Notes and Quotes
Astrid Ensslin
and James Pope (beginning on page 311
The Mobius Case: http://www.media.bournemouth.ac.uk/studentshowcase/work/mobius/
Inanimate Alice: http://www.inanimatealice.com/
Denarrator Blog: http://genarrator.blogspot.com/ (hasn't been updated in almost two years)
The main focus of the authors’ case studies will
be on how digital literature is being used to help students build knowledge and
skills in the areas of digital literacy, multimodal narrative analysis,
stylistics, creative writing, and in the creation of digital fictions (311).
The first case study is an example of how skills
in digital literacy, multimodal narrative analysis, and ludic interaction have
been and may be taught by using Inanimate
Alice (311).
Inanimate
Alice and Laccetti’s education pack (311-315).
The second case study project was dedicated to
testing and fostering intrinsic motivation, developing advanced communicative
competence in a foreign language, medially extended literary competence and
spatial macrostructural thinking through creative collaborative writing in the
digital medium as well as to teaching critical awareness along the lines of
poststructuralist and hypertext theory (315).
Foreign language to discuss hypertext (315-318).
I’m
curious as to how this worked out considering so many of the words used in
digital literature are words even some native speakers don’t know.
One motivation has been to “lift” digital
literature out of the creative and critical ghetto it would appear to have
migrated to (319).
What.
Critical stalemate and lonely creative corner
(320).
Why
do they feel the need to word it like this?
Case study 3 is an attempt to bled theory with
practice and break down conceptual/theoretical barriers (320).
Finally
making sense…
They seem to want digital literature to lose its “underground”
status… now it makes sense why they keep trying to distance it from creativity.
You don’t have to pretend something isn’t borne out of and completely
intertwined with creativity to establish it as a legit subject to study (321).
The authors argue that
critical literature has largely overlooked the areas of how narrative structure,
voice, character development, drama, and closure are affected by the interface
in interactive narrative (321).
This whole essay seems to
be an attempt to argue that digital literature should become more popular, and
(as I comprehended it) that digital literature should work harder to be less
obscure so that more people can enjoy it. So is that kind of like “selling out”?
I didn't particularly take to the essays by Ensslin and I’m not sure if it was
because I didn't agree with most of the ideas or if it was because of the
abrasive writing style. Maybe it was just written for people that have already
emerged themselves in the field. I just felt like I didn't get enough time to
warm up to the ideas before the authors moved on to the next ones. Maybe I'll change my mind when I do a second reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment