judgements and aesthetics about collaborative and net writing

İmac dunlop 07/10/04

Isn't it great that people can get together and write stuff?

Yes.

Isn't it interesting how generative engines can make new work from any input, or generate new work in itself?

Yes

Isn't it different?

Yes

Whats your problem?

Its a struggle between definitions. Do I want "generative" to appear as a maxim applied only to electronic interfacing, at the expense of what it means to be creative?
I'm not sure, just as I'm not sure that machines replicate thought in any real way. Generative for me is expression -as opposed to output- at some level it is unquantifiable. Electronically, it is quantifiable, even if the generating method consumes some randominity in its source.
As this technology is replicant, it can only replicate through a theatrical method. Leading to that which is of such a caliber as to "fool" the viewer/reader into thinking it is a distinctly human production.

What's the difference anyway?

Perhaps there isn't one. Perhaps there isn't one in collaboratively generated writing. But in the end, there is no great difference in reading. Linearity may be a subject to which the screen is a plastic interface, but in the end, consumption of any written language by the viewer/reader will be linear, that is how written languages work. One word after another, we interface using a continuim, a linear continuim.
Participation is one level, reading a work in progress or finished accumulation is another, and it is in that experiencing phase that any work will take on a linear timeline.

You mean experimentation for the author(s) is not the same as experimentation for the viewer?

Yes. The viewer is subject to a great deal more than the purity of screen based work. They are subject to access, download speed, plug ins and software. The viewer will alsways see on line work through the widow of the screen.
This window or frame subjects the viewer to advertising ( browser interface) and to the invisibly complex manner by which any work appears on screen. i.e. the Technology of electronics, and the evolution of its production as software, hardware, in the marketed world.
Film is more what this experience is about. Literature must converge and come to terms with visual and cinematic language. And film must also converge, to become more like publishing.

Any ideas?

In the end, its better to encourage people to participate in the written word from a perspective of trying to make the best they can, and not rely on the "why does a dog lick its balls? Because it can!" aesthetics of programming possibilities.
Function and form must both exist as integral parts in communication. Making something "look good" does not make the content any better. It is a principle of advertising and consumption which only leaves the viewer waiting ("dwell time" as it is known) for the "real" content they were watching to start again after the advertising break.
Surfing is no different. "Attention span" conditions should not be a critieria, they should be confronted and challenged. Tech-wise, the shortcoming is that -to date- websites are not cinematic.

x mac d.

İmac dunlop 2004