electronicliteraturereview

Posts Tagged ‘electronic literature

Interview with Eman Younis

leave a comment »

Many roads lead to the study of electronic literature – and eventually to the ELR. In this interview Eman Younis, a member of the Arabic Electronic Literature research group, tells us how she found her way to the New Media Studies and what challenges the research group meets when it is faced with cultural issues of tradition-conscious Arabic countries.

 

ELR: Eman Younis you are a member of the Arabic Electronic Literature research group. How did you start studying electronic literature and how did this organization come about?

Eman Younis: In fact, my interest in Digital Literature started by accident. I was looking for material on the Internet about Contemporary Youth writing in preparation for writing my Ph.D. dissertation in modern Arabic literature. In the course of my search, I came across articles that deal with Digital Literature in general – Arabic and Non-Arabic. The subject drew my attention a lot and aroused my curiosity and I started looking for more and more information about the field. When I was sure that there is sufficient information and data to conduct a scientific research, I decided to change the subject of my dissertation to ‘Digital Literature’. At that time, I was among the first Arab researchers who conducted a scientific research about this genre of literature.

Regarding the group of Arab researchers in Digital Literature, they are a small group of researchers whom I joined by recommendation of the scholar  Riham Hosni, who is in charge of this project. She thankfully initiated  the building up of a special Website under the name of AEL (Arabic Electronic Literature) that aims to put the Arabic Digital Literature on the World Map and introduce its most important Arab creators, researchers and critics in this field to the world.

ELR: In 2015 you published the essay titled “Interaction Between Art and Literature in Arab Digital Poetry and the Issue of Criticism” in which you discuss the critical approach to electronic literature. You suggest that an open and dynamic form of expression like electronic literature needs a “hypercritic” that allows the analysis of the audio-visual effects that interact with the literary text. Can you tell us more about this concept? Where is that critic? Which role does technology play in the analysis of works of electronic literature?

Eman Younis: Before I start talking about this term and concept, I want first to talk about the research from which the term emerged. Nearly two years ago, I and one of my colleagues wrote a research about the “Interaction between Art and Literature in Digital Poetry.”  We chose the poem “Shajar al-Bougaz/ al-Boughaz Trees” by the Moroccan poet Mun’im al-Azraq to be our sample of discussion and application. It is a very long and compound poem. What characterizes our research is that we are two researchers in two different fields. She comes from the field of art and I come from the field of literature. We decided to mix between the tools of ‘artistic criticism’ and the tools of ‘literary criticism’ in analyzing the poem and the result was amazing. We reached conclusions, which we would not reach if each of us worked separately.

In this way, the term and concept of ‘Hypercritic’ started to crystallize. We  found that the electronic text requires both an extraordinary writer and an extraordinary critic, which we called ‘Hypercritic’, who is a critic that possesses different critical tools that enable him/her to deal with a text within broader horizons. In my opinion, the most important one of these tools is the ‘tools of artistic criticism’ because Electronic Literature goes under the category which has become known by the name of Digital Art. If these tools are not available in one critic, then it is possible to rely on a group of critics from different fields as my colleague and I did in order to analyze the text.

Some people might object to the idea of Hypercritic from the point of view that each writer interacts with the text in a different way according to his or her culture, education and vision, but we believe that here lie the aesthetics of the Digital Text.

In reply to this claim, I say that we should differentiate between an ordinary reader and ordinary critic. When we talk about the reception of the literary work by the reader/receiver, there is no doubt that the process of interpretation remains confined within the abilities of the readers to decode the text, and each reader might reach with the work to a point that differs from the other reader. In return, when we talk about the reception of the text by a knowledgeable critic, we expect that he/her will reach with it interpretative points that are deeper, more stable and more convincing because his/her conclusions depend on serious theories and critical directions.

ELR: The AEL has organized an event together with the Rochester Institute of Technology dedicated to electronic literature which will take place in Dubai from 25 – 27 February 2017. What are some of the topics that you are especially looking forward to?

Eman Younis: As I have mentioned, the main goal of the conference is to put the Arab Digital Literature on the international map of digital literature. Lots of Western critics do not know anything about Arabic Digital Literature.  Besides, they are ignorant of our researches in this field due to the fact that this literature has not been translated into English. In view of this situation, the conference constitutes an opportunity for us to introduce some of the Arabic experiments and the most important academic and scientific researches and studies in this field.

In fact, we have put down several axes for this conference. The most important of these are: critical studies; the impact of the social networks on literature; experiences of individual writers; children’s digital literature; challenges and obstacles; future of the Arabic Digital Literature.

ELR: What does the panorama of the Arabic electronic literature look like to date? How many authors and academic scholars are there? Is there a development in the community?

Eman Younis: Digital Literature appeared in the Arab world in 2001, when Muhammad Sanajleh wrote his first interactive novel titled Zilal al-Wahed/Shadows of Oneself, which was followed by several other works. Very few Arab writers have followed his steps such as the poets: Abd al-Nur Idris and Mun’im al-Azraq and Muhammad Ashweka from Morocco; the poet Mushtaq Abbas Ma’en from Iraq and others. Despite these attempts, the Arab Digital Literature is still moving very slowly in quantity and quality in comparison with what is taking place in the Western World, not only on the level of the number of texts, but on the level of critical research and studies that accompany these works, and even on the level of electronic sites and magazines that take care of it.

In spite of the efforts that are made in the Arab world in this direction, the written literature still occupies the first place in the Arab countries. However, Digital Literature at this stage seems to be not more than a problematic experience that dangles between the tide and ebb of acceptance and refusal in the critical sectors.

Certainly, there are lots of reasons that hinder the rooting and establishment of the digital literature in the Arab countries such as: the political reasons that the Arab world suffers from these days, the economic conditions, and the abysmal digital gap between the developed countries and the developing countries. Digital Literature requires large economic resources and entails high expenses, which are not available to most writers in the developing countries. This situation explains the slow growth of Digital Literature in the Arab world and its absence in some countries of the Third World. Besides, a large number of the Arab writers, especially the older generation, suffer from “Computer Illiteracy”. Generally, the Arab mentality does not accept change and diverting from the familiar conditions easily. Thus, the Digital Literature entails breaking of many fixed postulates upon which we have grown regarding the concept of literature and the roles of the writer and the reader.

Furthermore, lack of interest in teaching Digital Literature in many institutes and universities in the Arab countries and its exclusion from the official teaching programs also constitute an additional crisis that hinders the movement of its development and awareness of its importance on the desired level.

I would like to point out here that I have written a study about this issue, which has not been published yet, in which I deal with the most important challenges that face the Arab Digital Literature these days, which is the subject that I will talk about at Dubai Conference, too.

ELR: What does the organization of the AEL want to do in the near future to develop the research, the discussion and the creation of works of electronic literature?

Eman Younis: This question can be better answered by Riham Hosni because, as I mentioned before, she is the person in charge of the project of AEL. However, in my opinion, our goal today is to show the world what we have achieved in this field so far regarding the creative experiences and critical studies on the one hand,  and our accompaniment of the international development and our benefit from it, on the other.

Advertisements

Interview with Reham Hosny

with 2 comments

What do Scheherazade, a Persian mathematician and the Rochester Institute of Technology have in common? Electronic literature!

The Arabic culture has contributed in many different ways to the history of electronic literature and there are many works of Arabic electronic literature. The ELR has interviewed Reham Hosny, the director of the Arabic Electronic Literature research group which aims to the creation of a network of Arabic authors and scholars and the promotion of Arabic electronic literature.

 

ELR: Reham Hosny you are a member of the Arabic Electronic Literature research group. How did you get involved with electronic literature and what is your role in the research group?

Reham Hosny: Well, it just so happened that I started working with Sandy Baldwin at WVU and then RIT in my Ph.D. project, which focused on digital poetics in the Arabic and Anglo-American contexts. I am lucky to be the first Arab scholar to study e-lit internationally with a prominent professor like prof. Baldwin who has become my role model and mentor. By the time, I have participated in many conferences focusing on the development and pedagogy of e-lit and proposing new perspectives on e-lit such as my newly presented concept of Cosmo-Literature.

This start opened many avenues for joint projects in the field; an important one of them is Arabic Electronic Literature (AEL) network. It is the first project of its kind ever that is interested in globalizing Arabic e-lit and putting it on the world map of the field. Prof. Baldwin and myself noticed that the Arabic e-lit and the Arab e-lit authors are not represented in the world e-lit scene. Much of the digital poetics is drawn from a small range of Anglo-American texts and critics. To get a broader understanding of the field, we should reflect upon different perspectives on e-lit from different parts of the world. We felt that it’s the time to shift the world e-lit community interest from the western e-lit to e-lit in other parts of the globe such as the Arabic e-lit as well as propose new concepts and ideas on e-lit derived from the Arabic culture specificities.

In September, 2015, we launched arabicelit website with many goals in mind: Firstly, uploading the data of Arabic e-lit writers and their works upon the world databases of ELMCIP to be available for researchers. To do that, we created connections and networks with all the Arabs interested in e-lit. The first stage was completed by uploading the personal data of Arabic e-lit writers. The second stage will include uploading data about their creative works. Secondly, considering holding a conference on Arabic e-lit at RIT Dubai in Feb. 2018. There might be a follow-up conference that will take place a year later at the RIT-Rochester campus. Thirdly, creating academic programs and workshops, publishing research papers on Arabic e-lit works and making comparisons with the world e-lit works to define the place of Arabic e-lit on the world map of e-lit. We will deliver the first of these workshops in the Dubai conference. Moreover, some research papers in English have come out recently addressing Arabic e-lit aesthetics.

Our efforts in the field have already started paying off. For the first time, the Arabic e-lit community was represented on a world interactive map designed by Scott Rettberg depending on the data that we uploaded on ELMCIP. The Arabic e-lit is more recognized now in the world e-lit community than before.

ELR: You participated in the ELO Conference 2017 which took place last July in Portugal with a paper entitled “Roots and Shoots: History and Development of Arabic Electronic Literature”. The Arabic culture has an important influence in the electronic literature. The word algorithm, for instance, derives from its inventor Al-Khwarizmi, a Persian mathematician and also the literary work “1001 Nights” is often quoted as an early example of hypertextual work of literature. What is your point of view on this matter?

Reham Hosny: The Arabic culture is one of the richest cultures that has its effect on different literary and scientific fields. The Arabic language is the official language of 22 countries and one of the most spoken languages around the world. The Arabic calligraphy undergone many changes to arrive at its present shape with three components: The plain unpointed letters, a pointing system above or under some letters to differentiate them from other similar letters which is called “i’jam”, and supplementary diacritics that control pronunciation which are called “tashkil”. These three components of the Arabic calligraphy along with its writing from right to left in a cursive way make it a visual language that can be used in decoration and artistic works.  

In “Roots and Shoots: History and Development of Arabic Electronic Literature”, I addressed the printed genealogies of Arabic e-lit. The reason behind my interest in following these precursors is the fact that “innovative e-poetry will continue to exist in relation to innovative print poetry” as Glazier believes.  

“Alf  Layla wa-Layla” (“One Thousand and One Nights”) which is considered a canonical text in the Arabic cultural heritage since the heydays of the Islamic civilization represents, with its succession of linked stories, a hypertextual precursor to e-lit. The concrete and visual poetry of the Andalusian age in the Twelfth century and the Mamluk and Ottoman ages after that represent rich precursors of e-lit. Moreover, the experimental modern Arabic poetry has many examples that could be considered precursors to Arabic e-lit.

ELR: The Manifesto of Arabic Electronic Literature reads that the community intends to look beyond the hegemony of English language. One interesting development in this respect concerns the creation of a programming language in Arabic as we can see in the code work of Ramsey Nasser and also in the work of the Quwaiti company Sakhr Computers that arabised the programming languages BASIC and LOGO back in the 1980s. What is your opinion about the development of an Arabic code language?

Reham Hosny: Unlike the languages that change every century, the Arabic language is consistent and rich language to the extent that texts from 1400 years back are still readable and understandable. The English language is the dominant language of programming; however, there are some infamous Arabic programming languages. One of the objects of AEL is to create a network and connections among Arab e-lit writers and programmers for future joint collaboration.

Qlb by Ramsey Nasser is an artistic piece that mocks the hegemony of English language in programming to show how biased the field of computer science is. This ambitious work is a good step upon the way of developing programming in languages other than English.

Sakhr is the first leading software company in the Middle East that depends on the Arabic language as its main medium. It has played a great role since 1980s in Arabizing some programming languages, manufacturing computers, and providing different kinds of Arabic language-based software.

I believe that one day, an Arabic code language will be developed to provide many potentials and privileges to the computer science field.

ELR: Another point of the Manifesto is that the community of the Arabic Electronic Literature wishes to expand its field of work and influence. In 2018 the city of Dubai hosts the first conference dedicated to Arabic Electronic Literature. Could you tell us more about the event?

Reham Hosny: As I stated before, holding an international conference on Arabic e-lit is one of the AEL project goals. The conference will be hold on Feb. 25-27, 2018. We already launched a CFP and received many submissions from all over the world in Arabic and English on the topic of Arabic e-lit. The prominent digital critic Kate Hayles will be the keynote speaker of the conference as well as the Moroccan critic Zohor Gouram. We also organized a meeting with many Arab and international scholars in March, 2017, at RIT Dubai to figure out the details and logistics of the conference.

The first workshop of its kind in the Arab World will be delivered at the conference to highlight the digital tools used in creating e-lit and featuring new e-lit genres that are not famous in the Arab World. Additionally, a digital cultural project focusing on the theme of Dubai and Arabic heritage will be coincided with the conference in collaboration with RIT New York and RIT-Dubai. It is supposed that a model of the project will be presented at the conference and Expo 2020 after that. The scientific and organizing committees of the conference include renowned international and Arab scholars. The conference is organized by RIT, New York, hosted by RIT, Dubai, and sponsored by many great foundations like ELO.

ELR: What do you foresee or wish for the future of Arabic literature?

Reham Hosny: The field of Arabic e-lit still needs many sincere efforts to explore its potentials and specificities. We need much collaboration with the world e-lit community to get more experiences on the ways of employing digital media in literature. We also need to close the digital divide in the Arabic e-lit community to compete internationally by training young writers how to use advanced software in writing. A lot of attention should be paid to the Arabic e-lit pedagogy because teaching e-lit in Arabic universities will guarantee its development and circulation. Most Significantly, we are in a bad need of adopting an archiving project because software like Flash is no longer in use that is why some Arabic e-lit pieces were lost.

I dream of Arabic electronic literature that helps rediscover the potentials of the Arabic culture and to be represented and appreciated internationally . AEL is a leading initiative in this vein and our future hope is to get more support to complete achieving its message and join the great project CELL as a partner.

#ELRFEAT: Entrevista con Mark Bernstein (1999)

leave a comment »

Sigue la serie de #ELRFEAT con una entrevista de Susana Pajares Tosca con Mark Bernstein del 1999. Con el permiso de la autora republicamos esta entrevista que salió por primera vez en la revista online “Pendiente Migración” de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

 

ENTREVISTA CON MARK BERSTEIN, CIENTÍFICO JEFE DE EASTGATE

Entre el arte y la ciencia

 

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Dónde están los hipertextos? (Es una pregunta con trampa)

Mark Bernsterin: En primer lugar es importante recordar lo lejos que hemos llegado hasta ahora. Tenemos muchos buenos hipertextos. La red es maravillosa, florece y –aunque gran parte de la red es sólo superficialmente hipertextual- avanza a pasos agigantados. A pesar de todo, nuestras estanterías virtuales aún están bastante vacías.

¿Dónde están los hipertextos? Algunos se están escondiendo de la tontería, de los argumentos triviales que se pronuncian como juicios y edictos culturales. Preocupaciones como que la pantalla parpadea, que se parece demasiado a la TV, o el test de Bolter (si se puede leer en la bañera) no se pueden tomar en serio, pero los medios y los periodistas parecen tomarlas en serio.

Algunos de nuestros hipertextos se han perdido en el cisma entre las dos culturas. Pensamos que el arte y la ciencia deben colaborar, pero al mismo tiempo nos comportamos como si nos sorprendiera y molestara que se acerquen demasiado. Unir arte y tecnología parece extraño, antinatural y aberrante. A los poetas no les parece raro esperar que la gente aprenda italiano medieval para poder leer a Dante, pero aprender un poquito de programación les parece una imposición inaceptable. Tenemos que cambiar esto.

Algunos hipertextos tienen miedo de la teoría literaria, o se retrasan porque los escritores no entienden inmediatamente que la escritura no es lineal porque sí, ni siquiera en papel. La narrativa siempre gira y se enlaza, siempre escribimos en nudos y reflejos, montajes y fintas. El hipertexto nos da una nueva posibilidad para hacer esto, y a veces la libertad de hacer bien lo que siempre hemos hecho con dificultad nos aterroriza.

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Por qué la mayoría de hipertextos tratan los temas de la identidad fragmentada o de la escritura?

Mark Bernsterin: Sí, son dos temas comunes, pero probablemente sea una exageración decir que la mayoría de hipertextos tratan de ellos.

Aún así estos temas son bastante comunes, y también provocan extrañas coincidencias. Durante un tiempo hubo accidentes de coche por todas partes (afternoon, Victory Garden, I Have Said Nothing, Uncle Buddy´s Pahntom Funhouse, Ambulance). El desmembramiento es otra imagen típica (In Small & Large Pieces y Patchwork Girl – dos obras que por lo demás no se parecen en nada, y en Cyborg: Engineering the Body Electric).

Parte de esto es por supuesto coincidencia, otras veces es simplemente alusión. Algunos aspectos del hipertexto –su fragmentación, su tendencia a los lazos, su conexión con la máquina- sugieren estos temas también. Y escribir sobre escribir ha estado en el aire durante todo el siglo XX: igual que la pintura del siglo puede ser definida como pintura sobre pintar, gran parte de la literatura del siglo XX se concentra en entender su propio medio de expresión.

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Por qué los hipertextos que tenemos son tan vanguardistas literariamente hablando y no hay otros géneros?

Mark Bernsterin: En parte por definición: la literatura que no nos es familiar es automáticamente calificada de vanguardista, y tiende a ser recompensada según su novedad –lo que Michael Joyce llama su “proximidad inexorable”.

Todavía no tenemos géneros hipertextuales porque aún no tenemos suficientes hipertextos. Se pueden ver atisbos de formación de género aquí y allí –hay una relación interesante entre Lust de Arnold y Samplers de Larsen, por ejemplo- pero los géneros se forman por acumulación.

Si por “género” te refieres al sentido peyorativo –como en “ficción de género”- el problema es técnico. Muchos géneros populares actuales son una revisitación de una secuencia ritual, llevando al lector por lugares familiares hasta una resolución que podemos anticipar pero que, gracias a la habilidad del escritor, aún nos sorprende y deleita. El misterio, en particular, es un ritual: el mundo está dañado, y el protagonista ha de echarse a las malvadas calles para intentar volver a poner el mundo en un estado tolerable. Es muy difícil combinar esta secuencia ritual con el hipertexto. No digo que no se pudiera hacer, pero los que lo ha intentado se han concentrado en presentar los misterios como puzzles. Han estado trabajando desde el punto de vista equivocado.

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Qué echa de menos en la literatura hipertextual?

Mark Bernsterin: ¡Principalmente desearía que hubiera más! ¿Dónde están los hipertextos? Nuestras estanterías virtuales están mucho más llenas que en el 87, pero se podría hacer muchísimo más.

No tenemos hipertextos en las ciencias, en la ingeniería o las matemáticas, ni siquiera en la informática.

Nuestros hipertextos tienden a ser serios, y a menudo son tristes. Eso es lo que me parece peor. ¿Dónde está la alegría? ¿Dónde está el amor? ¿Dónde se esconden el schlemiel y el schlemazel?* No me malinterpretes: la seriedad es buena e importante. No es que me quiera ir a tomar unas cervezas precisamente con los muchachos de Esperando a Godot o a ligar con ninguno de los de Macbeth. Pero la amplitud es importante. (Me sentiría más a gusto si supiera que podemos hacerlo; a los pianistas no les debe resultar muy gratificante estéticamente hacer ejercicios y escalas, pero es bueno saber que puedes hacerlo si lo necesitas).

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Cuál es el papel de Eastgate en este mundo del Hipertexto?

Mark Bernsterin: Estamos entre la vela y las estrellas.

Por un lado, Eastgate es una compañía que hace tecnología. Creamos herramientas hipertextuales, software para que la gente escriba de formas que antes eran imposibles. Eso quiere decir que estamos muy unidos a la informática y a la ingeniería de software que hace posibles estos progresos.

Por otro lado, Eastgate es una editorial de hipertextos. Buscamos hipertextos de calidad que puedan cambiar a la gente y al medio. No nos detiene el trabajo duro.

Así que Eastgate está en un punto interesante, cambiando constantemente entre lo tangible y lo intangible, entre el arte y la ciencia, entre plazos inminentes y horizontes que se extienden durante décadas. No es extraño pasar de estudiar procesos sobre comercialización de embalajes a diseñar nuevos algoritmos de enlace en pocos minutos.

De hecho, una de nuestras herramientas hipertextuales, Storyspace, ha terminado teniendo un papel muy interesante en la investigación sobre hipertexto; para mucha gente se ha convertido en el sistema básico, la herramienta general de hipertexto que la gente conoce primero. Aquí en Darmstadt hay mapas de Storyspace por todas partes, en libros de texto de Sociología y en las notas que toman los asistentes a un taller de Hiperficción…

Susana Pajares Tosca: Eastgate parece el ejemplo perfecto de “tender puentes en el abismo” entre la ciencia y el arte. ¿Han alcanzado ustedes un equilibrio que el resto parece no entender?

Mark Bernsterin: ¡Mantener el equilibrio siempre es difícil!

Conectar la ciencia y el arte es lo que hacemos, es la idea principal detrás de Eastgate. Si hemos tenido éxito ha sido gracias a un grupo excepcional de gente con talento y un grupo excepcionalmente paciente de inversores y directores.

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Por qué es útil una Conferencia como ésta?

Mark Bernsterin: Las Conferencias para investigadores son todavía la mejor forma de compartir nuevas ideas y descubrimientos. Las publicaciones periódicas y libros son demasiado lentos.

Otra parte importante de las Hypertext Conferences (Conferencias sobre Hipertexto, de las que esta es la décima), es la oportunidad de discutir nuevas ideas con la gente más brillante del campo. El año pasado, por ejemplo, quería adaptar partes del sistema seminal MacWeb de representación del conocimiento de Marc y Jocelyn Nanard para utilizarlo en las nuevas herramientas de exportación a HTML para Storyspace. Arrinconé a Jocelyn Nanard en la recepción para pedirle consejo sobre el implemento de algunos detalles que no siempre se incluyen en los artículos pero que pueden ser muy importantes para construir sistemas que la gente usa día a día. Me dijo que estaba afrontando el problema por el lado equivocado, y acabamos teniendo una conferencia ad hoc junto con Daniel Schwabe. Planificamos el diseño de la nueva facilidad de exportación HTML en cosa de una hora, y ha resultado ser una de las mejores cosas del nuevo Storyspace.

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Ha encontrado alguna idea nueva interesante este año? (¿O es un secreto?)

Mark Bernsterin: Normalmente me lleva un mes o así extraer la idea (o ideas) clave. La idea de Peter Nürnberg sobre informática estructural es prometedora, y la demostración de un reimplemento colaborativo de VIKI sobre un servidor estructural fue espectacular. Esto me sugiere unas cuantas estrategias para nuestro nuevo proyecto de sistemas. El Taller de escritores originó una gran cantidad de “cosas que los escritores desean”; y pasaré sin duda muchas horas meditando sobre su lista.

También es interesante ver como mi ponencia de 1998: “Estructuras de Hipertexto” ha sido leída y entendida de forma muy diferente por gente diferente. En particular hubo un grupo muy interesante de ponencias críticas (se me ocurre pensar en Walker, Tosca, Calvi y Rau) y algunas ponencias en los talleres sobre lenguajes para estructuras (Schwabe, los Nanard, Bieber). Estos dos campos parten de actitudes y lenguajes muy diferentes; reconciliar ambas aproximaciones requerirá una meditación cuidadosa.

Susana Pajares Tosca: Usted tiene una gran experiencia de conferencias de hipertexto… ¿cómo ha evolucionado este campo en los últimos años?

Mark Bernsterin: En los primerísimos años, la gente estaba preocupada sobre todo por el problema de la navegación y por los expedientes (estándares y modelos) para afrontar el enorme coste de crear los primeros sistemas hipertextuales. Ambas cuestiones se revelaron después como parcialmente irrelevantes: el problema de la navegación era una ilusión. Los sistemas hipertextuales ya no son tan caros de hacer, así que no es vital codificarlo todo según una especie de denominador común general.

Lo que no entendimos en esos primeros años era que escribir hipertexto llegaría a ser un desafío que introduciría nuevas cuestiones muy interesantes sobre retórica y técnica. Durante un tiempo existió una gran tensión entre escritores e ingenieros. Esta tensión se ha disipado ahora, hasta llegar al maravilloso espíritu cooperativo de la conferencia de este año. Por ejemplo, el taller de escritores de Deena Larsen estaba lleno de escritores y diseñadores de sistemas. Este fenómeno es nuevo y muy positivo.

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Cómo ve el futuro de esta conferencia?

Mark Bernsterin: Es una conferencia excepcional, probablemente la más fuerte y consistente que conozco. La gente se preocupó durante un tiempo de que el hipertexto desaparecería porque sería demasiado fácil y obvio; eso aún no ha sucedido. Aún tenemos muchos desafíos interesantes.

Espero ver más trabajos sobre sistemas próximamente, investigaciones sobre nueva tecnología de software que exploren extrañas y nuevas ideas.

Susana Pajares Tosca: ¿Determina la importancia de la WWW nuevas actitudes frente al hipertexto o vivimos de espaldas al mundo real?

Mark Bernsterin: Las determina mucho. La red proporciona un maravilloso conjunto de documentos y un increíble campo de pruebas para nuestras ideas. Mozilla puede ser muy importante para la investigación en los próximos años; debería ser factible para un investigador crear un navegador muy sofisticado (u otro cliente de Web) para explorar ideas novedosas.

Tenemos que ser conscientes de lo que la red es y lo que no es. No es un interfaz de usuario; podemos (y debemos) ir más allá de los enlaces azules.

Susana Pajares Tosca: Muchas gracias por su tiempo y por responder todas nuestras preguntas.

* (N.del T.) Schlemiel y Schlemazel son dos palabras Yiddish que se refieren a personajes populares en la tradición cuentista judía, uno es el gafe que atrae las desgracias intentando hacer el bien, y el otro el “destinatario” al que le ocurren las desgracias.

 

© Susana Pajares Tosca, 1999 por el texto.

Written by ELR

June 25, 2017 at 8:00 am

#ELRPROMO: ELO Conference 2017 “Afiliações, Traduções, Comunidades”

with one comment

No próximo mês a Universidade Fernando Pessoa, da cidade do Porto, receberá a edição de 2017 da Conferência anual da Electronic Literature Organization, neste ano sob o moto “Afiliações, Traduções, Comunidades”. O blog ELR realizou uma entrevista com o presidente da organização desta edição, Rui Torres, professor associado da Universidade Fernando Pessoa e autor de várias obras de literatura eletrônica.

Co-edição por Maíra Borges Wiese

 

ELR: Rui Torres, pela segunda vez Portugal organiza uma conferência internacional de literatura eletrônica. Em 2015, estudiosos e criadores de literatura eletrônica de vários lugares do mundo reuniram-se na Universidade de Coimbra na conferência “Digital Literary Studies“. Como surgiu a proposta deste ano para a Conferência da ELO ?

Rui Torres: Uma pequena nota, antes de responder à pergunta: eu fiz parte da comissão científica do DLS, em Coimbra, e espero que ele continue por muitos anos. No entanto, esta conferência (ELO’17) talvez seja um pouco diferente, desde logo porque é especificamente sobre literatura electrónica, ao contrário do DLS que é mais abrangente, ligando-se por isso às humanidades digitais. Os temas DLS foram análise computacional de texto, filologia digital, ensino, acesso aberto… É verdade que também se abordou a criação literária, mas não como ponto base de reflexão.

A proposta de organizar a ELO’17 no Porto surgiu como reconhecimento de um trabalho que temos vindo a realizar na Universidade Fernando Pessoa desde há  duas décadas. O Pedro Barbosa (ex-professor da UFP, fundador do Centro de Estudos em Texto Informático e Ciberliteratura) trabalha na criação, e também na teorização, da literatura electrónica, desde os anos 1970.

Esta conferência surge também no seguimento da publicação que fiz com o Sandy Baldwin com ensaios portugueses sobre intermédia e ciberliteratura traduzidos para inglês, “PO.EX: Essays from Portugal on Cyberliterature and Intermedia by Pedro Barbosa, Ana Hatherly, and E. M. de Melo e Castro” (West Virginia University Press, 2014).

Por fim, como membro do Board of Directors da ELO, cumpro uma das minhas funções, que é organizar eventos relacionados com a ELO.

ELR: Qual foi o maior desafio encontrado na organização deste evento?

Rui Torres: A mediação entre culturas diferentes (a ELO, por um lado, com as suas raízes norte-americanas; e o Porto, em Portugal), mas também a organização de múltiplas tarefas (Conferência, Festival, Exposições), alguma dificuldade em encontrar patrocinadores para as exposições, e a organização e preparação das exposições elas mesmas. Se fosse apenas uma Conferência científica… Mas não: são 5 dias de actividades, das 9h até às 23h… em cinco espaços distintos.

ELR: Um dos tópicos da Conferência é «Comunidades».Pode-se dizer que há um desenvolvimento das pesquisas acadêmicas nas universidades de Portugal? O que diria sobre a atual situação dos estudos sobre literatura eletrônica no país?

Rui Torres: O programa de doutoramento em Materialidades da Literatura, coordenado pelo Manuel Portela na Universidade de Coimbra, é talvez o mais importante espaço de investigação nestas áreas, pelo menos nestes últimos anos.

Eles (MatLit) são, aliás, um dos parceiros da Conferência, nomeadamente pela participação de vários curadores com origem ou sede de trabalho na Universidade de Coimbra, mas também nas comissões científicas do Festival e da Conferência.

Há depois duas revistas que têm dedicado o seu espaço para a divulgação de pesquisas nesta área: a Revista Cibertextualidades, que eu fundei e coordeno, com sede na UFP; e a revista MatLit, associado ao programa com o mesmo nome da UC.

Há muito trabalho sobre artes digitais, nomeadamente nas Faculdades de Belas-Artes do Porto e de Lisboa, há o Future Places no Porto, o Artech, etc. Mas são abordagens muito abrangentes, que acabam por não se focar (intencionalmente) num tema específico, como é o caso da ciberliteratura.

ELR: Outro grande tema da Conferência é «Afiliações», que parece dar especial atenção às práticas de re-leitura, recriação e remediação digitais de obras criadas em materialidades diversas, mas não-digitais (com ênfase nas criações mais experimentais características do século 20). Como percebe a importância da materialidade digital para a preservação, divulgação e revisitação da tradição literária e de obras de movimentos de vanguarda e experimentais ainda pouco conhecidas?

Rui Torres: Esse é o aspecto central da nossa abordagem nesta conferência.  As três strands da Conferência (Afiliações, Comunidades, Traduções) pretendem estruturar diálogos e debates, criando um diagrama da literatura eletrónica e ampliar a consciência da história e da diversidade do campo. Nesse sentido, pretende-se contribuir para deslocar e re-situar os pontos de vista e as histórias sobre a literatura eletrónica, construindo desse modo um campo maior e mais expansivo, mapeando relações textuais descontínuas entre histórias e formas.

O tema “Afiliações” relaciona-se com o facto de entendermos a literatura eletrónica como trans-temporal, com histórias (anda) por contar. Para tal, propomos abordar perspectivas diacrónicas e genealógicas, possibilitando os estudos comparativos, dando espaço para uma arqueologia das relações ​​entre a literatura eletrónica e outras práticas expressivas e materiais, como a poesia barroca, o futurismo e dada, o concretismo, a videopoesia, etc. Claro que nos interessam estas arqueologias no sentido de identificar o modo como essas formas expressivas são recriadas e transcodificadas em formas digitais de literatura, mapeando assim os antecedentes estéticos e materiais da literatura eletrónica.

ELR: Serão os participantes portugueses maioria nesta edição da ELO Conference? O que você espera da receção do evento e de seu impacto para o desenvolvimento do interesse – desde por parte de alunos na fase escolar ou universitários às pessoas da comunidade em geral – por literatura eletrônica?

Rui Torres: Apenas 10% dos participantes são portugueses. Temos 20 participantes de Portugal, principalmente alunos de doutoramento. São principalmente investigadores de Coimbra, mas também do Porto, de Braga e da Madeira, e há pelo menos 4 portugueses que estão a trabalhar ou a estudar no estrangeiro que também vêm ao Porto falar sobre o seu trabalho. Temos ainda representantes da língua portuguesa, de Cabo Verde e do Brasil. Considerando que temos aproximadamente 250 participantes de 35 países diferentes, julgo que podemos concluir que se trata de um evento internacional, mais do que orientado para participantes portugueses.

O facto de o Festival e as Exposições serem abertos à comunidade, sem necessidade de pagamento de fee, pode ajudar a disseminar um pouco estas novas formas de escrita. A ver vamos!

Written by ELR

June 18, 2017 at 10:00 am

#ELRPROMO: “Other Codes / Cóid Eile: Digital Literature in Context”

leave a comment »

In a few days the event “Other Codes / Cóid Eile: Digital Literature in Context” will take place in the Irish city of Galway. The organizer Anne Sofia Karhio, a researcher in the field of electronic literature, accepted the invitation to participate in an interview to promote the event.

This is the first #ELRPROMO, a new topic in the blog that aims to the announcement of forthcoming events in the field of electronic literature.

ELR: Anne Sofia Karhio you are a researcher in the field of electronic literature. When did you start studying electronic literature and what are your main research interests in this field?

Anne Sofia Karhio: I have, like many others working on electronic literature, been trained in more traditional literary scholarship. I studied comparative literature at the University of Helsinki, and then English literature at Trinity College Dublin and finally at the National University of Ireland, Galway, where I got my doctorate and where I’m still based.  I’m not sure whether “traditional” is exactly the right word here, though, as I was always drawn to the more quirky or experimental. My initial interest in electronic literature was also a result of that: I simply became curious about what happens when words move from page to the digital domain, all the strange shapes and forms they can take, and what this means for how we understand language and literary expression. It was only after my PhD that I really started looking into digital literature, and I have to admit that it has been quite a learning experience, though a really rewarding one.

My postdoctoral research project, co-funded by the Irish Research Council and the European Commission via Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions, took me to the University of Bergen to work with Scott Rettberg, Jill Walker-Rettberg and other researchers in electronic literature and digital culture there. It is difficult to explain how life changing that experience was – the research community in Bergen is quite amazing, and really welcoming for newcomers. Due to the Bergen connection I have also been lucky to be able to connect with many well-known scholars, authors and artists, some of whom have since visited Galway – these include Scott Rettberg, Rod Coover, Maria Engberg, Jason Nelson, and Alinta Krauth.

My current research focuses on poetry, technology and landscape, and I’m therefore particularly interested in the shifting border between verbal and visual expression in all kinds of multimodal environments. My research has been largely focused on form, aesthetics, and close reading and analysis, and there has been less of that practical or creative input that characterizes the work of so many scholars of electronic literature. At the same time, practice has started infiltrating my research in all kinds of small and perhaps unexpected ways – like trying out augmented reality apps to explore how these technologies frame the visual environment, and so forth.

ELR: What is your approach to electronic literature? Do you see electronic literature as experimental literature? Do you make a comparative study with other artistic practices?

Anne Sofia Karhio: I have no background in IT or programming, so I have had to learn a lot of things from scratch just to get beyond the level of surface aesthetics of many works. I also continue to work on print poetry as well as digital literature, and want to consider questions of landscape, for example, thematically as well as through the technological platforms and practices. To jump to the last part of that question first, the concept of landscape has its historical roots in the visual arts, so this is a constant point of reference. Overall, I guess it is safe to say that the borders between art forms are currently in turmoil, which means that cinematic expression, music and sound, and all kinds of embodied and haptic technologies are also increasingly relevant. It can be a little bit of a balancing act, sometimes, to retain an openness to these developments, and still keep a focus on the specific topic of one’s research. But I suppose as a researcher I’m most comfortable in inhabiting that transition zone, historically as well as aesthetically. For me, the new digital homes for literature were never a sign that literature would be discarding print to embrace the digital; rather, there is a range of transformative exchanges between these two domains.

It is hardly controversial to say that experimentation often characterizes electronic literature, not least because of the relative novelty of the medium. Many dislike the term “new media”, as computer technologies as well as electronic literature have been around for decades. I speak of “new media technologies” in my own research, but more in the sense of technologies that are new, rather than New Media as shorthand for late 20th-early 21st century digital technologies. This also allows for a historical perspective: I’m quite interested in the work of poets who relate the current historical moment to how writers and artists engaged with the technological changes in the Victorian era, for example – the “new media” of that period. The Northern Irish poet Sinéad Morrissey is a wonderful example of that.

I suppose that like any other art form, electronic literature can be conventional or experimental, depending on whether it repeats pre-existing forms and practices, or finds new ways of challenging them. But one does encounter particularly many practitioners who are drawn to the idea of testing new methods of creativity and dissemination. There is more than a hint of that eccentric scientist mentality, and of course the question is how patience with scholarship and aesthetic craft relate to the fascination of the “new”. And then there is the issue of aesthetic and artistic communities, and the national and cultural institutions that foster them (or fail to do so). Experimentation and artistic license are not part of the culture in quite the same way in different countries. Ireland, for example, has produced pretty revolutionary experimental writers, like Beckett and Joyce – but they did their experimentation elsewhere, for reasons that relate to the culture and society here. Experimental literary communities may have found it more challenging to prosper in Ireland, for various reasons, though there are individual scholars and practitioners who are testing new platforms here, too, like Jeneen Naji in Maynooth, the electronic literature author Michael J. Maguire, or James O’Sullivan who runs New Binary Press. Not to even mention quite a few younger researchers that are curious about the field.

ELR: In 2015 you co-organized the ELO2015 Conference “The End(s) of Electronic Literature” and co-edited the Conference Program and Festival Catalog. What are in your opinion some of the most important outcomes of that event?

Anne Sofia Karhio: The ELO2015 conference was quite an overwhelming experience, partially due to the sheer number of proposed papers and art works. The diversity of the material covered in the catalog, for example, makes it quite difficult to make any kind of a generalizing statement on the conference contributions thematically or even technologically. But the conference topic or title, “End(s) of Electronic Literature”, does suggest a certain coming of age of the field, I think, though perhaps those who have been a part of the organization longer might be better equipped to evaluate that. I believe there were varying opinions on that title, and whether it reflected some kind of pessimism regarding the future of electronic literature, e-lit being “done”. But more than that, I’d say it reflected a historical moment of a kind of coming of age – now that electronic literature has been practiced for decades, and has more institutional recognition, there is also a need to reflect on its purpose, its changing forms, and perhaps even its key concepts in a way that may not have been similarly possible before. What the ELO2015 conference certainly highlighted for me was that the sheer variety of what is now covered under the term “electronic literature” is such that it raises all kinds of questions, mostly very interesting ones, on what we understand even by the term “literature” in a wider sense. The question is far from new, but we can now approach it from new perspectives.

ELR: From 11-12 May 2017 the conference “Other Codes / Cóid Eile: Digital Literature in Context” will take place. What will be the topics discussed on this occasion?

Anne Sofia Karhio: I spent quite a long time trying to find the right phrasing for the title of the conference. The term “context” is not entirely groundbreaking, of course, but here it partially stems from this sense that formal, aesthetic and technological questions still overshadow an awareness of that extra-literary (or extra-artistic) terrain from which electronic literature, too, emerges. It is interesting – and sometimes slightly frustrating – to see how the old debate regarding formalism and aesthetics versus cultural identity or context still keeps repeating itself, even in the field of electronic literature. But I’d like to go beyond that and seriously consider how literature in the digital domain can offer a new aesthetics for social critique, how new technologies make it possible to examine the more sinister aspects of the new digital society from within in the context of globalization, for example, and how questions of linguistic difference now also assume a new relevance. The bilingual title of the conference, “other codes” as well as the Irish language “cóid eile”, is not there just for a bit of exotic cultural flavor! I’d like to think that the approaches of the invited speakers that we will hear from at this event reflect the variety of ways in which “context” can be understood: Sandy Baldwin, Jessica Pressman, María Mencía and Scott Rettberg have all engaged with it differently, like looking at non-Western electronic literatures and global issues, questions of gender and sexuality, precedents in literary movements in the 20th century, multimodal art practices, and aesthetic communities or new genres.

ELR: What do you hope or foresee for the future of electronic literature?

Anne Sofia Karhio: I think as humanities scholars we are naturally equipped to defend the importance of art and literature and have a sense of how they shape the human experience, and how they profoundly interrogate our relationship with the non-verbal as well as the non-human domain. But the more I learn about how digital media technologies impact on our environment, and how their connections to all kinds of questions of economic and political power, surveillance and control work, the more convinced I am that literary scholars and practitioners, as well as digital artists in other fields, have a huge responsibility to make visible (sometimes literally!) what these technologies do what they are used for, and what possibilities of expression, agency, or resistance they give us. Digital arts and humanities are too often understood merely as applying new technologies to humanities research on established forms of cultural expression. This might sound a little bit bombastic or lofty, but I think if we are at all worthy of calling ourselves humanities scholars, we also have to do the opposite (and this is what so many practitioners of electronic literature already do): we must apply the rigor and critical force of humanities creativity and scholarship to all aspects of the digital. Too much is at stake for us to leave the digital for the engineers alone. The old joke applies: science can tell you how to clone a dinosaur – humanities can tell you whether it might be a good or a bad idea!

 

Interview with Jessica Pressman

leave a comment »

ELR: Jessica Pressman since 2012 (?) you are member of the Board of Directions of the Electronic Literature Organization. How did you get started with electronic literature and what fascinates you most about this literature genre?

Jessica Pressman: I actually worked from the ELO far before 2012. I served as the Programs Director for the ELO back in 2001-2 and then took on more responsibilities as Associate Director (2002-4). I did this while I was a graduate student at UCLA. ELO was then housed at UCLA, and N. Katherine Hayles was the Faculty Director. I was the sole staff member, and I got a first-hand education in the ELO and in non-profit organization.

But this is not how I started with electronic literature.

I applied to graduate school to study Victorian Literature. I wanted to study the Pre-Raphaelites; image and text are inseparable in such work (think Dante and Christina Rosetti). I was also interested in what I now understand to be the social networks that configured and propelled that artistic movement. Multimedia, multimodal, social networks: it was all there.

But, I was unhappy at UCLA, so I took a leave of absence. I went to Boston and worked for a company (Cognitive Arts, founded by AI pioneer Roger Schank) that then (in 2000, the height of the dot-com wave) was making interactive training simulations for companies and schools. We basically were making narrative teaching games (again, using language from today to describe the past). I liked the work but wanted to understand it from a more critical perspective. So, I read George Landow’s Hypertext. And, bam: that book hit me. It gave me a critical vocabulary and framework to approach that stuff that I was making, to understand what I was doing and what I wanted to do. I wanted to study hypertext.

Well, it just so happened that the foremost scholar of hypertext and this new thing called “electronic literature” was back at UCLA: Katherine Hayles. So, I returned to UCLA, shifted my focus from the first industrial revolution to the second, and then worked with Kate Hayles in all things e-literature and ELO. Kate is really how and why I started, learned, and loved the field of literary criticism focused on electronic literature. She is a role model and a mentor.

ELR: In your article “Electronic Literature as Comparative Literature” (2014) you state that electronic literature is comparative because it combines text, image, sound, movement, interactivity and design. As a researcher and teacher of experimental American literature would you say that electronic literature is experimental literature, too?

Jessica Pressman: I think electronic can be experimental. More often than not, it is, but this is because right now we are still accustomed to thinking about “literature” with terms and conceptions derived from print. But, “experimental” does not describe a platform or media; it describes use of that platform and media. Some books, films, sculptures, play, etc. are “experimental;” some works of electronic literature are too.

ELR: In your latest book “Reading Project” (2015) you explain how to analyse e-literature. Could you explain why it is necessary to use different methods?

Jessica Pressman: Reading Project does not aim to explain how to analyze e-literature—I would never presume or desire for there to be any one way to analyze anything—but, rather, to offer a model of how digital humanities (DH) practices can produce literary criticism. Jeremy, Mark, and I were tired of hearing critiques of DH that its creation and use of tools doesn’t lead to interpretative payoffs; most of these critiques are valid, by the way. We also wanted to experiment with pursuing literary criticism that employs the actual affordances of computational media to address a digital work; thus, we read the programming code (Mark’s Critical Code Studies approach) and created big data visualizations (Jeremy’s Cultural Analytics work), and we built a Scalar tool (Scalar Workbench) to assist others in practices similar types of collaboration. Finally, we had a professional goal and critique as well: we wanted to show what is gained by collaborating in literary criticism, by eschewing the scholarly model of a solitary researcher pursuing hermeneutics by instead having three scholars work collaboratively and dialogically towards building a single interpretation.

The reason why electronic literature elicits different critical methods is because such work often defies a single genre or disciplinary category. Is Tender Claws’s Pry (2015) a work of film, game, novella? The answer is not interesting but the question compels different approaches, which leads to (or should) interesting opportunities.

Just by designating a work (Pry, for example) as “literature” already implies how one will approach and value it: through a focus on its text. But many of the works that I spend my life reading and teaching could (and often are) identified and understood as other types of cultural objects: visual art, film, games, performances, etc. One of the reasons I love electronic literature is precisely this: because it invites and rewards multiple critical perspectives and practices. In so doing, it pushes literary critics towards reflexive consideration of our normative practices and towards experimentation with new ones. That is exciting to me.

ELR: In the description of the ELO’s role you can read that the organization aims to create “a network of people who produce works of electronic literature and people who read, discuss, and teach e-literature”. How successful has the ELO been in this attempt so far and how do Universities collaborate with the ELO?

Jessica Pressman: I think the ELO has been invaluable. The very fact that we have an annual conference, an archived volume of works (the Electronic Literature Collection), and a website for interpersonal connection means that we have a field. We have a community.

ELR: What do you foresee for the future of e-literature?

Jessica Pressman: I am a literary historian more than a prophet or visionary. But, from this perspective, I believe I can proffer that whatever comes along that seems completely new and futuristic will offer us new ways for understanding our past and for appreciating our seemingly “old” media.

 

 

 

Interview with Judy Malloy

with one comment

ELR: Judy Malloy, you have engaged in three decades of creative work in the field of electronic literature, beginning with the publication of “Uncle Roger” in 1986. What in your opinion are the most significant moments in the history of electronic literature thus far?

Judy Malloy: This is a welcome question. The long and rich history of electronic literature in toto is what is most significant. But there are so many significant moments that I can only mention a few — and even then, it is perhaps a longer answer than expected. Another day the list might be somewhat different. Today this is what I am recollecting:

To begin with: significant computational processes in word structures can be traced from Wibold, Archdeacon of Noyon’s 10th century dice-mediated Ludus Regularis, to the circa 15th century dice-generated collaborative narrative of vice and virtue, Chaunce of the Dyse, to formative computer-mediated work in the 1950’s –- including the generative love letters that Lytton Strachey’s nephew, Bloomsbury-bred computer programmer Christopher Strachey, created using Alan Turing’s hardwired random number generator, as well as the work of Stuttgart computer scientist student, Theo Lutz, who entered words from The Castle into a program that generated politically-charged remixes of Kafka’s vocabulary.

In the 1960s and 1970s, a map of significant moments, in France would probably pinpoint the founding of Oulipo, Raymond Queneau’s Cent Mille Milliards de Poèmes, and George Perec’s Die Maschine, among many others. Pierre Boulez’ Troisième sonate pour piano Formant 3: “Constellation — Miroir” would surely appear on this map, as would – experiments with the cutup method in the work of Bryan Gysin, Williams Burroughs and Burroughs’ partner, computer programmer Ian Sommerville.

Meanwhile in New York City, after composer James Tenney gave a workshop on FORTRAN to Fluxus artists in 1967, Alison Knowles wrote the brilliant generative poem A House of Dust (realized by Tenney), and Dick Higgins created and programmed the edgy Hank and Mary, a Love Story, a Chorale.  Additionally, the lists of words that Fluxus poet Emmett Williams chose for IBM, first created without a computer in 1956, were computerized in this time.

And in Massachusetts BBN (ARPANET contractor Bolt, Beranek and Newman) computer programmer Will Crowther wrote the pioneering Interactive Fiction, Adventure, and then at MIT Tim Anderson, Marc Blank, Bruce Daniels, and Dave Lebling created Zork and went on to found Infocom, the primary source of classic Interactive Fiction — while in Connecticut, at Yale, Joseph Meehan created Tale-Spin.

In the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, based in Canada with strong roots also in Austria, IPSA (I. P. Sharp Associates) and IPSA’s ARTEX made node-to-node communication possible — we called it “telematics” in those days — hosting collaborative works such as Bill Bartlett’s Interplay and Roy Ascott’s La Plissure du Texte.

Beginning in 1986 in Berkeley, CA my own Uncle Roger, the first realized hyperfiction, was significant in that rather than a game-centered or communications approach, I wrote and programmed it as a work of computer-mediated literature, and it was the first realized work of electronic fiction that was both written and programmed by a woman.

There followed — beginning with Michael Joyce’s classic afternoon, a story and the work of the StorySpace team — a flowering of hypertext. The writers came from many different places; the center was the Massachusetts-based Eastgate Systems, headed by Mark Bernstein. Hypertext literature was central in what Robert Coover called the “golden age”. The four works Coover singled out are Joyce’s afternoon, my its name was Penelope, Stuart Moulthrop’s Victory Garden, and Shelley Jackson’s Patchwork Girl.  It should also be noted that in the field of digital poetry, Jim Rosenberg’s spatial hypertext was primary in the pre-web era.

In the period of widening development (1995–2010), places on the map are clustered all over the world, as works of potential significance were created in generative poetry (the work of John-Pierre Balpe and Nick Montfort, Fox Harrell’s GRIOT System, Nanette Wylde’s Storyland, for instance); in Interactive Fiction: (Emily Short’s Bronze, Andrew Plotkins’ Hoist Sail for the Heliopause and Home);  in hypertext (my The Roar of Destiny, Mark Marino’s a show of hands, Sharif Ezzat’s Like Stars in a Clear Night Sky, Deena Larsen’s Marble Springs Wiki); in electronic manuscripts: (Noah Wardrip Fruin et al’s Screen; J. R. Carpenter’s Entre Ville); in concrete and digital poetry (William Harris’ Armistice, Maria Mencia’s Birds Singing Other Birds’ Songs); and in performative, filmic, and collaborative works. (Ingrid Ankerson and Megan Sapnar’s Cruising; Judd Morrissey’s The Last Performance). There were many others.

I am disinclined to mention works from 2011-  because the dust has not yet settled, but for my own work I like From Ireland with Letters and my generative “the whole room like a picture in a dream”: Dorothy Richardson and Virginia Woolf Writing“.

ELR: In another interview you name four authors of print literature as influences on your works of electronic literature: Italo Calvino, Marcel Proust, Dorothy Richardson, and Laurence Sterne. Can you comment on analogies and differences between electronic and print literature?

Judy Malloy: This is a difficult question, and the answer can be framed in many different ways. Primarily electronic literature is work that utilizes computer-mediation to create literature that is only possible to read on a computer. But the boundaries are becoming somewhat blurred. Many of the strategies developed by writers of electronic literature can influence print literature and even in some cases have been utilized in print, while at the same time we see writers of electronic literature incorporating print components in their work.

I have always believed that print literature is such a powerful interface that it will continue, but that electronic literature is equally powerful and will flourish and run side by side with print literature, so to speak. In the 21st century, the fact that electronic literature and print literature are each influencing each other is greatly enriching both fields!

ELR: In August 2016 you edited “Social Media Archeology and Poetics” a book featuring essays of 28 artists, scholars, and curators who describe computer networks and online platforms. What are your current opinions/thoughts about archiving works of electronic literature and digital art?

Judy Malloy: Social Media Archeology and Poetics is media archeology about how social media platforms with cultural components were developed and flourished in the days before the World Wide Web.

To create Social Media Archeology and Poetics, which was three years in the making, I primarily asked pioneers in the field to write about their work. This is different from archiving works of electronic literature and digital art. However, it does dovetail with my vision, which is that in addition to the work of critics and curators, it is important to make early works themselves accessible and also to encourage creators of electronic literature to document their own work. In this respect, we are in the tradition of conceptual art and performance art, and — in this field that lies between computer science and literature —  we also document electronic literature in the tradition of sci/tech researchers. It is vitally important to publish peer-reviewed first person documentation from the creators or researchers themselves. Thus, the primary source for Strachey’s love letters is Christopher Strachey, “The Thinking Machines,” Encounter, 3 (1954): 25-31. The primary source for Lutz’ work is Theo Lutz, “Stochastische Texte,” augenblick 4 (1959):3-9.  And the primary source for Uncle Roger is Judy Malloy, “Uncle Roger, an Online Narrabase”, in eds. Ascott, Roy and Carl Eugene Loeffler, Connectivity: Art and Interactive Telecommunications, Leonardo 24:2, (1991): 195-202. This does not mean that criticism and theory are not very important.

Contingently, as regards archiving works of electronic literature themselves, when the original platforms are not available, I prefer to translate my own works to contemporary platforms. But I also highly respect and appreciate the curators and archivists in our field, such as Dene Grigar, who have approached this in many creative ways.

ELR: In the year 2003 you edited the book “Women, Art & Technology” a compendium of the work of women artists who have played a central role in the development of new media practice. How do you consider the role of women in new media today?

Judy Malloy: As Jaishree Odin’s Hypertext and the Female Imaginary and Maria Mencia’s forthcoming #WomenTechLit clearly demonstrate, contemporary women artists and writers are equally as important and influential as male artists and writers.

ELR: Have you any thoughts about the future of Electronic Literature?

Judy Malloy: As the rich history of electronic literature begins to be acknowledged, and the field comes of age, it has been a pleasure to both work with students in the creation of electronic literature and to continue to develop my own work.

I look forward to new work from the field as a whole and to a more central place for electronic literature in the literary world.

 

Written by ELR

February 20, 2017 at 7:30 pm