Dear Billy, i will take the bait, but not too zealously, i hope.
>> And of course the technology used to create text will influence the
>> text, usually by imposing limitations on what can be done. For
>> instance, I remain to be convinced that there is much real difference
>> between clicking a hyperlink and turning a page, apart from the fact
>> that the former is usually slower.
If we limit ourselves to the concept of the paper page in our use of the
electronic page then, as you say, the difference between the two is not
great.
But the electronic page is capable of far more than than the paper page.
It is in effect a program which can combine text and other elements, and
those elements can be animated or written dynamically in various ways,
either predetermined by poet/programmer or triggered by the actions of the
reader/visitor. The degree of interactivity could range from zero to
co-authorship. The electronic page may also be linked to numerous related
pages, resources, which are accessible at a click. The "mailto" link is
very common and "chat rooms" are now being offered at some sites, thus
increasing the possibilities of "networking" (sharing and learning).
>> As I see it, there are three basic attitudes to IT, zeal, Ludditism or
>> scepticism. Personally, I go for the last of these. It is the duty of
>> the converted to convince us of the superiority of technology lead
>> writing. Frankly, most of what I've seen so far has failed to do so,
>> for me at least. Wish I could spend more time on this, but lunch is
>> long over.
I've never heard anyone claim that "technology lead" writing is superior.
I _have_ heard it said that the electronic page is a new medium in which
poetry will thrive.
Electronic poetry does require a slightly different approach. For instance,
(a minor thing, or is it?) the paper page is deeper than it is wide whereas
the screen is invariably wider than it is deep and scrolling is a chore.
The "endless" vertical two-dimensional array of the paper page requires
the "endless" vertical two-dimensional array of the paper poem. The
process of writing a poem usually involves creating such an array before
publication is ever thought about. The possibilities of the electronic
page would obviously be limited by such an approach.
Sorry to mix threads but, as Ric said today in his post "the education of
desire":
>> For me this links directly into the earlier discussion about the
>> role of performance, particularly of performances which open
>> possibilities for audiences, rather than simply serving as delivery
>> vehicles for texts: "you do the thinking".
I suppose i would fall into your converted catagory but i have always
thought of writing as programming, the performance as "run" time. To me,
writing for the pixel page means writing for an interface which is
endlessly adaptable and which does not impose such things as architecture,
or even completion, in quite the same way as writing for the paper page.
Regards,
Steve
------------------------------
[log in to unmask]
http://www.debris.demon.co.uk/
------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|