The need has always existed but not the technology
“An antibook like Glas would no longer be an antibook in an electronic addition” (Bolter, 211). In describing both sides of a two way street, Bolter describes the linear nature of literacy. How scientific writing always cumulates in a linear fashion as written work, the straight ahead linear nature of technical, business and academic writing. Then he goes on to explain that written literature, there is a disconnect between the author and the reader. He explains literacy afford a lack of control, a lack of authority between the author and the reader. This implies a degree of freedom that is delegated to the reader even, if I may add, if society doesn’t allow such freedom.
The antibook that Bolter refers to is the other side of the street. It is the affirmation that the need for hypertext has always existed. The antibook is a three column book with the linear text in the middle, and the two sides holds footnotes and references. In other words, the linearity of the central column is side-shifted by the columns that sandwich it. The antibook takes the idea of hypertext to another level, one above footnotes and references that we may find in a printed book or academic paper. The antibook makes it even easier to side-reference as one reads the text. Some may say that it ruins the linearity of literacy much the same way as hypertext and multimedia. I see the antibook as Bolter describes it as further evidence that the need for hypertext existed long before the technology was in place just as the need for an automobile or airplane long precedes the actual machine.
Bolter offers another piece of evidence where the need precedes the technology. The codex, or bound book, enabled large volumes of data to be stored in compact spaces. The first encyclopedia emerged shortly following the codex. The desire to amass, archive and store information in a database has always existed but not the technology. It would a mere one hundred years before we see the first use of a relational database in a computer which is perfectly suited to fulfil the functions of an encyclopedia.
So before we condemn hypertext and multimedia as the scourge of society, I think we should consider that the writing space has always had a need for interlinking information. The desire for linearity of literacy was an attempt of the author in controlling the outcome of the reader. At the time of early literacy, perhaps authors already felt that they lacked the voice to defend their work when they hand over the written piece to a reader. Bolter refers to the authority of literacy: “In the late age of print, scholars in the humanities continue to regard print forms as authoritative” (Bolder, 264). Is it possible that this authority is nothing but an illusion, authority dissolved by the act of handing over the “printed form” to the reader who is free to interpret the text as he or she pleases.
There was always a need for the interlinking properties of hypertext and a need for multimedia information that include visuals, video and audio.
The picture from this post was taking in a book storage room at my school.
Bolter, J. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dobson T. & Willinsky J. (2009), Digital Literacy
Great point! There have been lots of examples of the ways that people have been working to make connections in different types of printed materials, the difference with hypertext is that it is a cleaner, easier way to do so. One thing which struck me as interesting was that as books were being copied by monks they would add in the annotations made by various readers. This shows how people were looking to create links between pieces of information.
Catherine
I guessed those books looked like they had been in the hands of students at a school! It’s amazing how we treat books considering how precious they would have been considered 150 years ago! We can toss them around and not worry too much these days.
I want to read more about the antibook now in Bolter. You have peeked my curiosity around this topic. I particularly like this statement you shared: “This implies a degree of freedom that is delegated to the reader even, if I may add, if society doesn’t allow such freedom.”
I love how much freedom I have to read what I want to read and that I am in control, but am also hugely aware of my ability to mis-read information. Mis-interpretation and not referencing where information came from is so easy to do. The only way to really learn is to dive right into it – and personally, I find it a laborious task! Obviously, I will do it, regardless, because I understand the need for it legally, but I am aware that I rarely have an original thought. All our ideas came from somewhere and perhaps our brain will put it together in a slightly different way than another person, but rarely will the ideas I have be 100% original. The line between referencing a collection of thoughts I no longer know the origin of and not referencing them is difficult to comprehend. And yet, all part of the great challenge of learning and sharing information!
You touched upon some great ideas. I agree that man has had the “desire to amass, archive and store information in a database” for hundreds of years. The want to compartmentalize and interlink information is a sign of our times. As our world got broader and our minds more open to new information, there is a natural want to collocate and classify. The opportunities that hypertext provides for users on this organization mission is immense. We are able to create a much more streamlined and compact way of storage. I also agree with your statement that the need for hypertext existed long before the technology was created. Such a statement peaked my interest and had me thinking on the evolution of text and storage/retrieval issues. Bolter raises many interesting points with regards to text and hypertext. I found the following statement from Bolter to be extremely thought provoking: “Critics accuse the computer of promoting homogeneity in our society, of producing uniformity through automation, but electronic reading and writing seem to have just the opposite effect.” (Bolter, 11) Bolter links this to the surge and “exploitation” of the printing press, which could be characterized as a tool that created homogeneity through mass production. I believe the negative light shed on hypertext is purely a response to the time in which we live. Each era and new development has led to critics who are happy to outline the pitfalls and concerns. But evolution requires an open mind and the greatest predictor of the future is the past.
Bolter, J. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.