Butter Archive #17: F r a g m e n t a r y

We’re off to a good start with my CLEVER title. Let’s do this list style, to go with the fragmentary theme.

  1. I thought Carr’s input (who is generally a person I don’t like, so it means something for me to praise him) on the decision making and therefore distracting nature of hyperlinks is very fascinating. It’s totally true that when you encounter a hyperlink you then get pulled out of the text and have to make a decision (even if, albeit, if it’s a minor one) to click on it or not, and then to think about the consequences of missing out on information or getting on a tangent.
  2. In referencing David Shield’s work it was interesting to think about violating copyright and authorship.. it does feel as if the internet allows for a more blending mindset than a usual book.
  3. Twitter as a platform of fragmentary writing that encourages sharing of other peoples content! I’d never thought of it that way! Retweeting suddenly means so much more!
  4. I liked that, overall, this was positive! I’m extremely annoyed with people saying “it’s falling apart! reading writing is falling apart!” (i.e. why I’m not a Carr fan) but this seemed hopeful. It just kind of admitted that there’s a change in how we read and that a change in how we write is the natural next step. It emphasized that this doesn’t need to be the ONLY way people write, but that it’s an interesting alternative and addition.

One thought on “Butter Archive #17: F r a g m e n t a r y

  1. Hi Ariel,
    You have made some excellent comments in your post. It was interesting to view your own personal opinion on Carr’s input. I think that adding one’s own personal thoughts and ideas into a post allows others to relate to the post and/or contribute his or her own ideas on the literary piece being discussed. In this case, I agree with you that fragmentary writing has positively contributed to digital literature. I also agree with you that online literature allows people to more easily blend their ideas than a physical book. In order for people to discuss the content of a physical book, one must take the time to meet others in a reading group, or discuss aspects of a physical book on a digital platform. Arguably, if a piece of literature is provided online, it makes discussion regarding the digital book more accessible to people and allows for a more open discussion. Therefore, I would argue that online literature creates more discussion than the literature in the form of a physical book.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s