For example, you wrote a great blog post and Neha wrote a poem “in” the space of the weblog, a form within a form within a form all supported by assembled code (is a poem in a weblog read differently than a poem in a paper journal?)supported by electron spin. Both of you were able to “manipulate” the theater, to shape the outcome at many levels (in the making). Now consider the “theater” where you watch a movie, the outcome of which you can’t change (as in The Lord of the Rings), although the meanings may change. (Remember how OJ changes that section of “Kugelmass” where OJ Simpson is mentioned?) Isn’t the entire experience of the movie shaped at many levels, the seats, the lights along the ceiling corners? And won’t that experience change yet again by the DVD?

Concentrating then on story space, this is akin to vantage point in looking at a space within a frame. The focus point as well (the window only) cannot avoid the peripheral interferance, though the interface is only with the image within that space. Standing in the dark, the focus on the image within the window space indeed is different than when daylight surrounds the viewer. But does the image change as well? I suppose it does–immersion, relationship, becomes important if one is aware of it.