This was a really engaging activity. I was nervous about the amount of learning that might be required to complete this task, but overall it didn’t take as long as I expected. Once my son and I got the story ball rolling, we had lots of fun with it. I had never heard of Twine before reading through the course material. At first, I felt intimidated because I assumed there would be coding involved and I have zero experience with coding. I decided to ask my son to help me create a story because I wanted to see how simple the process was and determine whether I might use it as a teaching tool. After watching the YouTube videos provided, the steps seemed pretty self-explanatory, so we got started.
This activity connected well to Chapter 3 in Bolter’s Writing Space: Computers, Hypertext, and the Remediation of Print. Bolter (2001) describes hypertext as writing in networks of passages linked together rather than in linear chapters. Twine literally does this: every passage is a node, and the [[links]] create the network. When you build a Twine story, you’re practicing the very form of “topographic writing” (p. 36) that Bolter explains. As you read through the story and are given options, you are essentially choosing your own adventure. Landow (1997) supports this when he states that “hypertext increases individual freedom because users are entirely free to follow links wherever they please” (p. 273).
Overall, this activity not only introduced me to a new digital tool but also gave me a hands-on way to see Bolter’s theory of hypertext in action. It showed me how technology can make writing more interactive, creative, and student-centered.
References:
Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. (2nd ed). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Landow, G. P. (1997) Hypertext 2.0: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press)