Animism And The Alphabet Summary
Annotation’s made from David Abram Animism and the Alphabet In Animism and the Alphabet, David Abram, founder and creative director of the Alliance for Wild Ethics, goes in depth about how writing and the alphabet developed over the years by various groups of people. After annotating the text, I was able to consider the arguments presented by David Abram and found myself questioning many of his viewpoints. As I was reading my annotations, one that jumped out at me was when I wrote “may not be “true” writing, but still has meaning behind each picture that can tell a story” (30). How does one actually determine what writing consists of? I feel as though writing does not solely consist of words, rather writing needs to communicate ones thoughts or convey a story. This communication can be demonstrated through pictures in addition to text.
It’s true that not everything can be voiced through pictures, but that is why the alphabet was later created. After looking into my annotation even further, I realized even though David Abram looks at the positive and negatives aspects of everything, I felt as though he was trying to create a certain image of what writing should look like. Abram uses persuasive language and supporting information that pictures are not writing since “some researchers” said it was true (30). Readers usually buy into …show more content…
In another annotation of mine I questioned “what does he mean by “more-than-human”?” (31). Within the first eight pages, Abram mentions this “more-than-human” field, world and life-world. Unsure of what this meant to the text as a whole, I tried to look further into the meaning behind the text. I felt as though the “more-than-human” phrase was used to highlight the ideas of people of the past who were no longer in the world and how they were big influences in the writing
It’s true that not everything can be voiced through pictures, but that is why the alphabet was later created. After looking into my annotation even further, I realized even though David Abram looks at the positive and negatives aspects of everything, I felt as though he was trying to create a certain image of what writing should look like. Abram uses persuasive language and supporting information that pictures are not writing since “some researchers” said it was true (30). Readers usually buy into …show more content…
In another annotation of mine I questioned “what does he mean by “more-than-human”?” (31). Within the first eight pages, Abram mentions this “more-than-human” field, world and life-world. Unsure of what this meant to the text as a whole, I tried to look further into the meaning behind the text. I felt as though the “more-than-human” phrase was used to highlight the ideas of people of the past who were no longer in the world and how they were big influences in the writing