Saturday, December 12, 2009
Monday, December 7, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Monday, November 16, 2009
How Internet Authorship is Changing Literature
How Internet Authorship is Changing Literature
Web literature has become increasingly important in today’s constantly changing, technology-based world. It is used in the classroom, in the home, and for recreation. The early web writers paved the way with simple tools such as setting up links within their work, and adding graphics and music to enhance the reader’s responses. One such writer is Don Wrege, who was one of the first web article authors. Wrege did an interview with a journalist named Carl Cohen in 1997, and in this interview he discussed how internet authorship would change literature and reading. While Wrege did not work with fiction, he was one of the first web authors to give readers the opportunity to go from a link in his work to a site where they could get specific information dealing with his writings. This simple step created new ways for writers and authors to communicate with their audiences. It also helped to create new styles of authorship that could be used by writers of fiction and nonfiction to validate their work in the audience’s eyes. Because readers could go to different sites to see information dealing explicitly with what they were reading, they were able to have a better, and more personal, understanding of what it was the author was trying to say. These small steps are what created the new genre of writing that has come to be known as “digital modernism”.
Web literature has become increasingly important in today’s constantly changing, technology-based world. It is used in the classroom, in the home, and for recreation. The early web writers paved the way with simple tools such as setting up links within their work, and adding graphics and music to enhance the reader’s responses. One such writer is Don Wrege, who was one of the first web article authors. Wrege did an interview with a journalist named Carl Cohen in 1997, and in this interview he discussed how internet authorship would change literature and reading. While Wrege did not work with fiction, he was one of the first web authors to give readers the opportunity to go from a link in his work to a site where they could get specific information dealing with his writings. This simple step created new ways for writers and authors to communicate with their audiences. It also helped to create new styles of authorship that could be used by writers of fiction and nonfiction to validate their work in the audience’s eyes. Because readers could go to different sites to see information dealing explicitly with what they were reading, they were able to have a better, and more personal, understanding of what it was the author was trying to say. These small steps are what created the new genre of writing that has come to be known as “digital modernism”.
“Digital modernism” is a new style of writing; "the appropriation and adaptation of literary modernism" is how Jessica Pressman explains the genre in her article The Strategy of Digital Modernism: Young-Hae Chang Heavy Industries’s Dakota. Simply stated, this means that authors take a work, recreate it so that it will fit into the digital world, and put it out on the Internet so that it can be read or watched by anyone with access.
Young-Hae Chang Heavy Industries’s, or YHCHI’s, Dakota is a perfect example of this genre. It is based on Ezra Pound’s Cantos, parts 1 and 2, and is adapted to be viewed, and not necessarily read all the way through. It is easier to simply watch this story unfold, rather than try to read it in its entirety because the words change speed as they flash across the screen and the music in the background adds to the intentional chaos. This is important, because in web-based literature it is not always necessary to see and read every aspect of work in order to understand the meaning behind it that the author is trying to convey.
Another site full of web-based literature from authors who use a few of the same tools that YHCHI uses, and a few that YHCHI does not, is the Electronic Literature Collection. The Electronic Literature Collection has many different types of stories; some of them are original, and some of them have been adapted as Dakota was adapted. One author who uses her own original writing, but uses other forms of art that she has found is J. R. Carpenter. In her story, The Cape, the writing is her own but she uses photographs and other images that she did not create to give her story more substance. This could also be categorized as “digital modernism” because Carpenter is writing her own work, but she is adapting other forms of art and including it in her stories. She is still, as Pressman said, appropriating and adapting, she is just doing it with images instead of words.
Another interesting work on the Electronic Literature Collection is Donna Leishman’s RedRidingHood. This work uses music and images, but there are no words except when the reader has an option about which direction they want the story to take. Now, because no words are used to tell the story, it could be argued that this is not literature at all, but it fits in nicely with the definition of “digital modernism”. Leishman recreated a universally known fairy tale, and put it on the Internet to be viewed, which is similar and different to what YHCHI and Carpenter do with their literature.
The similarities between these three works is obvious; all three web authors use some of the same tools and techniques to complete their works. YHCHI uses music, word speed, and occasionally color to tell a story. The speed of the words flashing across the screen, along with the music, creates reactions to the work that are hard to create when they are just writing. Even though the reader does not always know exactly what flashed across the screen, the format of the story helps the reader to understand what is happening. This is similar to Carpenter’s work. The words do not flash across the screen rapidly; in fact, it is sometimes challenging to understand what exactly Carpenter is trying to say in her story. The words do not move, the photos and images in The Cape change to give the reader a better understanding of what it is that Carpenter is trying to say. This factor, along with the fact that the reader can decide what they want to read first or what they might want to skip over creates a very personal interpretation of the story. Leishman’s RedRidingHood uses many of these same tools. The music in the background helps to create the mood; it is the soundtrack that takes the place of the writing. The recreation of the fairy tale into a digital format creates similarities to YHCHI and Carpenter. Also, the fact that the reader has a choice about how to continue the story creates similarities between Leishman and Carpenter. All three of these stories have the similarity of not being clear about what it is that they are trying to say with their work, but use the uncertainty that they create to help the reader make their own interpretations about the meaning behind the sounds, images, and words.
Aside from these similarities, there are many differences between these styles of web based literature. YHCHI does not stray from the format that it has created. Even though it is hard to understand exactly what they are trying to say, the flashing words and background music are always there. There are never any images to go along with the story, and there is rarely any color against the stark white or completely black background. In contrast, Carpenter uses images and colors to go with her work. It is, in fact, necessary that there be some kind of guide through her stories because the words are so unclear. RedRidingHood is very different from both of these styles because Leishman uses no words to tell the story, but allows it to unfold up to a certain point, and then it is the viewer’s choice about how to continue. Because there are no words, having music and clear characters and images is more of a necessity in this form of storytelling than in either Carpenter’s or YHCHI’s.
Although these types of storytelling are very common on the Internet, there are other, more reader oriented, forms of storytelling. Many readers can have the opportunity to give their thoughts on certain subjects, if they want to, on sodahead.com, or create their own art and post it on centripetalnotion.com. These two sites are examples of sites where web-based literature is commonly used, but not always with the same tools that are used on the other sites.
Sodahead.com does not actually use any of the glamorous tools that YHCHI or Carpenter use. This site is more focused on reader/viewer responses, and is set up specifically so that readers can become writers on the subjects they find most appealing. A common sodahead.com reader can post opinions about religion, politics, or entertainment, and any of the many different topics can, and sometimes do, branch out into different areas of conversation. Readers can also respond to something that another person has written, whether it is a question about the President or a comment about the new Harry Potter movie. This is an important factor because it allows the everyday reader to become a contributing writer on the site. Everything that is written about comes from some idea or inspiration already on the Internet, and the reader can interpret and adapt that idea to suit what they are trying to say. Due to the fact that the work can be adapted, it would seem logical that this could be called “digital modernism” as well.
Centripetalnotion.com has many different forms of creativity, but the section devoted to literature is interesting because it is so different from works by YHCHI, Carpenter, and even works on sodahead.com. Very few of the writings on that site incorporate any of the tools already discussed; there is no use of flashing words, loud background music, or moving pictures. Also, people cannot respond to the writings so much as they can comment on what was written. What people write as comments about the work on this site is not included underneath in a conversation style, but kept on a separate page. Aside from these differences, it is clear that the writing done on this site could also be considered “digital modernism”. Writers are still taking works and adapting them to suit their purposes; for example five writers decided to do an article about the things that Kurt Vonnegut has said and how well he said it. These writers took pieces of Vonneguts work and put them together to make one large article. That is clearly within the realms of “appropriation and adaptation”. Also, even though the comments that people write in response to the work is not automatically seen, they are still responses and that is very similar to sodahead.com.
All of these sites have differences and similarities; some more obvious than others. At first glance, one could come to the conclusion that all of these examples of web-based literature have nothing in common, and it would be easy to argue for that conclusion. None of these styles use all of the same techniques. Unlike traditional genres of literature, such as novels, poems, and plays, there is no format that is the accepted for all works. YHCHI uses no graphics, but at the same time, makes it necessary for the reader to simply watch the screen instead of reading the words flashing across the screen. It is too hard to understand all of the words, and it is easier to follow the story if the reader stops trying to catch every single word. This is also true for Carpenter, who uses many tools that YHCHI does not. Carpenter uses photos and graphics to help her tell the story, and that is exactly what they do. Without the pictures is would be too hard to understand what she was talking about, so it becomes necessary to watch and read in order to catch everything. Because everything is so vague in Carpenter’s work it is unnecessary to read in the order that the story is laid out in, and interesting to skip certain parts.
This is also a factor in Leishman’s RedRidingHood. The reader has many options about how to view the story, and what direction the story will take. Along with that, it can only be watched, but is still considered literature because of the medium Leishman chose to use. Choosing the direction of the story is a tool that sodahead.com chooses to use as well. In this site the reader can enter a conversation, and with one simple response, branch the conversation in many different ways. Also, the fact that the reader can become the writer can add a lot of inspiration to a reader who has opinions on a subject. Voicing opinions and being heard is also an important factor on centripetalnotion.com as well. Because the reader wants to voice an opinion or tell a story is why they choose to use the site; just because they do not make all of the flashy choices that other web authors do does not mean that they cannot be included within the genre.
The choices that these web authors make are the very factors that are changing the way people read and understand literature. Web authors are broadening the definition of literature, and they are doing so by utilizing styles and tools that would have seemed outlandish and crazy only twenty years ago. It has now become an accepted fact that literature can be viewed as well as read, as proven by YHCHI, Carpenter, and Leishman. Also, it is not just critics that can have their opinions on subjects heard, but any person who wants to write an opinion about something can do so without any real challenges.
The fact that there can be so many different ways of writing is changing how people choose to tell their stories, and that affects the response of the reader. If the reader has options about where the story will go then the response to the story will be affected. If the reader has to stop and become more of a viewer, and does not catch every part of the story, then the response to the story will be different than if the reader could go at their own pace. The very unpredictability of the new genre is what makes it so different from “traditional” writing. There are no real guidelines about how to change a work because there are so many different ways to do so on the Internet. In the future people might come up with differing titles for different styles, indeed there are already quite a few, but for now it could be argued that they all fit nicely within the definition of “digital modernism”.
Bibliography
Pressman, Jessica. The Strategy of Digital Modernism: Young-Hae Chang Heavy Industries’s
Dakota. Project Muse. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/modern_fiction_studies/v054/54.2.pressman.html
Carpenter, J.R. The Cape. Electronic Literature Collection 1.
http://collection.eliterature.org/1/works/carpenter_the_cape.html
Leishman, Donna. RedRidingHood. Electronic Literature Collection 1.
http://collection.eliterature.org/1/works/leishman__redridinghood.html
Sodahead. http://www.sodahead.com/
Gordon, Scott, Josh Modell, Noel Murray, Tasha Robinson, Kyle Ryan.
15 Things Kurt Vonnegut Said Better Than Anyone Ever Has Or Will.
http://www.avclub.com/articles/15-things-kurt-vonnegut-said-better-than-anyone-el,1858/
Wrege, Don, Robert Carl Cohen. Robert Carl Cohen Interviews Don Wrege Internet Author.
Google videos.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCxQN1=zR6I
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Creative Gallery Response
After last Thursday and creating that short forking story and google map I have a better idea of what I want to accomplish. I want to "write" a story, but because I will be working with a legend or fairy tale of some kind I know that the writing won't actually be mine so much as the changes in the writing. I'm thinking of working on a short fairy tale like Hansel and Gretel, or shortening a story like Sleeping Beauty. I do want to use google maps because I think that it would be really interesting in a fairy tale to show a map, and where the characters are going. It would be nice if I could create something as visually stimulating as YHCHI, but as forking as Carpenter. I am aware of the fact that it might not be possible for me to do something that complicated, so I am going to focus on creating something more similar to Carpenter's work.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)