THE WEB ESSAY: EXPLORING ARGUMENTS

NEXT!

Many of the hypertext essays written by writing theorists currently on the web seem to me to be extensions of print conventions, what David Kolb calls "threads of discussion or argument," rather than a new type of writing with a different "texture" (338). I think that this is partly due to the fact that some essays, such as the collaboratively authored piece, "What Matters Who Writes? What Matters Who Responds? Issues of Ownership in the Writing Classroom" and Nancy Kaplan's "E-literacies: The Politexts, Hypertexts, and Other Cultural Formations in the Late Age of Print" are based upon print texts, in these cases, traditional keynote adresses given by Andrea Lunsford and Kaplan respectively. Despite the conversion to hypertext, both pieces pursue rather strong and identifiable linear arguments. While the hypertextual nature of the essays encourages the reader to follow digressions form the main threads, the threads are as obvious as the brightly colored yarn I used in grade school to tie the pages of my reports together. The authors stress linearity through their navigational construct. Most obvious is the "Next" button in "What Matters" which allows the reader "to follow the text nearly as it was delivered." Kaplan's argument threads are more cloaked, but can usually be followed by clicking on a linear teaser with which she often ends a screen, LIKE THIS:

While it is understandable why a prior print version of a hypertext might resemble the linear argumentation in printed texts, what explains the reason why this phenomenon can also be found in essays originally created in hypertext?


Contents Links Reply