Re: [-empyre-] re: Liquid Narrative Topos
Well, Jim's comments gave me some ideas to discuss. Let's do it.
He said: "These do not necessarily have to be new media related it is just
that with digital media there is
really is no copy and no original, just copious reproductions of simulacra.
How it is entered into by the user/reader/listener/viewer is never the same
each time. Streams of recounting swirl around us everyday
in digital worlds."
Well, I wanna discuss this first comment, that arises from Aarseth's concept
about cybertext. I almost disagree with Aarseth when he says about a
nontrivial effort in the reading of a text. But he also says that ergodic
literature is a process of traverse the text, and not only reading. Despite
of I consider reading a process of crossing text. Thus, I think Aarseth
losts one great chance of develops a good concept. And I agree with Jim when
he affirms that we are surrounded by endless recombinations. That's why I
said there is no onthological difference betwenn cybernarratives and other
type of narratives. But, let us come back to traversing idea. If we take all
meanings of this verb, we can perceive that it can mean travel through the
text. And this is still an approach for cybernarrative real concept. It's
not pass over ou through or across the text, but how, as "reader", we create
the narrative, the ambience around itself? When I talk about immersion,
think that cybernarrative must be capable of create its proper ambience, the
place of immersion itself. And this ambience is temporary, it vanishes.
What's the relation of digital media with this definition? Or, what's the
specifity of digital media here? Cybernarrative combines a support less
fluid than the body, to compare with theater, with a so intense flow as that
one allowed by free movement of the gesture.
Well, this takes me to another form to think cybertext, based also on
Aarseth. This author considers cybertext as a "perspective on all forms of
textuality", a model to explore "textual communication that will accomodate
any type of text".
If we accept this concept, then cybertext will be a relationship and not a
spacialized form, fixed by a group of signifiers.
And this takes me to the problem below indicated.
"From what I understand about the term narrative and the theory work around
it, there seems to be a fixed or static state to it. In the term 'Liquid
Narrative' I detect an attempt to enlarge the ability of narrative to
account for becoming or the movement and change of a performative new media
This attempt could lead the concept of liquid narrative to something that
will not possess none of the characteristics of a fixed narrative, of a text
that must be oppose itself to the expectations of the reader. And would not
have an aesthetic effect. If aesthetic effect arises from the encounter
between text pole and reader pole, what happens when text pole seems not
exist anymore? Or, what signifies read a cybernarrative?
I'm not sure about my considerations, but like Jim, I wanna arise more
questions and not only agreements.
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and