/lit/ - Literature

>>19661095
It was only antiquity, not the middle ages. But there were still some particularly capable people in antiquity who could read in their minds.

>>19661095
>>19661103
Why did they not possess such a basic skill? Were they retarded?

>>19661126
it was because the text had no punctuation or spaces and they also just had slaves to do it for them.

>>19661095
Some texts do gain from being read aloud. Poe in particular imho.

I am very dumb but I can read in my head

>>19661095
Researchers say the sentence quoted below has the most beautiful prosody in the English language, but you have to read it aloud to get the full effect. Go ahead and try it for yourself!

>I am sofa king wee Todd did

>>19661095
Reading aloud is a super power (((they))) don't want you to find out about. Just try it for a while. You'll never want to go back to le timid cowardly head-reading.

At least assuming what you're reading is worth reading in the first place. If you're reading junk then hearing your own voice speaking it will only increase how much you hate yourself

Reading aloud is like playing a sidescroller. It's fun, just running across the lines, trying not the fall. You're literally engaging your voice, the voice of the author is passing through your own. Your everyday conversational diction improves, your enunciation, your vocabulary, your velocity. The brain is multimodal, and more mediums make for stronger comprehension. Reading aloud is great practice for acting, voice acting, sales, lecturing, vlogging. Memorizing poetry is an obvious signal of class and grace. Performance is meditation. You can detect when you sound lame or authentic and interrogate yourself as to why, experimenting with different directions with how to read. Writing becomes obvious in its needs. Probably everything you actually hate about your own writing become as apparent when you have to read it out loud. Record your own readings and listen back and you can re-experience any text in an extraordinarily powerful way.

>>19661403
This 100x. Plus it helps you identify good books and bad books. You CANNOT read a bad book out loud for more than a few minutes before rolling your eyes and realizing the author is retarded. Most people on /lit/ would probably avoid literally decades of life wasted reading garbage

>>19661095
It's slower.

>>19661304
This. The Tell-Tale Heart becomes all the more chilling when read aloud.

>>19661103
There was a Bishop that Augustine said could do it. Everyone couldn't figure out why he'd do something so weird, and Augustine eventually decided he did it so nobody would come up and ask him difficult questions about what he was reading.

>>19661126
There are a couple of reasons like lack of punctuation or everything being in capital letters or allthewordsbeingbuncheduplikethis
My favorite one, as Seneca notes in his letters, whether it was poetry or some history book, it was meant to be read aloud so you can fully appreciate the sonority with which the writer sculpted his piece.

>>19661095
I used it to fix a lisp when I was younger.

>>19661403
>Memorizing poetry is an obvious signal of class and grace.

Yet in literature it is mostly buffoons who do this

>>19661327
Fuck...

>>19661095
Hard books get easier to read and understand.

>>19661403
>>19661437
Thank you

>>19661327
kek reminds me of the elementary trick of getting someone to say
>i was born on a pirate ship
while holding his tongue

A culture of oration and low literacy made it necessary to be able to soundly read aloud if you wanted to be taken seriously.

>>19661095
Imagine hopping on a carriage and having to listen to 6 other people reading their stories aloud?
Fucking maddening.

>>19661645
Spell ICUP, I dare you.

>>19661736
E-Y-E C-U-P

>>19661095
Your neighbors will either hate you, think you’re a schizo, or both.

>>19661126
>>19661587

Were citizens exposed to writing on a daily basis and mostly literate? Are normies SODUMBTHATIFIWROTELIKETHISTHEYCOULDNTQUICKLYREADITSUBVOCALLY

>>19661103
Augustine isn't Middle Ages yet, and it probably was done before that, I mean, it probably wasn't Ambrose who invented it, he just happened to be the first one Augustine saw.

I meant this reply >>19661803 to the OP >>19661095

>>19661799
idk how the romans handled public education but some of the lower classes had some level of literacy, given that the graffiti was mostly done by them, often with bad grammar and spelling.
There is also the issue of it not being a cultural norm to read silently so it wouldn't cross their minds to do so.

>>19661803
>>19661805
Antiquity is in the op image

>>19661327
Damn you got me

Maybe there really is something to reading aloud that you can't get from reading in your head. I wouldn't have gotten the joke unless I read it aloud

>>19661095
This is basically an exaggeration tending towards the mythologizing. See the evidence: "...Cato and Caesar were standing together, and had opposing views. Just then Caesar was passed a little note from outside, and he read it in silence; but Cato shouted that Caesar was doing something strange, and receiving communications from the enemy. And the crowd went wild..." Caesar, as military commander, read in silence, as was to be expected, but remarks it is strange. Sure it is strange, but clearly not the reading itself, as Cato clearly understood that Caesar was reading in silence; the purported strangeness was the occlusion and secrecy of it in a time when so much was dependent on maintaining the trust and confidence of the greatest number, because the machinery of state was not yet depersonalized and industrialized. When Augustine notes that Ambrose reads in silence, again the strangeness, pertains to his not sharing something designed for public sharing, a literary, philosophical, or theological oeuvre, but because it was so rare or even unheard of per se.

>>19662228
Ye. Lots of word play can be lost if you just glaze over the text within your mind.

>>19661095
This is basically an exaggeration tending towards the mythologizing. See the evidence: "...Cato and Caesar were standing together, and had opposing views. Just then Caesar was passed a little note from outside, and he read it in silence; but Cato shouted that Caesar was doing something strange, and receiving communications from the enemy. And the crowd went wild..." Caesar, as military commander, read in silence, as was to be expected, but remarks it is strange. Sure it is strange, but clearly not the reading itself, as Cato clearly understood that Caesar was reading in silence; the purported strangeness was the occlusion and secrecy of it in a time when so much was dependent on maintaining the trust and confidence of the greatest number, because the machinery of state was not yet depersonalized and industrialized. When Augustine notes that Ambrose reads in silence, again the strangeness, pertains to his not sharing something designed for public sharing, a literary, philosophical, or theological oeuvre, not because it was so rare or even unheard of per se.

>>19661095
If you ever write anything yourself remember to read it aloud to get the feeling for how it flows.

>>19661095
What's Ptolemy saying here (2nd century CE; De iudicandi facultate 5.1-2, Burnyeat’s translation):
"...[F]or judging a thing and discovering its nature, the internal logos [in this context, ‘faculty of reasoning’] of thought is sufficient: uttered logos makes no contribution here -- rather, its activity, like the exercise of our senses, disturbs and distracts one’s investigations. That is why it tends to be in states of peace and quiet that we discover the objects of our inquiry, and why we keep quiet when engaged in the readings themselves if we are concentrating hard on the texts before us. What talk is useful for, by contrast, is passing on the results of our inquiries to other people."

>>19661095
IIRC McLuhan considers privacy as we know it now a recent contrivance, and that reading quietly in public would be as strange to them as reading aloud in public would be to us

>>19661126
Yes, ancient people were retarded. Have you never read any ancient literature?

>>19662301
WRONG! They were literally just retarded back in the day; I mean, for fuck's sake, they literally, unironically thought the ocean was "wine-colored"!

>>19662301
WRONG! They were literally just retarded back in the day; I mean, for fuck's sake, they literally and unironically thought that the ocean was "wine-colored" (look it up)!

>>19662379
>>19662382
grapes used to be blue, numbnuts

People in antiquity did things in ways that we find bizarre because they lived with a completely different concept of time. There was no necessity to do things faster, as in modernity. Why would you need to hurry so much? Why would you need to read a text without vocalizing?

>>19662390
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA! The fucking cope!
This is literally some "brown cows produce choccy milk" level of thinking.
Please consider suicide.

>>19662398
This.

>>19662382
Homer is not saying it was the literal color of wine, but rather that it was as opaque as wine, for example, as opaque as wine in a metallic drinking bowl.

>>19662460
You're both wrong, the phrase 'wine dark' is used because ancient greek didn't even have a word for blue specifically. Most ancient and even many modern languages describe appearance via value (light and dark) rather than hue

>>19662479
This is precisely my point, it was a reference to opacity, not strict coloration per se. To describe what we would call blue, Homer would either have to refer to purple or green. It was his artistic prerogative to choose either. Btw, under certain not necessarily uncommon conditions blood may appear literally green underwater. In any case, the wine dark sea is probably also an evocation of dark blood, and how so much of the blood of men ends up mixing with the sea, making of the two a sort of poetic precursor of the Christian imagistic concept of "one body, one blood." The wine dark sea might quite literally be in the same sanguinary vein as the latter.

>>19662427
The other day while I was in bed I pictured Ebenezer Scrooge roaming the house with his candle. Imagine living in a time when you'd have to light a candle to go around your own home at night. And not in cases of emergency, but every night. The very idea of light and dark is gone in this era where I can flick a switch and get instant brightness in my room.
Have you ever been in a house far off in the country? When you look outside at night, you see black. A pitch black field. It's like an abyss that your eyes cannot penetrate. And from that abyss come the voices of animals, and other noises of nature that you are not part of. Painters, of course, did not have access to 6000K bulbs, so they only had the time of day to paint. You never think about this, but this border between day and night, light and dark, is completely lost now. You do not really look far into the sky at dusk and think of how to adapt.

>>19661789
>The year of our lord 2021 (almost 2022)
>Still living in a hovel where you and your neighbors can literally hear every word each other says
Stop being a poorfag

>not singing aloud prose in plainchant

>>19661789
They already heard all my angry monologues about society in a foreign language, I can do no further damage.

>>19661095
I read aloud because I remember basically everything that I hear. I never had to take notes during my traditional education. Learn how you learn. In conclusion, results may vary.

>>19661327

>>19661327
wtf bros...

>>19662228
Reading it out loud didn't help. Had to fiddle around with the words in my head and stretch the sounds to make it sound like the intended joke. Maybe a dialect thing.

>>19661095

>Redpill me

No

>>19664160
Please?

I did this after reading that specific Nietzsche aphorism about it. Every aphorism after that I get noise complaints from neighbors.

>>19664456
Read lolita with throat bass throat singing

>>19661095
In the Middle Ages most people were illiterate, so if you were one of the rare people who could read, you would feel obliged to read aloud, so that everyone around you could enjoy a book they would otherwise never experience.

Those days will soon return. By the end of this century any man who can decipher the printed page will have three square meals a day, a permanent seat at the Village Chief's right hand, and all the prime 15-year-old pussy he can handle.

>>19661587
VGHRETVRNTOTRADITION

>>19664456
link to that aphorism?

>>19662460
>>19662479
This is what happens when scholars never go outside. The ocean has no pigment. The hue changes at sunset.

>>19661437
>100x
post ca

>>19665405
No, it's just that Homer was blind and didn't know what colors were

>>19665331
All too human
344

That aphorism has been referenced in Genealogy of Morality too.

I can't seem to read literature without hearing the words one-by-one in my head. I don't seem to have this problem when reading various other text on the internet. Anyone else experience this? I don't remember having this as a child, but reading the past year or two it has been the case.