(the way you mobilize both your port and the original material to make some broader hypothesis or claim that matters)
I'd love to see an example of this - it's the single point of Evaluation that made me wonder how that can be demonstrated effectively.
What must be preserved when a work of electronic literature is carried across to a new platform: the work’s interface? Its narrative or themes? Its interactivity? Its aesthetic design? The underlying algorithms? The constraints of the original? And should the port try to improve upon the original?
For me, this is the real crux of the port project. Is it even possible to stay true to more than one or two of those questions?
It is a work that can only be understood, in fact, as a system-never by an exhaustive reading of its texts.
This is extraordinarily clear and I like it a lot. When literary and creative form comes from combinatory literature - you can't begin to understand the work by reading the content.
I will be writing about a series of concepts I’ve been developing called the “simples” of digital literature. Each of these simples describes some element of the deep structure of the text/algorithm interaction inherent in all digital textuality — those places where the mathematical underpinnings of text as it appears on the screen (since there is always something at work keeping the text you are reading now visible) and how artists exploit them to create unique effects.
I rate this a lot. This removes the technology-platform-specific nature of other definitions and looks underneath the literary work itself. I really rate the reference to 'underpinnings' - it strongly speaks to how intensely integrated both the literary experience is alongside the mechanics of that digital experience.
the book is dead, long live the link
I think this is an interesting way to express the evolution of electronic literature, but link is quite possibly dating as fast as 'computer' in the ELO version. Perhaps 'long live the code'?
neither naively celebratory, presuming that computers will change writing the way DNA testing has changed crime television, nor overly technical, branching off into deep theoretical territory
This covers some of the complexities in trying to interlock creative arts with rigid technology, all within a single description. It calls out how fast technology dates and platforms change while noting how literary creativity will not be tied to those boundaries.
important literary aspects
This key phrase in the definition is very puzzling. I am still not quite certain what aspects can be defined as important and who makes that specific judgement. (The reader? The academic? The peer?) I'm very keen to work it out though.
this term and definition in itself brought together genres that in many ways were seen as separate in the early years.
This is a fun example that seems to suggest that blending technology frameworks with literary value creates a mash-up of the unexpected, and genres evolve almost to break through the definition.
they cannot be experienced in any meaningful way without the mediation of an electronic device
I think my biggest curiosity here is the variable nature of the word 'meaningful' - it says to me 'it must be moving, be changing, be something bigger, it is an experience' so seems directly mismatched against the real specifics of 'electronic device'. Others may not agree with my definition of 'meaningful' however, which is half the fun of trying to define something in the first place.
provides a historical context for what she identifies as "generations" of works of electronic literature, identifies some of its genres, and cites examples of important works.
The historical context and generations of work references are fascinating. It implies that cataloguing previous works is almost archaeological in nature. This makes me think that the more popular and interlocked E-Lit becomes with technology, especially in places where the old definitions do not necessarily work as well as they used to, the more there will be to catalogue and showcase. Does this mean it is about storing stories, technology applications, experiences or all three?
created in 2006 and with some entries from 2010
The digital landscape moves extremely quickly. Entire digital mediums have evolved, become everyday experiences for millions of people then collapsed and been superseded by a new digital standard many times over between 2010 and today. It will be interesting to analyse whether entirely new literary experiences have risen and evolved during this timeframe or if they are iterative experiences on some of the older showcases. Has any brand new E-Lit been created? It's a fun question to ask and it also impacts the definition in my view - as defining it with definite platforms would lock it to an 'era' of digital mediums and it will become out of date.
The confrontation with technology at the level of creation
I like the meshing of these terms, this is one of the clearest sentences for me when trying to define E-Lit. It's not creatively restrictive, not platform specific, not holding back an experience or a 'reader interaction' and gives an immense space to work within - as long as that work is technically deliberate.
“born digital” works are created explicitly for the networked computer
I find the choice of the word 'networked' changes the categorisations under which e-lit could be considered, and is a very specific term. Networked implies that the literary experience must be shareable, or connected or sent or easily accessed. This is not defined in other possible definitions - and makes me wonder whether it's a requirement for a definition, or a restriction.
selecting some text
I follow the bidding of the cheerful tutorial page.