Printed text and the text that appear on a computer screen (cybertext) are very different as we have seen in Mechanisms. The linear or one dimensional attributes of the printed text make it much more versatile and in my opinion inviting for the reader/user. It makes you think about the popularity level of those choose your own adventure novels that had a bunch of different endings depending on the choice you made at the end of a given chapter.
I particularly remember when R.L Stein (the creator of the Fear Street and Goosebumps series) came out with some of these books. I am not sure if they were deemed a success or not. Part of me wants to lean towards saying that the medium of cybertext is much better to try out this kind of experiential reading.
Comments:
I commented on David Cristello's blog entry about this reading. I wrote that: The gamer and reader are similar as the programmer and the author would be as well. I would say that the game and book need the author more so in order to exist than the reader. Someone has to make the game before it can be played.
I also commented on Kayla Sawyer's blog entry on the reading. I wrote: Text is a tool that we use in order to convey certain messages and themes. I believe it becomes tangible when it is put on a computer screen or in a book on a printed page.
Finally I commented on Rachel Prichard's blog entry on this reading. When I think about transmission I immediately think of the brain and how we have these messages sent to us every day via the brain. So does that mean that the brain is the most complex mechanism? I don't know if it really fits that definition though. In regard to txting and meaningful conversation (brought up by Kayla): I believe the exact opposite. I know people that only have serious talks via txt in the same way they do via email.