hypergogue

The Readerly Text

Barthes argues that most texts are readerly texts. Such texts are associated with classic texts that are presented in a familiar, linear, traditional manner, adhering to the status quo in style and content. Meaning is fixed and pre-determined so that the reader is a site merely to receive information. These texts attempt, through the use of standard representations and dominant signifying practices, to hide any elements that would open up the text to multiple meaning. Readerly texts support the commercialized values of the literary establishment and uphold the view of texts as disposable commodities.

I'm totally down with this paragraph until the last sentence which fills me with horreur.

It strikes me that the web is still filled with readerly texts. Sure, there are comment forms at the bottom of blogs. And we have wikis in a class of their own, crowdsourcing content.

But when Barthes talked about writerly texts, he was talking about multiplicity of meaning not a self-organising, self-censoring approach to a mythical NPOV.

What makes collaboration (on documents) different from consultation/comment is the ability for participants to delete text and take it in different directions. The wiki has the right technology for this but it also has a 'form' and conventions that encourage a certain approach and direction.

And wikis tend to be separated off from the rest of the web on their own sites - a bit like the comments at the bottom of the page.

What I'd like is pages with multiple elements. Say a Read-Only list of facts and data interspersed with wiki-like elements or Waves. Google Wave has the replay feature so you can, in theory, see how an element changes over time. In theory, you could see a multiplicity of approaches and texts. It could be writerly.