Skip Navigation


Literary and Linguistic Computing Advance Access originally published online on March 27, 2006
Literary and Linguistic Computing 2006 21(Supplement 1):87-98; doi:10.1093/llc/fql010
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/suppl_1/87    most recent
fql010v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lindsay, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ALLC and ACH. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

‘When thou tookest the book / To view the scriptures, then I turned the leaves/And Led thine eye.’1 Literary Theory and Hypertext—A Faustian Predicament

Katharine Lindsay

Learning Technologies Group, University of Oxford, UK 2

Correspondence: Katharine Lindsay, Learning Technologies Group, Oxford University Computing Services, 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN UK. E-mail: katharine.lindsay{at}oucs.ox.ac.uk
Advocates of hypertext have proclaimed that it will change the face of the literary world and ultimately the way that we read: the ‘book is dead’ (Douglas, 1994, p. 113). However, these claims are driven more by an euphoria for post-modern theory than by reliable knowledge of human users. This research outlines some of the limitations of hypertext theorizing and, in doing so, promotes experimental evidence over ideology.

This article will convey a resistance to hypertext theorizing by focusing on the issue of studying literature and the hypertextual use of association, or ‘intertextuality’, that has been proffered as the ideal way of reading and interpreting. Although hypertext may have much to offer in terms of aesthetics and pedagogy, this article will argue that the universializing nature of the claims made on its behalf obscure the central issue—how the readers use a hypertext to effectively derive meaning. Firstly, to clarify matters, the events that led to hypertext being considered the Utopian form of textuality will be discussed. Secondly, it will be shown that recent research from a different field of scholarly investigation, namely Cognitive and Computer Science, contends that hypertext is in danger of precluding the experience of reading which depends on structure, guidance and interaction with a stable text. Finally, findings will be put into practice and reasons given for a more constructive model of hypertext that better accounts for what is known about how the readers interact with a literary text.


1 The words of Mephistopheles to Faustus (Marlow, 1986, Doctor Faustus V.ii. pp. 89–91)

2 Research for this article was conducted at the Department of Information Studies, University of Sheffield, UK.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.