A Narrative Re-Shuffling
In Gary Shteyngart's
Super Sad True Love Story, set in a
near-future America that is financially reliant on China and Western Europe, the
populace is “starkly divided between the proletariat and the
bourgeois, obsessed with pendant-sized devices called
äppäräti that
display a constantly updating biographical sketch of the holders vis-a-vis those
around them”
[
Shteyngart 2001].
[1] One character, finding himself
dispossessed of devices, throws himself off the roof of his apartment building, so
painful is the feeling of disconnection. More fortunate residents in the same
building are the couple Lenny and Eunice, who put one another through a careful
self-screening of characteristics, by no means matching but nonetheless necessary to
their connection: “categories of net-worth, ‘fuckability,’
child-abuse scales, and other measures achingly important to Americans in
Shteyngart's fictional world.” (Ellis)
Narrative, evidently, is the default setting for new media — as media
present themselves to the imagination of current print realism. Novels concerned with
happiness and sadness, truth, love, and, not least, story, have no
trouble absorbing devices as though they were all part of our culture's ongoing
sentimental education. The sad truth of this particular novel by Shteyngart might be
stated as an allegory of what happens when narrative is personalized and its display
is facilitated from one moment to the next, even as the narrated experience is under
way. Biographical notations in new media, updated continually, need to be validated
by being shared, over long distances and in the present. Users need to
know, always, where they stand within self-organizing, self-interested systems of
professional networking, dating, entertainment, travel, etc. The delay mechanisms in
print (separating hand and eye, composition and later presentation on the published
page to a relatively amorphous audience) can no longer be tolerated by a sensibility
grown accustomed to a life arranged in media. A post is like a phrase spoken in
conversation in that a response is needed for its completion. Dynamism, rather than
reflection, is more the norm in new media.
The self-conscious migration of literature into new media has been a fevered
reconstruction (and continuous presentation) of narrativity, by which I mean the need
for constant connection and to make present (as an ongoing story) the events of one's
life over time and across distances. The idea, a given for many scholars and most
mainstream fiction writers today, that a life worth living must be lived narratively
— that an experience worth sharing had best be told as a story — has been carried
into new media but not, as we might have anticipated, through hypertexts and other
kinds of born-digital literary writing. Nor can digitized novels, long poems, or
continuous dramas have anything approaching the cultural presence of the kinds of
narrative now associated with handheld devices and social networks.
[2] Even games in new media are said to
need a narrative, to justify themselves as educational or fulfilling. (By contrast,
nameless designers of the old board games never had to apologize for pleasures that
were taken, for the most part, episodically and without narrative reconstruction,
with the roll of a dice, the gain of a few millions in play cash, or the construction
of a very long word over squares of varying value.)
Could anyone have expected that this one literary element — narrativity — would have
come to inhabit new media so thoroughly? That the social and the affective would
re-assert itself with such a vengeance, in an environment grounded in what is
calculable, useful, and instrumental? Most surprising of all is the way this
self-assertion has been reinforced by media whose operations (based in calculations
and high speed binary selection) in themselves could not be further from narrative.
Even in the realist tradition in print, narrative was never so thoroughly realized,
so firmly tied to characters whose desires could be measured from one moment to the
next, given a value, and hence made available for
exchange. What can be
held in place, in the mind of a reader who might regard himself as a character in
various ongoing fictions, can be reinforced, certainly, by devices held in the hand
and suited to the interrogation of others — concerning their traits, their
whereabouts (and ours) at any given time, our present availability for social,
sexual, or work relations.
[3] Life-narratives no longer need to be displaced into the more
reflective genres of novelistic fiction. And what's more: our narratives have become
newly calculable, measurable from one moment to the next, and hence available for
direct participation in an economy of "passionate interests" [
Latour 2010].
[4]
Does the present re-situation of our personal narratives from novels to apps imply a
transformation of literary engagement generally? It might, if one holds that
narrative is essential to literature — even as some claim (with very little objective
justification) that narrative is essential to a well-lived life. But narrative, in
fact, has been only one, arguably a minority, element in the long network of literary
fiction in print
[5] – whose canonical texts more
often demonstrate episodic, fragmentary, and situational aspects of knowledge (even
within the realm of 19th century realism, but certainly in epical, allegorical, and a
rich variety of modernist forms that tend to explore consciousness more than
connection). Musil, Joyce, Proust, Pynchon, and Wallace are no less a part of the
literary mainstream than Dickens and Austen. Similarly, our present äppäräti, however
great their commercial market share, are only a small portion of what the current
technological culture produces, in comparison with databases and supporting
softwares. (Consider, for example, how little press coverage is given to the CEO of
the German company that holds rights to the enabling software used in every Apple
app.) The tendency to focus on that small portion of technology that falls under our
individual narrative control is no more accurate or desirable, when it comes to
technologies, than is the tendency to equate realism in fiction with a
narrative realism.
A largely impersonal, non-narrative form also can have a place in new media, though
not those media that come down to us in the form of devices. When one
considers databases, codework, or any of the hundreds of streaming media that refresh
the screen that we happen to have open at any given time — the possibilities for
other kinds of meaning making become readily apparent. The literary re-opens, when
demands for immediacy and for interaction are lowered. When freed from the need
always to be responding instrumentally, readers and viewers can cultivate habits of
reflection that might echo the experience of print reading but remain wholly within
the possibilities and constraints of new media. Such are the literary qualities that
I discovered during a period of several months in 2008, when I was asked to write on
a digital art installation by Kate Armstrong and Michael Tippett. Grafik Dynamo! is a networked cultural artifact that
includes arbitrary associations between texts and images drawn from RSS feeds on the
Web. The work is a sort of network comic book, which pulls together texts written by
Armstrong with more or less random images pulled in from LiveJournal and Flicker. The
work was observed, during that particular period, in much the way that I observe most
works of born-digital writing — that is to say, in a state of semi-distraction and
occasional reflection. I had the Dynamo! running on one
or two windows, behind or to the side of other windows that required more immediate
attention. Those interfaces, apps, and emails at the front of my screen must exist,
somewhere. I don't intend to return to these everyday communications, and I hope
nobody else will have occasion to want to do so.
For the present collection of DHQ essays on new media
writing, I return to the written record of my experience with the Dynamo! The text that follows originally was included as a
catalog essay put together by the Prairie Art Gallery, when the work was exhibited in
Grande Prarie, Alberta. I was not able to attend the exhibition and I have not
checked to see if the event was documented in new media, but that is not the
experience I wish to present here. Rather, the essay offers a sense of how a range of
literary qualities can exist, almost accidentally, within or around the instrumental,
highly narrativized spaces of new media. Precisely because the work is so minimal —
more a matter of framing than narrativizing — there is not so much in the way of
stated authorial intention to divert our critical attention; with no need ever
actively to respond to the images and text organized for us by "the
device," a space emerges for unmolested viewing and reflective reading. There will be
instances in what follows, where my own conceptual shifts might seem no less
arbitrary than the image that happens to be pulled from the LiveJournal at any given
moment, on any given screen. The just mentioned “device,” which (according to
one of the hundreds of text snippets) is “lost in the general
flux of ideas,” had no connection, in my earlier reading, with the devices
in Shteyngart (whom I had not read at the time). Other, more visual connections (to
Roy Lichtenstein's prints, for example), occurred to me too late, to be worked into
the body of the written text. These connections emerged only on re-reading, and while
looking again at the image clips I pulled from LiveJournal (which are not the same as
the ones reproduced in the catalog, or the ones presented here, in this slightly
revised version for Digital Humanities Quarterly).
In this sense, the present essay is also a kind of autobiography, but one that is
without the usual, strong narrative that so often attaches itself to new media, and
without the strong argumentative thread that characterizes professional literary
criticism. Here I am interested in what it means to inhabit the much more extensive
environment of streaming images and streaming text, which does not in itself exhibit
narrative qualities, which precludes argument, and which only accidentally can be
said to have literary qualities. I am increasingly persuaded that electronic
literature, if it should ever come to be a widely recognized practice, will emerge
not because artists self-consciously interrogate the aesthetic or literary
affordances of this or that specific technology.
[6] Rather, literature
is poised to enter our mediated lives in much the way that literature has always done
— at those moments when we cease to involve ourselves too fully or immediately in
what can be reported, and we engage not exclusively with characters who can be known
and stories that can be told but rather with modes of consciousness and
cognition.
[7] These latter are capable
constantly of being refreshed, and revised, generating “patterns
of reading that come to be interspersed with regular life” (in Armstrong's
words) [
Armstrong 2008].
The essay that follows is a record of the reflections occasioned by one reader, in
the hope that others will bring their own conceptual frames and schema to bear on the
work (that remains in place at its turbulence.org site
and hence is available for further reflection and evaluation).
Graphic Sublime: On the Art and Designwriting of Kate Armstrong and Michael
Tippett
We still like to think of it as “out there”: the Web, the World-System. We've
had it long enough for a generation of children to reach adulthood using computers,
and for a generation of new media artists to build bodies of work. No longer are we
looking at literary migrations; hybrids are capable now of being born digital, not
carried over from Fprint, punch card, or canvas to the screen. We go there, to the
terminal, to look things up, to book our vacations, to network, to post resumes, to
find the jobs that keep us sitting, for the most part, in front of terminals. Or it
comes to us – on a mobile, handheld, cell, or pod. “How old
world” it seems, to Kate Armstrong and her generation of literary and
graphic artists, how labor intensive and exploratory, to go in “search” of
information when it can be brought to us through an RSS feed: a Rich Site Summary,
RDF Site Summary, or Really Simple Syndication.
Visit the website? How old world. Why would you, when it – when they – can come
to you? An RSS reader, essentially, is a service that can parse any number of
sources for updates, so that you don't have to visit the sites to get their
information. The reader pulls it together for you, and rolls everything into
one.
The automatic delivery of text fragments can generate new patterns of reading
that come to be interspersed with regular life. [
Armstrong 2008]
For several months over the Spring/Summer of 2008, the
Dynamo came to be interspersed with my own writing life, which
increasingly takes place online. The habits of attention and (no less important)
negligence I've developed over the years are not disturbed by what the
Dynamo sends me, a Running Sense Stream of snapshots and
clips from around the world. The images cycling through the panels are not resized –
sometimes only part of a picture fits inside the frame, and this, too, gives the mind
something to do. There is always “more” to an image than what we see, and there
are also always more images, whose happenstance positioning with each other and with
Armstrong's sentences generate meanings potentially no less significant, and much
more patterned and expansive, than (what I can find on) my own.
The relationship to the screen, to the digital page, is changed by having
material delivered through feeds. Instead of material coming together into one
piece on one screen, where a person can “go” to read it, the material is
always being sent out, always in flux. It is never finalized. [Armstrong 2008]
Over centuries of print literacy, scholars got used to visiting archives in
“search” of information. We used to research
documents, we were taught to discern arrangements, patterns, and structures that
other writers put there before our arrival, or that they failed to see for reasons of
ideology, racial or gender bias, or their position in a medial ecology different from
that of today. We tried to bring forward something of the past and, when we finished,
we left our results in books and in archives, to be built on and corrected (or not)
by future scholars. At the same time, people living their regular lives left everyday
documents of their own, the tiniest fraction of which could be retrieved by
researchers and converted by authors into history, and stories. All this required
time – the long time of art and scholarship but also the incredibly short time it
takes for the vast majority of documents to be lost.
The documents themselves, those we have kept, precede even the victors who write
history.
I.
I'm a literary scholar and an editor, by profession – the kind of person who used
to keep 3X5 cards in my shirt pocket, who would then, after a bit of mental
processing (and much forgetfulness), transfer some of these notes to my word
processor. When I read, even now, I make marks – I think about what the author is
saying but I also think ahead to what I'll be saying about the author, or about
topics an author treats and I may want to treat differently. Commissions like this
one, to write catalogue copy on a work that could be art, could be electronic
literature, or some new amalgam or anomaly, run contrary to habits that I've
internalized throughout a career that's concentrated, mostly, on words in print.
The images that cycle through
Grafik Dynamo! have
been scraped from the LiveJournal site.
[8] These are photographs, mostly, taken by
digital cameras and posted on blogs and websites. I can remember seeing Roman,
Greek, Cyrillic, Arabic, and Chinese characters among scraps of text that appear
in the photos. (The purchase of the source site by the Russian firm, SUP, may have
tilted the frequency toward the Cyrillic.) The images appeared to early
reader/viewers, and they are in fact, “somewhat randomly
retrieved”
[
Andrews 2006]. “Somewhat” — because is it ever possible to
achieve randomness through programming? Coherence cannot be avoided, even if we
try. The
sense of a narrative, the
impression of history
in the making, persists in what we see.
The similarly “random,” though written, captions, speech, and thought
balloons confirm the impression that something, somewhere in the background, is
happening:
How little it takes, to place us in the stream: a “but,” an “ach!” an
adverb signifying development however “slowly”; the hint of something
“new”, even “startling”. A character, the “prostitute” for
example, needs only to appear more than once – and this is enough to stimulate
recognition, even without her being named or any attempt having been made at
characterization. We don't even know if she's a he or he's a she: that will depend
perhaps as much on the image that happens to be attached to the text, as on any
gender presumptions a male or female, hetero or gay, reader may bring to the word
“prostitute”. What we experience is a sensation of meaning without
meaning's actualization in words. The message is self-contained; it requires no
further interpretation on the part of the author, by us, by the LiveJournal, or
the Dynamo. A narrative always seems to be in
process, somewhere.
But not here.
Not in the place where we are reading, viewing, receiving the image/texts. Not in
the office working (or playing games) on company time. Not at home where the
Internet is paid by subscription. Not at the business center, wifi hotspot, or on
the handheld we're carrying.
The
Dynamo gathers images already found on blogs,
sent through feeds, and located on various sites as they are updated. But the
texts were written. Armstrong says she was drawn initially to science fiction and
1940s spy fiction:
I was loving the brilliant innocence of
both comics and that literature, where everything happens in either London or
Damascus, people carry around suitcases of gems, and scientists become deranged
by their magnificent powers. [Armstrong 2005b]
Armstrong's words arrive on the screen in the form of captions, thought, and
speech balloons. They are pulled randomly from the author's flat file, and
sometimes they appear long enough for me to read one and view the accompanying
image before I turn my glance to the next panel, and the next. If I'm quick, I can
clip a text and paste it to a file of my own, for later reference. But that sort
of careful, accurate, and attributed citation really is suited more for print
projects. Here, on the screen, the news from London and Damascus reaches me
without my having actively to go in search for it or for anyone to consider
preserving it.
In the world of crime novels and comics, decisions emanate from some imperial
center (“London”) in response to news from the outposts (“Damascus”). An
atmosphere of international intrigue pervades but the center/periphery model does
not conform all that well to the Dynamo's present
reality. Messages arrive, rather, from all places equally. They are all encrypted,
but routinely decoded before they reach us, as plain text or attachments on the
computer where we can enjoy a distracted, demanding, but mostly peaceful life in
images.
An article of faith for the era of new media: If it is on the screen, if it has
been captured already, it cannot harm us.
The news comes at us from everywhere, and if not from everyone in the world
exactly, from the cross-section of bloggers who post on LiveJournal. “Incoming
mail”: here it's as if the “news” that reaches Captain Pirate Prentice
at the start of Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow,
early one morning by way of a V-2 Rocket dropped on London, were now as common as
the arrival of the morning email. In 1973 Pynchon, too, was playing off the
staples of spy fiction and comics: someone, some somebody, a bureaucrat with a
sense of humor, went to the trouble of replacing the bomb the Rocket was meant to
carry with a little black box containing coded instructions. It's also, for
Pynchon, something of a stretch to bring an imagination of technology and
international intrigue to the forms of conventional narrative. But readers at the
time were willing, enough of them, to go with the flow and “suspend
disbelief.”
A willing suspension of disbelief? Try getting one of the kids from the Internet
and computer gaming generation to do that. My own students, I suspect, are not put
off so much by 700-plus pages of coruscating, brainy prose, as they are simply
unwilling to go beyond their own suspicions, their self-reliant conviction that
the materials they've gathered on the world are no less valid than what can be
compiled by any literary author, living or dead, white, male, or otherwise.
This culture of suspicion, in some ways, is itself a legacy of the paranoid
culture deliniated by writers of Pynchon's generation. Technology and information,
in the worlds of
Gravity's Rainbow and
Grafik Dynamo, each can inflict its own violence on the
texture of everyday life, but each is also capable of evolving. As cultures
differentiate themselves internally through contact with an enemy in wartime, so,
too, can one medium come more fully into its own when a new medium appears. This
intermedial encounter is enacted in the
Dynamo when
the texts Armstrong had written take on new meanings through contact with the
unforeseen images:
As I was working with these themes I found
myself adding references to things that seemed more current, like evangelicals,
lobbyists and apocalypse, and started to pull in other concerns, not usually
associated with comics or hard-boiled crime novels, such as existential freedom
& metaphysical structures like extra-temporal essence. These things started
to feed back on each other so that all of a sudden I was discovering
implications that philosophical states were being influenced by these
mysterious machines, or that powerful non-specific figures were motivated by
the desire to have outre religious experiences. So that's how the material
evolved in the beginning. When it started to run against the influx of images I
was happy to see that these associations became even more complex. [Armstrong 2005b]
As the example of Gravity's Rainbow shows, past
literary practices have worked similarly, not in the genres of comics
and crime fictions, but with these genres to get at the shape of the
techno-culture. The “funnies”, purportedly written for children, are like
more recent computer games and popular entertainments generally: they are ways
that people learn to live with technological violence. (Transferred to the video
or computer game screen, people also learn to work, as if work were “play”,
within highly structured, desensitized desktop environments.)
II.
The best account I've read of the interaction between comics and technology (and
the battle within comics between text and narrative, sound and dialogue, image and
word) is in print but remains, as yet, at the time of this publication,
unpublished.
For the past few days, the manuscript on my coffee table has been a memoir in
novel form by Phillip Wohlstetter; working title:
Valparaiso. Going from the screen to the page,
in
media res and literally between media, I have reached Wohlstetter's
narrative of the military takeover of Chile on September 11, 1973. Is it so
strange that, under fire, Wohlstetter's narrator should enter into a digression
about, of all things, the art of comics?
I wonder if the people who drew comic books were vets. Sound bubbles with
bold capitals and exclamation points don't exactly reproduce the noises or
explosions to which they allude, but they do capture their importance –
their constant and imposing presence – by offering them equal space with
dialogue or narrative, and I will follow their lead for a page. . .
TING-TING!
WROOKATOMBA!
POP! POP! TAKKA-TIK-TAKKA!
WHOMP! WHOMP!
VROOM! VROOM! VROOM!
TING-TING!-TING!
WROOKATOMOBAKKABOOM!
TING! TING!
WHAKAWHAKAWHAKTHUMP! WHUP!
[Wohlstetter -, 200]
In his own fashion Wohlstetter, like Armstrong and Tippett, draws on the
comic-strip genre even as he reflects on a national tragedy experienced at first
hand. With no democratic leaders emerging at this moment to defend the Chilean
government, with a personal will to resist the usurpers but no clear political
agenda to follow, Wohlstetter (or his narrative persona) follows the lead of comic
artists. The list that starts on manuscript page 200 turns into an all-over blast
on page 201, filling the left- to the right-hand margin by the same sounds,
repeated over and over (with an occasional “
POK!…
” here and there a “
WHUP! WHUP!. . .” and at least one good old-fashioned “
RATA-TAT-TAAT!!
”). Thereafter, Wohlstetter's account of the coup continues as conventional
reportage, or rather, a report of a halting record-in-progress:
“I am standing here in Santiago, Chile, a corner across from La Moneda
palace,” says a man in tweeds, “the office of President Salvador
Allende.” He is talking into a cassette recorder. I didn't notice his
arrival. “I'm looking at the smoke and flames — ” Click. “Damn,” he
says. He flips the cassette to the blank side. “I'm standing here in
Santiago,” he says, but this time he stops, turning in alarm with the
rest of us toward the drone of incoming jet engines. [Wohlstetter -, 188]
We are here, in front of
La Moneda palace, with a
narrator who will soon be running to escape the flames. Or rather, we might
imagine ourselves in a photograph, a famous one (reproduced in the Wohlstetter
manuscript) that shows a few civilians taking cover (but now running) under a
billboard advertising Schick razors:
“That one hit the roof,” says someone. Meaning it didn't hit us. The
planes draw away. I can feel in the crowd of onlookers a kind of collective
exhalation, an unwinding in the gut, or maybe that's just me. “Close
shave,” says Fedora. He nods at the billboard atop our kiosk. It touts
the chromium edge of the newest Schick razor blade. [Wohlstetter -, 188]
The contrast between Wohlstetter's narrative and the dynamic presentation by
Armstrong and Tippett is instructive: In Grafik
Dynamo!, there's no narrator around to say, “it didn't hit us”; no
need, no reason, to establish a sense of place when the reader inhabits all places
at once and is always “here,” safe at home, secure in an office, processing
images on a screen.
It's a “close shave”, for sure, between a moment of lasting historical change
and its contemporary representation. For a richly diverse, extended period in
North American literary history, it seemed that the novel could still register
political changes by noting down the expressive changes in contemporary languages,
not least the professional languages that were evolving along with a technological
society. An account of the whaling industry in Moby
Dick, the development of the German-American “Rocket State” in
Gravity's Rainbow, and the establishment of a
neo-liberal autocracy in Valparaiso, could each fill
in for the emergence of an entire world-system. The quest for domination, by Ahab,
by Blicero, by Robert Coover's comedian character, Richard Nixon, might have been
strange accounts of a single, overreaching personality. But these narratives were
able, nonetheless, to point a direction through the culture at large, to uncover a
living aspiration toward world-domination within current arrangements.
The ever open, ever ambiguous literary representation can hold an audience, it
seems, only so long as the world-system itself remains incomplete, and only so
long as a sense of wonder exists in readers. Once a world-system takes hold in
reality (as in Pinochet's Chile), its representation in literature largely ceases.
If the short-lived socialist state under Salvator Allende was unique, conforming
neither to Marxist nor Maoist precepts, the counter-revolution and authoritarian
capitalism that followed would become all too familiar. Although outright military
force was usually avoided, the innovations of the U.S. backed Pinochet government
were to be picked up and further developed by the Thatcher, Deng, Reagan, Yeltsin
administrations and their successors. The revolutionary impulses of the Sixties
and early Seventies, it was discovered, could be reigned in not through military
force alone, but with a more ambitious, more subtle, and long-term expansion of
the military into the social and the economic spheres (even as the military itself
would be reconstructed on a corporate model: soldiers to be replaced, largely, by
security forces, military engagements overseas decided in days or weeks, from the
air, and other innovations described by the Mexican philosopher and sociologist,
Manuel DeLanda, in War in the Age of Intelligent
Machines).
In North America, world fictions such as Gravity's
Rainbow, The Public Burning, JR, and The Names ceased to
appear as the world-system established itself nearly everywhere, peacefully in
some times and places, violently in Chile. “The generation of '73,”
Wohlstetter's generation, the generation of Robert Coover, Don DeLillo, William
Gaddis, and Thomas Pynchon, produced narratives that were as open to innovation,
formally, as they sought to be expansive in subject matter. The embrace, by these
writers, of comic forms can be seen in retrospect to have been more scandalous
than the obscenities and broken sexual taboos, a generation or two earlier, in the
work of James Joyce, D.H. Lawrence, Henry Miller, and Anais Nin. This latest,
arguably the last, generation of world-epical story-tellers in the United States
felt an attraction to the more popular, generic appeal of the comic strip, its
ability to range from the joke to issues of cosmic importance, and its deflation
of the high seriousness of modernist fiction between the World Wars. Knowing that
the world was changed forever by technological violence, post-modern,
post-World-War II writers in North America still went out into the
world, they researched their themes, at times exhaustively, seeking power in
knowledge. These writers sought not just literary materials, but also political
alternatives in the countries where they traveled: Allende's Chile, Castro's Cuba,
Mao's China, America itself during the colonial, revolutionary, and antebellum
eras. (Pynchon, for decades, was rumored to be walking the length of the
Pennsylvania/Maryland border in preparation for Mason and
Dixon, published in 1997).
In the restless tradition of Herman Melville, Henry Adams, Henry James, and
Gertrude Stein, U.S. writers of the generation of '73 often felt at home only
among a community of expatriates.
Despite their cosmopolitanism, these writers worked, for the most part, alone. And
their medium remained, for the most part, print: the medium of memory, the medium
of language heard in the head, not in the ears.
Comics, the successor to the print novel, were “what World War
II brought back to America. Dulled eardrums”
[
Wohlstetter -, 200].
III.
These days, cassettes don't break, journalists don't need to go looking – and
authors don't hold onto manuscripts very long – after events. But can there be
said to be an “after”, or a “before”, to be experienced while watching
the graphic, dynamic images collected by Armstrong and Tippett? There are many
“nexts,” frequent “meanwhiles,”
“buts,”
“slowlies,”
“suddenlies,” and other signifiers of conflict and change. Repetitions and
recurrences abound, contexts multiply but there is never a design-governing
principle that would allow a narrative or an argument to develop. We still have,
frequently, the drone of jet planes and the sounds of life during wartime. The
unprecedented and generalized violence of the past century shows no signs of
abating, in the new one. History, as such, is nowhere present in the Dynamo – not if we mean, by history, a narrative to be
told about the rise and fall of nations, the formation and re-formation of
imperial powers, the flows, blockages, collective aspirations, and economic
segregation of populations. Neither is history present, significantly, in much
fiction in the U.S. since the Eighties. Writers in print, during the past twenty
or thirty years, have generally reigned in the previous decade's worldly
ambitions. Authors have learned to limit themselves to the domestic sphere, its
intellectual range contained by the incorporation of writers into academic
Programs, its subjective power channeled into the demands of possessive sexuality
and commercial culture.
The comic, it would seem, is the only medium left with a mandate for presenting
society whole, in broad canvas.
As if answering to the changed media environment, comics, and its upscale cousin
the “graphic novel,” use tensions between image and text as a way to present
society's changes and continuing contradictions. This tendency was pushed further,
through the Eighties and Nineties in the U.S. and Europe, by electronic media in
which text itself could change. Experiments in hypertext and interactive fiction,
for example, brought blocks of text together using hyperlinked words or phrases,
producing alternative trajectories through a narrative and in principle, avoiding
closure. Yet the programming, that made possible such freedom, was still in the
hands of the author, so that the claim of readerly freedom proved largely
illusory, like much else in a culture based on consumer “choice”. Such work
purports not to represent the culture but to enact it.
THE WORK WAS A WONDER OF MONOTONY! [
Armstrong 2005a]
The requirement of the new, post-war, post-imperial order is not simply that all
work, including works of art, should change, but that change (like the
accumulation of capital) needs to be endless.
By contrast, the work on our screen at this moment, a kind of designwriting
practiced by Armstrong and facilitated by Tippett, is quite stable, formally and
in its use of technology. The images change, to be sure, and the scripts
themselves might appear one time as a caption, the next as a thought balloon. But
the words themselves – what Armstrong actually wrote – are the same each time, and
the simple, unchanging three-panel structure makes it possible for multiple
meanings to be glimpsed in each sentence and sentence fragment, for associations
to occur, complexities to develop.
Or not.
The creators seem to have realized (and their curators recognize) that stability,
at the level of the medium, actually creates more opportunities than so-called
“reader-interaction” for freedom in reception:
Together, images and sentence fragments create a strange, dislocated sense and
expectation in the reader. Sometimes at complete odds with each other;
sometimes in complete synch, they are always moving, always changing. There is
no reader-interaction with the work, no way to navigate it by pointing and
clicking. Despite this, the work forces the viewer to engage in mental
construction. . .[Greene and Thorington 2006, 30]
The use of the word “force”, though overstated, is symptomatic and reinforces
the military context behind so much of our contemporary rhetoric of
“freedom”. So often, in the open networks of new liberal media culture, the
user's freedom becomes a compulsion to continue:
. . .to forge
a link between text and images. . . [Greene and Thorington 2006, 31]
To “forge”: the combination of any two elements (even if only mentally)
implies a kind of violence:
. . .between thought balloons and
sentence fragments, to find a connection between frames, to find a story; or to
simply submit to the discontinuity and occasional moments of perfect or seeming
sense. [Greene and Thorington 2006, 31]
Submission to the given, finally, is the condition of narrative in the new media,
the infrastructure supporting a new democracy, sort of:
. .
.of the net, by the net, for the net. [Greene and Thorington 2006, 31]
Now that technologies facilitate the viewing of atrocities, deaths, events that
occur at every instant worldwide, the call of narrative is no longer to locate
such events in our own lives. What is required, rather, is a space where events
can be at once received and held at a distance. Texts can be written, not as
commentary or analysis, but as affective outbursts, capable of combining but only
randomly, never through authorial purpose or intention.
NOTHING NEW. [Armstrong 2005a]
A condition of narrative in the new media ecology is that nothing, no alteration
to the social or political order, can be allowed to happen, ever. That doesn't
mean that things don't change, but when change is endless, when
dynamism and innovation are requirements rather than exceptions, the arts of
story-telling suffer. The narratives going on, online in the world at any given
moment, can be ours without touching us, courtesy of the Grafik Dynamo! No other instrument performs so well, as
the networked computer, the removal from the world of sequence, consequence,
argument, and affect.
Or rather, affects are everywhere, but never in “us,” the reader/viewers.
Still, as nature abhors a vacuum, minds (those accustomed to reading novels,
watching films and TV, and listening to radio) cannot live without narrative – and
so we respond to narrative's absence by imagining stories of our own. I indulged
the impulse “to engage in mental construction”
[
Greene and Thorington 2006, 31] on the day when I happened to clip those two
Dynamo scripts about someone who “would fight
me” and someone else, or maybe the same man (why not?) who was trembling.
This happened to be the day that Eliot Spitzer resigned as Governor of New York
State, hoisted by his own petard when a Federal wiretap recorded his calls to an
escort service. A coincidence? Maybe, maybe not – but suddenly the line I'd been
noticing for weeks, concerning the man who is about to “lose everything”,
puts that other line about the prostitute with “startling news” in a kind of
perspective. Meaning begins to accumulate.
Or not.
I know that the texts were written before Spitzer became a headline. In the mind
of the author, Kate Armstrong, these sentences can have had nothing to do with
Spitzer, but that's the story I, the reader, happened to be following, offline in
the news, those days.
The same caption will appear under different images (human, animal, machinic,
organic). First the cartoon monkey, then the banana, can be seen speaking the same
line. These particular image-captures are part of a poster having to do with
Barack Obama, as it happens: the Democratic Party primary campaign was still under
way. Around this time, Tuesday 4 June 2008 (the day of caucuses in Vermont, Rhode
Island, Texas, and Ohio), I also caught a glimpse of a T-Shirt, “Hot for
Hillary”.
As it happens.
We can be sure that events are happening, unreported and unavailable to the
dynamic of Web capture. This knowlege, somehow, is comforting. But not once, not
ever, is there more than an accidental connection between one affective moment and
another. Narrative is kept, literally, out of the picture.
“There's affect everywhere” — emotion, pathos, psychological involvement. The
scripts, capitalized and presented often as exclamations, might be said to combine
the spare diction and thematic expansiveness associated with the classical
tradition of the Sublime. The word turns up, I notice, in at least two scripts:
There's the man who's “clothed in sublime richness.” The crowd, a frequent
appearance in the Dynamo whose collective agency is
more consequential than any individual's, is said to be “struck, as one, by the
sublime mystery.”
But even if the word itself never appeared, Armstrong's scripts would still be
sublime in their frequent concern precisely with what is not said.
Even as the images depict what cannot have happened (not to us), we are made to
sense, through combinations of image and text, those places where language has
reached its limit.
The Sublime is what Romantic poets felt in the presence of nature. It's what Henry
Adams felt confronting the first electronic Dynamo, whose powers he felt would
usurp those previously associated with sex and religion. It's why Frank Zappa
can't say where she's coming from when he's just met a girl named Dynamo Hum. It's
the sum total of all expression at any moment on the LiveJournal, as captured and
presented by the
Grafik Dynamo!
DISREGARD HIS LOFTY VISION! [Armstrong 2005a]
IV.
The Grafik Dynamo! graphic – where have I seen this
before?
I remember seeing something like it the other day on Travelocity, when I was
booking a flight (Chicago to Vancouver, Washington, where Kate Armstrong would be
presenting her work, then on to Berlin). There has to be a deeper visual history,
I know. Without exactly remembering, I have seen something similar on show
posters, in prints, on television, and sure enough an Internet search brings me
back to those earlier media. The curvilinear title – it descends from Buffalo Bill
Cody posters from the 19th Century, that's where Armstrong and Tippett got the
lettering, the drop shadow, gradient red range. It seems to have been a popular
choice for monster movies, and the Grafik Dynamo!
certainly channels plenty of modern monstrosities, mutants, impossible
permutations: those animals with diminishing atomic weight, those mysterious
things of science, the undisclosed doings, “meanwhile”, at the fumigation
center and so forth.
The graphic appears also in shows on Vaudeville and in Nashville, Tennessee.
Oh and there it is, the most famous of all probably: the Ben Hur movie poster,
foremost among dozens of adventure film titles that I found on
GRAPHICINTENETSIT.COM.
Where will I see it, once I've lived with it in my browser window for some several
weeks?
In the city of Kiev, en route to somewhere else, I saw it in Cyrillic on a
billboard advertising Индиана Джонс (Indiana Jones). Ben Hur and its filmic tradition have gone global. In
Kiev, one can see almost the same curvature as can be seen in the
Armstrong/Tippett title, the same lettering in black and orange.
The curvature, I only just now notice when I glance at my bookshelf, is found also
in the second word in Scott McCloud's book title, Understanding Comics – the very book a designer friend lent me, so
that I might write knowledgeably about Grafik Dynamo!
The oversized critical-essay-as-comic-book (offering “a ring-side seat for the
battle of words and pictures”) went with me on the plane to Croatia, then to
Kiev, back briefly to Chicago and then to Vancouver, Washington, where I returned
the book to the friend who lent it to me, so that he could return it, in turn, to
his library at the University of Minnesota, Duluth. I was given, in turn, Phillip
Wohlstetter's novel-in-manuscript, to read on the plane home.
The Wohlstetter manuscript was passed to me by Rob Wittig at the 2008 meeting of
the Electronic Literature Organization in Vancouver, Washington. Kate Armstrong,
whom I met there for the second time in four years, followed up by kindly sending
me details on the production of Grafik Dynamo!
Networks, and occasionally narratives, are capable also of forming
around a work of electronic literature. There is a practice of
everyday life for many who create e-lit involving travel, conferencing,
collaboration and attempts at co-production, to keep the work circulating in
multiple media. As McCloud's wording suggests, the medial encounter between words
and images can be itself part of a “battle”, but there is also the
possibility of opening new cognitive possibilities in the spaces “between”
media. In comics, there are mysteries within each panel – the head that comes off
the torso with a tip of the hat, is the example McCloud provides. And then the hat
that comes off the head.
It's heady stuff, for sure, what the panel can convey with its lexicon of lines,
symbols, icons, and images in combination with words: the way a line, by itself,
can convey either “fear, anxiety, and madness,” or
“calm, reason, and introspection”; either warmth and
gentleness, savagery and deadliness, or a rational, conservative disposition [
McCloud 1994, 88]; the way that the sketched expression on a
face produces the same expression in ours, while reading – even as, in life, we
react to others unconsciously with our own expression – and all this happens
prior to verbal communication.
All that happens within a panel, or inside the panel created when one living body
comes into visual range of another – as a friend or enemy, depending on what's
communicated pheremonally and muscularly, in a face-off.
But, for McCloud, “It's the power of closure between
panels” that is most interesting.
We already know that comics asks the mind to work as a sort of
in-betweener – filling in the gaps between panels as an
animator might – but I believe there's still more to it
than that. [McCloud 1994, 88]
I think so, too. Within a panel, as McCloud notes, “We can
only convey information visually”
[
McCloud 1994, 88]: word balloons and transliterations (CHOP!
CHOP! CHOP!) can only
suggest sounds (but suggestion usually is
enough); the squiggly lines above a boiling pot can be all it takes to locate us
in a kitchen, where we know something about smells. The same squiggles above a
pile of garbage, locate us in an altogether different setting, stimulating several
senses at once.
Still, strictly speaking, the visual is the only sense in use, in us, when
reading.
But between panels, none of our senses are
required at all. Which is why all of our senses are engaged!
[McCloud 1994, 89]
The total engagement – Arthur Rimbaud would have said the “derangement” or
unruliness – of sense experience. Le dereglement des tous les
sense: this too, is a characteristic of the Sublime, the aesthetic of
disruption, the aesthetic of war (in contrast to the Beautiful, which has more to
do with sensual life and loves). McCloud has zeroed in on the right aesthetic, for
recognizing and realizing the potential of his own “invisible art” of comics.
But the engagement, to the point of disorganizing, the senses is not,
in itself, the full story: the liminal space between frames is all on the side of
perception, not communication – and you do not have art without a movement from
one to the other, perception, communication, and back, continually. What engages
the senses, necessarily, is operative: it makes something happen in
our minds, but pre-reflectively, and in a way that cannot be communicated to
another mind (except by force, even if it's the genial force of a smile in one
person conveying a smile in the other).
Perception works, in aesthetics as in cognition, precisely because it
is kept offscreen (in comics) and out of consciousness (in face-to-face
encounters). When perceptions are fully engaged, this is of course a powerful
experience – hence the power of the Sublime in aesthetics, and the highly evolved
perceptual power that each person possesses, and has possessed since before the
emergence of rational thought. But that power, which necessarily blocks conscious
awareness, is only a stage in the development of an artform. The completion comes
with reflection, and communication – and for this we need precisely a medium that
reduces sense experience, which can be conveyed not directly (like
light, sound, and touch) but indirectly, as when we grasp a
meaning.
The medium that remains best suited to such communications, as far as I can tell,
is the printed word.
The skilled use of this medium, even in the age of the word's technological
obsolescence, is what distinguishes critical comics by McCloud and the graphic
sublime of the Grafik Dynamo!
McCloud's work is not criticism, and Armstrong/Tippett's work, as I have argued,
is not narrative. But these works have the virtue of letting us know, sensually,
what it is we're missing – in an era that systematically denies the development of
critical and narrative experience.