At 03/04/98 09:43:31, Ted Slade <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
# George
# Isn't the problem that poetry is anyway hypertextual, containing
# references, allusions, multiple meanings, non-poetic images, concealed
# rhythms, not all of which are consciously put there by the poet, and
# which the serious reader has to tease out, not by a single linear
# reading, but by repeated and close study? And if you try to formalize
# this by developing the hypertext poem in which every such nuance is
# represented by a link the reader can follow, aren't you in danger of
# destroying rather than enhancing the essential interplay between the
# reader and the poem?
Maybe the hypertextual poem will be a "hopeful monster" - something that
may not live beyond it's novelty. Then again, it might develop it's own
kinetics with a life of it's own.
Roger
#
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|