April 20, 2009 Group presentation question

To what extent do you think that the technotext is as much a literary work in the same sense that a book is? If you do not believe that technotext can be a literary work, what is it lacking? If you are a supporter, then what does it have?

Technotext can be a literary work and more. Whereas a book is non-mutable, or, rather, not meant to be mutable (because one could technically cut up a book and rearrange the words/letters), technotext is meant to be mutable. Technotext may have multiple beginnings or endings, yes, which allows the text to be more interactive with the reader. In some sense, the reader chooses what happens in the story. Depending on how advanced the technotext is, words can move around the screen and therefore be a just like a book but with added features. What a technotext is lacking is the fact that it may not give a reader closure. What I mean by this is that if it has multiple endings, the reader may not have a sense of what the "real" ending is meant to be. Obviously, with technotexts with multiple endings, perhaps there is not meant to be a "real" ending and that is the beauty of it. However, I know some people who would be bothered and question "but which one is the real ending?" and hate the alternative endings (and, one could say, similarly, cliff hangers). Technotexts also lack the ability to be printed and bought in a bookstore. They rely on the computer to live, or they do not exist. Despite this fact, I still like technotexts. I like the interaction. However, I will admit that for the simple fact that these technotexts live on the computer I am more impatient with them than when reading books. There is a sort of immediacy that comes with anything I view on the computer.