Interactive Hypertexts vs. “Personal” AI Chatbots

Alayna Brown

AI-generated narratives and human-made hypertexts like Luminous Airplanes and My Body invite readers to interact, only hypertexts can successfully convey authentic emotion and intentionality. Using links in hypertext literature allows authors to guide readers through complex, emotionally charged narratives, taking them to different points in the story that may be more important to their point of view. Yet AI-generated responses lack the depth, journey, and coherence necessary for meaningful storytelling.

In Luminous Airplanes Paul La Farge uses links to give the reader insight, backstory, or even a side quest within the protagonist’s memories. Diversions as such give the reader more context or unexpected insights. These links that trail you around the novel create a richer understanding of the protagonist’s life. The more readers explore, the more apparent the novel’s themes become— in the case of Luminous Airplanes those themes are loss and the complexity of memory. One use of a link in La Farges Luminous Airplanes occurs in the Chapter A Year-Round Springlike Climate the narrator was talking of his need to be in the city and then states, “I wanted to live in the apartment until someone dismantled me and carried me off.” (pg 2 of 4 paragraph 2) (bold is the linked part). This link leaves the reader guessing what will come next, although the line seems a bit sad the link leads the reader to a photo and some context around him moving in with friends (The End of a Murphy Bed, page 1)

Getting the readers to interact with the links simulates exploring one’s memories, making the novel more than just a story; it becomes an introspective experience. When deciding which link to follow, many readers focus on certain themes or memories that resonate with them, making the experience personalized.

With the text, My Body is an even more interactive experience. At first, I myself was confused about how to navigate the story, but I then learned to navigate the pages you must click on different parts of the illustrated body. Most if not all parts of this novel are non-chronological. It is a tour of Shelley Jackson’s body and mind, symbolizing that identity and memory are not linear but rather a patchwork. Each link in My Body connects to a personal anecdote or a bodily reflection, contributing to a mosaic of Jackson’s identity. By clicking from one body part to another, the reader develops a holistic and fragmented understanding of her life experiences and self-perception. Reflecting the human experience of memory, where connections are often associative rather than linear. I first clicked on the tattoos “body part” and Shelley stated “I have twenty-eight tattoos, of which two are visible. On my right arm, over my triceps, I have a black ampersand, about one and a half inches high.” Learning a little about Jackson’s tattoos made me among other readers wonder what the meaning behind all her tattoos may be. Clicking the link Black Ampersand took me to a memory of her in grade school. Links among hypertexts can be confusing but have caused me to engage and want to understand a story better.

Now where does this stand in the world of AI? Hypertexts use pre-determined links that guide readers through carefully crafted narrative pathways. Yet AI chatbots generate responses dynamically. Hypertexts provide a defined structure even if it’s nonlinear and chaotic, whereas chatbots may offer more unpredictable paths that possibly don’t make sense and unconsciously align at all, resulting in potentially disjointed or less cohesive narratives. Hypertext authors like La Farge and Jackson thoroughly designed the links in their stories to control how information and themes are revealed. In contrast, AI chatbots lack intentional curation, making their generated narratives feel more shallow or aimless.

In summary, the use of links in Luminous Airplanes and My Body provides a highly intentional, interactive structure that enhances reader agency, immersion, and layered understanding. Links allow these stories to mirror the complexities of memory and identity, making them well-suited to the non-linear, fragmented nature of hypertext, layering the story and allowing the reader to empathize in their way with it. This interactivity slightly aligns with AI chatbots’ potential for “personalized” storytelling, but hypertexts maintain a more controlled, purpose-driven narrative experience, lending them greater thematic depth and coherence.

Massage the Ideals of Human Evolution

By: Alayna Brown

In The Medium is the Massage, McLuhan delivers a groundbreaking argument that shifts focus from content to the mediums we use to convey that content. This suggests that the medium shapes human experience and, consequently, the network of society. He states, “Our time is a time for crossing barriers, for erasing old categories—for probing around” (Page 10 Medium is the Massage). Humans are evolving and everything around us will evolve with us in a manner to better promote growth of one’s conscience. One key term McLuhan uses is “massage,” hinting that media impact how we perceive and interact with the world by actively “massaging” our senses and consciousness rather than skimming over the surface with a direct message. Another is his concept of a “global village,” foreseeing that electronic media would connect people across distances, forming an interconnected social experience. McLuhan’s argument contests readers by engaging them visually and spatially in his text, sharing meaning through design, images, and non-linear structure. This approach reflects his argument that the medium concerns understanding, as the reader must engage with his ideas conceptually and physically.

While McLuhan celebrates the integration and transformative nature of electronic media, Sven Birkerts in Into the Electronic Millennium takes a more cautionary perspective, focusing on the downsides of moving away from traditional print media. Birkerts worries that electronic media erodes deep, contemplative reading and the connection to history, arguing that the electronic era stimulates superficial and fragmented understanding. If he were to counter McLuhan by proclaiming that the “massage” McLuhan refers to is not inherently positive and could be weakening our capacity for introspection and distort our understanding of reality.

I tend to align more with McLuhan’s perspective. Birkerts’s concerns about how we are shifting away from deep reading are valid, yet McLuhan’s insights are more so adaptable to our current technological landscape. Birkerts’ nostalgia for print risks idolizing the past, overlooking the likely potential for electronic media and its ability to foster new forms of creativity, learning, and a different kind of connection. McLuhan’s vision embraces the inevitability of change and opens up possibilities for how we might positively harness the “massage” of this digital age.

Blog #2

In the introduction to the first two chapters of the Gutenberg Elegies, Sven Birkerts takes it upon himself to discuss how digital media is currently changing the way we read, understand, and think. Birkerts is worried that this outrageous shift from print to digital is hurting and inhibiting our ability to read intensely and think critically. He praises the print era (constantly stating how it allows us to feel and show empathy), particularly the time of Gutenberg’s printing press, he goes on to make remarks on how it encourages focused and immersive reading. “The Gutenberg press made possible the mass production of books, which meant that texts could be read in their entirety and at the reader’s own pace, encouraging a level of concentration and immersion that was previously unattainable.” (quick summary of Birkerts main idea). In this remark, Birkerts emphasizes how the invention of the printing press revolutionized reading by allowing a more focused and comprehensive engagement with texts while contrasting this deep, mesmeric reading experience with the fragmented reading habits that are associated with digital media.
Birkerts vouches that print media, its physical pages and straightforward layout, guides us to the ability to dive deeply into texts and truly engages the reader with them. Conversely, he negatively considers digital texts, and how their constant notifications and need for attention, ultimately interrupt our thought process and emotional focus, leading to a less understanding and broken-up reading experience.
Bringing my own reading habits forth, I can most definitely relate to Birkerts’s concerns. Growing up, I loved the feel of physical books and the idea of being able to keep the books I read, the ability to be able to make notes in the margin made the reading experience feel more whole, and annotating and rereading my books helped me understand on a deeper level, emphasize with the characters, and understand many concepts and words better. This fits Birkerts’s idea that print media encourages deep engagement. Although I also use digital media a lot now, for school, work, and my own personal brain stimulation with apps such as TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, and many others, and while I do get distracted more easily, I also enjoy the convenience of technology and the instant access to a very wide range of information. This represents a different side of the story — technology or digital media can be useful in ways that print can’t always match or reach.
What’s Next for Birkerts? I see that Birkerts will delve deeper and give an extensive review into how digital media affects our habits, thinking, and emotional habits. He might go on to also explore how these everchanging reading habits affect our understanding of certain concepts and how we interact with the world.
What Could Strengthen His Argument? To convince me more and possibly get me to advocate for Birkerts side, he should present how digital and print media could collaborate. If Birkerts can demonstrate that certain digital tools (prime example, the interweb, and news) can strengthen traditional reading rather than replace it, his argument might be more compelling. He should also consider how new and more extensive types of reading in the “electronic age” might offer a wider variety of kinds of intellectual growth.
My personal reading experience supports some of Birkerts’s points. For example, there are times when I find it harder to focus deeply and understand certain things when I read online. Some forms of media can be distracting and in a format that is hard to understand. Nonetheless, I also notice that (some) digital media brings us new benefits, like as I stated previously easy access to a wide variety of information and many interactive elements such as calling, facetiming, or texting long-distance friends, family, and partners. This suggests that although Birkerts’s concerns have their own validity, there should also be a place for technology and digital media in the aspect of enhancing our literacy.
In summary, Birkerts’s Gutenberg Elegies brings important points to light about how digital media negatively impacts our reading and thinking. Yet my personal experiences show how digital media can both challenge and benefit our cognitive and emotional abilities. Birkerts should strengthen his argument by reconsidering and further exploring how digital and print media can enhance and complement each other.

Graff’s idea of “hidden intellectualism” and Berry’s argument for literacy.

Although many people view reading in an electronic age as unnecessary or useless, The Gutenberg Elegies author Sven Birkerts believes that a decline in reading habits can and will create a dysfunctional, less empathetic, and uneducated society. Above all Birkerts emphasizes this problem with urgency, stating constant exposure to technology provides digital stimuli and affects our ability to concentrate deeply, ultimately leading to perfunctory and superficial engagement with literature.

Gerald Graff argues that intellectualism is not limited to traditional academic subjects. Graff suggests that people can become intellectually engaged in non-educational or non-academic subjects such as pop culture, sports, and certain hobbies. Non-academic subjects engage a certain part of the brain releasing hormones that keep us motivated and increase our cognitive ability, which is beneficial in academic settings. Graff believes that certain “hidden” forms of intellectualism can aid in improving academic skills if we understand, recognize, and use them in education.

Berry takes a much broader view of literacy, accentuating particular understandings and critical thinking about the world, not just simple reading and writing. He proceeds to emphasize that he is concerned with how traditional education often overlooks many practical skills and affects real-world knowledge, advocating for a balance between feasible experience and academic learning.

Graff and Berry both challenge precarious views of intellectualism and literacy. Graff represents how intellectual engagement can sprout from various interests. Whereas Berry provides urgency to the idea of integrating practical skills into education and academic learning. With both ideas together, they suggest that intellectual and literacy skills can be prevalent in many forms beyond traditional education.

Am I a hidden intellectual? I’d say I see myself in Graff’s view of hidden intellectualism. For example, I tend to take an interest in media such as news, music, video games, and film. To understand certain contents like that it takes strategy and problem-solving skills as well as a certain level of understanding which is not commonly recognized in a traditional academic scenario.

Berry’s view resonates with me as well. I’ve found that many practical skills, such as teamwork, problem-solving, and budgeting, hold the same amount of importance as what we learn in an educational setting. This shows Berry’s idea of literacy should include not only academic skills but real-world skills.

Graff and Berry both advocate for an immense perspective on intellectualism and literacy. Graff targets non-academic interests and how they can be intellectually beneficial, while Berry emphasizes that combining academic learning with practical skills sets up a more focused and understanding future for one. Both propose the idea to bring to fruition a more inclusive approach to education.

In summary, Graff and Berry encourage us to rethink the idea of what it means to be literate and an intellectual. Both show that diversity in skills and knowledge can and will strengthen our academic and everyday lives.