valeur heuristique de la litterature numerique

## serge bouchardon


digital literature exists in the wake of things like: - combinatorial lit (oulipo) - constraint lit (idem) - fragment lit (?) - audio/visual lit

literary experiments (-> which implies that the experiment is the first intent, no? could it be that art flourishes on the margin, like the hacker code of paloque berges?)

literary expression: writing, narrative, position of the reader

what has source code writing to offer when it comes to literary creation? (and vice-versa)

the digital only refers to itself (yes, but the digital is inseparable from the act of writing, which then involves a human and therefore necessarily (?) a relationship to other worlds). but also the very first thing is hardware

form and meaning are closely linked (cf. j. rousset, forme et signification, 1966)

the bizarre love triangle of media studies: - technically - semiotically - socially

source code could be a particular modality/mode of text (now i need to define which one!)

mark marino: critical code studies!

“possesses aesthetic properties everything which sets in motion, which makes do (fait faire)”

relationship between literature and communication??

“the interrogative stance can not only stand in what has been done, but also in what can be anticipated, through conception and creation” (epistemological constructivism, hacking, 1983). “the creative moment sets up the conditions to observe a phenomenon”

the digital lit object

halfway between the concrete object that belong in the observation field and the scientific object which has alread-established explanations of the real

the digital lit object is complex: need to explicit these webs of relationships (historical, geographical, means vs. ends, broadcasting techniques); it stands at the frontier of a lot of domains.

in the poetic dimension of technical objects, there is this idea that, as we realize a technical object, new ideas appear and transform the initial project. it is a literature OF the technical apparatus.

is there really a tension between the imperative formal semantics of programming and the cultural forms of writing? writing is an apparatus of externalizing memory and thought, while the program is “a means to certify the future, to eliminate uncertainty and the unlikely in order to bring it back under control, mastery”. (while i don’t see this as a tension), the author says that out of this initial seemingly-impossibility. (closeness of the program, openness of the language)

question of the architectural literature. «<

L’INTERSEMIOTISATION DU LANGUAGE ET DU TEXTE (how these systems of signs interact with each other)

the aesthetic experience can result from the tension between materiality and the revelation of meaning/direction (transcendance). it is a bit like the double-coding that CPB was talking about, but perhaps could be extended by defining (precise/multiple) what materiality and transcendentality; but nonetheless advancing an aesthetics of materiality.

dual-positioning of source code text 1. against text (literary) 2. against text (productive software)

e-lit is at the frontier between print and digital, text and multimedia, litterature and art (??) e-lit is at the frontier surroundable, by authors, researchers, movements, and institutions e-lit is a laboratory, in which the researcher works on samples but those samples could influence the broader world

but it has first and foremost a quadruple dimension (social, technical, semotic and aesthetic)