For Tuesday (9/5)

We’ve been thinking and talking about reading paper texts versus digital texts and about the various experiences and affordances of each.  Rather than just thinking about texts as objects for readers to consume, let’s start thinking about digital texts as media for readers to use or re-make.  We’ll use the hypothesis tool to explore these possibilities. (Here’s a quick how-to on adding links, images, and videos to your annotations.)

I’ve created two new instances of the Diaz and Levine poems.  For Tuesday, I want you to create 4 new inter-textual annotations and 3 new visual annotations on these new 2.0 versions of the poem pages.

  1. Your 4 inter-textual annotations should connect highlighted words or phrases in the poem to texts/pages outside of the poem page.  Before you start linking via hypothesis – – think about the purpose of your linking.  What kind of context are you trying to create for the reader?  How will your link make the poem more interesting for the reader?  How will it help the reader to understand the poem more fully?  Will your inter-text annotation help the reader to ask new questions or see new things in the poem?  (For instance, knowing what words mean is important.  But, linking to dictionary definitions of words doesn’t seem like a particularly creative or inspiring addition to the poem.)
  2. Your 3 visual annotations can include images or video.  Again, think about what these visual annotations will do for the reader.  (Linking a picture of a hummingbird to the word “hummingbird” probably won’t help readers a whole lot.)  What kind of relation do you have in mind for the visual/textual connection?  How will your visual annotation pose new questions about the poem to readers?  How will your visual annotation encourage readers to see new dimensions to the poem?

Perhaps the best way to think about this kind of annotating is thusly: you are creating a palimpsest to accompany the poem, an addition that builds from the original text but that carries readers along new paths.  Perhaps there are other, better ways to think about deforming the poems . . .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *