Transparency and Materiality: The Struggle

Loss Pequeno Glazier tells us about the struggle between transparency and materiality of both print poetry and electronic literature in “Between the Academy and a Hard Drive.” This struggle is in part the recognition that writers have been dealing with for years: how much of the meaning of our writing are we getting across, and how much of the physical text itself adds or detracts from this? While this has always been a struggle for traditional poets and traditional means of poetry (or rather, pen and paper), this struggle between the materiality and transparency is even greater for electronic media. Since this is a relatively new medium in the history of the text, and the realm of possibilities with this medium are seemingly impossible as technology continues to advance, it is important to realize a really great point that Glazier makes: “Innovative practice has pioneered not only new media but also new ways of perceiving through a given medium, a practice that has localized art not as a way of representing but as a way of making.” (173)

What Glazier means in this quote is that in new mediums (like electronic literature), the reason they are considered innovative is because they create new ways of looking at the world, and not just simply understanding things and interpreting them the way that you always have. This is especially true with today’s electronic literature. While some online poetry or animated texts are very cut-and-dry with little room for interpreting things and understanding them in a new way, others are different. Some can stretch your brain and cause you to struggle with it, and when you’re done with that text, you walk away completely confused. Just because you’re completely confused, however, does not mean that you’ve stopped thinking about it. Suddenly, a light will go on inside your mind, and you will not only understand what the author has been trying to say to you, but you will think to yourself, “Wow, I never thought about it like that!”

This has happened in history with written texts. In the earlier days, I’m sure most people would have been completely confused with the way Shakespeare’s sonnets were placed on a page. The development of the novel in the eighteenth century brought innovative ways of moral instruction and entertainment in one revolutionary text. Today, writers are having the same struggle with online stories and poems. They are met with resistance, but this is only because many do not understand the innovation behind what they are trying to do.

In my own readings and writings this semester, I too have struggled with transparency and the materiality. Many of the things I’ve read for this class this semester have caused me to stretch my brain and look at things differently, and many things I’ve read this semester have caused me to struggle with the materiality of the text itself. In my own animations, while I don’t think I could ever consider them to be truly innovative, that struggle itself [between materiality and transparency] has caused me to think in different terms that what I have been before I animated. Every choice I make in my work has ramifications, and do I want my viewer/reader to be hung up on the technical things I have done, or do I not want them to notice those things at all and instead grasp a deep meaning behind it? While there is really no answer to this (each work is different and will have individual answers), it is interesting to consider as I move towards the final animation projects. What do I want to convey? Transparency, materiality, or perhaps a combination of both? How can I find this balance between the two?