I'm sorry we haven't had a chance to discuss the reading from Murray. Here are some starting points for deeper reflection. Please give these some thought before our next meeting.
(1) Murray herself points out one risk of indulging in a technological fantasy based on the 23rd-century world of Star Trek--namely, her vision depends on technologies that are a long way from reality. Can you think of other limitations of the Holodeck as a model for the "future of narrative?"
(2) Is the Holodeck in Star Trek (or as Murray describes it) a mass medium? Can anyone in Federation society take part? Does the Holodeck require any knowledge of basic conventions? Does it have something like a literacy?
(3) Murray's model for "narrative" appears to come as much from 19th century novels as from Gene Roddenberry. At one point she refers to the "benign and responsible" effects of 19th century fiction. Are novels in fact always "benign and responsible?" Can you think of any that aren't, or weren't? (Hint: the Marquis de Sade was a 19th century novelist...) Who or what made us think that novels are "benign and responsible?"
(4) Murray famously declares that "all successful storytelling technologies become 'transparent.'" Do you think this is inevitably true? If so, what are the implications of this transparency?
(5) Is the medium of television "transparent," in your experience? Are there any moments at which you become aware of the medium as a medium?
(6) According to Murray, how do "additive" multimedia works differ from those that are "expressive?" What does she mean by "scrapbook multimedia?" How do we get beyond this stage?
(7) Murray describes four properties for interactive media. The work is Procedural, Participatory, Spatial, and Encyclopedic. What do each of these terms mean? Think about the banner ads you built for Assignment 2. Which criteria do they satisfy? Which are not satisfied? What about the work you plan for Assignment 3?
(8) Murray says (p. 89) that our culture lacks a way of judging or understanding "multiform" stories. Do you think this is as true in 2003 as it was when Murray wrote (1997)? If you think we've made progress, point to some specific developments (e.g., movies, Web sites) that indicate this progress. If you think we haven't made progress, think about what it would mean properly to understand multiform storytelling.
