OK. So I was feeling guilty about forgetting to post for a few days, but seeing the bare forum, that cloud has lifted.
As I mentioned in our discussion, my interest in "textualities" stems largely from the intersection of entertainment media, which result in the formation of "texts" that exceed the boundaries of the original sources. For example, the "text" of Dracula (i admit, I'm taking an example from my own work) consists of a massive, highly amorphous, flexible cultural discourse, of which the novel by Bram Stoker, a litany of films on vampirism or the character of Count Dracula specifically, radio plays, works of sociology claiming the validity of vampire legends and the existence of vampires, as well as various other iterations (you could include Count Chocula cereal) contribute and produce a larger text available for analysis. The Sherlock Holmes discourse could fit this categorization as well.
My second interest in textualities involves the cultural assumptions we all attach to various texts, often emanating from the fields from which they emerge. Hence, the oft-rehearsed debate comparing the value/quality of a literary work and a subsequent adaptation; the former is often held as a template to which the latter aspires, despite the fact that a film adaptation may draw from a range of other sources as well and be subject to different rules of expression. Moreover, we often ignore the commercial aspirations of those texts we prefer to view as pure, i.e., uninhibited and uninfluenced by commercial interests for example, such as literary works and their authors. From this perspective, we can perceive texts making claims to authenticity based on their widely accepted cultural value. For example, each film version of Pride and Prejudice lay claim to being the "real" adaptation of the Jane Austen novel, which in turn bestows a sheen of quality upon the specific film while serving as a commercial marketing strategy.
Anyway, I'm rambling now. These are my thoughts on textualities. I'd love to hear yours.
Kyle
Hi all,
In response to Kyle's excellent comments (which were not rambling in my view), I'd like to add a few thoughts on textualities. I am especially interested in the ways that electronic texts transform the experience of reading by enabling reader choice and interactivity. Specifically, I focus on the concepts of hypertext (as theorized by Landow, Bolter, McGann, and others) as well as cybertext (a term coined by Espen Aarseth in his book of the same name). Hypertext, as we all know from browsing and designing web pages, is a network of "lexia" (pages or nodes with verbal or other multimedia content) connected by links that can be traversed in various orders based on the choices of different readers. Cybertext adds a greater range of responsiveness to hypertext by allowing for the reader to input text rather than only choosing between predefined links. Computational processes and other "rules" respond to this input in order to produce new text, thereby enabling the reader of an interactive narrative to actively shape a story.
Anyway, I'm interested in artistic and pedagogical applications of these two forms of textuality. My third dissertation chapter is all about a method for using hypertext to teach students how to compose interpretative essays about postmodern novels in a way that enables reader choice rather than paralyzing students in aporia and indeterminacy. A fourth chapter is all about how to metaphorically "transform" printed texts into interactive fictions through a program of rules that allows students to change the significance, motivation, and even potentially the outcome of events in postmodern novels. In practical terms, I eventually want to figure out how to use technologies of game design to transform printed texts into interactive fictions and games.
Ok, so all that is about my own work, and we want to figure out how to do a project that brings together Kyle's interest in authenticity and adaptation, Greg's in Renaissance drama, Joey's in editions of Chaucer, Ingrid's in Alice in Wonderland, and mine in pedagogical uses of hypertext and cybertext. My first idea was that we could all contribute an assignment individually, but not everyone's interests are primarily pedagogical. Maybe we could make a website showcasing each persons' individual work with textuality (either scholarly or pedagogical), but using hypertext to link together common threads and themes. Thus, one of Ingrid's observations about teaching various adaptations about Alice could link to Kyle's thoughts about the varied valuations of Jane Austen texts. If Joey made a page featuring various editions of Chaucer (perhaps archived in a hypertextual format akin to McGann), it could link to my page about cybertextual transformations of Thomas Pynchon or detective stories. And so on with all of us, allowing a balance between individual freedom and group cohesiveness. . . what hypertext is all about. Anyway, that's one idea, expressed at great length. :) I'm also very open to other ideas.