c y b o r g m a n i f e s t o 2 . 0
:: t e c h n o l o g i e s :: h y p e r t e x t
:: m u l t i l i n e a r i t y
One crucial feature of hypertext, as George Landow describes in chapter 1 of "Hypertext 2.0", is the fact that it allows for lexia-to-lexia, string-to-string, many-to-one and one-to-many linking which causes rich hypertext documents to be multilinear. This feature fits with the idea of a fragmented, rather than a unified, self, and especially makes the medium ideal for creating partial alliances or creating multiple connections by virtue of analogy, metaphor or metonymy. A question we could ask ourselves however is: What about linking across differences, or to 'the other we cannot know', as Jacques Derrida puts it in his idea of hospitality?
Although a hypertext docuverse is much more explicit in having multiple authors where not one gets easily foregrounded, and it hypertext offers an excellent tool for collaboration, still the question of authorative control, both in content of lexias and in who puts the links where and why, remains. As Jacques Derrida shows us: any text that has enunciative and authorative powers implies a singular addresser, and any text that does so can be deconstructed (or shown to have a conceptual center after all), making the potential space for the 'other' a problematic thing. Will potentially extremely open hypertext clusters, like for instance the Indymedia project, allow for this Derridean hospitality, or does even there certain concepts govern the structuring of materials?
|t o p||m a p|