Wow, you’ve all been busy while I was away! So much to digest, but I think
I’ve caught up with the conversation now and would like to pick up just a
few small threads, in no particular order.

Re the literary imagination – I would like to propose that we consider
setting aside the notion of the literary, which so often muddies the waters,
and think instead of ‘writing’ or ‘text’ or even ‘information’, and see how
that affects the debate.  After all, there is much more to digital
textuality than ‘literature’. A useful source for this is Alan Liu’s recent
book The Laws of Cool
http://www.english.ucsb.edu/faculty/ayliu/research/books/Laws_of_Cool_precis.html
which looks at business language and knowledge work. I think it is very
important to pull ourselves away from canonical thinking sometimes and
consider functional and informational texts like the memo or the
advertisement or even the train timetable. All of these are tools for
communication which use text and which have been transformed by technology
at various points.

I am interested in Yvonne’s comments about rules and language. When I first
discovered the existence of computer programming, the very concept of it, I
was utterly fascinated by it. As I learned more, and found that these strict
unbending processes can form the basis upon which wild thinking and
creativity can grow, I was even more intrigued. Eg in MOOs, where anarchy
can often rule, nothing is possible unless you obey the rules of code. I
loved it, and only regret that time has not yet permitted me to really fall
deeply into learning to code properly.

But that leads me to George’s comment which  is so very true – many critics
and indeed exponents of hypertext and digital media of all kinds have even
less experience than me, often no first-hand experience of it at all. Not
even a soupcon. Many who write on chat have never been in chatroom, ditto
MOOs, etc etc. which in turn leads me to remind all of us that some of the
critical work which has informed our understanding of digital texts and
digital life in general may have been written by those people – and not just
critics, but novelists too. EG do Gibson’s novels REALLY reflect the
cyberlife you actually know? They certainly don’t reflect mine.

Rajesh says ‘aren’t today’s ICT’s far far more influential than any in the
past?’ In all honesty, I don’t think so. Surely the most influential
information technology was the stick used to draw images in the dirt,
perhaps passed via a messenger who had memorised them but did not know what
they meant. That stick is infinitely more loaded with power than my cute
little iBook. So I don't really agree with you there Rajesh, despite the
fact that computers have changed my life and that of many people I know.

Finally, Annamaria, I love your idea of the computer as a companion species.
Now, in that case, I admit I would prefer my iBook to a pointed stick any day.

Best

Sue

**********

To alter your subscription settings, log on to Subscriber's Corner at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/writing-and-the-digital-life.html

To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask] with a blank subject line and the following text in the body of the message: SIGNOFF WRITING-AND-THE-DIGITAL-LIFE