Lonnie Edwards

COMM 352

February 24, 2017

The Bridge and the Chasm

In the Novel Speaking into the Air by John Durham Peters, early on he introduces us to

his idea of the bridge and the chasm. In terms of all types of communication, there is a chasm or

gap between the speaker and the receiver. The bridge, which serves as the link between the

speaker and receiver helps in aiding the process of the message to get from one point to the next.

That means the purpose of the bridge in communication is to be able to help speech get from

person to person, without the language being broken.

This brings forward the issue whether or not the bridge and the chasm happen to be the

same thing. They are two completely different things. The bridge, is like a foundation that the

speaker and receiver must set in order to hold a dialogue. Another way to think of the bridge is

to view it as the only line of connection between people allowing us to communicate with each

other. Without this bridge, we wouldnt be able to communicate. Thinking of the bridge like a

foundation allows us to see how it helps us to communicate. This foundation consists of

language, culture and environment. It consists of language because if the speaker and receiver

speak the same language then there will be no gap between the two. Culture is thrown into the

mix because if the speaker and receiver have the same culture, that allows them to be able to

connect on certain cultural aspects. Environment as well because people of the same

environment will able to relate in a way that people not from that environment will be able to

comprehend.
 The chasm on the other hand is much like a barrier that is in the way of communication

safely making its journey from the mouth of the speaker to the ears of the receiver. The chasm

has the ability to be able to break communication while it is in transition from the speaker to the

receiver. It is able to do this through a few different ways. The first way is through a break in

language. This can be through a difference in language which ultimately doesnt allow

communication to occur because the speaker and receiver wont be able to understand each

other. If the speaker only knows the English language and the receiver only knows the Spanish

language, then there is a break in the language because they are unable to understand one

another.

The idea that communication can break fairly easily makes communication that much

more difficult between the speaker and the receiver. This is because language can be broken in

an assortment of ways. Yet, language is successful when the bridge is able to connect between

the speaker and the receiver. In order for this to take place, the bridge must extend from the

speaker and the receiver so the chasm must not be in the way of the two.

Therefore, the chasm and the bridge dont necessarily work together in order for

communication to occur. Just, the bridge must be able to reach over the chasm. In other words,

it isnt possible to bring the two together. This is because the chasm and bridge work

independently of each other. It seems as though the two cant occur at the same time because in

order for one to prosper, the other must sacrifice itself. For example, if the chasm were to

supersede the bridge, communication isnt occurring because of a possible language barrier

between the speaker and the receiver. Thus, making it so that the chasm is too much for the

bridge to connect between the speaker and receiver.

 Dissemination and dialogue play a large role in communication, considering they are

both different forms in which we communicate with people. Dialogue, is a conversation that is

held between two or more people. While, dissemination is actively spreading words widely

across a medium. For example, in Speaking into the Air, Peters wants us to see dissemination in

the same light as most people see dialogue. With that being said, the two different modes of

communication have the ability to bridge the chasm.

First, dissemination is able to bridge the chasm because most messages that are sent

widespread have a message that can travel very fast. This is evident in Peters book through his

use of Jesus. He story was able to be told by dissemination at a very high level. He had his

disciples go out into the world and preach his word, while he also did the same. This was a

successful process because they all aimed to create a shared meaning. Meaning the receivers

have very little room for interpretation.

Also, another way in the book that dissemination takes place is with Peters references to

angels. Angels in a sense are an ideal form of communication because they communicate Gods

thoughts to all of His children. This makes the angels masters of the art of disseminating. They

are able to bridge to successfully bridge God and all of his followers.

Yet, sometimes dissemination is not always the best option for communication. This is

because from dissemination widespread meanings can come about which causes the receiver to

be confused of what the actual meaning of the message is.

Dialogue is able to bridge the chasm because it has the ability to clarify meaning. For

example, Socrates writes his Phaedrus as a dialogue so that the conversation goes on and the

speaker and receiver of the message have the opportunity to ask and answer any questions that
are presented. This is able to bridge the chasm because there is no longer any room left for

misunderstanding between the speaker and receiver because questions are being asked to clarify

anything that isnt crystal clear.

Yet, dialogue also has times where it is not the best option for communication. For

example, its not ideal when trying to recreate a moment that has happened in the past. This is

because it necessarily wont incorporate everybody and they wont all have the same shared

memory. So, when looking back on a memory confusion may arise. Otherwise, dialogue is able

to bridge the chasm much like dissemination can.