Okay, so the links are not random. Again, I am talking about well-constructed works. (Well, no kidding - why would one consider bad examples when talking about an art form?)
-- Regarding interaction, you've hit on a widely acknowledged question that has been discussed by people more competent than I am.
-- ELO's definition of electronic literature, as I said above, is problematic. It does not, however, exclude live performance from this definition -- if it did, why would the organization put on readings as part of their events?
-- Like interactive fiction, other forms of electronic literature do not merely rehash work that has been done in other media. Try to reproduce, say, These Waves of Girls, or The Unknown, or Stuart Moulthrop's Reagan Library (QuickTime required) as a print book or a film.
-- I never said that the academic world is stifling new media work. That would be inaccurate and downright insulting. The university setting has done a lot to create an environment conducive to electronic literature work. There is still a lot of skepticism, and I believe it is due to lack of communication on both sides. It is true, though, doctoral degrees in electronic literature cannot co-exist productively with the current understanding of what a PhD means. The consensus in the creative community seems to be that collaboration between writers and designers is essential, and I agree; the academic world, on the other hand, places a lot of stock in being able to draw very distinct borders between different individuals' intellectual product. So, something's gotta give. Hopefully, that something will involve expansion of definition of PhD, and not compromise on the creative side.
That said, in order to be something new and amazing (which it is already), e-lit does not depend on doctoral degrees offered in it.
---
On to natecull's response.
IF is only a more immersive environment for you because you are willing to step beyond the default blue or white screen with text and a prompt. The illusion of reality is not maintained any more in IF than it is in HT, with regard to the structure of each. They are both forms of writing with words on screen. If anything, hypertext has more possibilities with regard to images and sound. Yes, IF makes you one of the characters in the story, but on the whole that has little to do with how immersive written text is.
Links do not by default tear narrative flow to pieces. If a hypertext work is well done, there are merely several possibilities for narrative flow, but it is there. The work involved in discerning it is no more than in IF.
Existing in some privileged plane outside the writing - you must not like any print writing at all!
to continue
--
Regarding interaction, you've hit on a widely acknowledged question that has been discussed by people more competent than I am.
--
ELO's definition of electronic literature, as I said above, is problematic. It does not, however, exclude live performance from this definition -- if it did, why would the organization put on readings as part of their events?
--
Like interactive fiction, other forms of electronic literature do not merely rehash work that has been done in other media. Try to reproduce, say, These Waves of Girls, or The Unknown, or Stuart Moulthrop's Reagan Library (QuickTime required) as a print book or a film.
--
I never said that the academic world is stifling new media work. That would be inaccurate and downright insulting. The university setting has done a lot to create an environment conducive to electronic literature work. There is still a lot of skepticism, and I believe it is due to lack of communication on both sides. It is true, though, doctoral degrees in electronic literature cannot co-exist productively with the current understanding of what a PhD means. The consensus in the creative community seems to be that collaboration between writers and designers is essential, and I agree; the academic world, on the other hand, places a lot of stock in being able to draw very distinct borders between different individuals' intellectual product. So, something's gotta give. Hopefully, that something will involve expansion of definition of PhD, and not compromise on the creative side.
That said, in order to be something new and amazing (which it is already), e-lit does not depend on doctoral degrees offered in it.
---
On to natecull's response.
IF is only a more immersive environment for you because you are willing to step beyond the default blue or white screen with text and a prompt. The illusion of reality is not maintained any more in IF than it is in HT, with regard to the structure of each. They are both forms of writing with words on screen. If anything, hypertext has more possibilities with regard to images and sound. Yes, IF makes you one of the characters in the story, but on the whole that has little to do with how immersive written text is.
Links do not by default tear narrative flow to pieces. If a hypertext work is well done, there are merely several possibilities for narrative flow, but it is there. The work involved in discerning it is no more than in IF.
Existing in some privileged plane outside the writing - you must not like any print writing at all!
-v