This definition of e-lit is really just trying to understand the merge between literary work and the digital realm. Understanding that the term has been misused to simply mean digital copies of literary text (books) but unveiling a new meaning of where the text and digital realm are intertwined and unable to be separated.

This is the most inclusive definition of e-lit I have encountered. It goes beyond text or storytelling in a digital medium to the actual mathematical underpinnings of how to get text on a screen and even the fragility of how long it can be there. There is a process beyond just the interaction between reader/viewer and the story/work but between the computer and and the text/code linking it all together at its root.

This definition of e-lit really emphasizes the medium (technology/electronic) as inescapable from the form. E-lit cannot exist without computing technology and can not be consumed without it.

I appreciate this definition because it excludes audio books and ebooks where by the work is adapted to a digital medium but is enjoyed in similar ways of how the story was intended.

Depending on how expansive "electronic literature" is as a term, this may be legitimately impossible. Heck, even under a very narrow definition, the continuous expansion of the online world means that e-lit is generated far, far, far faster than it can be catalogued. How often do people produce e-lit without knowing that they're doing it?

So is this about history, how electronic literature will development or more?

I think this is a good definition of E-literature because it says literature produced for the digital medium, and the digital medium refers to the physical ways of storing media, such as a computer or a smartphones.

I find this completely amazing, I wonder what was the time that the author took to write this poem, and I wonder if there are any publications of the poems created by the readers.

I liked these definitions of E-literature, and I like that we can see how the terms are used depending of the region. I particularly like where it says "Put Simply, Electronic Literature is considered a "born digital" art form. I think that it is important that we do not forget that E-literature is an art.

What does he mean by "can no longer be experienced as originally intended"? Is it known how it was intended to be experienced?

"Electronic Literature is considered a "born digital" art form with unique approaches to thinking about and working with digital technologies for the purpose of creating literary art."

EL is not a solely digitized written work (where there is first a literary text - e.g. storing William Shakespeare´s Sonnets in PDF format), but rather the other way round: using the possibilities provided by the digital technologies to create literary art.

"The book is dead, long live the link" and "hypertext is a way of life" - these two statements reflect the writer´s idea of what is important and unique about electronic literature:

• it can be found on the Internet
• the texts are linked to each other.

Brian Kim Stefan is not giving a clear definition for the term as his intention is to provide the readers with "simples" of digital literature. "These simples describe some element of the deep structure of the text/algorithm inherent in all digital textuality - ...the mathematical underpinnings of text and how artists exploit them to create unique effects".

The artwork that he mentions here: Young Hae Chang Heavy Industries', Shelley Jackson' and David Clark's work are really fine examples of electronic literature.

E-lit is any text using the digital medium. In my opinion, it then includes written work (from PDFs to game stories) as well as oral texts (podcasts and recordings). I´m wondering whether graphic stories (solely graphic, without written/oral texts included) should be included here or it would be considered as part of the visual arts (like paintings and sculptures). I´m also curious to know how we handle the "private life" of the authors. In critical editions you can find included letters and diaries and I´m not sure how these sources can be accessible without violating the author´s privacy (I´m talking about late authors who cannot make public their own texts any more and no heirs to make such decisions).

This is interesting to me as electronic literature is not the first literary revolution and will likely not be the last. We all think of stories being found within text but the beginning of story telling was oral. An interesting thing to think about is will there be a time when e-lit becomes the new standard? And furthermore, were there people who analyzed the written word in the same context we do today?

In my opinion, the stake of this paragraph is the chart showing the evolution hypertext, electronic literature, digital literacy, digital poetry and e-poetry

So the definition of e-lit is "a literature produces for the digital medium"?

I was waiting for this notion to arrive : the idea of hypertext seems more interesting to me than the expression "electronic literature" which seems dated and more restrictive.

What I feel reading this, and the comment on Tristam Shandy, is the idea that what we define as electronic literature has more to do with the idea of book as play, or as something non-restrictive, more open, than with modern technology.

Not found :(

d004x Nice, thank u

Sorry, I take a bit of issue with this phrase as well. I would agree more with the ELO definition's context--that eLit takes advantage of such devices, rather than absolutely requiring them. I can think of several examples of eComics that are absolutely optimized and meant for viewing onlne/on HD devices...but can be reproduced and displayed effectively on paper as well. The experience isn't nearly as good, but the communication of the media is still effective.

I take issue with the word "emergent," not because I disagree with eLit being emergent, but because I don't believe it's exclusive. Is literature itself no less emergent or is eLit not part of literature? Same with any art form. In my mind, it could more appropriately be quantified in terms of it's nascency or newness compared to conventional forms of literature. Also, emergence connotes unexpectedness...not sure anyone who's been alive the past 3-4 decades finds the creation eliterature unexpected.

This seems very limiting to me. Again, while I see the importance of the line between works experienced through their original medium and works experienced through an adapted medium, I don't believe adaptations should inherently be less meaningful. That aside, this definition still relies on the equally nebulous definition of "literary works." I think part of the point of this article is to gain or consider the recognition of "The Academy" but are we to assume that "literary works" are those also recognized by The Academy? (Especially considering how often e-lit itself falls outside that category...) It isn't as specific as it clearly wants to be; this definition of e-lit (like the previous one) relies on readers agreeing on what constitutes "literary."

I would consider adding, "Computer art installations, such as comics and graphic novels, which..." Comics (including graphic novels) are traditionally considered (within literature and art circles) as "hybrids" of literature and graphic art. I'm including them because, within those circles, they are often derided or excluded as "inferior." Comics are increasingly created online-only/digitally-only and specifically for viewing on high resolution monitors. eComics have already changed the rules of comics--particularly segmentation (hyper-framing and multi-framing) and eye progression.

This brings up an interesting question about adaptations. Must a work be "born" digitally? When plays are adapted to novels, for example, do they lose their "important literary aspects" (which seems like a very arbitrary phrase to me anyway)? I would argue that adaptations to different mediums aren't inherently lesser (or less "literary") than their originals and I wonder how that might impact the way we'd classify a piece. There's always been questions about whether an adaptation is really "the same" work as the original anyway, so would transforming something into e-lit actually make it e-lit? On the other hand, what happens when e-lit is transformed into something accessible to those without access to whatever technology it was originally intended for? If you make a twine game into a sort of printed choose-your-own-adventure book, have you really lost what makes it valuable as e-lit or have you stepped up even further the idea that e-lit is partially intended for greater accessibility?

Em PT-BR

"Trabalhar com importantes aspectos da literatura que obtenham vantages das capacidades e contexto providos por programas autosuficientes ou computadores em rede."

If chatterbots is part of e-lit, conversation between role-play players should be included as one of the category as well.

I think the literary aspect that defines electronic literature is being ever changing, ever evolving, and foremost social or socially developed (as are digital technologies). Which brings me to a notion of electronic literature: A literary genre or type of literary work that has the ability to absorb the qualities of newer technologies in order to modify or update the context in which it is produced, distributed and received, presenting itself as an interdisciplinary and versatile new kind of literary language that has merged with the (digital) tools that created it so that it is now indistinguishable.

I think this passage is THE clue. IRL I work on classic, 19th and 20th definitions of differents kinds of art. It usually turns around the limits of different arts, that come with the medium they are exposed in. The artist from the 20th century loved breaking that limits. From that point of view, e-lit has broken it all. It has improved the medium and it has even questioned the limits of creation itself. (I think analytic art critics wont like my point of view...). E-lit has lots of issues as an art and this is great. (Sorry for my awful english! Feel free to do as many corrections as you want!)

Absolutely the most crucial heritage of the digital age. As everything gets digitized, textual representations become just an arbitrary interpretations of the software used at one particular moment

I would say rather that narrative is being re-invented. People are story-telling creatures, and as mentioned in this course they are made to interpret the chronological lapse of sequences as causal, which means adding a story-telling quality to them. In the world of hypertext, the one who does the ergon, or work of pursuing the links, writes their own individual narrative, but the point is that it is always an in-the-moment, unrepeatable experience, therefore extremely procedural

Although the statement seems to be too strong, I tend to agree with Landow, in the sense that with the advent of technology our culturalk practices have changed their focus from timeless meaning making to in-the-moment processes

I definitely think this is the challenge of this final project. Translation as a concept is just so tricky, especially when it comes to aesthetic riddled texts. Translators often have to pick certain elements like this and stick with them. This is why when reading ancient texts like Beowulf and the Oddessey, which translation you read definitely matters.

This definition gives more attention to the "literary" aspect of e-lit. It emphasizes that e-lit are ultimately "works of art" or in other words, e-lit is "born digital" but in the context of artist/writers exploiting the capabilities of digital or electronic devices and mediums

I think that by analyzing how the terms that describe electronic literature have been used, how they have changed and have overlapped through time, Rettberg brings to light how elusive a definition of electronic literature seems to be, given how broad and versatile it is. It seems like a paradox, the difficulty in defining the phenomenon creates the difficulty of naming it and so the difficulty in tracing its history in a clear way.

This definition seems to interact well with that given on the last link. What I think binds the two definitions together is the "born digital" aspect of e-lit and the idea that e-lit can be experienced through multiple mediums or devices, so long as they are electronic or in an electronic context.

Another way to say that, as they can be printed, e-books are not e-lit, even if they have never been published on paper, but just Digital Literature, isn't it?

Let's not forget that most of Burroughs techniques were developed with Brion Gysin, who experimented with a version of the cut-up method of the Surrealists using tape recorders and printed material.

This relates to the GeoGoo site we saw in the introduction. The power of combinatory strategies is practically exponential.

This is the dimension of the electronic literature that was not present in the traditional notion of literature. I am interested to see how this discussion will develop further, but clearly the point is that, like with many other art forms, electronic literature democratizes the process of creation allowing people with different set of skills to express themselves as literary authors by applying those very skills which do not necessarily need to be related to the language and lexical mastery, as it traditionally used to be the case

This is the point I also underlined earlier in this course when analyzing the Love letters generator itself. Even though the output itself is not impressive, what makes Strachey's project so noteworthy is the questions he is raising with it, the tools he is using to raise them and the innovation of the creation process. In that this piece of art is very close to the conceptual art paradigms

One of the most crucial questions when trying to define the body of the electronic literature. Electronic literature does not take all the elements of the traditional understanding of literature with it, and also it introduces some completely new attributes so where then is the limit and how we know what we can call a digital literature work?

I appreciate how Noah Wardrip revisits the term literature, as this term has been with us for such a long time that the theory has started taking it for granted. Especially in the context of digital culture the boundaries of this need to be challenged and inspected, and I believe that here the very essence of the literary, which is able to survive in the digital context, is encapsulated,

Brian Kim Stefan's ideas are differentes because he talk about Electronic Literature but before the web. So, we can do things without the computer

Nice to see the nod to video games here. See also: massive multiplayer rpgs. For that matter, tabletop RPGs are hypertext, too, and include the ephemeral nature (vaporware) of early e-lit..!

It seems to me that he is arguing for a LACK of definition, saying that is might be more useful to look at characteristics of works in the canon rather than to define the genre. Because of the wide variety of works that can be considered e-lit, the term seems hard to nail down (as we've seen across these sites) but there are some requisite characteristics that can be looked for and analyzed.

This - this is key. That relationship between the underlying the structure and the visible experience. This acts to define Electronic Literature. its the process-oriented nature of the text.

The idea of Brian Kin Stefans is a mix of other groups of media: artistis, writers, music works, animators,etc. This differents 'faces' represent the discipline

Creators of electronic literature.

"simples" are the basic elements of digital literature

Or maybe "long live the word". Let´s hope the word will not be replaced by mere images.

The definition is not full to my mind. The author didn’t pay attention to narrative part of e-lit works.

How does Brian Kim Stefans' idea of electronic literature differ from other definitions we've encountered?

Mr. Stefans' idea of electronic literature primarily differs from our definitions in it's scope; Stefan clearly sees the term as currently lacking solid meaning due to the differences between the various members that can arguably represent the discipline.

The problem is that the artist/writers who can be said to be “electronic writers” are coming at it from different angles.

This is how participatory culture changes the nature of networked production. Now, with our comments, this webpage is not the same as it was before we annotated it. Our contributions help shape the reality of the web. This is profoundly empowering, if not outright terrifying!

this definition seems overly limiting to me, seeing as he seems to focus more specifically on either hypertext or text graphics (fonts, colors, spacing, sizing, elements, etc) that are controlled by mathemetical algorithms. his definition to me at once feels too limiting and too vague- he starts talking about video games, and while i think video games are an art form in and of themselves and can contain e-literature, i'm not sure that they themselves qualify unless the game is a text based adventure.

That is just cool.

That's a good point for initiate a project about love

Should eventual obsolescence be considered a factor in defining electronic literature?

Should future-proofing a concern? We can still read texts from the dawn of written language, but we can't read e-lit from fifty years ago. Is that a bug, or a feature..? Should e-lit be the Snapchat of literature..?

Just throwing it out there.

Fascinating that the WELL sprang from the same folks who brought us the Whole Earth Catalog, which was created in print in the most primitive fashion possible: a typewriter and a Polaroid camera...

I have a vague memory of "playing" this!

For me this raises a question of whether e-lit is really inclusive/who it's really for given that there are different levels of ability with and access to computers across cultures and generations.

This is cool to me. We think so much about the internet as being this place where everything is permanent, whether you like it or not, and yet it can present an opportunity for even more ephemeral art than the printed page. Performance literature!

Key - love this book. 'Distant reading' is the literary theorists approach to technological affordances, and it has a great deal to say to artists and creators.

I hoped there would be information outside of US

I had touched on this in an earlier annotation but because it is so much easier to publish online now more people are able to read your work at a fraction of the price. Of course, it is easy to read the first few paragraphs or the first chapter of a book for free to see whether it's well written and interesting before you spend the money on the entire book. So, more people can publish but you still have to know how to write.

So not only were these early e-lit efforts probably created using non-open software, they were distributed using now-obsolete physical media? I hope someone somewhere has backed them all up to modern formats and media.

The search for terms: terms hypertext fiction, electronic literature, digital literature, digital poetry and e-poetry. It´s a good list to search but should add e-lit, e-literature. It´s hard to define the number of produces because the content replication. The effort of define the produtions of e-lit are glorious

Does that "make" an electronic text "literature"? Like an art gallery gives "proof" that a painter really is an artist?

But since Jenny Holzer "published" her texts also on paper, stone or bone carvings, I would regard it as literature (or art), but not electronic.

Ted Nelson first published his book "Literary Machines" about hypertext in 1980. He is credited with creating the term "hypertext" back in the mid-1960s as part of his vision for Project Xanadu, a computer-based system to inter-link text and store (world) knowledge. Although it was never actually implemented, these early ideas had a great influence on others and later related technology. The author appears to diminish Ted Nelson's contribution to Electronic Literature by claiming that he only used the exact term "electronic literature" twice in this book and that he was mostly referring to non-fiction uses. The general title of her essay is a bit misleading in that she is only interested in the history of the hypertext fiction community.

One of the convention definitions of "Literature" is that it is written work often having a superior or long lasting artistic merit. Are what is judged to be 'important literarcy aspects' of electronic literature different in some ways than print - given its broad nature and especially given its likely limited life-span? Critique would have to occur only when the electronic literature could be accessed.

What are the implications of relying upon commercial (non-open source) software for the creation and dissemination of e-literature, in this case stories using hypertext? How much does this limit reader access to the products (as compared to print literature) - not just in the present but also to future readers encountering obsolete technology. Is Electronic Literature an ephemeral or even a self-limiting form of expression?

I would think that technology comes before the use. First there was the technique of book printing, then came the distribution of books and there were people who wanted to read them. The same goes for electronic texts.

Rettberg is trying to show that a term is necessary for the development of the field. 'Electronic literature' is the umbrella term she prefers.

Without a name, the field would probably continue to exist in a vacuum.

What is the argument Jill Walker Rettberg is making in this section? What's at stake?

I believe Jill is trying to illustrate the lack of a banner by which an entire field can stand by. Without a specific name, as well as a clear historical account of the discipline, it's difficult to characterize it. What is at stake then is clarity; specifically, the clarity and standardization of jargon and methods you get with more established fields.

This is a fascinating history of how informal networks and more formal organizations influence the field.

I'm really glad to see that this page is tracing the history of e-lit before the internet, as some of the previous writing have discussed it as being tied to "networked" or "online" computers. This article makes it clear that e-lit had a robust life pre-internet.

published by whom? Is self published work counted in?

Can we consider that there is also more and more e-lit with social media, where people are used to created content, and even if not everything is e-lit, this new type of content sparks something within some artists/writers? Has social media made it easier to create e-lit?

Another critical distinction - in this very course, we are participating in shaping what falls under the term "electronic literature" - these conversations are now part of the critical field in a way that would have been impossible before Web2.0.

This is such an interesting approach to hunting definitions. In the academy the use of terms is so specific to context and time, and to track these words across time really captures the urgency of emerging fields.

This reminded me of Orwell's "Versificator" in 1984. He writes, "The words of these songs were composed without any human intervention whatever on an instrument known as a versificator. But the woman sang so tunefully as to turn the dreadful rubbish into an almost pleasant sound."

Orwell doesn't seem to hold out much hope for machine generated literature, but I wonder how far off that is from something like Camel Tale that randomly remixes 30 years of Metallica lyrics: http://thefwordsrt.appspot.com/cameltail.html

And yet, the randomness of Camel Tale is surprisingly compelling.

Oh man, I could spend hours with this toy from Google, mashing up sociology and literature. I had forgotten about this! https://books.google.com/ngrams

In French is Littérature Numerique? I'd like to know

"Creative Nations" in Australia

Interestingly never encountered this group in Creative Media studies in Australia. I wonder if this field is more recognised in the "pure" academic scholarship courses, rather than those aimed at creative practitioners (commercial)?

Want to read this.

This seems to eliminate some of the forms on the previous page, which were written in CONTEXTS (emails, twitter, etc.) only available on computing devices but not necessarily only able to be experienced on those devices. I can accept either definition though I was originally thinking more closely along these lines. I wonder if one definition is more commonly accepted than another?

So, how would it be considered if I for example use pencil and paper to write down poetry or anything and then I type my diary entries into an electronic device for it to be displayed in digital platform such as a blog? Is it considered to be "born" on paper? Or is it considered to be "e-lit" because despite of the paper based start, it was thought to be published in a digital media?

Its born digital - that seems to be the key - its built with the affordances of the digital medium in mind!

I like this definition as it clarifies the difference between digital literature (traditional writings converted to digital medium) from electronic literature (writings created in and dependent on a digital medium).

It accounts for the European perspective of Electronic Literature being referred to as Digital Literature. It does not, however, explain how the Europeans refer to "digital literature" as we know it in the States.

I just learned there is an MLA Convention! I need to figure out where, when, and if they'll let me in!

Although one might seem to think it unknown, it has been there since the first computer. It is everywhere and something that is just taken for granted...like toilets. I know that is a weird analogy but I am in the Peace Corps and went about a week without a toilet in my house. You don't really think about it until it's placed right in front of you.

I actually really like this idea that electronic literature is unique and works to help foster art in a new way.

e-Genesis!

By adding the absolute word "cannot" (though softened perhaps a bit by adding "meaningful way"), this seems a narrower definition than the previous one, which I'm fine with.

BTW, if this e-lit course is held a second time, you'll have to find new pages to annotate, as these ones have already slowed to a crawl with all the multiple highlights over the same text. I hope the devs of Hypothes.is are watching!

This is an "emergent literature and academic field" whose subject matter, based on the technology of the time, more often has a limited longevity e.g. perhaps unplayable after a decade or two!!

I think what makes a text (e.g. Homer´s Odyssey) digital is not only the presentation on a screen but also the way people deal with it, by reading it on screen, searching through it, creating comments and helping each other to understand the meaning.

The context here is more academic. The goal seems to be to attain some recognition.

The definitions look both to writing and reading of e-lit, but they don't mention any impact of the book market who establishes and builds up some writersmore than others. Is there any impact up til now or is e-lit some kind of "underground" still?

yes, though very rigid

absolutely. (im just nodding my head in the annotations now because i have nothing to say)

Sounds appropriate as well. Nevertheless, I think the former definition paints a picture more inline with what pops into my head when someone says the term "Electronic Literature."

It is interesting not only to read and enjoy contemporary e-lit works but also analyze them as an object for the research in the sphere of literal criticism, narratology etc.

Part of me disagrees with this/doesn't think it's necessarily so. I recently read a book surveying YouTube's rise in popularity and the authors noted that some of the most popular vlogs there weren't by people who supposedly grew up with technology and making video but rather people who were in their twenties and thirties....?

Along with the later note about electronic literature being "born digital", this suggests that electronic literature is inherently tied to its medium/the medium is part of the message of the piece... so it differs from simply being electronic because, in particular in the case of books that are then made into e-books, it can't be remediated without something (meaning) being lost.

Examples of the field in practice seem more meaningful than a singular definition.

This is fair enough, although it it rigid. As a definition, it is more about what e-lit is NOT rather than what it is.

What is the context of this definition? Does it account for other perspectives? The context is the new born people in the digital word. Where more and more people don´t learn more how to handwrite. And create more content in digital media. It´s acoount for a new perspective and form of interaction with art and so a new form to Interact with a explantation of the word.

I think this explanation is very good, you can't have one without the other.

Can we considered it is unknow by the name "electronic literature" but that anyone who has extensively used a computer has been confronted to elit ?

Can e-lit have a physical prolongation thanks to technologies like 3D printing or the maker movement in general?

The concept of emergence is useful here. "Emergence" can be understood to be new formations of knowledge or new and unexpected effects that come out of the workings of complex systems. Emergent effects are unanticipated, responsive, and surprising. In this way, e-lit is vital both as a mode of artistic production AND as a subject of scholarship (pushing and pulling traditional scholarship outside of its comfort zone) because it surprises us and teaches us about possibilities we never knew existed.

The is a very good description of what e-lit can be described as and I think that it pretty much covers most of the other perspectives of e-lit.

i love this definition! it really puts emphasis on distinguishing it from other more traditional aspects or kinds of literature and shows how vital the digital playground is in constructing/generating e-lit. the digital element takes center stage here and it's what elevates the written experience to new heights.

I'm currently reading her book, "Reading Writing Interfaces", which was the inspiration for me taking this edX course by @samplereality. Recommended!

The genesis of e-lit must surely trace back further than that. T.S. Eliot? The Dadaists? E-lit could not have been born merely from the advent of computers, it must also be the product of a particular literary tradition, right?

This addresses some of my concern with the ELO's use of "take advantage of". Here, the interconnectedness and dependency is made more central

I wonder if this includes something like the opera "Death and the Powers" (http://opera.media.mit.edu/projects/deathandthepowers/).

I first read the book of the opera in Poetry Magazine where the experience was anything but e-lit. Still, the performance includes robot actors, which seems like e-performance or e-theater. Is it worth making a distinction between e-lit and e-theater? Is there such a thing as e-theater?

So, the big question for me is: How can we make for returning the electronic literature to the original paper format?

For me this information (SMS messages) is very interesting because that allows us to create projects that can generate a deep interaction

Forms of Electronic Literature

Troubling right from the start. Define "important literary aspects."

I do believe the most important part of this text is "The confrontation with technology at the level of CREATION is what distinguishes eletronic litearute from, for example, e-books [...]". With that said, my personal definition of e-lit, based on this, is:

A work of literature made with digital tools, and created in such way that these tools are also part of the literature material itself.

Electronic literature often intersects with conceptual and sound arts, but reading and writing remain central to the literary arts. These activities, unbound by pages and the printed book, now move freely through galleries, performance spaces, and museums. Electronic literature does not reside in any single medium or institution."

This is very interesting because from a musical point of view perhaps a song with text printed on a pianola roll is electronic literature.

Right; I was thinking in the very limited terms of lit that could only be experienced through a computing device but this fits the definition of "[taking] advantage of capabilities and contexts provided by the stand-alone or networked computer."

Well the definition of e-lit is quite determined in this sentence. - However in order to get used to this saavy app (hypothesis platform) I'm going to descrive with my own words what I got from this definition-

Apparently e-lit has to do with the literary aspects and connections made between several interactions of liteature and technology (for what I get, standard books may also apply here) where sometimes it may ne regaldless of human intervention.

Also, I think this has to do with the "computing" devices, within mechanisms and systems that may be also the way we as humans construct reallity and other things though language and literature. This reminds me of some Foucault's theory about how a single word may be considered as a discoursive device in a complex mechanism interacting with several systems in a society o so...

What's really interesting is that the human intervention may not be required after all to consider the creation and acknowledgment of a literary work.

Confrontation with technology as a way to elaborate and create literature differs widelly from just using tecnological devices to display literature.

I would say the e-lit refers to litterary works using eletronic devices (such as computer, tablet, smartphone...) and their capabilities (such as text, network, etc.)

This is my working definition for now.

interesting! I feel I chose the right course!

Not sure why "important" modifies literary aspects. Such assertion remains to be demonstrated.

This is a very interesting course, some of the examples I think are more on the side of conceptual art or performance art. I guess the lines are becoming blurry.

I think it's really important to involve other organizations. I think that the more people who know, the easier it can be to disseminate the information. I think with the evolvement of self publishing it is easy for many more people to read your work than if it were published in hard copy...although I still love books so very much.

I like being given examples of something I am unclear of, like E-Lit, to help me discover what it is. I find the examples interesting, I also would think that it might be the code that makes up a webpage.

This paragraph contributes a lot to reaching a definition of e-lit, in my opinion.

Okay, I get what's being said here and I agree, e-lit is probably more than just digitised books, but how long has it been since most "traditional" book authors hand-wrote or manually typed their books on paper? It seems to me that "traditional" authors frequently, perhaps typically, create their works "in confrontation with technology", whether it be MS Word for a novel or shorter work (and all the interactive formatting and restructuring it allows), Final Draft for scripts, not to mention all those author-assist programs out there that help with structure and formatting.

Nowadays, even paper novels are created on computers.

But still, I think I know what they're groping towards in their definition of e-lit. My short version:

E-Lit is "literature" (something that is primarily text-based) that is created mostly on computer/s, for delivery and consumption/exploration mostly via computer/s.

Left undefined is "computers", which is going to get harder and harder to strap down in the future - will augmented reality via VR headwear count? :-)

Computer isn't defined here, and perhaps doesn't need to be, but it could include something as simple as a calculator used to help determine the outcome of "battles", and hence which page to turn to next in the story.

I took quite an interest in chatterbots in the early to mid-2000s. I haven't run any of them in years, but I still have dozens of them that are about ten to fifteen years old now.

Now a list list of examples, most of which are new to me, and hopefully all clear to me after I have finished the course. For now I am particularly interested in the collaborative writing, but I´ll see.

According to me, e-lit is literature which uses electronics in any form, that is, phones, computers, tablets , etc. Including both, whether these are used to create literature or convert literature to electronic forms.

yesssssssss there's no overbearing authority on what is considered electronic literature or not

there are so many hardcopy novels that take this format though, i wouldn't say that it is exclusively for e-lit

i strongly agree with the "take advantage" part of the sentence. this eliminates things such as e-books and pdfs of novels -- they don't count as e-lit in this definition because they take the form of hard-copy books; they have pages and margins that make them look like a book. that's not taking advantage of computing devices.

I like that. That sounds pretty right-on to me, but I certainly am no expert on the subject.

I only looked at volume 1, but this is a major time-suck.

Maybe this is because I am not a lit person, but this phrase seems problematic to me. "Important" seems a poor choice of words, as it is a highly variable, loaded concept. This may be ignorant, but I don't know what might constitute a "literary aspect." Can that be well-defined without the term "literary" in it?

I'm curious about the use of the term "archiving" here. The way pieces display is sometimes machine dependent (mac vs. pc, etc.) and as technology progresses certain pieces may lose their compatibility with browsers/operating systems. In particular I'm thinking of some flash pieces that we looked at in another class I took on e-lit that students either couldn't pull up or get to display correctly because the plugins on their computer were too advanced for the piece to work with them.

Also, what is a piece of e-lit then/after they don't work? What do pieces of e-lit become when people no longer know how to navigate or read them?

I'm interested in seeing how issues of control and censorship play out in the future. We talked a lot in one of my classes about looking at who "controls" the stories, so I'd be curious to see who ends up "controlling" e-lit as it moved forward.

This reminds me a little bit of Richard Lanham's The Economics of Attention, especially his conversation about looking at versus looking through. If confrontation with technology is part of e-lit, then it's self-conscious and reflective of its medium and also, at least in some cases makes readers look at it rather than through it. (And the medium/how e-lit is presented is part of the message it conveys.) (According to Lanham we typically look through text/aren't aware of the medium.)

Its a good text. The e-lit is not only writing, but most, sounds ,images are used like complements, or in the other way the text is the complement

The idea of going beyond the ebook and really using all the possibilities offred by digital is important. But can e-lit use pieces of "traditional literature", for example coming from the public domain?

So I guess texts created by AI, or at least some of the texts, can be considered e-lit.

How easily could our cognitive be used for e-lit? Could we create e-lit without even knowing?

Sometime it is difficult to identify and measure an aesthetic value of some “contributions”. Where is a border between a work of art and simply graphomania?

This explanation helps me to think that e-lit is literature works crafted with different language that fits the computerized medium whereas technology enhances the ways we respond to the 'context'. Words, sentences and concept are adaptive to the 'computerized' medium and this enable people to have direct interaction with the content.

This is the critical piece, it seem to me. E-lit is thus about communication/community, the capacity to share works in new ways and to watch them inhabit spaces of constant movement rather than the stable archives of libraries, museums, etc.

"important literary aspects"... sounds very subjective

The choice of the term “confrontation with technology” is an interesting one and seems to reflect the view of ‘older’ print-based literature consumers coming to grip with not only the ‘new’ digital technology but also how it is also altering the conception of literature. I would suspect younger generations that have grown up ‘digital’ would consider this to be less of a ‘confrontation’ and more of an expected ’transformation’ in the digital space.

This attempt at describing Electronic Literature already sounds rather dated and illustrates the difficulty of trying to precisely define something directly associated with a rapidly evolving (digital) technology! In fact, as illustrated by the examples, the technology itself is altering the understanding of what Literature itself means.

huh, this definition is really fascinating! I love the idea of an interactive poem that's generated partially by a computer based on responses it gets to prompts given to the user. for example, a site could ask a user to input some emotions they're having, or describe the situation that they're the most emotionally moved by at the moment, and then the site coule start crafting an individual poem based on those answers. i would love to see that! digital is just such a fascinating format for poetry, or any other sort of writing that moves you emotionally and is highly individualistic.

This, I'm fascinated by, and need to dwell on more. What is the "context" of a computer? Its language? Its interface?

"take advantage of" doesn't seem strong enough. The relationship between the work and the computer are, I think, much more intertwined. e-lit doesn't "take advantage of" this situation, it is born from it, empowered by it.

True, but as Kdpalermini said, art can itself be a type of electronic literature. Maybe not electronic, but reading and writing remain in a codex, in the nazca lines or other form of ancient art.

For a introduction, this is the best way to describe e-lit. #d004x

As someone who works in publishing, I'd be curious to hear more details about the market for e-lit.

This description makes the most sense to me.

I like their definition because it removes the possibility of a normal book being transposed to an E Book and people consider it E Lit. An E book takes advantage of no capabilities or contexts afforded by a network computer or stand alone computer. Sure, it is marketed and download via these mediums but that has nothing to do with the literary aspect of the work.

This type of fiction is also implemented in video games as well. This type of fiction makes a very good use of hypertext because the hypertext serves as the transition from one scene of the story to the next.

The concept of being non-linear and interactive is what has stood out to me in the examples of electronic literature that I've seen so far. While this can appear in traditional books, it seems to be far less common and thus can be seen as a defining feature of hypertext fiction.

I've taught several lit classes where I begin by having students read a CYOA book. It is very effective at getting us thinking about structure, format, and readerly experience.

This is basically the definition of how the internet works. Makes us realize how practical and convenient hypertexts are when it comes to navigating the internet.

This is in part what makes hypertext art so alluring, it articulates our desires and fears within the terms of our changing sensory and cognitive experiences.

One of the most astonishing and effective structures I've seen in this format is the Twine piece "A Kiss" http://www.freeindiegam.es/2013/07/a-kiss-dan-waber/ You can view the structure of 1,001 passages (the "map" of the story) as a piece of art in itself. Navigating through the passages is a journal in time (before, during, after the kiss) and space (proximity to the characters)—brilliant. Because the fragments are highly structure in two dimensions, you regain a sense of linear progression that's often lost in hypertext. It feels orderly, no matter how you click through the piece. The story fragments, with their time/space coordinates, build on each other.

For me this highlights a lot of what we have seen so far. Electronic literature seems to be about more than just the text, with images, sound, interaction and other elements being connected to the text. Without these other elements part of the narrative is lost.

This is a compelling idea I have been grappling with myself as I think about digital pedagogy and the future of the humanities. Finding continuities in history as opposed to just disruptions can really help but technological shifts in context.

should be 'or'

This makes the fourth typo. Why should I continue?

So, the equivalent of Russian literary movements is computer art????

this assumes I agree with your definitions

Noun or verb: this group seems to be trying to start a new term definition. Have they?

How does a slow reading speed affect the intended mimick?

I love the idea of disabling other technologies - making them useless - a way to force the user to reconsider their own use of that technology. F-ing with fuction

Do these definitions work best with the english language because computer languages are mostly based on english?

"requires" seems the key word to me here, and not only that, but that it requires computation!

Parts 1 and 2 of this essay are available in more-or-less the same wording in a blog post on Grand Text Auto by by Noah Wardrip-Fruin: https://grandtextauto.soe.ucsc.edu/2005/08/01/christopher-strachey-first-digital-artist/

This suggests why new technologies often have appeal to artists (anyone with an inquisitive creative mind)! The sense of "magical" (dis)reality due to having never experienced something is perfect for creating a surface response of the unsettled, dysfunctional, or even shock.

An amusing side note is the the Mark I computer was also able to generate sound - and it was programmed by C. Strachey to produce computer music :-)

Included in the Ferranti Mark 1's instruction set was a hoot command, which enabled the machine to give auditory feedback to its operators. The sound generated could be altered in pitch, a feature which was exploited when the Mark 1 made the earliest known recording of computer music. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferranti_Mark_1 ]

The Mark I computer had a built-in instruction that put 20 random bits into the accumulator using a resistance noise generator (special electronic hardware), rather than use a pseudo-random number generating algorithm as is done on most later computers. Interestingly, it was A.M. Turing who recommended incorporating a random-number generator into this computer (and who built it), to create what he referred to as a “learning machine” - allowing the machine to take a guess and then make a decision based on that result. (info from book Turing’s Catheral by George Dyson).

this is what I am constantly drawn to - the interface. the moment of encounter between poem and reader, embedded within all sorts of constructed architectures of code and expectation. so much potential.

this is critical. the format, presentation, and interface of dig lit is what invites us into the content (or intentionally doesn't).

This is the kind of thinking that turns us back to format and context, uncovering what is truly radical about how we interface digital literature.

For me this section really highlighted just how art and literature can be the same. I think this idea of art and literature being part of the same is something to keep in mind when looking at e-literature that goes beyond the traditional book (of course it could just be my performing arts background speaking).

This is extraordinarily clear and I like it a lot. When literary and creative form comes from combinatory literature - you can't begin to understand the work by reading the content.

Here begins the part of Wardrip-Fruin's article that will be especially useful to us in D004x.

How useful is this distinction between process intensity and data intensity? How does it help us to think about digital media differently?

I really like this sense of what counts as "literary."

This should sound familiar!

Adding text to a highlight makes it a note (and gives you the chance to make it public), whereas highlights default to private I think).

This is a note - I'm not 100% sure what the difference is between notes and highlighting, yet, since we can add comments to notes and notes generate highlights?

Clever