above, it would be the first book to systematically examine writing
technology development throughout the 5000-year history of the Chinese
civilization. Oddly enough, though this civilization boasts of one of the earliest
written forms of language and several pioneering writing technologies, such as
paper, ink, pen, and movable type, no systematic treatment of these writing
technologies have ever been done in book-length studies.
2. Rhetorical History would also be the first book to examine these particular
writing technologies from a rhetorical perspective. Similar studies that employ a
rhetorical perspective have been done that examine particular
writing/communication technologies in the history of the Western civilization
(e.g., Yates’ Control through communication and Doheny-Farina’s Rhetoric,
innovation, technology). No book-length rhetorical studies, however, have been
done on writing technologies in China.
3. Unlike most studies of writing technology development, which focus more on the
impact of writing technologies on the culture, Rhetorical History has as its focal
point of study the impact of culture on writing technology development,
particularly the influence of rhetorical constructions by the agents of change—the
participants. This reverse perspective, which calls attention to the much neglected
aspect of the rhetorical influences of culture on writing technology development,
will be more helpful in our understanding of the reciprocal relationship between
culture and (writing) technology. At the same time, however, Rhetorical History
will pay its due attention to the impact of writing technology development on the
Chinese society of the various historical periods.
4. Rhetorical History also aims to bring new light to the study of cross-cultural
communication through rigorous analysis of the unique rhetorical practices of the
Chinese culture that have powered the development of each writing technology at
issue. From this light, it is my hope that we will arrive at a better understanding
of how different cultural and rhetorical contexts affect writing technology
development, which in turn affect our writing/communication behavior.
5. Perhaps, most importantly, Rhetorical History bridges the interests of diverse
fields that have rarely come together in any single study. It encompasses rhetoric
and composition’s focus on the rhetorical underpinnings of writing and writing
technology, professional and technical writing’s attention to the contexts of
corporate communication, computers and writing’s interest in the reciprocal
relationship between technology and writing, communication studies’ concern
for mass media and society, cultural studies’ awareness of social contexts, Asian
studies’ curiosity about social development in Asia, and technology transfer’s
consideration of the complexities of technological innovations and transfers.
However, Rhetorical History does not aim to become the hodgepodge of random
research interests; rather, it is designed to make sense of the complex writing
technology developments using an eclectic approach squarely grounded in
rhetorical theory, with an unequivocal focus on the most important piece of any
technological development: the participants as the agent of change.
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 3
Methodology
My methodological approach consists of two aspects: (1) an examination and critique of
current theories of technology and (2) an articulation of an appropriate model of
rhetorical analysis. To examine the rhetorical context of any writing technology
development first entails a thorough understanding of the complex nature of
technology—not only the physical artifacts but also the cultural and ideological aspects
that are inalienable components of any technological development. It further requires a
clear articulation of all the factors/elements that make up a rhetorical situation of
technological development. Finally, it requires a set of operationalized tools that can be
applied to the analysis of any situation of technological development.
A historical perspective on how scholars and researchers have been examining
technological developments will serve to contextualize the rhetorical approach of my
study. I examine such theories as the neutrality theory of technology, the theory of
technological determinism, the substantive theory, the convergence theory, the theory of
scientific and technological revolution, the ambivalence theory, the mediation theory, the
critical theory, the social theories, and the rhetorical theories. This examination will serve
two purposes: (1) to provide a historical perspective on how our interpretations of
technological development have evolved over the last few decades and (2) to critically
analyze the strengths and weaknesses of these theories as a foregrounding of my model of
rhetorical analysis.
My rhetorical approach positions any technological development as a situated practice. I
define technology as a social phenomenon that consists of two overlapping components:
the technical artifact (the physical object) and technical rationality (the cultural
infrastructure embedded in its design and use) (see Figure 1). These two components
don’t simply overlap with each other but are so immersed and intertwined within each
other that they defy easy delineation. Because of this, my approach sees the social and
cultural factors within the rhetorical context not as simply external influences that affect
the development process but rather as intrinsic elements of the technology itself that
make up the driving force behind development.
Technology
Technical Technical
artifact rationality
Figure 1. The nature of technology
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 4
Thus positioned, my methodology aims to develop a valid, well-grounded model of
rhetorical analysis that can be applied to any situation of technological development. I
base my model on Kenneth Burke’s well accepted categorization of rhetorical
situations—the pentad. However, in addition to the five elements of the pentad outlined
by Burke—act, agent, agency, scene, and purpose, I also integrated a sixth element into
the equation: attitude, one that Burke mentioned several times in several of his works that
he wished he had added to the pentad. The addition of this sixth element, I believe, is
rather critical to my rhetorical model because attitude is the most revealing aspect that
helps us understand why participants define a technology the way they do; in a way, it’s
also the underlying driving force behind all actions.
Under the framework of this six-element model of rhetorical analysis developed by Burke,
coupled with a synthesis of the strengths of current and past theories of technology
mentioned earlier, I derive the following six logical elements as the basis of my rhetorical
analysis of any technological development:
1. Act—Knowledge construction (the essence of technology development or
transfer)
2. Agent—Participants (the activating agent of technology development)
3. Agency—Communication medium (the means of communicating the knowledge
about technology)
4. Scene—Exigency (the social context that prompts technology development)
5. Purpose—Knowledge access and control (the power to control who can define,
access, and distribute the knowledge about technology and through what means)
6. Attitude—Ideology (the invisible driving force behind technology, the x factor
that rationalizes all the actions by the agent)
Exigency
Ideology Knowledge
Participant
Medium Control
Figure 2. Elements of a model of rhetorical analysis
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 5
Essentially, this model of rhetorical analysis looks at any technological development as a
discursive/rhetorical act and examines how these six elements interact with and act on
one another, with the participant/agent being the center of all actions (see Figure 2).
In addition to the rhetorical angle, my methodology will inevitably also be historical,
placing all technological developments within historical contexts. I will consider social,
economic, political, and cultural evidence that define a particular rhetorical situation. I
will draw on all kinds of theoretical and empirical evidence, including, but not limited to,
published work by scholars on the subject, historical texts such as literary works and
documentaries, relevant policies and regulations of different eras, media reports, Internet
discussions, etc. Such a methodology, I believe, will render a well-rounded treatment of
the writing technology developments in the history of China.
Comparable Books
I’m confident in saying that no book in any field has done any systematic and exclusive
treatment of writing technology development in China, not to say from a rhetorical
perspective. In addition, very few books have focused on the impact of culture on writing
technology development rather than vice versa. Furthermore, of the few studies that do
take a rhetorical approach to the subject (which I’ll mention below), none have yet
articulated a practical model of rhetorical analysis. I believe for writing/communication-
related fields such as rhetoric and composition, professional and technical
communication, computers and writing, such a study is needed not only to expand our
horizon from a cross-cultural communication perspective but also to establish a
distinctive philosophy and approach toward one of the most important aspects of our field:
the tools/technologies of writing/communication.
A number of books have examined science and technology development of particular
historical periods in China and its impact on the Chinese society (e.g., Rudi Volti’s
Technology, Politics, and Society in China; Claude Alphonso Alvares’s Decolonizing
History: Technology and Culture in India, China and the West; Joseph Needham’s
Science and Civilisation in China; Thomas Carter’s The Invention of Printing in China
and Its Spread Westward). These studies, while informative in their own right, are
inadequate particularly for those of us who focus on writing and communication and the
rhetorical implications of writing technology development. Besides, most of these studies
only concentrate on particular historical periods, leaving us with really no comprehensive
accounts of technology development throughout the history of China.
Other studies have investigated the subject of technology transfer, which is one of the
topics examined in my proposed book in its discussion of the computer technology in
China. For example, Frederic Fleron, Jr.’s Technology and Communist Culture: The
Socio-cultural Impact of Technology under Socialism (1977) brings together more than a
dozen studies on technology transfers under the socialist system, some of which cover
technology development in modern China. These studies, however, are focused almost
exclusively on the political contexts of technology transfer, with no consideration of the
discursive practices that define the transfer process. In addition, these studies are more
than 25 years old and are already outdated in their interpretation of the social and
political contexts the socialist countries.
A few interdisciplinary studies in technology and culture have been monumental in their
influences on the field of rhetoric and composition. Most notable of all, perhaps, is
Andrew Feenberg’s Critical Theory of Technology, which is an in-depth analysis of the
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 6
process of technology transfer from one culture to another. This study, while
tremendously informative and insightful, is more a theoretical articulation of the author’s
overall philosophy on technology rather than a practical application of a theory on
particular technologies, which the proposed book is designed to be.
Perhaps, the most comparable books in nature, relatively speaking, are those published
within the fields of rhetoric and composition, professional and technical communication,
and computers and writing. These books employ, more or less, a rhetorical approach
toward the investigation of writing technology developments in the West and their
rhetorical implications (most notably, Stephen Doheny-Farina’s Rhetoric, Innovation,
Technology: Case Studies of Technical Communication in Technology Transfers;
Johndan Johnson-Eilola’s Nostalgic Angels; Patricia Sullivan and James Porter’s
Opening Spaces: Writing Technologies and Critical Research Practices; Robert
Johnson’s User-Centered Technology: A Rhetorical Theory for Computers and Other
Mundane Artifacts; JoAnne Yates’ Control through Communication: The Rise of System
in American Management; Elizabeth Eisenstein’s The Printing Press as an Agent of
Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe; Gail
Hawisher and Cynthia Selfe’s Evolving Perspectives on Computers and Compositon
Studies; Cynthia Selfe’s Technology and Literacy in the Twenty-First Century; David
Bolter’s Writing Space; Paul LeBlanc’s Writing Teachers Writing Software;). These
studies have been tremendously informative and enlightening to our studies of writing
technologies, especially for those of us in writing/communication-related fields. However,
none of them have examined writing technology development in China.
My proposed book, Rhetorical History, hopes to fill a niche that’s been much neglected
in these fields, especially rhetoric and composition. Book-length studies of non-western
writing technologies are almost non-existent. Rhetorical History should be a helpful
addition to the existing scholarship on the reciprocal relationship between culture and
writing technologies.
Audience and Market
The primary audience for Rhetorical History includes researchers, teachers, and students
in rhetoric and composition, especially those in computers and writing and professional
and technical writing. It addresses issues of concern to those of us who are interested in
exploring the complex issues between writing and writing technologies. Specifically, it
caters to the interest of the following groups:
Teachers and graduate students in rhetoric and composition, professional and
technical writing, and computers and writing
Readers of and contributors to such journals as College Composition and
Communication, Computers and Composition, Technical Communication
Quarterly, Technology and Culture, Technical Communication, Journal of
Business Communication, Business Communication Quarterly, Journal of
Business and Technical Communication, etc.
Regular attendants of such conferences as CCCC, MLA and ATTW
Participants and subscribers to online listservs such as techrhet and attw-l
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 7
Members of the Modern Language Association, Conference on College
Composition and Communication, Computers and Writing, the Association of
Teachers of Technical Writing, and the Rhetoric Society of America
In addition, the interdisciplinary nature of Rhetorical History will appeal to the interest of
several other significant groups of readers, namely,
Teachers, researchers, and graduate students in the fields of ESL, TESOL, TEFL,
and applied linguistics
Researchers in communication studies who are interested in communication
technologies and mass media
Scholars in cultural studies who are interested in the interrelationship between
culture and technologies
Intellectuals in Asian studies who are concerned about any kind of social
developments in Asian countries
Theorists in technology who explore the social impact of and motive behind any
kind of technological development
I believe Rhetorical History will have its market in graduate courses that include any of
the following as a course component: theories of technology, communication media,
electronic writing and publishing, computers and writing, Asian cultures and/or societies,
technology and culture, rhetorical theories, technology transfer, cross-cultural
communication, and professional and technical writing in international contexts. Such
graduate courses are a common part of most graduate programs in rhetoric and
composition, professional and technical communication, communication studies, and
Asian studies.
Another important aspect that must be mentioned is the growing interest in Asian studies,
especially that of the Chinese culture, language, and technology. When cross-cultural
communication courses are becoming a norm rather than anomaly in many graduate
programs under the overall context of globalization, I believe Rhetorical History would
fill a significant need in a market that’s still largely untackled.
I believe my book on writing technology development in China and its rhetorical
approach would be a timely contribution to several fields, given the current interest in
technology and in rhetorical theory. At the same time, because of the historical nature of
its topic, I believe Rhetorical History, like many historical works, will have a rather
enduring timeliness.
Length, Status, and Timetable
Rhetorical History will be somewhere between 250 and 300 manuscript pages, including
all appendices. I expect to have two to three appendices, about five tables, and
somewhere between 15 and 20 figures.
Rhetorical History is a revision of my PhD dissertation completed at Purdue University
in December 2000. However, Rhetorical History represents a serious departure from the
dissertation in both structure and content design. While my dissertation devotes a big part
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 8
of it to literature review and the justification of my methodology and focuses on the
rhetorical analysis of the computer development in China with a less rigorous
examination of the other writing technologies mentioned above, my proposed book will
have a much more succinct treatment and delineation of my methodology and will
examine all the writing technologies that have ever emerged in China with equal rigor
and depth.
Currently, the project is in good progress, with one chapter finished and another chapter
revision under way. I expect to complete the project and submit the manuscript to the
publisher no later than August 2004. I’m very confident of this timeline for three
reasons: (1) research required for the book project was already completed; (2) my
dissertation chapters on all these writing technology developments provide a very good
basis for my book chapters; and (3) I can commit a significant part of my time to the
project even during the academic year since my teaching load is fairly light (2 courses per
semester, all repeat courses) and I expect my department’s full support for course release
once a book contract is secured.
My Credentials and Research Interests
I believe I’m uniquely qualified to write such a book for the following reasons:
I have been engaged in research in issues of technology and culture related to
professional and technical communication, electronic writing and publishing,
cross-cultural communication, contrastive rhetoric, and so on. Such a research
focus is consistently reflected in my scholarly work, including, among others, my
two co-edited collections on contemporary western rhetoric and some of my
conference presentations at such national conferences as Conference on College
Composition and Communication, Association of Teachers of Technical Writing
Conference, Modern Language Association Convention, and Association for
Business Communication Convention (please see my vita for details).
I have a diverse educational background that has prepared me well for an
interdisciplinary study like this one. I have a BA in English Language and
Literature, a one-year graduate study in ESL, an MA in Business and Technical
Communication, and a PhD in Rhetoric and Composition with a focus in
Professional and Technical Writing.
My ethnic background is Chinese, and I’m familiar with the Chinese culture and
its history. In addition, I have lived in both China and the U.S. and am familiar
with both cultures, especially from a cross-cultural communication perspective.
I’m familiar with the academic culture and scholarship in both countries. I taught
English at the university level in China for eight years and have been an assistant
professor at two different universities in the U.S. for about four years. I have
taught graduate and undergraduate courses at these universities in composition,
technical writing, business writing, electronic writing and publishing, proposal
writing, technical editing, rhetorical theory, etc. This teaching experience,
coupled with my three years’ experience as a program director at one of the
universities, has given me a good understanding of the needs of the programs in
rhetoric and composition and professional and technical writing, what courses are
offered and needed, and what texts are sought after in various courses.
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 9
My Contact Info.
Address: Dept. of English
Georgia State University
MSC 8R0322
33 Gilmer St., SE, Unit 8
Atlanta, GA 30303-3088
Phones: 404-651-2900 (O)
770-953-2467 (H)
Fax: 404-651-1710
Email: bgu@gsu.edu
Attachments
Table of Contents
Vita
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 10
Table of Contents
Ch. 1 Introduction: (Un)loading Technology
(introduces the book with interesting examples of the use of the new writing
technology—the computer—similar to the one used in this prospectus; describes
the scope and purpose of the study, overviews the history of writing technology
development in China; describes the unique nature of the Chinese language;
defines and deconstructs technology; and rationalizes my methodological
approach)
Ch. 2. Oracle and Bronze Inscriptions: The First Chinese Writing Technologies
(traces the emergence of the first writing technology in China—the oracle bone
inscriptions as they were first used as divination tools in the 16th century B.C. in
the Shang Dynasty; examines its derivative technology—the bronze
inscriptions—that appeared in the late Shang Dynasty and were popularized in
the ensuing Zhou Dynasty; explores the transition between the two; examines the
rhetorical context of these inventions, which will be done for all subsequent
chapters that discuss writing technology developments)
Ch. 3. Early Forms of Pen, Ink, and Paper
(examines the invention of first brush pens as early as 11th century B.C. and their
improved versions in the 3rd century B.C., the emergence of primitive ink in the
3rd century A.D., and the use of the early forms of paper—bamboo, wood, and
silk long before the paper of the modern form was invented in the 2nd century
A.D.; examines the rhetorical context)
Ch. 4 The Modern Form of Paper: The First Major Invention
(studies the invention of paper in the 2nd century A.D. and its subsequent
popularization and use; analyzes the rhetorical context)
Ch. 5 Block Printing and Movable Type: The Onset of Mass Book Production
(investigates the invention of block printing in the 8th century A.D. and of
movable type in the 11th century A.D.; discusses the significance of the two
inventions and examines the rhetorical context)
Ch. 6 The Chinese Typewriter: The Missing Link
(discusses the invention of the Chinese typewriter in the mid-20th century and
explores the reasons for the failure to popularize this writing technology)
Ch. 7 The Computer and the Internet: The First Foreign-Born Writing Technology
(examines the transfer and development process of this foreign-born modern
writing technology from the late 1970s to the present; explores the complex
rhetorical context that enabled the development of this new technology)
Ch. 8 Conclusion
Appendices
References
Index
Book Prospectus (Baotong Gu) July 31, 2003 11
Related docs
