#2

1. Performers like the scop, gulsar, or jongleur, which was the most important skill—memory or invention? Explain Why? Did the spread of literacy change the balance between these two skills?

While both are important it is of my opinion that memory was of stronger importance in terms of skill. Conquergood discusses that, “There is no record of any scop ever dying for something he said in performance, where as many a man laid down his life for what he uttered in boast, or worse, lived out of a wretched existence in exile because he failed to live up to his boast.” This particular quote stands out ot me for two reasons.

In terms of the importance of memory in performance, Turner says that “By their performances ye shall know them.” This idea can be seen in several of the themes from this week’s readings. Turner talks about the liminality of rituals in culture. He focuses on the “in between” stages of rituals and rites of passage. From this standpoint, one can argue that people are recognized or remembered by the performance, which in this case is the ritual, they have gone through. The ritual, being war, and that ritual being communicated by the boasting of the scop, gulsar and jongleurs. This is not to say that invention was not an important factor, but on the basis of the continuation of the retelling of lived memory or performances, memory, surpasses.

With the spread of literacy there is a slight dynamic shift in which is more prominent, while some literary critics and believe in invention or that the text can stand alone and speak for itself, those in this discipline, I believe should still stand in the basis of importance of memory. While literacy may reify the text there is still a stronger dynamic that comes from the practice and the actual retelling that can provide heavy influence on an audience.