to the future

I’m back from my trip to Texas.

The first order of business is to congratulate Joanne Buehler on her acceptance to Trinity College. Congratulations and good luck.

games and the classroom

One issue that keeps coming up as we talk more and more about new media and what to do with it in the classroom is the issue of the nature of the classroom itself. It’s a fun idea, something to throw around. What is it? How is it constructed? What sort of space is it and how much latitude do we have to play with it, especially within American education.

Some might say that the world is a great lecture hall and that all the objects that make it up are things with which to learn, from tadpoles to user interface, and thereby have a useful purpose.

Is the classroom gamelike; that is, does the classroom display characteristics of game. I don’t mean game as in the “frivolous” but games as strictly rules-based situations contrived for a given outcome. Most situations involve some sort of “reward,” a pay off, hence demand strategic thinking to get that reward. We need to get to the elavator before the crowd does, so we finish work a little early and then dash for the hall. Finishing work is the “tactical maneuver.” Strategy is the overall plan.

Does the way people behave in the classroom involve “game-like” approaches, playing for a particular result? If we achieve the result, did someone learn?

games and teaching/oops! learning

One of the hot issues these days is games and education, using games to teach (sort of like using stories to teach, hm, what, narrative?) and teaching with games. Subtle distinctions? Using games to teach and teaching with games. Are these similar statements?

Games are immersive by “nature” (they want us “inside”). Therefore, they encourage virtual spaces that grab and keep you. Games have a power of immersion that teachers would love to capture in the classroom, having students so engrossed in the “moment” of the subject that they just can’t help but leave jazzed and “filled” with so much about Shakespeare that their tongues drip with sonnet honey.

Lots of games exist that are themselves “learning” environments with a specific goal: teaching physics, for example. Yet all games involve environments and codes and surfaces that demand learning or that must be learned. In games we learn because we have to. There are some games that I can’t stand: certain games that are so complex, like Wadjet, that I spend much of the time at the table amazed at my dumbness. I like fast, kinetic games where cards are slapped around and fingers bleed, gladitorial stuff. Yet, as far as PC games go, I immerse myself in the adventures.

We live in these worlds anyway. Is the classroom not just another form of virtuality?

festivals

So, the festival is completed. Ernie Dorling had some nice grit and a strong messages about truth in non-fiction. Colin McEnroe gave a splendid talk on memoir with engaging and sincere discussion, and Professors Hamilton, Brown, and Abbot gave each excellent presentations on query letters, newspaper writing, and poetry. I left Abbot with considerations of my own work in the form and am considering returning to certain works, which have to be built as poetry–the images don’t work in the language of fiction. In that particular compressed language some things go, other things don’t. But I also left the poetry discussion thinking about poetic language as a “found” language, that the language of poetry works at this level. To impress the image we must find a language with which to express it. Thus is a poem a “return” or a “departure” or a “following”?

For a poem like The Wasteland, we must read the poem “in” its “language” and find it, as might archaeologists. Hmm.

on festivals

The writer’s festival put together by Neha and the gang (Susan and other Narratives helpfuls) is going quite smartly. If Jerz or anyone else from SH read this then I urge you to put Ms. Bawa to good work, whatever the smoking policy. She’s a great organizer, has lots of potential as a writer and scholar, and has the steel to get things done.

I’m proud of the people running around Tunxis these days. We have lots of great students heading off and staying around, hopefully for a good long time. They often come back to, those that go, and tell us what we do right, what we do wrong.

Kudos to the presenters, although I feel I ran a little flat. David Pesci was dead on with the process, especially the real work of writing being that of revision. Timmons hit stride with IF, doing an excellent job of taking us through that world of narrative and structure, the great world of maps and configurations of the digital. We also made good friends with Victoria Zackheim, author of The Bone Weaver. She gave a great talk on the development of her novel and was insightful and direct in response to questions.

Looking forward to the next round.

(beyond) text

As I consider hypertext more and more in a global context–writing a story in Storyspace places the tool, concept, and writing process at the center of things. After a writer completes a story in Word, do they have dreams of the “system”?–I ask more and more questions about synthesis and effect.

Where will we be in 5 years? What will I be staring at and touching (clicking?)?What will happen to the weblogs and the “poems that go”? I want to be able to walk into the hypertext and change it from the inside yet make something physical.

the weave of new media

Over at new media land we’re hunting the structure of day by days for New Media 1: Perspectives (Fall 2004 semester), the first course in Tunxis Community College’s New Media Communication program. Perspectives introduces students to the spectrum of media and their traditions and current applications, forms, and combinations. We’re going to paint with a big brush and eat lots of chocolate cake: we’ll cover image and text, screen and book space, film, photography, and story.

And we have a hero, too. Harold. We discovered today that Francis Ford Coppola has a purple crayon too.

inner and outer space

The past and space, memory and presence, are interwoven. Existentially, we are always in the moment yet moving. Existence (the experience of life, of ourselves living) is paradoxical, since time moves continually yet we feel fixed on solid ground. Certain modernist trends (which could be traced back to Copernicus) shake this ground up by insisting on uncertainty, by experimenting with forms, by unsettling the observer; its not hard to do in the 20th century as technology and environments change swiftly. How is this uncertainty, this unsettling dramatized? In Heart of Darkness, Marlow slowly makes his way up, down, through, over (all these descriptions depend on point of view) the water course, he makes certain observationsConrad dramatizing the actionabout his environment, interpreting experience, fixing it, since we cant fix it ourselves. Marlow says:

We were cut off from the comprehension of our surroundings; we glided past like phantoms, wondering and secretly appalled, as sane men would be before an enthusiastic outbreak in a madhouse. We could not understand because we were too far and could not remember, because were traveling in the night of first ages, of those ages that are gone, leaving hardly a signand no memories. (1984)

In In Memoriam, Tennyson struggles with grief. But for Marlow the very conditions of life in the moment have changed. He feels, first of all cut off. But its like hes been cut off from anything in particular. He feels cut from the comprehension of things. Hes signaling a cognitive shift. Solid ground can be described as a metaphor for normality, sanity, reason. You are on solid ground means that you get it or getting close to a solution. But here Marlow glides as a phantom. But what does it mean that hes traveling in the night of first ages? In a way this reads like a wall, a separation from what hes known in his life: purpose, civilization, a normal existence in a modern world, where things make sense, where events, actions, motives, and shapes appear coherent. But in his new situation, similar is narrative disposition to the composers travels in Alejo Carpentiers Los Pasos Perdidos, Marlow moves forward into the past, into the past as a modern man, hence his comprehension of the new (old) world is taxed, perhaps even impossible to understand. But whats the problem with this? Partly, the problem is memory. Memory provides context, anchor, a line from the past and the future: I remember tomorrow as a plan, a concept derived from the habits of yesterday. This is where maps come in. In IF we refer to the map to figure out where we are, what weve already traversed.

In human terms, memory is the the map keeper, the foundation on which the map has been drawn. But as Marlow grows small as he proceeds into the heart of darkness, he has no memories with which to provide context.

The earth seemed unearthly. We are accustomed to look upon the shackled form of a conquered monster, but therethere you could look at a thing monstrous and free. It was unearthly, and the men wereNo, they were not inhuman. Well, you know, that was the worst of itthis suspicion of their not being inhuman. It would come slowly to one. They howled and leaped, and spun, and made horrid faces; but what thrilled you was just the thought of their humanitylike yoursthe thought of your remote kinship with this wild and passionate uproar . . . but if you were man enough youd admit to yourself that there was somewhere in you just the faintest trace of a response to the terrible frankness of that noise, a dim suspicion of there being a meaning in it which you — you so remote from the night of first ages — could comprehend. And why not? The mind of man is capable of anything–because everything is in it, all the past as well as all the future.

The night of first ages is, of course, a figure. The negativity of night is a response, a cultural twitch. Marlow makes lots of these, of course. Nevertheless, the figure transfigures also, and maintains the coherent image with opposing, light. We could claim that darkness simply signals Marlows sense of disconnection with the men, women, and the world hes penetrated, in terms of a distance, a remoteness of relationship, a remoteness of understanding. This is an inner distance. Marlow says that the meaning, the relationship, the ancient sense is somewhere in you. The map never dissolves entirely.

Marlow has been awed by the space hes entered, crushed by the physical enormity of the jungle.

“Going up that river was like traveling back to the earliest beginnings of the world, when vegetation rioted on the earth and the big trees were kings. (1982)

and

Trees, trees, millions of trees, massive, immense, running up high; and at their foot, hugging the bank against the stream, crept the little begrimed steamboat, like a sluggish beetle crawling on the floor of a lofty portico. It made you feel very small, very lost, and yet it was not altogether depressing, that feeling. After all, if you were small, the grimy beetle crawled on — which was just what you wanted it to do. (1983)

The physical description of the jungle and the people in it, Marlows sense of remoteness and size, a distance from himself, a hollowing, signals his reaction to Kurtz:

But the wilderness had found him out early, and had taken on him a terrible vengeance for the fantastic invasion. I think it had whispered to him things about himself which he did not know, things of which he had no conception till he took counsel with this great solitude — and the whisper had proved irresistibly fascinating. It echoed loudly within him because he was hollow at the core. . . . (2001)

Marlow develops his imagery deliberately and subtly. Distance slowly develops into a remoteness, then to a solitude and a hollowness as a response. Hollowness reverberates the loss of the real, the loss of the sense of the individual self, the I of place and space, which gives the map meaning and fixity. Kurtz, he claims, is hollow at the core, but how does this change the meaning of the idea of transcendent time as Marlow moves from the civil present into the barbaric past, his new present time, which is so disturbing? What is, therefore, solid, knowable, fixed in place?

I tried to break the spell — the heavy, mute spell of the wilderness — that seemed to draw him to its pitiless breast by the awakening of forgotten and brutal instincts, by the memory of gratified and monstrous passions. This alone, I was convinced, had driven him out to the edge of the forest, to the bush, towards the gleam of fires, the throb of drums, the drone of weird incantations; this alone had beguiled his unlawful soul beyond the bounds of permitted aspirations. And, don’t you see, the terror of the position was not in being knocked on the head — though I had a very lively sense of that danger, too — but in this, that I had to deal with a being to whom I could not appeal in the name of anything high or low. I had, even like the niggers, to invoke him — himself — his own exalted and incredible degradation. There was nothing either above or below him, and I knew it. He had kicked himself loose of the earth. Confound the man! he had kicked the very earth to pieces. He was alone, and I before him did not know whether I stood on the ground or floated in the air. I’ve been telling you what we said — repeating the phrases we pronounced — but what’s the good? They were common everyday words — the familiar, vague sounds exchanged on every waking day of life. But what of that? They had behind them, to my mind, the terrific suggestiveness of words heard in dreams, of phrases spoken in nightmares. Soul! If anybody ever struggled with a soul, I am the man. And I wasn’t arguing with a lunatic either. Believe me or not, his intelligence was perfectly clear — concentrated, it is true, upon himself with horrible intensity, yet clear; and therein was my only chance — barring, of course, the killing him there and then, which wasn’t so good, on account of unavoidable noise. But his soul was mad. Being alone in the wilderness, it had looked within itself, and, by heavens! I tell you, it had gone mad. I had — for my sins, I suppose — to go through the ordeal of looking into it myself. No eloquence could have been so withering to one’s belief in mankind as his final burst of sincerity. He struggled with himself, too. I saw it — I heard it. I saw the inconceivable mystery of a soul that knew no restraint, no faith, and no fear, yet struggling blindly with itself. (2007)

Theres that phantom imagery againwe glided (1984), a recalling of the passage down, or up, or through. This is a hint that the river is like thought, too. The mind moves like water. In the tale, mental state takes on the state of nature. Wildness is wildness, order order. The outer is the inner, the inner the outer. The map whose edges suggest wilderness or mystery draws, beguiles. Eve dreams of godhood, always, Frankenstein of glory.