For all we know, a Neanderthal awoke one morning, rubbed his favorite body parts and perceptively said, "My, what an elegant sunrise." Or possibly, "Get out of my cave, she-witch, and never come back." Clearly, at least to the non-cretinous, the need for artistic, creative expression has been around for a very long time.

It had a beginning, obviously, though none can say who, when, where or how it all started. Archaeologists suggest Sumer, at 7,000 B.C.E., as evidenced by the cuneiform clay tablets left by those ancients. If you read the translations of those wedges, however, you'll find that the scribes wrote about possessions, financial matters, recording transactions in perpetuity as though sanctioned by their gods. They wrote no stories, poems nor histories, just wealth. Makes

Things started changing in that millennium, especially with cylinder seals left on the entrances to crypts, suggesting stories told by symbols, real, imaginary or bloated out of all proportion. All we for sure is that the Indus valley, Mesopotamia, had a profound effect on the advent of writing long before the Aramaens fashioned the Phoenician trading merchant's system of accounting into a usable word system.

There were others, including thousands of hints that writing achieved a sublime level in civilizations no longer extant and almost completely unknown. In fact, there are far more dead societies than anything alive today. I find it hard to believe that none of them sought the means to express themselves considering the ego of homo sapiens. It is much more probable that they all did have something akin to writing. After all, even prehistoric man is known to have crafted beautiful representations of animals and all kinds of symbols

Things really started getting dicey in Akkad, also Mesopotamia, with epics like Gilgamesh, long before Greeks claimed to have invented poetry, the so-called first organized narratives. In spite of the fact that such epics have survived in places like Iraq, Egypt, China and Peru, they all had a common problem, the other side of ego. That is, the kings of those hills decided that if anything was going to be written, it must be about them. Egypt is chock full of deceptive Pharaohs who compelled their scribes to equate them with deities.

The same is true almost everywhere else until we reach the Hebrews in 1450 B.C.E., about the time Troy fell to Mycenae. It took a disaster some 850 years after the escape from Egypt, the Babylonian captivity, for the Hebrews to codify their language and transfer it to animal skins. Until then, everything was memorized.

By that time, there were other contenders and systems of writing, like the enormously complex vertical scrolls and symbols of the Chinese, the boustrophedic contribution right to left, then left to right of Pacific peoples, and many other complicated and almost always symbolic representations of thought. The Hebrews, however, developed letters for words, rather than symbols for story-phrases, in order to more accurately record their history, faith and psalms. The known civilized world was astounded by their achievement when the Hebrews returned to Israel in the 5th century, B.C.E., their Torah and

It was then that the Greeks developed their language and used it to express themselves in ways the Hebrews would not dare. Instead of psalms about a One G-d, they conceived tales of a multitude of gods and innovated the beginnings of what we now call poetry, including fiction. Like the Hebrews, such works were committed to memory long before being written. Homer, for example, never wrote a thing, being blind. For that, the Greeks borrowed from

It is also fair to say that the Greeks undoubtedly fostered the first critics, for oral narrative or epic poems and the tales that grew out of them were always submitted to audiences in amphitheaters, designed as entertainments, crowd pleasers. Clearly, some works were more popular than others and have survived to this day. From there, it is much easier to trace the development of written works. We know that authors eventually became their own scribes as

time raveled on, for there is voluminous evidence to prove it. Also found in the surviving archives of dominant cultures, especially Rome, are the critiques of works by famous scribes such as Virgil, Josephus and many others, written by men who wished to preserve their commentary of such writings, most especially their disagreements. That relationship between scribe and critic survived until Rome fell, when the earth was cast into the black Middle Ages of ignorance, dominated by Christianity. Not 15th century C.E. Europe did men seek to express themselves again, though the church tried valiantly to

Gutenberg printing press and the desire for artistic freedom was decisive. In Italy, great thinkers like Da Vinci, Michaelangelo and Galileo had profound influence. In France, Michel de Nostradame preceded those who would soon follow in Germany, Belgium, Spain, Portugal and virtually every European nation of consequence.

But it took a hundred years before critics resurfaced. Indeed, the dissemination of written works was largely limited to the wealthy, for only they could afford education. Everyone understands the complexities and changes that ensued. Except for a few exceptional people, there was nothing to present itself as a writing profession, hence no real need for readers, much less critics.

Wars, starvation, atrocities and plagues put an end to that forever. People wanted to express their opinions about those things. When a new class of publishers arose, who got sick and tired of commonplace complaints and diatribes, writers found another way to state their views via fiction. It had a built-in added attraction, entertainment. It is here that we find the commencement of what we are today, scribes seeking critiques.

Until recently, it hasn't mattered who or what we were, only that we wrote well and reached out to a population that suffered much less from the ravages of intelligence than the savagery of financial woes. People were much more educated than ever before, a real breakthrough compared to millennia of uncontrolled ignorance, and possessed just enough money to purchase books. The critic reemerged and became marginally knowledgeable. Comparisons

between writers were being made. Some, who actually deserved recognition, received it. Everything we scribes now desire came to fruition during these last three to four centuries.

Our creed is very simple. We want our words to be read. It is implied that those who read must comprehend. We do not insist that the reader enjoy, for the genres have expanded such that other reactions, such as fear and horror are considered valid. Beyond comprehension, we hope that our inscribed thoughts reach out to the many, though for most of us it is an unrequited dream because of the depressing publishing realities.

While we wait for or attempt to entice publication, we give our brainchildren for free to those who are willing to comment. Such feedback is often illuminating, providing answers to questions we haven't yet conceived or assisting our efforts to improve style, technique and content.

We fear only double ground zero, both the deplorable state of publishing together with nonexistent feedback. For that reason, literary societies continue to thrive and offer hope, however bleak at the moment, that one day our efforts will be justified, that the world will read our works and nod positively, saying, "Well done!" For now, it is the most that any of us can expect.



	The Scribe's Creed A Literary Article
		back




For all we know, a Neanderthal awoke one morning, rubbed his favorite body parts and perceptively said, "My, what an elegant sunrise." Or possibly, "Get out of my cave, she-witch, and never come back." Clearly, at least to the non-cretinous, the need for artistic, creative expression has been around for a very long time. It had a beginning, obviously, though none can say who, when, where or how it all started. Archaeologists suggest Sumer, at 7,000 B.C.E., as evidenced by the cuneiform clay tablets left by those ancients. If you read the translations of those wedges, however, you'll find that the scribes wrote about possessions, financial matters, recording transactions in perpetuity as though sanctioned by their gods. They wrote no stories, poems nor histories, just wealth. Makes me think we've come full circle. Things started changing in that millennium, especially with cylinder seals left on the entrances to crypts, suggesting stories told by symbols, real, imaginary or bloated out of all proportion. All we for sure is that the Indus valley, Mesopotamia, had a profound effect on the advent of writing long before the Aramaens fashioned the Phoenician trading merchant's system of accounting into a usable word system. There were others, including thousands of hints that writing achieved a sublime level in civilizations no longer extant and almost completely unknown. In fact, there are far more dead societies than anything alive today. I find it hard to believe that none of them sought the means to express themselves considering the ego of homo sapiens. It is much more probable that they all did have something akin to writing. After all, even prehistoric man is known to have crafted beautiful representations of animals and all kinds of symbols on the walls of caves worldwide. And when they weren't painting, they carved. Things really started getting dicey in Akkad, also Mesopotamia, with epics like Gilgamesh, long before Greeks claimed to have invented poetry, the so-called first organized narratives. In spite of the fact that such epics have survived in places like Iraq, Egypt, China and Peru, they all had a common problem, the other side of ego. That is, the kings of those hills decided that if anything was going to be written, it must be about them. Egypt is chock full of deceptive Pharaohs who compelled their scribes to equate them with deities. The same is true almost everywhere else until we reach the Hebrews in 1450 B.C.E., about the time Troy fell to Mycenae. It took a disaster some 850 years after the escape from Egypt, the Babylonian captivity, for the Hebrews to codify their language and transfer it to animal skins. Until then, everything was memorized. By that time, there were other contenders and systems of writing, like the enormously complex vertical scrolls and symbols of the Chinese, the boustrophedic contribution right to left, then left to right of Pacific peoples, and many other complicated and almost always symbolic representations of thought. The Hebrews, however, developed letters for words, rather than symbols for story-phrases, in order to more accurately record their history, faith and psalms. The known civilized world was astounded by their achievement when the Hebrews returned to Israel in the 5th century, B.C.E., their Torah and Commentaries (Tanach) considered the enlightenment of the age. It was then that the Greeks developed their language and used it to express themselves in ways the Hebrews would not dare. Instead of psalms about a One G-d, they conceived tales of a multitude of gods and innovated the beginnings of what we now call poetry, including fiction. Like the Hebrews, such works were committed to memory long before being written. Homer, for example, never wrote a thing, being blind. For that, the Greeks borrowed from the Egyptians and Hebrews, using scribes to record for posterity those works considered worthy. It is also fair to say that the Greeks undoubtedly fostered the first critics, for oral narrative or epic poems and the tales that grew out of them were always submitted to audiences in amphitheaters, designed as entertainments, crowd pleasers. Clearly, some works were more popular than others and have survived to this day. From there, it is much easier to trace the development of written works. We know that authors eventually became their own scribes as time raveled on, for there is voluminous evidence to prove it. Also found in the surviving archives of dominant cultures, especially Rome, are the critiques of works by famous scribes such as Virgil, Josephus and many others, written by men who wished to preserve their commentary of such writings, most especially their disagreements. That relationship between scribe and critic survived until Rome fell, when the earth was cast into the black Middle Ages of ignorance, dominated by Christianity. Not 15th century C.E. Europe did men seek to express themselves again, though the church tried valiantly to suppress it. But, it was the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the Gutenberg printing press and the desire for artistic freedom was decisive. In Italy, great thinkers like Da Vinci, Michaelangelo and Galileo had profound influence. In France, Michel de Nostradame preceded those who would soon follow in Germany, Belgium, Spain, Portugal and virtually every European nation of consequence. But it took a hundred years before critics resurfaced. Indeed, the dissemination of written works was largely limited to the wealthy, for only they could afford education. Everyone understands the complexities and changes that ensued. Except for a few exceptional people, there was nothing to present itself as a writing profession, hence no real need for readers, much less critics. Wars, starvation, atrocities and plagues put an end to that forever. People wanted to express their opinions about those things. When a new class of publishers arose, who got sick and tired of commonplace complaints and diatribes, writers found another way to state their views via fiction. It had a built-in added attraction, entertainment. It is here that we find the commencement of what we are today, scribes seeking critiques. Until recently, it hasn't mattered who or what we were, only that we wrote well and reached out to a population that suffered much less from the ravages of intelligence than the savagery of financial woes. People were much more educated than ever before, a real breakthrough compared to millennia of uncontrolled ignorance, and possessed just enough money to purchase books. The critic reemerged and became marginally knowledgeable. Comparisons between writers were being made. Some, who actually deserved recognition, received it. Everything we scribes now desire came to fruition during these last three to four centuries. Our creed is very simple. We want our words to be read. It is implied that those who read must comprehend. We do not insist that the reader enjoy, for the genres have expanded such that other reactions, such as fear and horror are considered valid. Beyond comprehension, we hope that our inscribed thoughts reach out to the many, though for most of us it is an unrequited dream because of the depressing publishing realities. While we wait for or attempt to entice publication, we give our brainchildren for free to those who are willing to comment. Such feedback is often illuminating, providing answers to questions we haven't yet conceived or assisting our efforts to improve style, technique and content. We fear only double ground zero, both the deplorable state of publishing together with nonexistent feedback. For that reason, literary societies continue to thrive and offer hope, however bleak at the moment, that one day our efforts will be justified, that the world will read our works and nod positively, saying, "Well done!" For now, it is the most that any of us can expect. W. A. Rieser