(Presentation and Introduction to the Manuscripts of a Social Group and their Attempt to Abolish Written Language as a Means of Communication)

***

This presentation was constructed from the analysis of a set of manuscripts found inside a book about objects used for divining, published in Angola in 1965 and acquired in a second-hand bookshop in Paris in 1999. The documents found in this book form a small nucleus of manuscripts apparently with the same origin and using the same type of paper, in a total of nineteen pages of a smaller format than those of the book in which they were found.

The documents, written in small handwriting with little ornament, are in a very poor state of conservation, and on about five pages it is almost impossible to read all of the sentences.

The documents, dated on some pages in the upper right corner of the page, cover a period from July to September 1957. The sheets of paper from the manuscript are spread throughout the whole of the book, apparently not following any rule or logic of interpretation.

These documents, which were originally written in English, were found about ten years ago and then interpreted and translated into Portuguese, finally giving rise to this presentation. The text that is exhibited here serves as an introduction and presentation to what we may define as a social group that is distinguished due to its use of a somewhat peculiar approach to voice and speech as a privileged means of communication.

What distinguishes and differentiates these manuscripts, and at the same time justifies our presentation, is that, apparently, this group came together around a radical proposal: that of abolishing writing as a privileged means of communication within the group.

Writing, a technology historically created and developed in human societies, has its central function as a vehicle for recording information, and it is impossible to deny its relevance for the diffusion of information and the construction of knowledge. The advance of new technologies and interactions among different supports (for example, paper, canvas) and languages (verbal or non-verbal) have even allowed the appearance of collective forms of constructing texts.

We start from the principle according to which this group decided to abolish  text because it was seen as a linguistic manifestation of the ideas of one author, which will be interpreted by the reader in accordance with their linguistic and cultural knowledge, using pre-existing systems of codification of language.

The group believed that a way of interpreting and possible fixing of the voice through text would be an attempt to enclose the objects, the emotions and the moments in undecipherable monoliths. The attempt to subvert the idea of making a text that goes through different phases and the main characteristics of which would be to go beyond the limits of the phrase, decontextualised from traditional grammar, would only serve to include the relevant roles of the author and the reader in the construction of texts. The group defended that no form of communication that had its provenance in speech should be recorded in any manner, and much less reorganised into categories such as prose, poetry, etc.

The manuscripts are drawn up in a chaotic and disorganised manner. On each page we can find different types of writing, sometimes more descriptive, other times in the form of a diary. The descriptions tell of an experience carried out by a determined social group that decided to stop using written language as a form of manifestation and of production of knowledge.

The form and the tone in which the descriptions are made in the manuscripts and the stance of the person who observes and then writes makes one think that the documents were drawn up by someone who belonged to this group, but unbeknown to the others. The handwriting, besides being small, is somewhat confused, looking like it was written in some haste. The description of the scenes is made from a distant viewpoint, and reflects the view of a silent observer.

From the statements contained in the fragments we managed to organise, we can deduce that the writings in question proclaim a total denial on the part of this social movement of all the formal aspects of text, that is, the denial of the need for a structure and of elements that might establish relationships among them, in particular when they take on the written form. Within the formal aspects there is a conscious rejection of the cohesion and coherence that grant meaning and form to the text. Coherence is related to comprehension, the interpretation of what is said or written. A text needs to make sense; that is, it needs to have coherence. Although cohesion is not condition enough for the statements to be formed as texts, it is the cohesive elements that grant it greater legibility and show the relationships among its diverse components. Coherence depends on cohesion.

It was due to the exceptional nature of the documents found that we decided to dedicate this presentation to the introduction of this particular group – a small society to which we have not managed to attribute a name. We have considered it fitting not to create a name to identify this group, as this might be an intrusive manner of defining a movement that, we believe, wishes to precisely go against any form of linguistic inclusion.

The manuscripts mention certain actions, and sometimes there is a specific linking and chronicle order, showing situations and objects, but we never find a geographical description that is sufficiently clear to allow us to identify the place where the events related may have taken place. The geographical references are very scarce, and the descriptions of the landscape are considerably less detailed than the descriptions of the group’s actions – which generally have a more documentary and sometimes intimate nature.

The manuscripts attach greater importance to all the manifestations in which oral confrontation is more visible. Special attention is given to a sort of ritual in which all the people in the group do a voice exercise. Of note is the importance granted to vocal chords and to their vibration, as well as the constant and undifferentiated production of sounds. Part of the reports mention different elements of the group that are studying the possibility of creating innovative forms of producing sounds, in a more or less systematic register, in which sound, reaching the mouth (the laryngeal sound), is articulated not only due to the action of the tongue, the lips, the teeth, the velum palate, the floor of the mouth, but also the nostrils, the hands, the arms, the legs and the feet.

The main part of the document is a detailed description of a scene, the moment of a performance. This is a sort of presentation, between dance, theatre, the manipulation of objects and voice projection. This “ritual” is staged about three times a day, and it is at these moments that all the members of the group gather around the objects each one has brought.

We end our presentation with some quotations taken from these manuscripts, without any chronological or hierarchical order:

“We were all gathered together, and a short while ago a group of people near to a wall, some sitting in different chairs, started to show a series of objects and make a considerably detailed description of them. They talk about each of the objects for a long time, and sometimes they caress them, to other items they react with some violence … The names given to the objects have also changed, and it was decided among everyone that each object could have several names, depending on the situation. The objects are normally set against the wall … Some people from the group discuss the possibility of giving new names to basic objects …

… many of the objects are cast into a fire made of hundreds of charcoal pencils – among the objects burnt are lamps, mirrors, table legs, photographs, items of clothing (for example, a scarf), books, paintings, games, cameras, chairs and big pieces of paper … all the people brought their books and spent hours carefully taking out each page, crumpling them up and throwing them into a big pile …”

“There is an older man who says out loud: the voice is the only instrument that can make the immaterial aspect of thought visible through the body … he is talking very loud so everyone can hear him …”

“Why do we need to write down the things we say? Do we have to remain attached to things written in the past forever?”

“… it was an impulsive movement to gain time to think – to make sure that my eyes weren’t tricking me.”

“The spoken language that we are slowly developing makes it sometimes look like we are stuttering … it creates very amusing situations …”

© Pedro Barateiro, 2009. All rights reserved.