|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 13, 2011 19:34:47 GMT -5
When I refer to freestyling, I mean someone performing a song live on stage. I wouldn't consider Lil' Wayne, on stage and making up a song as he goes and saying it outloud, to be lit. It would be that oral tradition. If he freestyled it in a studio and the lyrics were subsequently written down on a CD insert, then the words written down on the sheet of paper are literature. But doesn't that completely remove Jay-Z from the process of literature? Since you're suggesting the only mode of literature is written, then the true creator of literature would be one who writes, correct? Or am I shooting too far here? Simpler question: does Jay-Z create literature. When he writes down his lyrics, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 13, 2011 19:35:13 GMT -5
But doesn't that completely remove Jay-Z from the process of literature? Since you're suggesting the only mode of literature is written, then the true creator of literature would be one who writes, correct? Or am I shooting too far here? Simpler question: does Jay-Z create literature. This is a Catch-22. We cannot answer this question until we define what literature is, but it seems we need to answer questions like these in order to define literature. This is true. |
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 13, 2011 19:36:00 GMT -5
But doesn't that completely remove Jay-Z from the process of literature? Since you're suggesting the only mode of literature is written, then the true creator of literature would be one who writes, correct? Or am I shooting too far here? Simpler question: does Jay-Z create literature. When he writes down his lyrics, yes. But he never does, so... |
|
Dobby
Young Armadillo
Posts: 80
|
Post by Dobby on Jun 13, 2011 19:37:26 GMT -5
When he writes down his lyrics, yes. But he never does, so... Then I believe it would more appropriately be labeled as oral tradition. |
|
|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 13, 2011 19:37:50 GMT -5
When he writes down his lyrics, yes. But he never does, so... So then he creates oral tradition, not literature. |
|
|
|
Post by cyanea on Jun 13, 2011 19:39:40 GMT -5
I wish there was another word for "oral tradition". It just sounds so awkward compared to a word like literature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 13, 2011 19:41:25 GMT -5
I wish there was another word for "oral tradition". It just sounds so awkward compared to a word like literature. I think I used it when it actually made sense, but now, I think you're right. Oral lore? ... that sounds cool. Orality? Lol... I'm just perusing the wiki page. |
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 13, 2011 19:41:38 GMT -5
But if he wrote them down, it'd be literature?
I really am not comprehending the actual aesthetic difference between the two forms. If literature has to be read, then for most of the population, most speeches/lyrics are not literature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 13, 2011 19:44:29 GMT -5
But if he wrote them down, it'd be literature? I really am not comprehending the actual aesthetic difference between the two forms. If literature has to be read, then for most of the population, most speeches/lyrics are not literature. Then they're not, it's as simple as that. Although most speeches are pre-written, aren't they? I still don't understand why you're trying to put something that can stand well on it's own under literature. |
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 13, 2011 19:45:52 GMT -5
I have an alternate question: how does Jay-Z writing his lyrics down change anything out all about the final product? Like, if he announced tomorrow that he's been lying for years and he actually writes down everything, what changes all of a sudden that makes his work literature?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 13, 2011 19:47:56 GMT -5
But if he wrote them down, it'd be literature? I really am not comprehending the actual aesthetic difference between the two forms. If literature has to be read, then for most of the population, most speeches/lyrics are not literature. Then they're not, it's as simple as that. Although most speeches are pre-written, aren't they? I still don't understand why you're trying to put something that can stand well on it's own under literature. Because I'm having trouble understanding the difference. The logic of "Well, they just are!" isn't quite working for me. |
|
|
|
Post by cyanea on Jun 13, 2011 19:48:43 GMT -5
But how do we study the speeches of history? I first experienced the Gettysburg Address in school where it was written down in a history textbook. I don't consider Obama to be creating literature when he stands at a podium to deliver a speech, but if that speech is later written down, I would consider the written form of the speech to be lit. (The original speaker of the speech doesn't need to do it for it to be considered lit. Much of Shakespeare comes from audience and cast memory, and we still credit it to him.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 13, 2011 19:51:20 GMT -5
But how do we study the speeches of history? I first experienced the Gettysburg Address in school where it was written down in a history textbook. I don't consider Obama to be creating literature when he stands at a podium to deliver a speech, but if that speech is later written down, I would consider the written form of the speech to be lit. (The original speaker of the speech doesn't need to do it for it to be considered lit. Much of Shakespeare comes from audience and cast memory, and we still credit it to him.) What I'm asking is why. Why is it that the speech doesn't become literature until it's written down? What changes? The Jay-Z example is a little better at explaining the conflict I'm trying to point out. |
|
|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 13, 2011 19:52:55 GMT -5
I think earlier, in the beginning of the thread, one of the things that most everyone agreed on was that literature was the written word.
What we haven't agreed on was everything else. If it is not written, it is not literature.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyanea on Jun 13, 2011 19:54:07 GMT -5
But how do we study the speeches of history? I first experienced the Gettysburg Address in school where it was written down in a history textbook. I don't consider Obama to be creating literature when he stands at a podium to deliver a speech, but if that speech is later written down, I would consider the written form of the speech to be lit. (The original speaker of the speech doesn't need to do it for it to be considered lit. Much of Shakespeare comes from audience and cast memory, and we still credit it to him.) What I'm asking is why. Why is it that the speech doesn't become literature until it's written down? What changes? The Jay-Z example is a little better at explaining the conflict I'm trying to point out. Because I don't think songs are lit. Song lyrics are, when they're written down. |
|
