8 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2015
    1. And what of narrative flow? There is still movement, but in hyperspace's dimensionless infinity, it is more like endless expansion ; it runs the risk of being so distended and slackly driven as to lose its centripetal force, to give way to a kind of static low-charged lyricism -- that dreamy gravityless lost-in-space feeling of the early sci-fi films.

      What about the first novel by Fernando de Rojas in the 16th Century, or Cervantes works later on? What about the migration from old Greek Epics in singed poetry to the works written by Homerus? Something to be listened and played with music should be ruled by the same literary laws as a written story (no music, white paper, letters...)?

    2. Venerable novelistic values like unity, integrity, coherence, vision, voice seem to be in danger. Eloquence is being redefined. "Text" has lost its canonical certainty. How does one judge, analyze, write about a work that never reads the same way twice?

      Venerable novelistic values don't work in venerable e-lit structures...we have to face the change from within, new product means new venerable values.

    3. There are other problems too. Navigational procedures: how do you move around in infinity without getting lost?

      What if "getting lost" is the essence of the trip?

    4. Writing students are notoriously conservative creatures. They write stubbornly and hopefully within the tradition of what they have read. Getting them to try out alternative or innovative forms is harder than talking them into chastity as a life style. But confronted with hyperspace, they have no choice: all the comforting structures have been erased. It's improvise or go home

      Old Continent oldfashioned structures are the best example of that issue, new writters try to innovate in contents and structure but never see digital as a quality guarraty. I think is the commitment with the paper, kind of literary marriage that implies all the traditions and conventions during centuries.

    5. Laurence Sterne, James Joyce, Raymond Queneau, Julio Cortazar, Italo Calvino and Milorad Pavic, not to exclude the form's father, Cervantes himself

      Miguel de Unamuno was quite brilliant with this counterline "guerrilla"...

    6. the virulent carrier of the patriarchal, colonial, canonical, proprietary, hierarchical and authoritarian values of a past that is no longer with us.

      That imposition is not about creation but about "copyrights" and its canonical sense of property that fits that old fashioned liberalism in arts. Creative commons is the best example of how we are trying to become free from those bounds.

    1. I don't totally agree with the fact that writers the creation of language is the target of a writer, I think language is just a means, the "algorithm" that "plays" with words/semanthincs, as any machine can do

  2. Oct 2015
    1. works with important literary aspects that take advantage of the capabilities and contexts provided by the stand-alone or networked computer

      I don't think this is a definition as it is too vague and just offers some features of the main subject. Still no idea :(