. Spinning .

Goodness me; am I to go around applying new media principles even to my simple morning cigarette routine in the dark garage?

Going out a bit later this morning (oh, all right; my second cigarette!) it was lighter as the morning warned of its arrival, visible through the darkness as a “screen” 12 inches high by 8 feet long of the garage door window. Though dim with dawn, I see the maple branches, leaves in front of a colorless old colonial that is my neighbor’s house. I can recall sitting in this same spot with the door wide open, and the house, the trees, the road, my own front yard and driveway become a part of this same scene. If I walk up to the door and peer out of the window, I know I’ll see much more. And if I open it, the world is mine.

Perhaps the reason that I’ve put this post off since last night is that in trying to organize my thoughts, I’ve gotten bogged down with coming at it from all angles:

—–> Reader reading readerly written text
—–> Reader reading writerly written text
—–> Writer writing readerly text
—–> Writer writing writerly text

If I may eliminate the first two choices, that of the reader, because it is obvious that a reader can read something as written (readerly), whether taken as fact such as textbooks, etc. (it is probably near impossible for a reader to NOT add his own input); or to interpret the text any way his experience or desire guides him (writerly).

Okay, now that I’ve gotten that nonsense out of the way, let me explore with less baggage and a better map.

Barthes’ notion of writerly narrative from a writer is perhaps a brilliant acknowledgement of the way people not only enjoy, but have a natural tendency towards reading. We learn the alphabet, how to switch letters around to form words, then how to switch words around to form a narrative structure. We want more; the entertainment value of story that didn’t need letters at all—the folklore style of story. But fiction, no matter how well written, is not complete to the reader if he cannot comprehend or relate to it by his own experiences, whether lived or read or told about, or watched on film. This is the element he adds to help him understand and enjoy reading.

Barthes saw this, and has held specifically noted various elements within narrative that could be met to produce the highest level of reader “involvement.”

To gear to this new level, Barthes suggested that to be a writer, one would be actively seeking to engage the reader, taking the focus off meaning as he intends (decentralization), to allow audience participation. This recognizes the reader’s ability to fill in what’s not been stated. The reader is allowed to wonder, produce mental images, using the text, without being tied to it. Meaning lay in the interpretation, was arguable, therefore had plurality, and opened up the literature to far beyond its numbered pages.

Barthes’ suggestion of writerly writing is exactly geared toward the new media of hypertext.

She wore a dress the color of blood. (Pretty denotative; if you think “green,” you’d be wrong or invalid. Flash image, and although dependent upon reader recall, pretty limiting in color between arterial or venous. However, being given the time, the reader’s natural imagination may conjure up a style as well.)

She wore a red dress. (Ah, now that’s better, very connotative; the reader must work a bit. Although it happens rather quickly, and the reader, anxious to move along, picks a color, not much more.)

She wore a dress. (Different ballgame. And while the “writer” still offers an authoritative color palette, he’s offering many choices as well. Each reader, by choice, will take a different path. Each reader, by choice, may take a different path each time he reads the story.

Along with Sister Mary Winword as an example of transcoding, we should place Clippy, perhaps better in his alias of “The Genius” (whom I used when I first started with Windows 2000 and called “Albert” before I got tired of his happy little wave).

These tools are in effect, “part of a new culture that blends human with computer” (Prof. J. Timmons, New Media class) and are but crude examples of this principle of New Media according to Lev Manovich’s “The Language of New Media.”

As Professor Timmons has pointed out, they also contain the element of “Variability” (Manovich) because they can exist in different versions (Clippy/The Genius, etc.), and can be user-chosen. I would also go so far as to say they may be considered “Modular” (Manovich) as they are part of the software program, and exist as a separate module that can be a part of the screen display or not, at the click of a button.

Professor Steve Ersinghaus has noted that Clippy–as himself, a paper clip–is a weird choice for a representation of a “help” file, as the paper clip as a sign meaning “attachment” had already been established, and thus we have been culturally coded to recognize it as such in the computer writing programs, e-mail, etc.

Having said this, who’s for turning Spellcheck into a graphical penguin?

Checked the garage this morning; sat for a few minutes and looked around. Visually, I still wasn’t there. By virtue of cultural coding, I was able to maneuver within the space, leave and enter an area where the light revealed at least my own visibility and separation from the darkness.

How’s this for transcoding (a blend of human and computer), although not graphically accurate: Winword’s little Spelling & Grammar Tool taking the place of your second-grade nun cracking a ruler on your knuckles every time you misspelled a word.

Those squiggles of red and green don’t hurt as badly, though.

I feel like a server on a DSL or cable line. Always open to the thoughts flying around out there, and some stimuli acts like a cursor that clicks it onscreen. Yet I can’t focus on something when called upon, as in New Media today. Can’t think on my feet anymore. Come to think of it, this last year of over 1100 posts in Spinning were created from seated (deep-seated?) inspiration out in the backyard, and followed through while seated at the computer.

Better to get this down before I forget it, but I’ll have to come back to carry the thought because I must go make dinner for the lonely.

Barthes’ (S/Z) Writerly Reading/Writing versus Readerly Reading/Writing can be applied to these statements:

She wore a red dress.

She wore a dress the color of blood.