my first literature review :)

It is not an everyday practice of most individuals to immerse themselves in the catalog of symbols that constitutes their being, or to even think about the impacts of their culture and how it shapes their mere existence through this set of symbols. Some may attribute this to our face paced lifestyles and our preoccupation with never-ending responsibilities, but this lack of awareness for what makes us who we are has been present in societies for hundreds of years. And rightfully so! Having the ability to pull back from one's self, and essentially one's own existence, requires a state of mind that must be cultivated differently for each individual. What makes sense to one person does not always resonate with another, which demonstrates that we all have our own individual culture as a subset of the larger culture we are a part of. Every variable that constitutes our culture(s) produces a function that allows us to operate in the context of our own lives. Therefore, it is safe to say that the structure of our culture(s) determines the functions that carry us through our lives.

The idea of structure and function can be seen throughout nature and in numerous disciplines. The human body exemplifies this concept in the purest form. When we look at the intricate processes that take place in order to keep our bodies functioning there is no doubt that it could not be possible without the specific structures that make up the systems carrying out these processes. The same is true of culture. Like a HUGE organism, culture is comprised of hundreds of thousands of structures that work in unison, as well as opposition, to produce functions that carryout in our every day lives. The work of Elizabeth Eisenstein addresses this as a problem in the sense that it is often overlooked, which can be detrimental when trying to assess the impact of cultural change.

In Eisenstein's most famous work, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change and the Structure of Communications Revolutions, we are brought to the roots of fundamental change via a handy little contraption known as the printing press; brought into use in Germany by Johannes Gutenberg in approximately 1439. This was the first movable type printing device in Western Europe and was responsible for the wide spread dissemination of knowledge. During the Renaissance period knowledge spread across greater distances because of the "fixity" print gave it, making it easier to share work on a standardized basis. As Eisenstein puts it, "print institutionalized this classical revival, fixing it and making it a Europe-wide phenomenon."

Being able to fix knowledge allows for all types of advancements. The structural features of oral communication which serve to obscure the details of tradition are diminished by writing and utterly effaced by print (Leed 1982). By having standardized text to refer to, scientists, historians and the like were able to add to the database of intellectual findings in a manner that contributed to the preexisting works as opposed to merely replicating it. For one of the first times in European history there was a concrete method to "distinguish between the reproduction of their culture and those alterations of the basic motifs and schemata which constitute a personal addition, an "original" contribution to that culture." (Leed 1982)

Where though, does this leave us in terms of identity. In a review of the literature there is little to be found regarding how individual's felt about having their identity associated with their contributions. It is easy to assume a few things: 1) people will be proud of their contribution, feeling as though they must be correct in their findings, and hope to be noted in print so they may be recognized even after their departure 2) people will take a more humble stance and want their ideas to prosper, not their identity, and therefore want to suppress their identity all together 3) being unsure of their works or possibly afraid of being persecuted for their findings/beliefs, people will want to remain anonymous for the sake of their dignity. In either scenario the importance of identity is not mentioned here (i.e. within the review of Eisenstein's work), and it is worth further research to find the links between the era of "fixity" and identity in relation to the specific ideas Eisenstein presents in her work.

As I continue through various literary sources, though, there is more talk about a concern for identity in general during the Renaissance era. Anonymity: The Literary History of a Word, written by Anne Ferry, gives us insight into how identity was approached over a vast time period (i.e. 16th century - 20th century) and their is time spent discussing the cultural "why's" that lead to the variance we see throughout history. In the late 16th century the word anonymous is brought into English from Greek indicating that the idea was in existence and being employed to some extent regardless of whether or not the actual word "anonymous" was being attached to it.

It is well known that in this period it was thought of as improper for "gentlemen and persons of rank to appear in print as poets..." and because these individuals were forced to employ anonymity for sake of their dignity, "...others who wanted to display their wit as a way of advancing themselves in courtly circles were driven to publish verse unsigned but under fancy disguises that could be seen through." (Ferry 2003) Politics is another instance where embracing anonymity could prove beneficial. But as we move into the late 17th century we start to see the word being employed as a means of "fashion, publishing tactics, or private caution." The use of the adjective "anonymous" does not abruptly change, rather it transforms slowly in relation to the cultural changes that are taking place.

Coming into the 19th century we see poetry becoming a form of personal expression as opposed to a "skillfully made object fashion according to formal conventions." The led to the birth of the actual noun "anonymity" from it's parent adjective "anonymous" born a couple hundred years earlier. The need for protection takes a different form here, as authors are concerned about how people will view the personal inner workings of the mind. This continues on throughout the 19th century in the midst of a growing concern for poetry as a form of personal expression & a desire of some for a "return to the literary past", that E.M. Forster describes as a time when "writers and readers...did not make a cult of expression as we do today. Surely they were right, and modern critics go too far in their insistence on personality."

What strikes me as even more interesting is the ping-pong effect that is beginning to take place. Amongst the shifts in perception of what poetry should be used for there is also a shift in how anonymity is used within poetry. As we approach the mid-1900's there is an ever growing feel for anonymity for what Ferry calls a cultural motif. Henry Seidel Canby addresses it in "Anon is Dead" written in 1926. He talks about how city life sets the stage for the desire to "escape from the deadly anonymity of modern life," generating the "passion for nonanonymity" in the "general man who feel shis personality sinking lower and lower into the whirl of indistinguishable atoms to be lost in a mass civilization." So here we have people wanting to move out of the idea of anonymity based on what is happening culturally. Essentially this brings us back to where I ended with Eisenstein's work.

All the talk of anonymity based on Ferry's article refers to poetry in particular. I am interested to know where people in the Renaissance era stood in terms of identity and publishing academic works. During this time period we have theologians and scientists adding to the commonwealth of knowledge in the most influential of ways and it would be fascinating to determine how anonymity was viewed in light of these subjects outside of the literary arts. I realize that my review of the literature is minuscule in comparison to what is available, so this is definitely accounted for as I write this, and it does not mean my search is over...it has only just begun!

Because printed media is so appropriate for the use of anonymity I would also like to look into different cases where anonymity is used. Aside from the poetic approach that Ferry embraces I have found some literature that may direct me towards the use of anonymity in religious works, which would take us back before the Renaissance (woohoo!) as well as the use of anonymity by Plato found in Platonic Anonymity by Ludwig Edelstein, which would also take us back farther. Other, more recent, literary works that address the different uses of anonymity include memoirs of Holocaust survivors (e.g. The Psychological Impact of War Trauma on Civilians: An International Perspective by Stanley Krippner and Teresa M. McIntyr), Curiosities of Criticism by Henry J. Jennings (1881) and The Writer: A Monthly Magazine for Literary Workers, referenced in the previous blog post.

In addition to looking at how and why people have used anonymity in past literary works and delving deeper into the cultural shifts that cause the ping-pong effect regarding the use of anonymity, I am interested in finding a common thread that runs through history right up to the point where my fellow ethnographers take over...the digital age. This will be exciting to meet up with them and, through their work, follow the thread that has run throughout history.