definitions

“E-poetry relies on code for its creation, preservation, and display: there is no way to experience a work of e-literature unless a computer is running it—reading it and perhaps also generating it.” Stephanie Strickland outlines 11 rules of electronic poetry.

The Global Poetic System (GPS) is an information system that explores four types of interfaces (mobile phones, PDA, desktop applications, and Web application) and three manners of reading (literary adaptive texts, literary classic texts, texts constructed by community interaction) through an interface that delivers literary content based upon real-time geographic positioning. This project is being executed by the Open University of Catalonia (UOC, Spain) and the Advanced Research Center in Artificial Intelligence (CAVIIAR, USA) thanks to a 200,000€ grant awarded by the Spanish Ministry of Industry and Technology for one year of execution during 2008. The GPS is an ambitious project that tries to incorporate the literature into the space of digital technologies, bringing the literature over to the greater public. It presents one of the most complex multi-channel, multimodal information systems to date. This talk will offer a preview and a sample of the text.

(Source: ELO 2008 site)

The Electronic Literature Collection proves that e-lit is a multiplicity that cannot be easily categorized. The information systems framework offers one coherent approach that applies to these works beyond the characteristics of any one element: text, image, sound, or interactivity. In this talk, I will demonstrate the ways in which educators and students can apply this framework to pieces as varied as Michael Joyce's "Twelve Blue," Jim Andrews' "Stir Fry Texts," and Maria Mencia's "Birds' Singing Other Birds' Songs." When read as information systems, these works not only reveal new generic differences but also present themselves as models for future works.

(Source: ELO 2008 site)

Over the last decades, the progressive adoption of information systems (IS) by artistic fields deemed to be the exclusive domain of creative humans provides some insights as to what the future may hold. The question addressed in this paper is: has literature missed out in this race to explore new horizons with the aid of the new technologies? In an attempt to answer it, we will start by studying how the adoption of IS came about in some of these fields, and we will try to postulate which particular ingredients may have played significant roles in turning little steps of modernization into revolutionary steps for the field. Then we will address the issue of which current advances in IS may be waiting to revolutionise literature, and what are the conditions that must be fulfilled for this revolution to come about.

(Source: ELO 2008 site)

Electronic literature is a term that encompasses creative texts produced for printed media which are consumed in electronic format, as well as text produced for electronic media that could not be printed without losing essential qualities. In this paper we propose that works of electronic literature, understood as text (with possible inclusion of multimedia elements) designed to be consumed in bi or multi-directional electronic media, are evolving to become n-tier information systems. By "n-tier information system" we understand a configuration of components clearly separated in at least three independent layers: data (the textual content), process (computational interactions) and presentation (on-screen rendering of the narrative). In this paper, we build two basic arguments. On the one hand, we propose that the conception of electronic literature as an information system exploits the essence of electronic media, and we predict that this paradigm will become dominant in this field within the next few years. On the other hand, we propose that building information systems may also lead in a shift of emphasis from one-time artistic novelties to reusable systems. Finally, we show that this type of systems is impossible to archive with current approaches in the field, and offer a solution for the preservation of this type of works.

(Source: ELO 2008 site)

What does the category of the literary give to digital humanities? Nothing and everything. This essay considers the "idiocy" of the literary: its unaccountable singularity, which guarantees that we continue to return to it as a source, inspiration, and challenge. As a consequence, digital humanities is inspired and irritated by the literary.

My essay shows this in three ways. First, through a speculative exploration of the relation between digital humanities and the category of "the literary." Second, through a quick survey of the use of literature in digital humanities project. Thirdly, through a specific examination of TEI and character rendering as digital humanities concerns that necessarily engage with the literary. Once again, the literary remains singular and not abstract, literal in a way that challenges and provokes us towards new digital humanities work.

Electronic literature is a term that encompasses artistic texts produced for printed media which are consumed in electronic format, as well as text produced for electronic media that could not be printed without losing essential qualities. Some have argued that the essence of electronic literature is the use of multimedia, fragmentation, and/or non-linearity. Others focus on the role of computation and complex processing. "Cybertext" does not sufficiently describe these systems. In this paper we propose that works of electronic literature, understood as text (with possible inclusion of multimedia elements) designed to be consumed in bi- or multi-directional electronic media, are best understood as 3-tier (or n-tier) information systems. These tiers include data (the textual content), process (computational interactions) and presentation (on-screen rendering of the narrative). The interaction between these layers produces what is known as the work of electronic literature. This paradigm for electronic literature moves beyond the initial approaches which either treated electronic literature as computerized versions of print literature or focused solely on one aspect of the system. In this paper, we build two basic arguments. On the one hand, we propose that the conception of electronic literature as an information system gets at the essence of electronic media, and we predict that this paradigm will become dominant in this field within the next few years. On the other hand, we propose that building information systems may also lead in a shift of emphasis from one-time artistic novelties to reusable systems. Demonstrating this approach, we read works from the Electronic Literature Collection Volume 1 (Jason Nelson and Emily Short) as well as newer works by Mez and the team gathered by Kate Pullinger and Chris Joseph. Glancing toward the future, we discuss the n-tier analysis of the Global Poetic System and the La Flood Project.

(Source: Authors' abstract at Hyperrhiz)

ELO Conference Abstract:

AbstractThis panel brings together scholars from the Colombia, the United States, and Europe to examine electronic literature not as computer-enhanced text but as information systems. As developed in the four papers, this "systematic" approach would push criticism toward an understanding of these textual objects that might facilitate more multi-level readings of developing systems, moving away from a capitalist-driven aesthetic which champions the novel above all. The objects of study range from works in the Electronic Literature Collection volume 1 to a recently funded locative media elit piece being developed for Barcelona.

This piece is an attempt to hasten the death of the 'electronic' in 'electronic literature' — to re-cognize it as a dead metaphor — as the prelude to an agonistic meditation on my generation's anticipation of the death of literature itself, with 'the literary,' potentially, waiting in the wings (and published elsewhere, elsewhen, elsehow).

(Source: Author's abstract)

Respondents at 2008 ELO Conference

Joe TabbiUniversity of Illinois Chicago, USA Scott RettbergUniversity of Bergen, Norway Stuart MoulthropUniversity of Baltimore, USA