As I write, a local newspaper is gearing up for its annual literacy promotion. The cause is hard to fault, especially if you’re a hyper-literate like me. I can’t help wondering, though, exactly what the organizers mean by “literacy,” except a vague, feel-good cause that everybody supports.
After all, there is something self-serving a newspaper promoting literacy. Is the newspaper really interested in the common good, or simply in ensuring a new generation of readers? In these days when obituaries are being written for beloved old newspapers in particular and the medium in general, I have to wonder.
The trouble is, no one ever seems to identify exactly what they mean by literacy. Even at a minimal level of being able to read street signs, ballots, and government documents, a definition of literacy runs into trouble. After all, exactly what abilities does minimal literacy include? The ability to use a colon or semi-colon properly? An ampersand? A hyphen or forward slash? The knowledge of when to use a list, and what a numbered list signals as opposed to a bullet list? When to use and how to pronounce the accents in words borrowed from other languages? By these standards, very few people would ever be counted as literate, even though all of these questions are relatively elementary.
Similarly, what level of comprehension is implied by the term? Does a person, for instance, need to be able to identify a literary effect? To be able to consciously use those effects themselves?
For that matter, is an awareness of language and how it develops required before someone is literate? If so, then thousands of grammar Nazis who condemn any departure from an artificial standard English would be horrified to learn that they were not literate themselves.
Also, sooner or later, a definition of literacy involves a familiarity with the cultural influences that shape a language. True literacy in English, for example, requires a knowledge of Shakespeare and Christianity (or at least the King James Bible), as well as several dozen other authors and cultural influences.
And what about idioms? Should a person who can write and read a language but not understand an idiom or a pun be considered literate?
Discarding any of these requirements is difficult, but that is only half the problem. The other half is what degree of knowledge or skill a literate person is supposed to have in each of these requirements. How can you measure a concept that, the more you consider it, the more complex it becomes?
No wonder that many educators stick to simpler goals, like standardized spelling. At least with spelling, there is usually a definite right or wrong answer, so long as you stick with official English. But including anything that makes reading or writing seem worth developing means entering a more complex world where right and wrong is qualified and weighted, where – horror of horrors – a student might even be able to question a teacher, provided they know how to construct an argument.
In the end, the concept of literacy seems to come down to what you are pointing to when you use the term. But I would be a lot more comfortable if the promoters of literacy did point to anything. For all I know, their concept of literacy – or, at least, what they are willing to settle for – is far different from my definitions.
I can’t help suspecting that authority figures are automatically hypocritical whenever they talk about literacy. Obviously, a technological society needs higher general standards of literacy than other cultures in order to function, but I always have the nagging suspicion that, when promoting literacy, the Powers That Be would vastly prefer that it not be promoted too far – certainly not to the extent that the average person can deconstruct official pronouncements and maybe question them. In the end, I suspect that the level of literacy they are prepared to settle for is far less than the level I would prefer, and that literacy can be a far more radical concept that everyone assumes.
Off the Wall 
I think you’re aiming too high, at least for the US. We’re still struggling with lose/loose, where to put the dollar sign, and your/you’re.
Hi Bruce,
This article got me wondering about people who name their children with odd spelling names. I’ve often tried to figure out if they were being unique or just truly didn’t know how to spell the name. It would be interesting to find out how many people were named something different purely out of their parents being unaware of how to spell a particular name.
I’ve been reading your blogs for some time now and always look forward to the next one. I am a Kwaguilth carver up in Port Hardy from the village of Fort Rupert. I’m one of those artists who use different venues to sell work that one of your earlier blogs alluded to. I haven’t sold a piece to a gallery in about four years now as I do almost excusively custom work. I basically go to summer markets for as many weeks as it takes and collect orders. Once I have enough for the year I quit the markets and get to work.
When I first started carving I was in Vancouver and had to do the rounds to sell a mask. Then as I started to make a bit of a name I would know who to call and who was into my work. I actually miss the gallery scene a little as it does gain you a certain recognition. Nobody in Vancouver would know me or my work anymore. I’m sure most galleries over there figured I stopped carving but in reality I just haven’t had the time to do a piece to bring to a gallery. It does, however, remain as one of my goals for the next year. I would like to get it into my system to always have at least one piece out there and available.
Anyways, I seem to have hijacked this reply a bit and gotten off topic. I just wanted to introduce myself as I’ve been reading your posts for a while now.
Cheers,
Jason Hunt
Although I admire your lofty standards, I must admit, I think you expect too much from the Average Joe. By definition, “literacy” is simply “the ability to read and write.” As you say, there are no standards in place by which to judge these things, so I suppose any level of proficiency can be considered valid. While I consider myself to be a literate person, my use of the language can best be described as “lightly polished crap.” I, like most people, tend to take liberties which, I’m sure, are offensive to some, particularly grammar nazis. However, I believe a certain amount of regional tweaking and modernization are often appropriate.
Were I to take a grammar test at this stage of the game, I have no doubt I would fail with flying colours, even given that I’m considered to be of an “above average” literacy level. My use of punctuation is dodgy at best, but, so far, it hasn’t sunk to teeth-grinding levels (hopefully). I confess these things en route to pointing out that if I’m considered above average and yet my skills are sadly lacking, what hope is there for the aforementioned Average Joe? Especially in view of the fact that I would consider many of our Educators to be less than an acceptible level of literate. Did you know that our children are now being taught “text-speak” in schools? What hope have they?
I certainly aspire to your level of literacy, but as goals go, this one is beyond my reach, and beyond the reach of most people. Still, there is no harm in trying.
I suspect that your local newspaper is striving only for the bare-bones literal definition: the ability to read and write. I would heartily support a raising of the bar.