Although not directly related to the presented question, Adrian’s venture into the shape and form of hypertext was particularly memorable. This point took me back to good ol’ symposium two – yes, that one with that frustratingly slow yet effective book example. At that time, I found the concept of the Internet as a medium without beginnings and ends somewhat unclear. The issue here was that I was not considering the Internet as a hypertext system, and instead was more so focused on the content that it contains. My understanding however has since changed after the multitude of lectures and readings revolving around this previously foreign notion.
I often start on a webpage of one kind, end up somewhere completely new and wonder how I got there. This, is the power of hypertext.
Hypertext forms the structure of the world wide web as we know it, enabling users to click from one hyperlink to the next as they ‘surf’ the net. The underlying complexity of the system allows for an interactive user experience, offering users the choice of which online path to take out of billions of possibilities. There is no formulaic approach saying that you must start on Google and end up on Wikipedia; no standardised beginnings and endings. Contrastingly to the static form of print literacy, the user of hypertext is free to make it up entirely for themselves as no page numbers exist to guide their journey. As Adrian put it, media online has no edges or endings. As I like the put it, the hypertext is metaphorically a ‘Choose Your Own Adventure’ book on steroids.
Keeping it short, sweet and straight to the point.
The week five reading by George Landow addresses all things hypertext – the nature of the concept, it’s impact on society and the like. Just a quick disclaimer: due to my sleep deprivation, lack of energy, and never-ending pile of assignments, I’m going to keep this post short and sweet!
Amidst Landow’s outline of the limitations of the terminologies used to describe hypertext, the following quote stood out to me:
“Additional problems arise when one considers that hypertext involves a more active reader, one who not only chooses her reading paths but also has the opportunity (in true read-write systems) of reading as someone who creates text; that is, at any time the person reading can assume an authorial role and either attach links or add text to the text being read.”
Consequently, it is arguable that the title of a ‘reader’ is an inappropriate term to use to label an individual who engages with online content. Hypertext ultimately enables a more meaningful and in-touch relationship between the producer and consumer. The ‘readers’ of hypertext can instantaneously respond to other’s works, by linking out to them in a blog post, or through simply posting a comment on their content. The individual who goes to these lengths is certainly doing a lot more than just reading – as Landow put it, they ‘assume an authorial role.’ Perhaps Axel Bruns’ ‘produser’ (mash between producer and user) would also be a sufficient description.
This level of interactivity enabled by hypertext is not as easily achieved between say the reader of a physical novel and its author alone. You can’t scribble a ‘comment’ in the back page of a novel for the author to receive… If you ‘link’ out to an author in an journal entry, they, nor anyone else, will have no awareness of your attempt to connect. But once you put the book down and open a web browser, you now can tweet at John Green to tell him how The Fault In Our Stars changed your life.
We can all thank hypertext for this ideal.
This weeks reading by Theodor Nelson is really quite astounding. Published in 1992, Nelson proposes a stream of theories and predictions based on hypertext and computer technologies for the future. Although some concepts raised were quite difficult to comprehend, it is very interesting to compare his speculations to our current means of technology and usage.
Seemingly, during the period of authorship, the entire field of technology and computing systems was a bit of a mess. The design and functional properties of computers at the time was extremely disorganised and opened ‘whole new realms of disorder, difficulty and complication for humanity.’ Whilst some attempted to embrace the new technology, many others were hateful towards it and were hopeful that the notion wouldn’t take off.
Nelson however developed his own approach to the matter. He claimed that these problems would be solved if attention was directed to the re-design and simplification of the technology. This, in turn, would create a more user-friendly experience and provide knowledge across platforms via hypertext.
He then delves into is the concept of ‘Project Xanadu,’ which was something I’d never heard of. He explains the project as a ‘hyper-text system to support all the features of these other systems.’ Xanalogical structure was based upon one pool of storage that can be shared and simultaneously organised in many different ways. This ideal sounds much like the fundamentals of the Internet, which makes me wonder if the later birth of the Internet in 1989 was an expansion off Xanadu Sytem or if the Internet instead dominated the idea of Xanadu out of the picture.
The section that struck me the most was ‘The 2020 Vision.’ The following excerpt is particularly remarkable:
“Forty years from now (if the human species survives), there will be hundreds of thousands of file servers—machines storing and dishing out materials. And there will be hundreds of millions of simultaneous users, able to read from billions of stored documents, with trillions of links among them”
Nelson is scarily accurate. For one, the human species have survived – hooray! But we are also living within this digital age, surrounded by these ‘machines’ that offer us a world of information at our fingertips. According to Internet World Stats, the system is an infinite resource containing almost a billion websites (not to mention pages) and there are currently seven billion avid Internet users across the globe. It is amazing to consider the dramatic proliferation that technology has undergone in such a short span of time, and how on Earth Nelson was able to predict this with such accuracy almost forty years prior. It is hard to imagine how much more advanced it can get in the next forty years, but I am so curious and excited to find out!
Technology is awesome. That is all.
