Search
The search found 2 results in 0.008 seconds.
Search results
-
Semantisation, Exploration, Self-reflection and Absorption: Our Modes of Reading Hypertext Fiction
"How do we read hypertext fiction? The question has been widely explored (Moulthrop 1991; Kaplan and Moulthrop 1991; Snyder 1997; Miall and Dobson 2001; Ryan 2001; Gardner 2003; Gunder 2004; Landow 2006; Mangen 2006; Page 2006) and there seems to be a consensus regarding the reader’s experience of hypertext fiction. Many critics actually claim that reading hypertext fiction generates frustration and insecurity. These and other studies describe how their readers react on and respond to hypertext fiction, but, as I see it, they partly fail in that they put to much weight on the reader’s responds and hardly no weight on the fact that hypertext fiction just like print fiction encourage or prefigure different responses and different modes of reading. The consequence is that these studies suffers from limitations witch lessens their valuable contribution to our knowledge about reading hypertext fiction. One reason for this might be that hypertext theory lack established concepts for describing response structures that encourage different modes of reading.
Eric Dean Rasmussen - 27.01.2011 - 15:13
-
New Media Literary: Hypertextual, Cybertextual, and Networked
The presentation deals with the problem of new media literacy, as compound of digital and network paradigm – whose differences with Web 2.0 are rapidly disappearing. However, the differentiation between digital and network is necessary in order to translate textual typology into cultural analysis – the hidden mission of new media theory from the very beginning.
First generation of hypertextual theoreticians detected hypertextuality as the basis of new media literacy – nonlinearity, interactivity and openness of the text were seen as democratisation of literacy. The presentation will try to demonstrate that hypertextuality is only a component of the digital paradigm, which is marked by broader flexibility of the text as productive apparatus. (That productivity of digital deconstructionist and poststructuralist theory connected with interpretation, but productivity is conducted, as Espen Aarseth pointed out, at the level of mechanical production.)
Eric Dean Rasmussen - 27.01.2011 - 16:28
