Development - Revision history

Lrod at 01:43, 6 November 2017

2017-11-06T01:43:06Z

Witchybitchy at 21:09, 24 October 2017

2017-10-24T21:09:24Z

Ahh at 21:06, 21 October 2017

2017-10-21T21:06:20Z

Itsacat at 17:55, 14 October 2017

2017-10-14T17:55:09Z

Classified at 04:22, 10 October 2017

2017-10-10T04:22:26Z

Russia today at 19:00, 8 October 2017

2017-10-08T19:00:00Z

Jkwan: Created page with "Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature..."

2017-10-05T05:50:01Z

Created page with "Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature..."

New page

Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any random work created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and progression of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that current works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the future and development of e-lit.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and [[progression]] of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that [[current]] works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the [[future]] and development of e-lit.
 ==See also==
 *[[creative]]
 *[[meaning]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:09, 24 October 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and [[progression]] of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that [[current]] works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the [[future]] and development of e-lit.		Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and [[progression]] of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that [[current]] works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the [[future]] and development of e-lit.
		+
		+	==See also==
		+	*[[creative]]
		+	*[[meaning]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:06, 21 October 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and [[progression]] of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that [[current]] works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the future and development of e-lit.	+	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and [[progression]] of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that [[current]] works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the [[future]] and development of e-lit.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:55, 14 October 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and progression of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that [[current]] works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the future and development of e-lit.	+	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and [[progression]] of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that [[current]] works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the future and development of e-lit.

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:22, 10 October 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and progression of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that current works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the future and development of e-lit.	+	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and progression of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that [[current]] works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the future and development of e-lit.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:00, 8 October 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any random work created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and progression of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that current works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the future and development of e-lit.	+	Exploration of the Library of Babel and its vast amounts of gibberish solidified my interpretation of N. Katherine Hayle's introduction to "A Context for Electronic Literature." The scenario's Brother Paul was outraged at the spread of print literature because the value of writing would be compromised and any common person could create "commonplace scribbling." At first glance this seemed rather elitist, and my initial response upon completion of the passage was to think of all the amazing works of literature that have come from the common man. I immediately dismissed Brother Paul's outrage, but upon browsing the Library of Babel I began to see his point. If we just let any [[random work]] created on the internet be deemed literature, might not the quality of literature as we know it be lowered just as Brother Paul feared. It was only after reading lines of gibberish from the Library of Babel that I felt Brother Paul's fears regarding the development and progression of literature, whether in written, print, or electronic forms. However, Hayle's story was also what prevented me from dismissing the Library of Babel altogether. While it is true that mounds of gibberish can be created from allowing programs to create "literature," it is also highly possible for works just as, if not more, amazing that current works to stem from electronic literature as well. Such was the case for print literature; thus, I have great expectations for the future and development of e-lit.