|
Why
is online writing unique?
(editorial
- talk to be given at AWP conference Albany, NY. April 1999)
Simon Mills
Many thanks for inviting me to talk at this conference. When I was initially
asked I thought I could give a talk about the frAme online journal I edit
and design. This in turn led to the idea of an actual "website demonstration".
However recently I've been thinking quite a bit about what this online
medium is, what makes it so special or distinctive. One of the aspects
is that it is a very intimate medium. Although a website can potentially
be published to millions of people the actual way each of these people
will actually consume it is usually intimate and private. I think it is
probably quite rare for several people to look at a website together.
This being in my mind the thought of a website demonstration seemed somehow
incongruous.
Instead I thought a more interesting exercise might be to look at what
makes this medium so unique and interesting for so many writers, readers
and artists. To this end I shall refer to some of the work published in
frAme so as
to give those with little experience of the web a better idea, perhaps
of it's potential and for those who do have experience of it a wider scope
for disagreement!
On deciding to present my talk on this subject I thought I'd do a little
research into what other people had developed on what we might call web-art.
Well, after a little searching around, (everybody knows the web is a great
resource!) I found a great talk given by David
Ross of San Jose State University about Net Art at the end of which
he gives a list of qualities, which he believes, makes Net Art distinctive.
So I thought, well lets look at this list and at the web and what's been
published in frAme and see what's relevant to writers here.
Perhaps the most obvious place to start is the actual lifeblood of the
web itself and that is hypertext. Hypertext was around long before the
web but I think it has been the web that has popularised it. How writers
are adapting to this new environment is still a fresh issue. This year
we saw the first International
Hypertext Competition and the range of styles of entries was staggering.
This variation can even be discerned just by looking at the difference
in type between the two joint winners. One is a sprawling text based hypertext
the other makes more use of sound and graphics to compliment short text
fragments.
Not only does hypertext lead to new forms of creativity, it also leads
to new forms of reading. No longer is the reading process something that
is strictly linear. It is left to the reader to navigate a text as they
please. In this sense the reader becomes partly responsible for the formation
of the text.
With this revelation came the idea that somehow hypertext was a form of
liberation. The idea that the reader has some control over a text instantly
reminds us of post-structuralist assertions made by the likes of Barthes
and Derrida. If you're interested in this then take a look at Belinda
Barnet's piece in frAme 2 which asserts that the control over the
text the reader has is an illusion: hypertext in-itself facilitates nothing
of the sort. She writes,
"The Author has been there before us, has layed down the lines and
the possibilities. We can go this way or that way in the same way that
we can choose this product or that product in the supermarket. There is
a choice, but not a contingent choice in this unfolding now."
Another upshot is the thought of how can a work be judged objectively
if everyone reads a different version?
This is not the place to get deeply involved in hypertext theory but I
thought I'd mention that these are the kind of ideas some hypertext writers
are struggling with at the moment.
Of course many writers may not be interested in the connection between
Critical Theory and Hypertext at all. To many it is simply an exciting
and challenging new medium.
Another major factor in what makes web-based work unique is its ability
to play with notions of identity. I touched on this when I mentioned the
idea that with hypertext the reader in some way authors their experience.
Thus juxtaposing notions of readership and authorship.
However there are other projects which play with notions of identity rather
more directly and deliberately. One example of this is the Amechan website.
(http://www.part1.org/amechan)
When you visit it you find yourself reading the journals of an Australian
born Japanese woman who visits Japan to see her Mother and stays. There
are also archives of emails sent between her and her mother and friends.
In fact you are also invited to email her directly and discuss her work
and life with her.
The site is updated promptly once a week so readers interest in the development
of the characters relationships is maintained.
In fact the site is a work of living fiction. It is actually written by
an Australian artist/writer living in Japan so in a way the story is an
inverse of her life. With the help of some friends she has also managed
to get photos to pad out this fiction. It is an online novel as such and
you can watch it grow and even interact with the main character something
previously unheard of.
It is not a deception however. The author undertook the project as a work
of art as something new and different compared to other fictional works
already in existence.
As well as highlighting the way one can play with identity online it also
introduces the way in which online works can be opened up for feedback
whilst the work is actually in progress and this feedback can in turn
become part of the work itself. Email Amechan and you may find your words
in her journal.
In fact whole projects online have revolved around the idea of audience
participation or reaction to an idea. TrAce's own Noon
Quilt is a good example. Participants were invited to write a hundred
words on what they witnessed outside of their window at Noontime. This
simple idea worked because of the sheer variety of people who took part
in it globally.
And in some way all the people who took part in the project became part
of a community: emails were exchanged remarking on what a unique experience
it was to be part of this literal patchwork of human life.
Community is a vital part of being online. Just by editing frAme I feel
like I have become part of a community of like-minded artists and writers.
In fact in a way this constitutes the most important aspect of being online
and that is that pretty soon you're likely to become part of a community
and when you get a community then pretty soon you start getting collaborations.
I think this is another important aspect of much web based writing and
art. Through the use of the web medium a great number of unusual and interesting
collaborative projects arise that quite probably wouldn't have happened
in any other way.
One personal interest of mine is the idea of the duration of web projects.
Like no other medium it invites projects of all duration. I remember reading
a poetry book by Gary Snyder called "Mountains and Rivers Without
End". This poem is a continual work in progress. In an interview
the author compares it to one of those Chinese landscape scrolls that
unroll and go on and on depicting all life. Of course by the time I'd
finished reading the book it was already out of date. No doubt the author
had written a new part of the poem that had yet to be published
The web invites this kind of epic quality. The idea that a web project
is never finished is not strange. If anything it is the norm. Not only
can projects online always be expanded they are also always open to revision.
A quality you don't often find in the print world.
Of course web work can also last for a fleeting amount of time much like
a TV or Radio broadcast. The Noon
Quilt project mentioned could have kept going indefinitely but a time
limit was enforced.
A mistake that might be made is to try and judge work on the web using
standards developed for traditional literature.
As Lance
Olsen writes in an article you'll find in frame:
"In the age of the Web, everything becomes, at once,
source and effluent text, in an endless watercourse of
meaning: TV shows, news events, music, zeitgeist shifts,
untold histories, images, asinine jokes, recipes, sex,
maps of Earth, the most sublime expressions of
philosophy and art."
For example the essentially dadaist/Surrealist notion of cut and paste
has moved into its heyday. Not only are people creating art by scanning
existent art and mixing it up online or taking texts and feeding them
through computer applications but they are even appropriating other websites
and playing with their contents.
For example Eugene Thacker's Bioinfomatics
takes existing websites relating to genetics companies and uses them as
the setting for his writings on the subject.
In fact the computer is the perfect home for Dadaism. Tom
Rodwell's article in the current issue of frAme
examines how some individual software developers are producing freeware
and shareware music applications that enable new ways to produce avant-garde
music. In areas like this we must ask ourselves exactly where the art
lies here: in the software, the user or more probably both.
There are literary examples of this kind of technique. Alan
Sondheim reports on his process of writing:
"I write and rewrite into a winperl program, changing it, substituting
texts for noun lists, etc. The program is the matrix/catalyst/chora for
subsequent processing. Once the program is transformed, I run it, enter
sentences, bypassing the natural language of the questions. Run over and
over again, texts emerge. The texts are then modified, sutured, eliminating
program artefacts. The program itself undergoes continuous rewrite in
relation to the texts. The program and the texts merge, diverge. I work
towards the unimaginable representations of the imaginary. I pull emanants
out from me, as if the body were wounded, as if ectoplasm were ASCII."
Here we witness literature and programming coming together to produce
something unique. A cyborg text perhaps?
Before I wrote this essay I made a note that web-based work somehow upset
traditional structures. By this I didn't just mean political or business
structures such as perhaps the pirating of commercial music over the Net
which certainly does, but that traditional forms of literature and artistic
creation were being disrupted. I soon realised that what was happening
wasn't so much an upsetting but an extending of traditional structures.
More precisely it is how web-work blurs the boundaries between many traditionally
discrete areas.
For example a work like Teri Hoskins meme_shift
makes use of a variety of different skills: Graphic Design/ Artistic Practices/
writing/ animation/ information management/ photography/ typography/image
manipulation.
Alan Sondheim also uses programming. Others introduce database skills
or digital audio.
The digital artist is a true multidisciplinarian.
It is interesting to try and understand a history of how this developed
so we can perhaps see that these New Media works aren't alien or divorced
from traditional structures but directly linked. So although I think we
can't judge New Media works by the standards of traditional literature
it should be borne in mind that they are an extension of it
In an interview with Geert Lovink entitled Digital Constructivism: What
is European Software Lev Manovich says;
". . . with new media, modernist communication techniques acquire
a new status. The techniques developed by the artistic avant-garde of
the 1920s, become embedded in the commands and interface metaphors of
computer software. In short, the avant-garde vision was materialised in
a computer. All the strategies developed to awaken audiences from a dream
existence of bourgeois society, like constructivist design, new typography,
avant-garde cinematography and film editing as well as photo-montage,
now define the basic routines of post-industrial society; that is, the
interaction with a computer."
Thus it is argued that what we are seeing today far from being a break
in cultural form is a logical continuation, and in some sense an implosion
brought about by the use of computers.
In the same interview Manovich says:
"During the 1980s in the US, all art students were required to read
classics written by, for example Foucault and Barthes. How much they understood
and whether this led to better art, is another question . . . However,
similarly, I now start meeting doctorate students in different disciplines,
such as communication or film studies, who are also quite proficient with
multimedia and JAVA programming. I would hope that they will be able to
synthesize theory and new media."
And indeed this is one of the things we are seeing happening. Talan Memmot
describes his recent work, "Reasoned
Metagoria" as Theory/Fiction.
A couple of concerns often heard are that the internet will alter the
notion of the author and perhaps even be responsible for the death of
the book. Although, as I have already mentioned , the role of the author
can be altered when working online it needn't necessarily be so. Yes,
collaborations can make it difficult to know whose work you are viewing
and linking to other sites adds to the confusion, but the fact remains
that the author still retains control.
As for the claim that the internet will destroy the book or perhaps more
accurately the traditional forms associated with it such as the novel
and short story I personally think this is very wide of the mark. In my
opinion there is not a competition happening here.
Web based art or literature, as I've tried to point out, offer something
distinct from the already established forms. They are not a replacement.
Ironically there has been similar concern within the internet community
that the web is taking the internet in the direction of being just another
form of television. Although this might be true in some cases the ability
for interaction offered online and the myriad ways this can be deployed
means that even if it came to pass that services like pay per view films
did become a reality the potential offered by the uniqueness of the online
environment would not disappear. In fact I see it becoming more diverse
as the next generation of web artists, those who perhaps grew up with
the computer, arrive on the scene. Something tells me they will not be
content with the online world just becoming a broadcast environment.
To conclude I would just like to say that frAme came into being because
we at trAce are excited by what artists and writers are making of the
online medium and as this medium matures we hope that those working with
it are taken more seriously.
Hopefully what I have done in this short talk is give some limited indications
as to what makes online works special and perhaps allay the fears of many
I have met that this online world is something too esoteric, radical or
even just filled with trash to be of any real consideration.
I can see why people think all these things but would re-iterate that
what we are seeing today is a new form that is occurring because of modernist
techniques born at the start of this century married to new technology
accelerating in development at its end.
Nottingham,
April 1999.
|
|