The Humiliation of the Word

After reading the other reviews I must add a few comments. First, you can't blame the author for lack of clarity. If you blame anyone, blame the translator. This book is translated from French and most translations are cumbersome. Second, Jacques Ellul is a Luddite (read his "The Technological Society" and you'll see what I mean) so his conclusions are going to be anti-techonology. Having said all that, this book challenges the assumptions of our image-driven society whether you agree with the author's conclusions or not. Jacques Ellul is a Christian but missed one important point on the image vs. word debate. And that is this: "The Word became flesh..." The Word by divine mandate became an image of God in the flesh. Also, man is made in the image of God. But Jacques Ellul is a great thinker and always provokes thought outside the traditional box.This is a great book and deserves reading and re-reading for any writer in our image-driven society.Aloha, Glenn

In this book, Ellul makes a strong distinction between the "word" and the "image" as a method of perceiving and making sense of the world. He claims that the "image" has been elevated in our society beyond its original purpose and capability. The "image" is limited to the material world, to the practical and cannot probe the depths of human experience, to go beyond the surface of reality. Therefore a society based on image will be a shallow society, incapable of find ing deep truths. He contrasts the limitations of the image with the strengths of the "word." The word, which has been humiliated in today's world, that is, lowered in status, demeaned, is capable of conveying truth and complexities that the image cannot. The word, because it is flexible and open to interpretation, is an instrument of communication and negotiation. Ellul takes this argument and applies it to several different areas of technology and communication. I agree wholeheartedly with his basic premise, although not with all of his applications. Sometimes his categorizations are a little unclear and confusing but overall he makes a very strong argument. He is absolutely brilliant in the way that he is able to analyze the very fundamental structure of the way we communicate and function as a society. He attacks the postmodern mindset by showing that they have a disdain for thinking and the intellect itself.