A collaboration with the Queensland State Archives, this is a collection of digital poems using archival material built into a physical space. Interactive elements cleverly repurpose old archive equipment such as card index drawers and microfiche machines. The poems draw on Brisbane’s past and recreate the experience of losing yourself in archival material.
This paper investigates how the theoretical concept of embodiment and related keywords such as touch, movement, gesture and haptic appears within the current practice of tagging creative works in the ELMCIP Knowledge Base. It further suggests how this practice can be extended within the Knowledge Base platform both in terms of providing more precise tags, and through the forthcoming Platform content type which will give users the possibility connect specific hardware and software with a creative work. Finally, it presents the outline for a research collection that explores the notion of embodiment. The collection gives an introduction to relevant researchers, artists, creative works and scholarly works exploring the concept of embodiment and technology, in the hopes that such a framework can inspire the further investigation of works related to the field of electronic literature.
The reading of any text, or the translation from one language (or mode) to another relies on a process of interpretation. Following Derrida, in his theory of translation, Lawrence Venuti writes that ‘Because meaning is an effect of relations and differences among signifiers along a potentially endless chain (polysemous, intertextual, subject to infinite linkages), it is always differential and deferred, never present as an original unity’ (Venuti 2008: 13). These plural and contingent relations that have the capacity to produce different meanings were played out in Ana Cavic and Sally Morfill’s animation for ELO 2016 (Rules that order the reading of clouds). Lines, as signifiers, developed through gestures of drawing, reformed repeatedly to create different relations, and produce new meanings that shifted between the contexts of image and text. In the process of making Rules (2016), the active space where interpretation occurred and meaning was produced lay between the frames of animated movement. This between space, or gap - prone to perceptual failings - is at the core of a new collaboration between Cavic, Morfill and Tychonas Michailidis. I am not listening is an interactive installation in which the interpretative space between the aural, visual and haptic is exposed and activated. The audience is witness to what Roman Jakobson describes as ‘intersemiotic transposition’ (1959): verbal signs are interpreted by means of non-verbal sign systems, and vice versa. Where Jakobson stated that ‘poetry is untranslatable,’ a creative transposition provides the listener with vibrating sensory feedback that is in fact a direct translation of the text. A chain of translation processes begins with simple drawing gestures from which a ‘kit’ of lines is developed. These lines, translated into a material form (initially adhesive vinyl), are physically arranged and rearranged to construct a series of poetic texts or ‘sculpture poems’ that in turn provide the content for audio recordings of spoken word. While preparing the adhesive vinyl lines, the process of weeding (removing the unwanted shapes from the vinyl sheet) produces remnants that are rolled into spherical sculptural objects. These are reinterpreted in their final material form to incorporate vibro-haptic technology, providing an object-interface through which the audio recording can be manipulated. In this work, therefore, literature is mediated by technology. The inclusion of alternative sensory formats to support the listening/reading of a text both augments the experience of the audience, and underlines its incompleteness within a chain of signification.
The intensification of tactile/haptic research by academia and the digital technology industry, has given rise to several instrumentalizations of the adjective haptic, often contradicting an entire philosophical haptological tradition, going back to Aristotle and allowing us to think of the haptic from a multisensory perspective capable of destabilizing the idea of pure sensory modalities. On the one hand, such intensification is evidenced by the ubiquity of digital technological devices that call for interaction through touch and gesture as tactile/haptic functions necessary for experiencing digital content. On the other hand, it may be seen in the increasing demand for tangibility between human and machine, particularly through sensory experiences made possible by virtual/augmented reality, as well as, mixed reality/virtuality platforms. Such intense literalization of the haptic also, paradoxically, ends up reinforcing the existence and primacy of a visual culture inherent to an ocularcentric society. It is in line with this haptological tradition, as well as through the recovery of a multisensory perspective explored by a series of avant-garde artistic practices that permeate the history of twentieth-century art, that I propose to (re)think digital literary works via means of an alternative and operative redefinition of haptic drawn from the metamedial and intermedial specificities of current digital poetic practices. Based on the mapping and analysis of carefully selected digital literary works, this research intends to understand how digital poetic practices make use of certain processes of haptic reading enabled by current digital technology, in order to explore and question the processes of writing and reading in media. In order to validate an argument largely based on the examination of ambiguities and tensions highlighted by the literary exploration of interface functionalities in arts and literature, this thesis will attempt to analyze the referred ambiguity, by showing a parallel between an inherent circularity of (multi)sensory perception and the way certain circular, or rather, spiral-like, trajectories, are able to be identified across multiple arts, artists and movements. All of this, of course, is put together via a process of dialectic subversion/disruption that characterizes multiple variants of experimentalism across the centuries. Moreover, doing so is a way of finding possible answers, or perhaps, raising new questions, regarding longstanding problematics pertaining to the relationship between tradition and innovation, from which the digital era is not exempt.
With this paper it is my intention to reevaluate the use of the adjective “haptic” with respect to a growing demand for tangibility between human and machine, namely through multisensory experiences made available by mixed reality/virtuality. From a haptological philosophic perspective, a tradition oscillating between the emphasis on vision and the emphasis on touch, this paper also intends to analyze notions of touch, gesture and contact, in their multiple meanings, in which the latter serves as a probe to explore the idea of cybrid bodies within processes of haptic perception in HumanMachine Interface (HMI).
Com o presente artigo proponho-me reavaliar a utilização do adjectivo “háptico” na sua relação com a intensificação da procura de tangibilidade entre ser humano e máquina, nomeadamente através de experiências multissensoriais possibilitadas por processos de realidade/virtualidade misturada. Partindo de uma tradição haptológica de linhas filosóficas, que tem oscilado entre “ocularcêntrica” e “tactilocêntrica”, o artigo explora ainda as noções de toque, de gesto e de contacto, nas suas mais variadas acepções, utilizando-se esta última para explorar a ideia de corpo cíbrido em processos de experienciação háptica com base na Interface Humano-Máquina (IHM).
The replacement of mechanical-electronic interfaces for tactile haptic contact with the screen, using hands, fingers and, in some cases, biological bodies, brings to the fore a series of literal gestures with obvious influence on the way we read and write in digital multimodal environments. Making use of a rhetoric based on perceptual qualities such as “transparency” and “softness”, this prosthetic reduction seems to give continuity to an ancestral desire of immediate and non mediated access to knowledge. On the other hand, it ends up by paradoxically reinforcing the domain of visuality propelled by Gutenberg’s paradigm as well as an understanding of reading as a visual process. Based on approaches and departures that paradoxes like these are able to trigger, I propose to examine notions of touch and gesture, in relation to writing and reading processes. Namely, taking into account the way it was understood by artistic vanguards such as the Portuguese Experimentalists – whose intermedial, cybertextual and intersensory concerns are still able to give birth to renewed readings when it comes to transactions between literature and digital. Furthermore, a special emphasis will be given to confluences of both analog and digital gestures, as one of the central characteristics of haptic reading processes produced by actual and virtual manipulations of the text in digital literary artworks
A gradual substituição de interfaces mecânico-electrónicas pelo contacto tátilo-háptico com o ecrã, através de mãos, dedos e, em determinados casos, todo o corpo biológico, acarreta consigo uma série de toques e gestos literais com influência evidente no modo como lemos e escrevemos em ambientes multimodais digitais. Fazendo uso de uma retórica com base em qualidades perceptivas como “transparência” e “suavidade”, esta redução protética parece dar continuidade a um desejo ancestral imediato e não mediado de acesso ao conhecimento. Por outro lado, e de modo paradoxal, ela acaba por reforçar aquilo que à primeira vista parece contrariar: o domínio secular da visualidade propulsionado pelo paradigma de Gutenberg e um entendimento de leitura enquanto processo mormente visual. É com base nas aproximações e afastamentos que paradoxos como o acima referido despoletam que me proponho analisar neste artigo as noções de toque e de gesto, na sua relação com os processos de escrita e leitura. Como forma de sustentar o argumento delineado utilizar-se-á como exemplo particular o caso do Experimentalismo Português, cujas preocupações intermediais, cibertextuais e intersensoriais continuam hoje a despoletar renovadas leituras nas transações e interseções entre literatura e digital. Por fim, dar-se-á especial destaque à confluência de gestos “analógicos” com gestos “digitais”, enquanto característica singular dos processos de leitura háptica que decorrem de manipulações atuais e virtuais do texto na obra literária digital.
Leaps and take-offs
The blue sky above us is the optical layer of the atmosphere, the great lens of the terrestrial globe, its brilliant retina.From ultra-marine, beyond the sea, to ultra-sky, the horizon divides opacity from transparency. It is just one small step from earth-matter to space-light – a leap or a take-off able to free us for a moment from gravity.
Paul Virilio, Open Sky
As I read Virilio’s introduction to Open Sky (1997 [1995]), I decide to open the Google Earth app on my iPad. By sliding my forefinger over its glassy surface, I notice that I am coming closer and closer to what corresponds to my current geographical position, but still, at the same time I am able to travel around the world in just a few taps and swipes on the screen. As reminiscent as it may be of David Bowie’s “Planet Earth is blue/and there’s nothing I can do”, this apparently insignificant manipulation also reminds me of Canadian astronaut Chris Hadfield’s version of “Space Oddity”, recorded inside the International Space Station and enabling more than 23 million people to witness Earth’s blueness through Hadfield’s camera lenses.
What all of these artefacts – videos, music, lyrics, quotations – have in common is the fact that they are affected by a series of interface mediations, all of which, of course, can be seen and touched through the Internet. However, one questions the real significance of this touch and why do we find the idea of holding the whole world in our hands so phenomenal. If what we need now to free us from gravity is just a leap or a take-off, which might be done by a simple touch of the hand or a snap of the fingers, what becomes of the eye?
The intensification of research around digital media devices that require tactile/haptic functions,1 such as touch and gesture, along with efforts to increase tangibility in the Human-Machine Interface (Gallace & Spence, 2014: 229), is giving way to a whole new rhetoric of bodies and surfaces (as well as interfaces). Not only touch and gesture are anything but superficial, but also these “new” processes of writing and reading tend to amplify the primacy of vision over other sensory modalities. This is a paradoxical situation that Wendy Hui Kyong Chun defines as a “compensatory gesture” by “the current prominence of transparency in product design and political and scholarly discourse”:
As our machines increasingly read and write without us, as our machines become more and more unreadable, so that seeing no longer guarantees knowing (if it ever did), we the so-called users are offered more to see, more to read. The computer – that most nonvisual and nontransparent device – has paradoxically fostered ‘visual culture’ and ‘transparency’. (2005: 2)
In addition, as ubiquitous computing turns into a naturalized process in our lives, the opacity/transparency paradox becomes even stronger, which is a natural consequence of its attachment to ubi-comp.
Extending an avant-garde countercultural tradition that started questioning visual culture as early as the beginning of the last century, there is also evidence of an increasing number of digital literary works channelling its countercultural and metamedial poetics towards the aforementioned phenomena. These “technotexts” (to borrow Katherine Hayles’ term) may or may not include multi-touch devices such as tablets and smartphones. Nevertheless, the one who do, often self-reflectively question the specificities of these digital devices and media, as well as the apparatuses enclosing them.2 I argue that such “machimanipulations”, manipulations of the device by both humans and machines, tend to defy the general assumption of surfaces as something superficial, recovering Deleuze’s idea of surfaces as double-fold and profound (1990: 4-11). If, in fact, we are now living in a “Glass Age” governed by a culture of transparency, to what extent are these “transparent” touching glass surfaces becoming an opaque looking glass?
This paper argues that attending to the tropes of circularity featuring in print-based literature proves to be a useful foil for an analysis of electronic literature. Based on the idea that digital literary mechanisms do not obliviate previous circularity-inducing structuring motifs in analog literature, such as labyrinths, chess, rivers, and clockwork, this argument arrives at a crucial time for literature, which is currently the object of intensified debates on beginnings and ends, especially in the context of digitality and multisensory perception becoming central to some aspects of its processes. Accordingly, circular motion is here analysed in its depiction and actuation across several kinds of literary / literal machines, in reflection also on how sensory perception both mediate and is mediated. If literature is conditional upon a series of unique, though interconnected, mechanisms, it seems reasonable not to discard a certain circularity of the senses that is brought into play there and, indeed, given both thematic and formal substance in analog and digital works. In other words, representations generated at the confluence of both biological and technological bodies cannot but instigate a circularity on which they are dependent: an idea which this article examines and critiques with reference to canonical and electronic literature, particularly Borges, Beckett, and Joyce.
POX: SAVE THE PEOPLE® is a cooperative board game that challenges 1–4 players to stop the spread of a deadly disease. Not only is the game fun, but through play, players understand group immunity and the need to vaccinate. Many public health groups need to better promote immunizations in order to continue to prevent vaccine preventable diseases. Vaccinations against deadly diseases such as diphtheria, polio, and whooping cough were standard public health measures: kids today don’t worry about getting polio, for example. Due to suspicions about vaccines and links to other diseases, more parents refuse to immunize their children, which could lead to a national health crisis. Parents have misconceptions about vaccination. For example, some parents believe that vaccines are no longer necessary. This belief may stem from the idea that children develop immunity to diseases automatically through time, which is simply not true; these myths can lead to disaster. For example, whooping cough has reemerged in the United States. As the percentage of people vaccinated against whooping cough has decreased, the U.S. has lost “herd immunity” to whooping cough, thus allowing ways for contagion to spread among the populace. (Source: http://www.tiltfactor.org/game/pox/)
