"The body is a patchwork, though the stitches might not show" well I would certainly hope not.
So she says that "books are designed to keep you reading the next thing until they end". This is not necessarily true, but we tend to keep reading because there is a point to what we are reading. There's a storyline, a plot, or something we're supposed to learn. Hypertext is not like that. Is this what S. Jackson is trying so prove? That by being random, the reader will stop reading? because if so, it's worked. Is it hypertext that's schizophrenic? or is it "Shelly Jackson"? Since schizophrenia is characterized not by a lack of things to say, but by how incoherent it all comes out. I'm not saying that Shelly is incoherent, just that she chose a rather...difficult way of presenting her opinions.
In a way everything here is overanalyzed and second guessing.
"We're not who we say we are. It's pretty evident that whatever we say about ourselves isn't the entire truth. Just like the body in her article, there are parts to everyone, whether it be personalities, hobbies, or the ID she was talking about.
"It's not what we wish it were". Well, if "it" was, we wouldn't be wishing for "it" to turn out different, right? this is pretty similar to the line "We are not who we wish we were". Obviously.
1. Is S. Jackson comparing life and the aspects of it to hypertext? how things aren't really complete, and they aren't what they appear to be?
2. If she had a main idea, what would it be?
3. What's with the depressing phrases at the beginning of each section?
4. Why does she start the article with a confusing paragraph about whomever she may be?
5. What is hypertext to her?
6. Is she just saying that life's a bitch? and to question everything?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete4. I'll admit the first paragraph truely confused the hell out of me. I probably spent about 20 minutes rereading it and wondering what was going on. But there obviously had to be a reason as to why she chose to start the article in such a confusing and weird way. The only reason I could come up with is she probably wanted to try a different tactic. She wanted to draw her readers in by starting the article in a unexpected way. In some way she starts it off as a mystery since we have no clue as to who the writer really is. This mystery is what draws readers in. This mystery keeps the reader hooked until they eventually find the answer they have been seeking.
ReplyDelete‘Just like the body in her article, there are parts to everyone, whether it be personalities, hobbies, or the ID she was talking about.’ What was she talking about? What do you mean, “there are parts to everyone?” Did you finish that thought? DO you mean there are parts to everyone that are patchwork, or that are hidden? Or that every person is literally made from parts?
ReplyDelete