Question 5: For Janet Murray, the computer is the medium for the next generation of fiction. Do you agree? Is it also the next generation of historical writing?
The permeation of technology on the current generation of students and some
scholars suggests that digital forms of fiction and historical writing are an
inescapable consequence of rapidly changing and developing digital technologies;
that indeed, it is the medium for the next generation. In Hamlet on the Holodek:
The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace, Janet H. Murray shows the use of multiform
stories in film, literature, and novels as a point of reference to illustrate
the more far reaching possibilities in cyberspace. Murray explains that the
multiform story describes “a written or dramatic narrative that presents
a single situation or plotline in multiple versions, versions that would be
mutually exclusive in our ordinary experience.” (p. 30). She asserts that
these interactions are analogous to the “holodeck experiences without
the machinery.” (p.43). She then carefully moves us through examples of
how the participant can become actively involved and indeed, immersed in this
multiform approach through digital technologies. Murray challenges us to accept
her theory that “just as we became accustomed to such devices in fiction,
so too will we become use to them in cyberspace” by showing us how traditional
linear and new technologies allow audience participation and involvement in
significantly different degrees. (p.104). Murray skillfully argues her point
by juxtaposing examples of audience participation in videogames and CD-Roms
against linear examples of the multiform approach. Murray is sometimes so excited
about the possibilities of moving towards these new technologies that she has
to pause and remind the reader and herself that “participation in an immersive
environment has to be carefully structured and constrained.” (p.106).
She is so impressed with the advancements in digital technologies, many of which
were introduced to her by her teenage son, that she sees implications for similar
applications in fiction and beyond. Murray primarily focuses on an approach
to this medium that would allow greater degrees of participation and agency
on the part of the audience. Indeed, I can envision simulations of historical
events/situations in which students use the multiform approach in developing
critical thinking, decision making, ethical, and analytical skills. Interactive
digital technology and its use in historical writing are evident on websites
like “DoHistory,” and will increase as new technologies emerge.
While, this is useful for fiction and also historical writing and analysis,
I am not convinced that the computer will be the primary medium for the next
generation; however, we will continue to see greater, more creative and sophisticated
uses of digital technology. Issues of time, complexity, and access may limit
the movement towards the computer as the medium for the next generation of fiction,
but more especially historical writing. Moreover, the traditional University
still demands hardcopy publications of faculty interested in tenure and promotions.
More significantly, the uses that Murray envisions would actually suggest a
narrow approach to historical writing. Murray concludes that, “we can
expect a range of narrative formats to emerge as authors look for ways to preserve
customary pleasures of linear narrative while exploring the essential properties
of the digital medium with increasing sophistication.” In this instance,
Murray is most realistic in recognizing the reality that linear narrative is
an important medium for this and future generations and is not in conflict with
digital possibilities.