This just includes some notes (for my benefit and future reference) I took when reading Hazel Smith’s essay, Creative writing and new media. I found two pieces of work (both of which had been referenced in the essay) extremely inaccessible. These are mentioned below.
This extract sums up the incredible scale of what is going to be possible:
Look up Simon Biggs
For gaming influences look up Jason Nelson (beyond the above work), Kate Pullinger, Chris Joseph
Blogs, etc, “…do not require skills in creative writing but can benefit from them, and are making the concept of the author more fluid and ubiquitous.”
Wide and Wildly Branded
The link below will take you to Wide and Wildly Branded (2009) by Jason Nelson.
In one sense I could just be getting overly worked-up about nothing more than categorisation. I do feel, however, that this piece is not really creative writing. To me it is a more general work of art. It involves text, video, sound and animation and so might be better described as a multimedia piece. I just do not see it as “creative writing”.
The Dreamlife of Letters
The link below will take you to The Dreamlife of Letters (1999) by Brian Kim Stefan.
Even with the context provided in the essay I found this very inaccessible. Watching this led to me to reflect on my comments in Part 1 about Art. I am happy to define both of the above pieces as “art”. What interests me much more is how we judge art and how a piece of work is recognised as having significance and value.