Kimberly Lai

(Image credit: Hypertext.org)

During the symposium yesterday, Simon said there is “no real point” in hyperfiction. With regular fiction, readers take on a more passive role, simply reading what has been written in a particular fashion and with an unchanging storyline. With hyperfiction, readers are required to be more participative. Readers become reader-authors. The storyline changes to your fancy. Don’t like this “ending”? Pick another.

No one likes a bad ending. God forbid if Snow White was never resuscitated. But as a reader, I agree with Simon. I read a book because I want to be told a story, not because I want to get semi-involved in the storytelling process and be neither reader nor author. I’d much rather be one or the other, not a compromise between the two.

As fascinating and intriguing hyperfiction may seem as an idea, I think hypertext works better with non-fiction.

On a completely different note: are reflections on the latest symposium considered as posts “about the workshop”?

During the symposium today, the panel discussed the 3.1 readings. Esther mentioned the irony of Paul Graham’s discourse on essay writing. He bemoaned the essay’s traditional structure, yet his essay was, ironically, very similar to the conventional sort, i.e. making a point and proving it (or what Graham calls the “defend-a-position variety”).

In a real essay, you don’t take a position and defend it. You notice a door that’s ajar, and you open it and walk in to see what’s inside.

– Paul Graham, The Age of the Essay

Elliot disagrees a tad with Graham, noting that it is important to learn how to write a good essay. He’s right; essay writing is helpful in teaching us to substantiate our assertions and helping us craft effective arguments. Writing is a powerful, influential tool that can shape society and alter history. Say, feminists want to make a point about issue so-and-so, but are unable to articulate their argument well. That would be a huge impediment.

However, at the end of the day, I think what matters most is, not the structure of an essay, but the core of it all – its content. Like Graham said, good writing should be convincing because it has the right answers, not because the writer did a good job of arguing.

(Image: Cardiff University)

It’s quite difficult to visualize what hypertext fiction is like, so here’s a video of Michael Joyce’s hypertextual novel afternoon in action:

Hypertext fiction is like the evil twin brother of good ol’ fiction. In a nutshell, the former threatens to overthrow traditional storytelling methods by eliminating a story’s conventional skeleton – the beginning, middle and end.

My initial reaction?

How about that three-act structure I just learned in Spring?!?!!?

But I read on, and began to find Landow’s argument extremely intriguing.

In a world of hypertext fiction, stories would never end; there would never be closure. Instead of “closure”, hyperfiction focuses on “continuation”. Theoretically, stories would be infinite. Readers wouldn’t remain readers; they’d become reader-authors with the ability to shape a story to their fancy. The stories end when you, as reader-author, want it to end.

Although we are on the topic of fiction, I feel like this postmodern method of storytelling reflects reality much more accurately. In reality, our “stories” never truly “end”.

For example, a breakup isn’t necessarily the “end” of a relationship between two individuals. Endings usually signify a point in which the story has “stabilized”. But I like to view stories as a volatile line graph, that rises and dips like a wave. “Stabilization” may signify a dip and subsequently a stagnant period of inaction, but it is bound to rise again. So, in the aforementioned example, the breakup could merely be a stagnant point in that particular relationship. The future of this relationship has various possibilities, but there is no “end” per se. Instead, a “to be continued…” is in order.

Mardy also made an interesting point about the relationship between hypertext and linearity – check out her post here 🙂

During the symposium on Wednesday, Elliot raised an interesting point on technological determinism. This theory postulates that technology is the force that shapes society. This coincided with what I read in the David Weinberger reading, Small Pieces Loosely Joined: A Unified Theory of the Web.

Over the course of history, we’ve seen new technologies sprout every year, every day. Someone somewhere is always cooking up new gadgets, new gizmos, new concepts never before seen or heard of. We’ve witnessed the birth of the printing press, the book, the television, the phone and so on. Has our society been altered through these technologies? Or were these technologies created as byproducts of our progressing society?

While I think it works both ways, I’m currently only able to come up with lucid examples for the former. (For the latter, stay tuned.)

Using the example of online shopping, Weinberger drew fascinating connections about the Internet and how it has affected him as a person. Online shopping had spoilt him; the Internet had manipulated both space and time, shortening the “distance” and time needed to travel from one “store” to the next. In real life, you would have to walk or drive from store to store, whereas on the World Wide Web, all you’d have to do is wiggle your fingers and click on hyperlinks. Simple.

I feel you, David. The immediacy of the Internet has made me more impatient. In real life, this sort of immediacy is simply unreal. You don’t order pasta at a restaurant and expect to dig in within seconds. But I do.

Technology has impacted my life so greatly I couldn’t imagine what it would be like if I hadn’t had access to a television, a computer and a smartphone. I’m not set on any career path in particular, but since I was in my late teens, I’d always gravitated towards journalism, photojournalism, documentaries, social issues, etc. This was probably because I had watched the news (note: television), read the papers (note: printing press) and subsequently discovered what was happening across the globe. My knowledge expanded beyond what could have been limited to my hometown, my country, a tiny community. And I was fascinated.

When I bought my first camera at 16, I began to visually document the world around me. With the Internet, I discovered the portfolios of incredible music and fashion photographers. Enchanted, I took a swing at music and fashion photography. Last year, I managed to shoot at a couple of gigs and briefly veered into the world of fashion photography. When people ask what my hobbies are, I say photography. Now what would I have said if the camera hadn’t been invented?

Wow. Peter Graham’s The Age of the Essay was a spectacular read. I compiled a few points he made that I found bookmark-worthy.

In the things you write in school you are, in theory, merely explaining yourself to the reader. In a real essay you’re writing for yourself. You’re thinking out loud.

But not quite. Just as inviting people over forces you to clean up your apartment, writing something that other people will read forces you to think well. So it does matter to have an audience.

What we Networked Media students are doing with our blogs are, in essence, similar to what Graham describes as essay writing. On this WordPress platform, in this very white block of space, I am thinking out loud. But not quite. These thoughts go through certain articulation before coming together as sentences and paragraphs. I am continuously backspacing, I am constantly refining. Writing encourages you to think, to scrutinize, to deliberate, to investigate.

The river’s algorithm is simple. At each step, flow down. For the essayist this translates to: flow interesting. Of all the places to go next, choose the most interesting. One can’t have quite as little foresight as a river. I always know generally what I want to write about. But not the specific conclusions I want to reach; from paragraph to paragraph I let the ideas take their course.

I’ve recently taken up the role of Editor in an up and coming lifestyle magazine in Singapore. And one of my core responsibilities is to generate story ideas. Like a beast. But when I find myself in a writer’s slump, I am useless. No ideas spring to mind and I am as good as a dried prune. The point is, whenever I feel that way, I remind myself to just write anyway. Write whatever. Write anything. Just. Write. Like Graham said, the act of writing – especially for an audience – encourages you to think. It keeps your mind active, keeps it churning. And once you begin to write, begin to “flow”. Flow interesting. And ideas will eventually form.

The more anomalies you’ve seen, the more easily you’ll notice new ones. Which means, oddly enough, as you grow older, life should become more and more surprising.

This, I just completely agree with. The older I get, the more I feel like “life is just beginning” (no matter how cliché it sounds). New knowledge, new anomalies – bring it on!

P.S.: If you’re finding Week 3.1’s readings a bit tough to get through, Tim did a great post, explaining some of the key concepts. Do check it out!

Allow me to backtrack a little and reflect on the first lesson’s reading, Adrian Miles’ Blogs in Media Education.

There are so many advantages to owning a blog, especially when it comes to applying for jobs. We’ve been warned about managing our online and social media, because employers can easily view our activity and web presence and decide whether we’re a good fit or not. So why not use it to our advantage?

Adrian said a blog is akin to a public journal. Like Elliot suggested, think about our online identities. This identity gives our readers and employers a sense of who we are, what we stand for. It is an extended part of our CV, so we really ought to pay great care to it. And no, no one’s curious about your bowel habits.

Here are some stunning statistics, courtesy of Lexology:

A 2012 social recruiting survey provides that 92% of U.S. companies now use social media and other social networks when looking for employees, up from 78% five years ago. While most companies use the more professional site LinkedIn, two thirds now also recruit through Facebook and more than 50% use Twitter to locate new talent.

Beejeezus?! How about some social media spring cleaning? Check out these helpful articles on the do’s and don’ts of social media:

Don’t Let Social Media Derail Your Career — Use It To Attract Potential Employers, Forbes
Six Social Media Career Killers, The Age
Cleaning Up Your Social Media Presence, Bloomberg Businessweek

Happy dusting!