Difference between revisions of "Development"
Russia today (Talk | contribs) |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| 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. |
| + | |||
| + | [[File:Example.jpg]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==See also== | ||
| + | *[[creative]] | ||
| + | *[[meaning]] | ||
Latest revision as of 18:43, 5 November 2017
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.
