Introduction

 

The text that we are going to analyze is a hypertext, called ´´If we even did anything´´ written by Ian Randall Wilson. In order to understand better its structure and the explanation that we are going to give, we must first of all know the meaning of the hypertext and its evolution in a brief introduction dedicated to it.

 

Hypertext most often refers to text on a computer that will lead the user to other, related information on demand. Rather than remaining static like traditional text, hypertext makes possible a dynamic organization of information through links and connections (called hyperlinks). Hypertext can be designed to perform various tasks; for instance when a user "clicks" on it or "hovers" over it, a bubble with a word definition may appear, a web page on a related subject may load or a video clip may run.

 

Etymology

The prefix hyper- (comes from the Greek prefix "υπερ-" and means "over" or "beyond") signifies the overcoming of the old linear constraints of written text. The term "hypertext" is often used where the term hypermedia might seem appropriate. In 1992 Ted Nelson - who coined both terms in 1965 - wrote:

By now the word "hypertext" has become generally accepted for branching and responding text, but the corresponding word "hypermedia," meaning complexes of branching and responding graphics, movies and sound - as well as text - is much less used. Instead they use the strange term "interactive multimedia" - four syllables longer, and not expressing the idea that it extends hypertext. - Nelson, Literary Machines 1992.

The Memex

All major histories of what we now call hypertext start in 1945, when Vannevar Bush wrote an article in The Atlantic Monthly called "As We May Think," about a futuristic device he called a Memex. He described the device as an electromechanical desk linked to an extensive archive of microfilms, able to display books, writings, or any document from a library. The Memex would also be able to create 'trails' of linked and branching sets of pages, combining pages from the published microfilm library with personal annotations or additions captured on a microfilm recorder. Bush's vision was based on extensions of 1945 technology - microfilm recording and retrieval in this case. However, the modern story of hypertext starts with the Memex because "As We May Think" directly influenced and inspired the two American men generally credited with the invention of hypertext, Ted Nelson and Douglas Engelbart.

The invention of hypertext

Ted Nelson coined the words "hypertext" and "hypermedia" in 1965 and worked with Andries van Dam to develop the Hypertext Editing System in 1968 at Brown University. Engelbart had begun working on his NLS system in 1962 at Stanford Research Institute, although delays in obtaining funding, personnel, and equipment meant that its key features were not completed until 1968. In December of that year, Engelbart demonstrated a hypertext interface to the public for the first time, in what has come to be known as "The Mother of All Demos".

Applications

The first hypermedia application was the Aspen Movie Map in 1977. In 1980, Tim Berners-Lee created ENQUIRE, an early hypertext database system somewhat like a wiki. The early 1980s also saw a number of experimental hypertext and hypermedia programs, many of whose features and terminology were later integrated into the Web.

Hypertext and the World Wide Web

In the late 1980s, Berners-Lee, then a scientist at CERN, invented the World Wide Web to meet the demand for automatic information-sharing among scientists working in different universities and institutes all over the world. Early in 1993, the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) at the University of Illinois released the first version of their Mosaic web browser to supplement the two existing web browsers: one that ran only on NeXTSTEP and one that was only minimally user-friendly. After the release of web browsers for both the PC and Macintosh environments, traffic on the World Wide Web quickly exploded from only 500 known web servers in 1993 to over 10,000 in 1994. In 1995, Ward Cunningham made the first wiki available, making the web more hypertextual by adding easy editing, and (within a single wiki) backlinks and limited source tracking. (copyright wikipedia®)

Next we will focus on a deep analysis of the hypertext ´´If we even did anything´´ by Ian Randal Wilson

Since we have done this small introduction, now we will treat the characteristics of this hypertext. ´´If we even did anything´´ is a short story and is constructed under the characteristics of metafictional effects. What we have noticed is that the author often infringes into the narrative by intruding to comment on writing, or involving himself with the characters and giving his opinion, like (´´Learning of her background and interests certainly changed my opinion of Marilyn´´). The writer also employs intertextual references and allusions by examining fictional explanations, (as in the case of the psyche) or incorporating aspects of theory (´´Freud said that actions are overdeterminated´´) and criticism (´´Marilyn needs to have her eyes examined´´).

About the structure

The first and unique image that we can see is located in the home page and supposedly symbolizes a small sculpture in the hand of somebody; and in the top of the picture it is written the name of the hypertext. The background is quite simple, with shortage of filling effects.

Furthermore, we have to mention that this hypertext is divided in 38 parts as far as the thematic, or by the locations which appear or the arguments of each of them. The page is constructed of an intelligent way, because it facilitates to us to read the hypertext in a linear way, from part 1 to part 38 (a column situated in the left part of the page) although it does not have any correlation a text with the other, and a non-linear way, provided by the writer, something that makes the text understandable. Furthermore, in part one the author enlightens that ´´you begin where you choose to begin, in the way you choose to make the beginning: as a first person narrative, as a third person narrative, or in medias res.´´

If we decide to follow the first person narrative we find out that there are no more than three parts associated between them (part 3, part 38 and part 14) but nevertheless there is only one part which is 3 and in case if we ´´are not satisfied with the beginning we have selected´´ the author facilitates us four pathways in part 38, as for example moving on with the narrative of the first person or following the narrative of the third person, the medias res or we could have another try. As we have said above the narrative of the first person ends after three parts. In these parts 3, 38 and 14, the author confesses to us about his old office, his new office and about his missing purse. In part 14, where the first person narrative finishes, the author doesn’t offer us a link to go on, so we had to move back at part 38 to follow the four options related above.

If we choose the third person narrative, which belongs to the argument, we find out something interesting, that the author supplies us with some commentaries and gossips of the people who work there, and no matter what link we choose (of those presented by the writer) we are lead to part 38, where are presented those four options; following the third person narrative we can either go on reading the argument of the story, following an alternative of the story, or supplying us with an explanation of the psyche, understand better Marilyn or her fantasies and the events with her grandmother, or even we can follow the real reason which prompted the story. Throughout all the argument (third person narrative) we have the possibility of returning backward or forward and understanding better the personages just by to facilitate a link to us in relation to them or with the events.

In case if we decide to begin in medias res, a similar thing is happening, as in the third person narrative, but with small changes as far as the argument. This pathway lead us to the part 7 (where the writer describes the escape of the thief) and then to the part 38 (with the four options). Following the medias res , we find out that we are guided for the argument, or for the real reason which prompted the story. We also have to remark that if we choose the reason which prompted the story then we are directed to the argument again, I mean no matter what we have chosen we are guided again the argument.

Another thing which is quite remarkable, is that the writer, in the penultimate part of the argument, tells us ´´If you are satisfied, stop here´´ and if we are not we could go on reading the last part of the argument. An additional thing, is that after reading six parts of the narrative, (the third person narrative) we arrive at part number 20, where the writer suggest us ´´to cut to the finish, go to part 27. If you do, much of what I have to say to you will be missed, the story, as an event, will be completed.´´ What he is trying to say is that if we choose the part 27, we will arrive at the end of history without having some other knowledge about the rest of history, which would be almost nine parts, in comparison with the three parts (if we choose the fastest way). In case if we decide for the fastest way, which is part 27 we will identify only the general things of the story, as for example: when the phone was ringing and Marilyn had to go in the secretary´s workstation, when she was looking for Sally and after she came back she realised that her purse was gone; whereas if we chose the longest part, we are provided with the address of Marilyn, with the conversation with Sally, another conversation with the thief telling her that he is going to prove her that he is not a bad person and also that he  has been in her house. According to what the author said, if we decide for the part 27, we definitely miss the events which complete this story.

With reference to the language, the writer ´´focuses on language as a tool of construction´´ and therefore uses a quite clear and concise language, thus facilitating its reading.

 

First page

Argument

Personages

Space

Conclusion

 

 

Academic year 2008/2009
© a.r.e.a./Dr.Vicente Forés López
© Tirca Mihaela
mitir@alumni.uv.es
Universitat de València Press