Re: [-empyre-] on electronic poetry
Interesting, about ambiguity in the choice of topic
title. It was deliberate. Literature is always
already misleading about something. Could a poet
'fake' a hypertext?
Isn't this the most interesting aspect of the discussion of 'digital art'?
...the essential underlying play between the technology itself, the
use of it and the [seemingly unrelated] outcome... and I guess also
the marketing 'presence'... [by that I mean how academics, curators
and journalists like to try interpret it for us]
I was thinking about how anyone would|could define and recognise a
'fake' hypertext and how the creative|interpretive|cognitive
processes work in ourselves to lead us through these experiences.
It also 'speaks' to the point melinda and others made earlier about
not relating personally to a specific technology or communicative
form and how to define 'immersion'.
I have a wide range of friends and relatives... some with head
injuries, some blind, some deaf... some very repressed and
conservative and some just crazy... all with their own internal
narratives and relations to technologies that are in the most part
incomprehensible or at least mostly opaque to me.
I am still pleasantly surprised at these unique ways of interpreting
and relating to the world.
Why do we even need a term like 'poet' and 'hypertext' ?
Many might find the current 'linear' texts we have hard enough to
navigate without diversion...
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and