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 MHonArc 2.6.8.