Humanity: The Key to Literacy

Preface:

The validity of the digital realm seems to come into question more frequently than would be expected in our modern society. Multimedia literature is discredited by critics and social media interactions are ruled invalid. In a society that values literacy, we often overlook that an important key to literacy is humanity. Literacy is very human and without an understanding of humanity, we cannot be fully literate. Interactions are crucial to developing a theory of mind that helps us relate to each other. Without interactions, we cannot comprehend and we cannot be literate. The problem arises when we have people discrediting the interactions and literacy that are purely digital in format. When we remove all merit from these literary contributions, we are also stripping some of our population of their literacy. The interactions and literature that are considered “multimedia” should not be viewed as less important than their more “traditional” counterparts.

This essay is a stitched together monstrosity of my first essay and third essays, whom I dearly loved but were severely incomplete on their own. My first essay was narrow-minded and had much room for personal and academic growth. My third essay was broader and did not fully expand on the importance of interactions that come from social media. Both essays have been interwoven to create this piece. I revised much of my original essay, removing my personal narrative which was important for its original submission but not necessarily prudent to this project. I maintained my quotes and conversation between Piper and Birkerts, but limited my conversation with Murray as I did not find it as crucial to the development of this argument. I am very happy about the revision work I did combining the two previous essays. Even though they were two separate papers with two very different views, they have come together and shown a remarkable personal and academic growth.

My original mindset was more akin to Birkerts perceived narrowmindedness than I cared to admit. Upon re-reading my initial essay, I was equal parts amused and horrified at what I had written. I was able to harness the irony in my agreement with Birkerts after a semester of disdain for anything he wrote. My third paper had a completely different composition in terms of argument than my original essay. The original was harsh, like Birkerts writing style, but my third paper engaged the reader in more conversation (which is what I had thought I’d done well in my first essay!).

This semester was a very important semester for me. It was my first one back to college after a leave of absence. I feel like I have accomplished a great deal with my writing this semester and these two original projects culminating into my final should reflect my growth. I have continued to keep revision in general on my “To-Do” list. As someone who enjoys the process of writing, I never much cared for the revision process. Revision seemed like unnecessary messy work and I preferred to spend my time writing new things. I have come to learn this semester that revision doesn’t only clarify the work, but enhances what has been written. I will continue to work on my revision strategies as I continue throughout my college career. I am very grateful for all this semester has afforded me to do with regards to my writing and advancing my academic career. I hope to continue improving on my writing throughout the rest of my time at Washington College.

End Preface.

________________________________________________________________

The ability to speak, read, and write is what makes humans unique. We invented words; we invented writing and reading. We also determined the qualifications that works must have in order to be considered literature. Additionally, over the course of human history we have evolved what it means to be literate. However, one condition of literacy that has remained steadfast is the necessity to understand and empathize with others. Without the ability to relate to and understand humanity, literacy cannot be developed. As our culture delves deeper into the uncharted abyss that is the digital realm, how is literacy being transformed? Literature is pioneering the unknown and a new genre called “multimedia literature” is emerging. The term multimedia literature is a contradiction to authors like Sven Birkerts who vehemently oppose the changes to established literature. According to some critics, the face of literature and literacy are changing and this is cause for alarm. Then again, has literacy really been changing? The development of one’s theory of mind can occur through social media platforms and multimedia literature contains the same elements that are found in traditional print, qualifying both platforms as contributing to and being literacy, respectively.

Literacy has always been an experience. Comprised of both oral and written cultures, literacy began with storytelling. Reading became an essential component of literature when writing became less specialized and more modernized with the invention of the printing press. Whether done in private or in a social setting, reading provides an experience that is unparalleled. Readers are transported from their current surroundings and exist for a few moments as a bystander in another world. However, there are some of us who have struggled with developing a full comprehension of humanity and therefore are unable to develop literacy traditionally. So then, what becomes of those who have struggled with our literacy? The experience that is associated with reading can be more difficult to obtain and, as an upsetting result, not as profound. The traditional printed literature that still dominates our culture[1] is not as universal, certainly not as accessible, as we have been lead to believe. Multimedia literature bridges the gap for many who are caught between desiring an experience and not being able to achieve one. The experience, the ability for a reader to connect with a text through interaction, is crucial to creating a personal foundation of literacy. For many, it is the experience that continues to fuel the desire to read. Ironically, the complex elements of multimedia literature can actually simplify the reading process and enhance the experience for many readers.

“Theory of mind” is an academic term that acknowledges the active mental state of others – understanding that a complex system of beliefs, thoughts, knowledge, intents, and desires lurk beyond the visible surface. Many psychologists argue that theory of mind begins to develop in early childhood and a thoroughly developed theory of mind can only be achieved through direct socialization. The social interactions that develop literacy are not always direct in the traditional sense. Interactions that occur between people through screens (i.e., social media) are just as direct as traditional face-to-face interactions[2]. Literacy is the ability to relate to and express the human experience through a thoroughly developed theory of mind and relies heavily upon the interactions between a reader and a writer through the text. A good writer understands that his audience will most likely have a different set of beliefs than he does. A good reader, likewise, understands that the writer’s theory of mind may vary greatly compared to theirs. As long as there are interactions that are developing one’s theory of mind, literacy is attainable. Literacy is achieved when a writer is able to express and a reader is able to relate to the human experience.

The development of oneself has the ability to enhance or hinder literacy. If we are stunted in our human development, we cannot be fully literate. It is often said that good writers are readers, but the question of “What makes a good reader?” is rarely, if ever, raised. A good reader can relate to the human experience because they have a thoroughly developed theory of mind that is formed through interactions. A reader who has experienced interactions with others will be more able to comprehend a text. Interactions allow us to perceive the world from another person’s point of view. With interaction comes empathy, and without this tool literacy is impossible. The same is true for the writer. A good writer is a reader, but a good writer is also a conversationalist. Much of the human experience occurs through interaction with others and without socialization an author’s work can severely restrict the engagement of the reader. In the same way multimedia literature creates an experience for those of us who are unable to connect with print, social media (sites like Facebook and Twitter) has opened a new world of communication[3]. For those who grapple with traditional interactions, social media is the perfect medium. The interactions that occur between people through social media may not be direct in the traditional sense, and many would argue that they are too indirect to be valid[4], but they are still valid interactions that are occurring daily.

An example of limited social interactions on personal literacy impacting a writer’s ability to converse is the case of Sven Birkerts. His formative years have negatively impacted his theory of mind[5] and therefore his writings. Since he was not able to completely develop his understanding of the human experience through social interactions, his writing lacks a much needed depth. As a result of his limited theory of mind, his writing can come across as uninviting. Technology was not as advanced when Birkerts was an adolescent, so he did not have the advantages of social media. However, he also did not seek to interact with others regarding the topic of literacy until his college years. While he is not completely at fault for his isolation, it did influence his writing style. Birkerts writes as if he is standing behind a podium and shouting his opinions. He does not know how to engage his readers in a conversation, nor does he encourage other viewpoints. The lack of social interactions for Birkerts has impacted his theory of mind, his ability to comprehend the human experience, and his empathy, which in turn makes his writing style off-putting.

To Birkerts, everything electronic is automatically discredited as literature. The digital world has no structure and there are too many distractions. We often find ourselves playing where we were once reading. There is no conceivable way could we can be playing and reading simultaneously, right? On the contrary, playing and reading actually fit together. As Andrew Piper explained in his essay “By the Numbers” featured in his collection Book Was There: Reading in Electronic Times, human beings are no strangers to playing with our literature. The invention of our alphabet was, in a sense, play. We play with our words and we play with our books. Play is a natural part of the learning process and so it must also be natural in the case of literature. While there are some who try adamantly to keep the two separate and in completely different corners of the world, overlap is bound to happen.

The benefit to multimedia literature, as Piper also explained, is that “… Digital texts are never just there. They are called forth through computation and interaction, whether by a human or a machine. This is what makes them dynamic, not static objects. It is this feature that marks the single strongest dividing line between the nature of books and that of their electronic counterparts.” (Piper, 132) All literature, not just multimedia literature, depends on interaction. However, a distinction in multimedia literature is that some interactions can alter the role of reader and author. The line between these once defined individuals is blurred beyond recognition. The relationship between the reader and the text exceeds a surface level of merely processing information and forms a deeper connection.

Birkerts statement that literature of value is only found in print form is enhanced by his argument that a major drawback of the digital realm is that it is exceedingly difficult to navigate. The digital world can function as a black hole and trap unsuspecting readers. “The point is that these technologies are not used in instrumentally isolated ways. Rather, they create a community of users and a complexly self-reinforcing culture of expectations. This culture, this environment — how well we know it — becomes ever more difficult to step away from; and it has various socially coercive implications.” (“The Room and the Elephant”, paragraph 26) This is evident in the multitudes of communities that have formed online. For many, the ability to connect with
other people on levels that reach beyond the surface is afforded through “groups” on social media sites like Facebook[6].

I do agree with Birkerts that multimedia literature can be overwhelming. The endless opportunities in a multimedia text can be daunting. For readers who prefer linear plots, there is a deep sense of unsettlement that arises when the control of a story is passed from author to reader. There is comfort in print knowing that the author controls where the reader will end and how they will get there. Nevertheless, what Birkerts doesn’t account for in his tirade against multimedia literature are people who have struggled with literacy in print form for their entire lives. The chance for them to experience the same love of reading that he has found in the form of print is given to them in the form of multimedia. There is nothing unnatural about playing when we read. There is nothing impure about literary moments coming in the form of interactions with a screen. Janet Murray, another multimedia literacy activist, argues that the “death” of the book, which Birkerts eulogizes, is not imminent and that the digital technologies he fears are simply the “children” of the print media[7]. Piper also argues in that regard that multimedia literature is simply an evolution – akin to the invention of our own alphabet. Print was the new medium at one time in history and it both fascinated and terrified people who were used to the oral tradition of literature just like the technology of our time fascinates and terrifies people like Birkerts.

Complete disregard for the multimedia genre and the dismissal of any merit found in forms of literature other than print not only discredits the literature, but the literacy of people who are the best readers when they play. Multimedia literature contains many of the same elements found in print text. There are plots – including an introduction, climax, and resolution (the basic pieces of a story). According to Oxford Dictionaries, literature must have “lasting merit”. The ability for literature to last depends on the reader. Without an active and engaged reader, literature (in print or multimedia form) does not move. Unfortunately, a reader who does not feel engaged with what they are reading will often struggle and the lasting merit of the print could then be called into question. If the requirement that literature must be “written” (in the traditional sense) was removed from Oxford’s definition, then multimedia literature could fit the definition. The development of a reader, likewise, can occur through traditional direct interactions or those found through online social media sites and those interactions are just as effective in developing a person’s theory of mind.

Literacy is human. Without literacy there is no way to document the human experience, but without experience there is no literacy. Literacy is, and should be, social and a developed theory of mind for both writers and readers is necessary to convey and relate to the human experience. The social interactions that are necessary to developing literacy transcend the physical world and enter the digital realm. Whether we are interacting in the traditional sense of the word “direct” or in the sense that has come to dominate the social media sphere, we are interacting. Print is the literature form of the “direct” interactions. Multimedia literature and interactions through technology do not render print obsolete. The platform does not hinder the formation of one’s theory of mind and literacy can be achieved through multimedia text and in interactions through social media.

_______________________________________________________________

Footnotes:

[1] Sweney, Mark. “Printed Book Sales Rise for First Time in Four Years as Ebooks Decline.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 2016. Web. 8 Dec. 2016.

[2] Fischer, Eileen, and A. Rebecca Reuber. “Social Interaction via New Social Media: (How) Can Interactions on Twitter Affect Effectual Thinking and Behavior?” Journal of Business Venturing 26.1 (2011): 1-18. Web.

[3] “The Evolution of Communication.” The New Media Consortium. N.p., 2007. Web. 10 Dec. 2016.

[4] McWilliams, James. “Saving the Self in the Age of the Selfie.” The American Scholar: Saving the Self in the Age of the Selfie – James McWilliams. The American Scholar, 29 Feb. 2016. Web. 1 Dec. 2016.

[5] Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies: The Fate of Reading in an Electronic Age. Pbk. ed. New York: Faber and Faber, 2006.

[6] Namsu Park, Kerk F. Kee, and Sebastián Valenzuela. “Being Immersed in Social Networking Environment: Facebook Groups, Uses and Gratifications, and Social Outcomes”. CyberPsychology & Behavior. (2009), 12.6: 729-733. Web.

[7]Murray, Janet Horowitz. Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. New York: Free, 1997. Print.
_______________________________________________________________

Bibliography:

Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies: The Fate of Reading in an Electronic Age. Pbk. ed. New York: Faber and Faber, 2006.

Fischer, Eileen, and A. Rebecca Reuber. “Social Interaction via New Social Media: (How) Can Interactions on Twitter Affect Effectual Thinking and Behavior?” Journal of Business Venturing 26.1 (2011): 1-18. Web.

McWilliams, James. “Saving the Self in the Age of the Selfie.” The American Scholar: Saving the Self in the Age of the Selfie – James McWilliams. The American Scholar, 29 Feb. 2016. Web. 1 Dec. 2016.

Murray, Janet Horowitz. Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. New York: Free, 1997. Print.

Namsu Park, Kerk F. Kee, and Sebastián Valenzuela. “Being Immersed in Social Networking Environment: Facebook Groups, Uses and Gratifications, and Social Outcomes”. CyberPsychology & Behavior. (2009), 12.6: 729-733. Web.

Sweney, Mark. “Printed Book Sales Rise for First Time in Four Years as Ebooks Decline.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 2016. Web. 8 Dec. 2016.

“The Evolution of Communication.” The New Media Consortium. N.p., 2007. Web. 10 Dec. 2016.

Final Project Proposal

For my final project, I plan to revise and combine my first writing project, “The Depth of Ink: The Layers of ‘Social Literacy’” and my third writing project, “Nancy Drew and the Mystery of Multimedia Literature”, that were both centered on defining literacy. I have chosen to revisit the first project, which focused on my personal definition of literacy, after writing my third project which had me coming to terms with whether or not there were differences in literacy in multimedia versus print form. For my third project, I interviewed my sister whose literacy was developed through multimedia (very contradicting to my own experience). For the first project, I focused on literacy in the sense of the connection between an author and a reader. Literacy, in my opinion, depended on the ability for the author and the reader to connect socially through text. Without the ability to interact socially (and thus developing a theory of mind), neither an author nor a reader could be completely literate. In my third project, I had to come to terms with the fact that my sister, who has struggled with social interactions due to Asperger’s Syndrome, was literate without having a completely developed theory of mind. Her literacy came through the ability to interact with multimedia texts in a way that she could not have thoroughly done through print. My third project had me rethinking my claim that theory of mind was essential to achieving literacy. Theory of mind may be necessary in traditional print, but in multimedia literature the reader takes on multiple roles (in some cases becoming the author) and literacy is still attainable without direct social interactions. I have also noticed that my initial aversion to Sven Birkerts has undergone a slight – not radical – shift. There are key points in his argument that I have found agreeable. I would like to revisit my first project and revise it with the aid of my third project and, my new found comrade, Birkerts.

The keywords for my third project will be intellect, narrative, and coming to terms. Intellect (or intellectualism/intellectual prose) is the ability to reason and understand objectively abstract or academic theories. In my second writing project, I discussed the intellectual Elizabeth Lavenza Frankenstein who is regarded merely as a secondary character. “‘Although educated with Victor, Elizabeth is limited in the ways she can further her education and develop her interests in academics. When Victor leaves Geneva to start the creation process on his second monster, Shelley writes that “Elizabeth approved of the reasons of [his] departure, and only regretted that she had not the same opportunities of enlarging her experience and cultivating her understanding.’ (Shelley 164)” While education is not intellect, without an education it can be exceedingly more difficult to understand abstract objectives, especially in the academic world. Narrative is an account of, often personal, events that helps to evoke pathos (personal credibility) in an argument. “The reading I did in late boyhood and early adolescence was passionate and private, carried on at high heat. When I went to my room and opened a book, it was to seal myself off as fully as possible in another place,” (pg. 37) is one of Birkerts most influential quotes from his narratives in The Gutenberg Elegies. Here, the reader is introduced to a young Birkerts who enjoyed the experience of reading in private (which, we find out, was because of the perception of reading in his house.) Lastly, coming to terms is when a writer interprets the opinions of other writers. Coming to terms is predominantly featured in counterarguments. In my third project I came to terms with elements of Birkerts’s argument. “I do agree with Birkerts that multimedia literature can be overwhelming. The endless opportunities in a multimedia text can be daunting. For readers who prefer linear plots, there is a deep unsettlement that arises when the control of a story is passed from author to reader. There is comfort in print knowing that the author controls where the reader will end and how they will get there.” For my final project I plan to focus on coming to terms, both with my new found agreement with Birkerts and the understanding of my sister’s literacy that was developed through multimedia. I have learned that coming to terms is not a negative mark in the writer’s column of pros and cons, but actually an important tool in developing empathy and a theory of mind. I used to believe that coming to terms with another person’s argument meant that your view was wrong, but now I see it as an opportunity to grow as a writer and as a person.

For this final project, I will be extensively focusing on my writing style and specifically targeting the language I use. I would like to leave my passive voice as far behind me as possible. When writing, I now notice that I slip into the passive more than I ever thought before. This revelation has made me self-conscious about my writing style, which I once thought was dignified. I have learned that the passive voice can negatively impact pathos and that narratives can be less effective when written in the passive voice. I am going to revise my final paper to be as concise as possible. I have found several online tools, like OWL Purdue (https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/owlprint/539/) that will help me in editing for passive voice. 

I am hoping that my final project will expand the discussion of what it means to be literate and developing literacy in the digital age, including what defines “social” in a world where interactions are occurring between people through screens.

Nancy Drew and the Mystery of Multimedia Literature

Preface:

Literature is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as “written works, especially those considered of superior or lasting artistic merit”. This traditional definition discredits any merit from the emerging field of multimedia literature. There is a line between literature and media and according to the Oxford definition, there is no bridge. What, then, becomes of traditional literature that becomes media? Is all merit stripped away once the printed form is removed? Piper and Murray would argue that multimedia literature enhances the experience for the reader and literacy depends on experience. Alternatively, Birkerts argues that when literature is taken from its natural form, literacy ceases and multimedia is merely a game. In the distinctive case of Nancy Drew, multimedia has enhanced the literature experience for many and has added to the legacy of the girl detective. I believe in my paper that I moderate a conversation between the three authors (Piper, Murray, and Birkerts) and thoroughly use the text of Nancy Drew books and games to discuss what literary merit is and how it can transcend print. I would have liked to developed my sister’s view more in depth, but time did not permit. I am hoping that if I return to this for the final project that I can do a justice to the wonderful interview she gave me.

I pledge my word of honor that I have abided by the Washington College Honor Code while completing this assignment.

______Rachel A. West____________  

Reading is an experience. Whether done in private or in a social setting, reading provides an experience that is unparalleled. Transported from their current surroundings, readers exist for a few moments as a bystander in another world, in a story. But what about those who have struggled with literacy? The experience that we associate with reading traditional print can certainly be more difficult to obtain and, as an upsetting result, not as profound. The traditional printed literature that still dominates our culture is not as universal, not as accessible, as we have been lead to believe. Multimedia literature bridges the gap for many who are caught between desiring an experience and not being able to achieve one. The experience, the ability for a reader to connect with a text through interaction, is crucial to creating a personal foundation of literacy. The complex elements of multimedia literature can simplify the reading process and enhance the experience for many readers.

My younger sister has Asperger’s Syndrome, a condition on the Autism Spectrum that limits the ability of a person to connect socially. Due to the impairment on her social interactions, the act of reading a book does not transport her as it would another reader. She struggled to engage with printed text and for years reading was at the very bottom of her list of “fun ideas”. That was the case until she discovered the Nancy Drew mystery series produced by Her Interactive. The series is comprised of thirty-six games which allow the once bystander reader to become Nancy Drew. My sister was immediately enraptured by this concept of becoming the main character in the story. The first time she played one of these games, she really experienced what it meant to read.
But, she was playing. There is no conceivable way could she be playing and reading simultaneously, right? On the contrary, playing and reading actually fit together. As Andrew Piper explained in his essay “By the Numbers” featured in his collection Book Was There: Reading in Electronic Times, human beings are no strangers to playing with our literature. The invention of our alphabet was, in a sense, play. We play with our words and we play with our books. Play is a natural part of the learning process and so it must also be natural in the case of literature. While there are some who try adamantly to keep the two separate and in completely different corners of the world, overlap – like in the case of Nancy Drew – is bound to happen.

The benefit to multimedia literature, as Piper also explained, is that  “… Digital texts are never just there. They are called forth through computation and interaction, whether by a human or a machine. This is what makes them dynamic, not static objects. It is this feature that marks the single strongest dividing line between the nature of books and that of their electronic counterparts.” (Piper, 132) All literature, not just multimedia literature, depends on interaction. However, a distinction in multimedia literature is that some interactions can alter the role of reader and author. The line between these once defined individuals is blurred beyond recognition. The relationship between the reader and the text exceeds a surface level of merely processing information and forms a deeper connection.

“I feel like I am Nancy Drew, like I solve the mysteries,” my sister said . To my recollection, this was never her reaction to reading the Nancy Drew books. Unlike the classic books which are written in third-person narration, the games immerse the reader and allow them the opportunity to be more than just a bystander. Alternatively, the Nancy Drew games are a first-person based game where the player must control Nancy’s movements, complete puzzles, interview suspects, and explore in order to check items off of a “To Do” list, make notes in Nancy’s diary, and ultimately solve the mystery. The reader must take control of the story and write most of the plot themselves. There are definitive moments when the story moves along at a predetermined pace such as when the reader’s input ceases and the story progresses like a video, but for the majority of the story the reader is making executive decisions to complete the story.

Janet Murray, who for a time developed software to be used when studying foreign languages, said that immersion is the key to literacy. Without total engagement and immersion, it is nearly impossible to learn a foreign language. For my sister, written English was a foreign language. No matter how hard she studied, there were times when she just couldn’t understand what she was reading. The Nancy Drew games have turned her into a reader, encouraged her to read the novels the games are based on, and overall have significantly boosted her literacy. After all, the computer does not strongly oppose everything print represents. The computer “ … is the child of print culture, a result of the five centuries of organized, col­lective inquiry and invention that the printing press made possible,” (Murray, 8) and no where is the relationship between parent print and child computer more evident than in the Nancy Drew franchise. “Cyberdrama” is a form of multimedia literature that merely forwards the reading experience and it does not render print obsolete. The ability of multimedia literature to engage readers on a new levels is what sets it apart from print. The effects of multimedia literature come together to create a reading experience like no other.

With multimedia literature gaining popularity, the fear of print becoming obsolete sounds the alarm for many scholars. For Sven Birkerts, print is comfort. He spent much of his turbulent adolescent years in solitude with his books. Print is similar to a security blanket and the thought that print might eventually be rendered passé causes him great concern. For Birkerts, the idea that literacy can be found in forms other than print is absurd. Print is the only natural form of literature and anything else, especially multimedia literature, is nonsensical. Print media is not wide, but incredibly deep, and the perceived loss of depth in the digital realm greatly distresses him. Birkerts is also highly concerned with the obscured line between the reader and the author in multimedia literature. Traditional print form is very clear in the role of each participant: the author wrote, the reader reads, and there is no room allowed for argument.  

Birkerts statement that literature of value is only found in print form is enhanced by his argument that a major drawback of the digital realm is that it is exceedingly difficult to navigate. The digital world can function as a black hole and trap unsuspecting readers. “The point is that these technologies are not used in instrumentally isolated ways. Rather, they create a community of users and a complexly self-reinforcing culture of expectations. This culture, this environment — how well we know it — becomes ever more difficult to step away from; and it has various socially coercive implications.” (“The Room and the Elephant”, paragraph 26) This is evident in the community that has formed around Nancy Drew fanatics. Where there used to be book clubs, there are now “Game Boards” with FAQs, hints, and walkthroughs; there are videos on Youtube of people playing the games and addressing each other as members of “The Nancy Drew Clue Crew”. This sense of community is a deep allure for my sister. She is able to participate in something greater than herself and she has become a part of a group of literary scholars. My sister can get lost for hours in this world, but it is not as concerning as Birkerts would have us believe.

I do agree with Birkerts that multimedia literature can be overwhelming. The endless opportunities in a multimedia text can be daunting. For readers who prefer linear plots, there is a deep unsettlement that arises when the control of a story is passed from author to reader. There is comfort in print knowing that the author controls where the reader will end and how they will get there. Nevertheless, what Birkerts doesn’t account for in his tirade against multimedia literature are people who have struggled with literacy in print form for their entire lives. The chance for them to experience the same love of reading that he has found in the form of print is given to them in the form of multimedia. There is nothing unnatural about the way my sister reads when she plays. There is nothing impure about her favorite literary moments coming in the form of interactions with a screen. If anything, because of the game series, she has been more open to reading print and has had a stronger desire to do so than ever before. Murray argues that the “death” of the book, which Birkerts eulogizes, is not imminent and that the digital technologies he fears are simply the “children” of the print media. Piper argues that multimedia literature is simply an evolution – akin to our alphabet. Print was the new medium at one time in history and it both fascinated and terrified people who were used to the oral tradition of literature just like the technology of our time fascinates and terrifies people like Birkerts.

So, then, what is literature? According to Oxford Dictionary’s definition it is written work of lasting artistic merit. “Multimedia literature” is just a contradiction according to Oxford. Yet, in the case of the Nancy Drew mystery franchise multimedia literature not only exists and does not contradict itself, but has aided its literary merit. The first Nancy Drew mystery, The Secret of the Old Clock, was published in 1930 and the first Nancy Drew PC adventure series was released almost 70 years later in 1998. The franchise, composed of over 300 books and over 30 games has stood the test of time. Nancy Drew could embody the definition of literature: written works of lasting artistic merit. However, part of her longevity can be credited directly to the branch into multimedia literature, which is not solely written work.

Complete disregard for the multimedia genre and the dismissal of any merit found in forms of literature other than print not only discredits the literature, but the literacy of people who are the best readers when they play. Stripping any literary merit from the Nancy Drew franchise because it branched into the digital realm is absurd. These games are literature. They have a plot including an introduction, climax, and resolution (the basic pieces of a story) and some of them are even based directly off of books in the Nancy Drew series. “Lasting artistic merit” was a stipulation of literature in the previously quoted definition. The ability for literature to last depends on the reader. Without an active and engaged reader, literature (in print or multimedia form) does not move. Unfortunately, a reader who does not feel engaged with what they are reading will often struggle and the lasting merit of the print could then be called into question. If the requirement that literature must be “written” was removed from Oxford’s definition, then Nancy Drew would be the definition of literature due, in great part, to her branch into multimedia.

The validity of multimedia literature depends on the definition of literature and whether or not it can be recognized by critics as a genre. For Birkerts, the question of multimedia literature’s influence on literacy is never raised. There is no argument for literacy gained through multimedia since print is the only legitimate form of literature in his opinion. In spite of his argument against anything technological, Birkerts does raise questions about the experience of readers outside of the safety of print and reading is an experience. If there is an experience of reading that can be found in multimedia, then there should be no question as to its literary merit.

Bibliography

Augarde, A. J. The Oxford Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1981. Print.

Birkerts, Sven. “The Room and the Elephant.” Los Angeles Review of Books. N.p., 7 June 2011. Web. 31 Oct. 2016.

Murray, Janet Horowitz. Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. New York: Free, 1997. Print.

Nancy Drew Sea of Darkness. Computer software. Vers. 6.0. Her Interactive, 2015. Web.

Piper, Andrew. Book Was There: Reading in Electronic Times. Chicago: U of Chicago, 2012. Print.