Sugarcane

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, [["|d9]]expressly represents[["|d9]] a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly [["|d10]]represents[["|d10]] a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this [["|d7]]radical[["|d7]] shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical [["|d8]]shift[["|d8]] in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this [["|d5]]radical shift in literature[["|d5]], then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this [["|d6]]radical shift[["|d6]] in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of [["|d3]]choose-your-own-adventure[["|d3]], perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, [["|d4]]perhaps[["|d4]] this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

[["|d2]]instead[["|d2]] of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]\n\n<<display 'Start'>>

the [["|2]]structural integrity[["|2]] of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a direct correlative of [["|21]]the author-reader relationship[["|21]][[.|a]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a direct correlative of the [["|23]]author-reader relationship[["|23]][[.|a]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader [["|24]]relationship[["|24]][[.|a]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist [["|c20]]literary theory[["|c20]]), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of [["|c19]]deconstructionist[["|c19]] literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a [["|5]]piece of culture[["|5]] might change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial [["|c14]]control[["|c14]] (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture [["|9]]might[["|9]] change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the [["|c12]]myth[["|c12]] of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against [["|c11]]the myth of authorial control[["|c11]] (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of [["|c18]]deconstructionist literary theory[["|c18]]), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the [["|c17]]artistic fruition[["|c17]] of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the [["|c16]]artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory[["|c16]]), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of [["|c15]]authorial[["|c15]] control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms [["|c45]]while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[["|c45]][[.|d]]

Interaction Poem II

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms [["|c46]]while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities[["|c46]] that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might [["|15]]change[["|15]] over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to [["|c41]]primordial, changeable, and communal[["|c41]] forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

[["|d1]]instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]][["|d1]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal [["|c44]]forms[["|c44]] while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

"Poetry"\n\nI, too, dislike it: there are things that are important beyond all this fiddle.\n Reading it, however, with a perfect contempt for it, one discovers in\n it, after all, a place for the genuine.\n Hands that can grasp, eyes\n that can dilate, hair that can rise\n if it must, these things are important not because a\n\nhigh-sounding interpretation can be put upon them but because they are\n useful. When they become so derivative as to become unintelligible\n the same thing may be said for all of us, that we\n do not admire what\n we cannot understand: the bat\n holding on upside down or in quest of something to\n\neat, elephants pushing, a wild horse taking a roll, a tireless wolf under\n a tree, the immovable critic twitching his skin like a horse that feels a flea \n the base-\n ball fan, the statistician—\n nor is it valid\n to discriminate against "business documents and\n\nschool-books"; all these phenomena are important. One must make a \n distinction\n however: when dragged into prominence by half poets, the result is not\n poetry,\n nor till the poets among us can be\n "literalists of\n the imagination"—above\n insolence and triviality and can present\n\nfor inspection, "imaginary gardens with real toads in them," shall we have\n it. In the meantime, if you demand on the one hand,\n the raw material of poetry in\n all its rawness and\n that which is on the other hand\n genuine, you are interested in poetry.\n\n —Marianne Moore ([[Original Version]])

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the [["|b30]]literary[["|b30]] text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary [["|b29]]text[["|b29]] to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user [["|b28]]navigates the literary text[["|b28]] to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user [["|b27]]navigates[["|b27]] the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the [["|b26]]user[["|b26]] navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the [["|b25]]user navigates the literary text[["|b25]] to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space [["|b24]]where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[["|b24]][[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a [["|b23]]space[["|b23]] where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we [["|b22]]create[["|b22]] a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we [["|b21]]create a space[["|b21]] where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the [["|b5]]top-down author-reader information pipeline[["|b5]] with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the [["|b6]]top-down[["|b6]] author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down [["|b7]]author-reader information pipeline[["|b7]] with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader [["|b8]]information pipeline[["|b8]] with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by [["|b2]]subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements[["|b2]] (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by [["|b3]]subverting[["|b3]] the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by [["|b4]]subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline[["|b4]] with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with [["|b9]]interactive elements[["|b9]] (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with [["|b10]]interactive[["|b10]] elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, [["|4]]how a piece of culture might change over time[["|4]], is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to [["|c40]]primordial[["|c40]], changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to [["|c39]]primordial, changeable, and communal forms[["|c39]] while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where [["|c36]]stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms[["|c36]] while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where [["|c35]]stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[["|c35]][[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories [["|c38]]return[["|c38]] to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where [["|c37]]stories[["|c37]] return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: [["|c32]]oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms[["|c32]] while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the [["|c31]]written[["|c31]] word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral [["|c34]]myth[["|c34]], where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: [["|c33]]oral myth,[["|c33]] where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly [["|b35]]interact[["|b35]] with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the [["|b36]]author[["|b36]][[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]\n\n<<display 'b'>>

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the [["|b31]]literary text[["|b31]] to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to [["|b32]]explicitly interact with the author[["|b32]][[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to [["|b33]]explicitly[["|b33]] interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to [["|b34]]explicitly interact[["|b34]] with the author[[.|c]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an [["|c23]]anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth[["|c23]], where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an [["|c24]]anti-athoritarian kind of literature[["|c24]] that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

[["|c1]]this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]][["|c1]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), [["|c22]]an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[["|c22]][[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that [["|c27]]returns to the roots of the written word[["|c27]]: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that [["|c28]]returns[["|c28]] to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an [["|c25]]anti-athoritarian[["|c25]] kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of [["|c26]]literature[["|c26]] that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the [["|c29]]roots[["|c29]] of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the [["|c30]]written word[["|c30]]: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and [["|c43]]communal[["|c43]] forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

[["|1]]the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]][["|1]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that [["|c58]]eschew[["|c58]] the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that [["|c57]]eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[["|c57]][[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously [["|c48]]updating[["|c48]] the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, [["|c55]]conversational[["|c55]] author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and [["|c54]]permeable[["|c54]], conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and [["|c53]]permeable, conversational author-idenities[["|c53]] that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and [["|c52]]permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[["|c52]][[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new [["|c51]]technologies[["|c51]] and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also [["|c60]]authoritarian[["|c60]], top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the ([["|c59]]also authoritarian, top-down[["|c59]]) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

the [["|3]]structural integrity of media,[["|3]] that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a [["|8]]piece[["|8]] of culture might change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational [["|c56]]author-idenities[["|c56]] that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// [["|a34]]will never, ever change[["|a34]][[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection [["|a33]]//Observations//[["|a33]] will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's [["|a32]]poetry[["|a32]] collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's [["|a31]]poetry collection[["|a31]] //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary [["|c21]]theory[["|c21]]), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern [["|c10]]retaliation[["|c10]] against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the [["|c9]]true postmodern retaliation[["|c9]] against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of [["|c13]]authorial control[["|c13]] (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be [["|c4]]interpreted[["|c4]] as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this [["|c3]]could be interpreted[["|c3]] as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this [["|c2]]could[["|c2]] be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true [["|c8]]postmodern[["|c8]] retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the [["|c7]]true[["|c7]] postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the [["|c6]]true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control[["|c6]] (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as [["|c5]]the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control[["|c5]] (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change [["|12]]over time[["|12]], is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over [["|11]]time[["|11]], is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously [["|c47]]updating the tradition[["|c47]] with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

[["|b1]]therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]][["|b1]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a [["|16]]direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]][["|16]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, [["|c42]]changeable[["|c42]], and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a [["|18]]direct correlative[["|18]] of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a [["|17]]direct[["|17]] correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, [["|20]]is a direct correlative[["|20]] of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might change over time, is a direct [["|19]]correlative[["|19]] of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with [["|c49]]new technologies[["|c49]] and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with [["|c50]]new[["|c50]] technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms ([["|a21]]this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties[["|a21]]) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this [["|a22]]makes sense[["|a22]] when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, [["|a23]]for example[["|a23]], Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, [["|a24]]Ezra Pound's facist ties[["|a24]]) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, [["|a25]]Ezra Pound's[["|a25]] facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's [["|a26]]facist ties[["|a26]]) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's [["|a27]]facist[["|a27]] ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... [["|a28]]the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]][["|a28]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the [["|a29]]text[["|a29]] of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of [["|a30]]Marianne Moore's[["|a30]] poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, [["|d15]]a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[["|d15]][[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a [["|d16]]more empathetic[["|d16]], humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a [["|d17]]more[["|d17]] empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more [["|d18]]empathetic[["|d18]], humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of [["|d11]]choose-your-own-interpretation ethos[["|d11]], creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of [["|d12]]choose-your-own-interpretation[["|d12]] ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation [["|d13]]ethos[["|d13]], creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, [["|d14]]creating[["|d14]], essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, [["|d19]]humanly communicative[["|d19]] way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly [["|d20]]communicative[["|d20]] way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, [["|b17]]hypertext fictions[["|b17]]) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, [["|b18]]hypertext[["|b18]] fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, [["|b15]]choose-your-own-adventure[["|b15]] stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure [["|b16]]stories[["|b16]], hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of [["|6]]culture[["|6]] might change over time, is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game [["|b14]]systems[["|b14]], choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., [["|b11]]video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions[["|b11]]) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., [["|b12]]video game systems[["|b12]], choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

the structural integrity of media, that is, how a piece of culture might [["|10]]change over time[["|10]], is a direct correlative of the author-reader relationship[[.|a]]

Architectural Diagram

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext [["|b19]]fictions[["|b19]]) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., video game systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we [["|b20]]create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[["|b20]][[.|c]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the [["|a16]]most authoritarian[["|a16]] of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the [["|a15]]most authoritarian of the artistic forms[["|a15]] (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most [["|a18]]authoritarian[["|a18]] of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the [["|a17]]most[["|a17]] authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era [["|a12]]egoism[["|a12]]), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, [["|a11]]enlightenment[["|a11]] era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, [["|a14]]is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms[["|a14]] (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), [["|a13]]modern[["|a13]] conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic [["|a20]]forms[["|a20]] (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the [["|a19]]artistic forms[["|a19]] (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

[["|a3]]the written word[["|a3]], therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the [["|a4]]written[["|a4]] word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist ([["|a6]]via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism[["|a6]]), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its [["|a5]]modernist[["|a5]] (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via [["|a8]]romantic[["|a8]]ism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via [["|a7]]romanticism[["|a7]], enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, [["|a10]]enlightenment era[["|a10]] egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, [["|a9]]enlightenment era egoism[["|a9]]), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]]

therefore, by subverting the top-down author-reader information pipeline with interactive elements (viz., [["|b13]]video game[["|b13]] systems, choose-your-own-adventure stories, hypertext fictions) we create a space where the user navigates the literary text to explicitly interact with the author[[.|c]]

[["|a1]]the written word, therefore, in its modernist (via romanticism, enlightenment era egoism), modern conceptualization, is the most authoritarian of the artistic forms (this makes sense when one thinks of, for example, Ezra Pound's facist ties) ... the text of Marianne Moore's poetry collection //Observations// will never, ever change[[.|b]][["|a1]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming [["|d22]]texts[["|d22]][[.|mm]]

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of [["|d21]]consuming[["|d21]] texts[[.|mm]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]\n\n<<display 'c'>>

instead of choose-your-own-adventure, perhaps this radical shift in literature, then, expressly represents a kind of choose-your-own-interpretation ethos, creating, essentially, a more empathetic, humanly communicative way of consuming texts[[.|mm]]\n\n<<display 'd'>>

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a [["|c63]]literary pantheon[["|c63]][[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) concept of a literary [["|c64]]pantheon[["|c64]][[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, [["|c61]]top-down[["|c61]]) concept of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]

this could be interpreted as the true postmodern retaliation against the myth of authorial control (the artistic fruition of deconstructionist literary theory), an anti-athoritarian kind of literature that returns to the roots of the written word: oral myth, where stories return to primordial, changeable, and communal forms while simultaniously updating the tradition with new technologies and permeable, conversational author-idenities that eschew the (also authoritarian, top-down) [["|c62]]concept[["|c62]] of a literary pantheon[[.|d]]