I enjoyed reading the blog posts this week, because I've always been curious about other peoples' interactions with Twitter. I never got into the Twitter-sphere, and I think it has something to do with my inability to accurately express myself in 140 characters or less. I was a little surprised with MermaidGhost's response to Zach Whalen's twitter project. I don't think that the Twitter-verse only appreciates bots because they're funny or can quote cult-classic movies. It seems that it sells the audience a little bit short, in my opinion.
However, if that is how the majority of the Twitter-sphere views bots, then it's easy to see how electronic literature isn't taken seriously. Bots, blogging, and computer-based criticism all seem to be viewed skeptically, and I think that adding social media into the mix only adds another level of skepticism.
But, why should we discredit computers or social media? I have more respect for digital media and computer-based criticism this week after working more on my own textual interventions, and reading Stephen Ramsay's explanation of patacomps and pataphysics. It seems there is a world of criticism and creativity that we, as a culture, are throwing to the way-side because we've pigeonholed the computer and social media into having only one function. Even worse? We've pigeonholed ourselves by asserting that digital audiences can't understand or don't care about internet projects, such as Zach Whalen's genius Twitter-bot.
Also enjoyed reading this. :)
ReplyDelete