Digital Clay:
Criticism in the Digital Realm

The technology of the computer allows us a new process of composing stories, so the computer and its multiple applications have become a hot topic for literary criticism. But because computer manufacturers change, bandwidth increases, and the operating systems and processors update with every holiday season, the composing capabilities of computer systems changes as rapidly as the technology of each computer accoutrement does. So forget creating a new critical idea each time technology allows, we must focus on the storytelling; the way writers and readers interact in this new medium. We need to critique this interaction, and not the flashy new programs that replace one another every few moths. Commenting on storytelling, Walter Benjamin stated

(t)he storytelling that thrives for a long time in the milieu of work—the rural, the maritime, and the urban— is itself an artisan form of communication, as it were. It is not the object of the story to convey a happening per se, which is the purpose of information; rather, it embeds it in the life of the storyteller in order to pass it on as experience to those listening. It thus bears the marks of the storyteller much as the earthen vessel bears the marks of the potter's hand (Benjamin 92).

Then how does a digital artist leave their handprints in a digital work? To understand and to be able to critique digital works, we need to look at how the way Benjamin's "experience" is passed on in the new form.

The digital can be what the printed cannot; the digital can be fluid, interactive, and multi-media. The form may be different with the digital, but there are still constraints that help to determine how a story is told. Just as the printed word (or hand written word) on paper was a technological advance over rune carving, for example, and the constraints of the paper technology still dictated how a story was told. Runes were once carved in large stones which were set in a public place, most commonly telling stories of genealogical histories that could withstand wind and water for ages. Paper is susceptible to time and weather and cannot be stored outside where the public can read, so the stories of the history of families could no longer be told in the same fashion, and this limit of technology could arguably have helped to relegate Europe's literacy to a few monasteries during a chunk of Europe's history. The digital has one large constraint in that there needs to be a power supply for it to work. One may not be able to take their computer to the lake to relax, like a book, but with better screen resolution, smaller processors, larger power supply in batteries and an expanding wireless network that day may be approaching quickly.

However, with such digital formats as hypertext, the stability of paper based work is challenged. The notion of interaction between writer, reader, and text is displaced with the layering of hypertext. Codes and programming now have to be acknowledged and factored into this interaction. With an additional layer, the "traditional" idea of author is made complex. Digital also makes use of media that the printed cannot, such as audio and visual, that must also be factored into this interaction. A work may have new visuals that are like film and television; are actual clips of film and television; are flash animated works that interact with the reader. The reader now has many more options in how they can read a text, and with the digital interaction, the idea of who the author is becomes even more complex. Yet the "handprints" are still there.

Gaming is digital storytelling as well. All games have a story at the core (even Frogger and Space Invaders have plotlines!) And the authorship of a "game" is extremely complex. There is a collaborative process of creation and programming by the many programmers that create the game, often the marketing team that brings the game to the public, and then the actual player(s) that create a new narrative each time the game is played. But this story is similar to a complex "Create Your Own Adventure" book. There is/are author(s) that write the story, an illustrator that contributes visuals, a publisher that packages the book, and a reader who creates a story based on their choices. Multiple authors have been around forever, from the days of passing down oral stories to team writers for today's sitcoms. The handprints of the authors are there, but with the digital, the reader who becomes another author can see there own handprints as well. When I play video games, my characters often repeat certain moves, not because it furthers the story or the action, but because I (and therefore my characters) simply think it is cool to do.

The form determines how a story is told, and with digital technology a story can be told in new ways, yet it is still a story. The form is multi-media that is layered and like what Baudrillard calls the hyperreal, the simulacrum, in that this form does not seem to be any different in certain respects. When I compose on paper or on the computer screen, I do not get a feeling that there is a difference. Technology changes, but the idea of storytelling is still there and so far the critical theory is the same. I think this medium has not been used to its full potential yet. First the great work will happen, and then the theory will follow.

Works Cited
Benjamin, Walter. "The Storyteller." Illuminations: Essays and Reflections. Trans. Harry Zohn. New York: Harcourt, 1968.