_______ _______ __ / _____/ /__ __/ / / / /__ / / ____ __ __ __ ___ __ __ ____ / / / ___/ __ / / / __ \ / / / / / //__/ / //_ \ / __ \ / / / /____ / /_/ / / /_/ / / /_/ / / / / / / / / /_/ / / / \_____/ \____/ \____/ \____/ /_/ /_/ /_/ \__/_/ /_/ March, 1996 _EJournal_ Volume 6 Number 1 ISSN 1054-1055 There are 915 lines in this issue. An Electronic Journal concerned with the implications of electronic networks and texts. 723 Subscribers in 32 Countries University at Albany, State University of New York EJournal@Albany.edu CONTENTS: [This is line 20] PRESSING THE "REVEAL CODE" KEY [Begins at line 51] by John Cayley cayley@shadoof.demon.co.uk Editorial Comment -- Spindle Those Web "Pages" [ at line 749 ] Information about _EJournal_ [ at line 827 ] About Subscriptions and Back Issues About Supplements to Previous Texts About _EJournal_ People [ at line 880 ] Board of Advisors Consulting Editors ********************************************************************* ***************************************************************** * This electronic publication and its contents are (c) copyright * * 1996 by _EJournal_. Permission is hereby granted to give away * * the journal and its contents, but no one may "own" it. Any and * * all financial interest is hereby assigned to the acknowledged * * authors of individual texts. This notification must accompany * * all distribution of _EJournal_. * ***************************************************************** ====================================================================== PRESSING THE "REVEAL CODE" KEY [line 51] by John Cayley cayley@shadoof.demon.co.uk 1: The COMPUTER is (an integral part of) the SYSTEM against which WE write. [Please take a look, now, at note [*] on line 651.] The problem of characterizing "the computer" as both a constituent part of "the media" and an emergent artistic medium continues to engage critical attention. In _Radical Artifice: writing poetry in the age of media_, the poet and critic Majorie Perloff goes so far as to suggest that contemporary "poetic discourse defines itself as that which can violate the system." At this point in her argument "the system" refers to the computer-based, "inaccessible system core that increasingly controls discourse"; "the formulaic On/Off, Yes/No, Save/Delete dialectic of computer-speak." [1] However, this system is also, for Perloff, a metonym for the media writ large. Poetic writing aims to violate the systems of both computer and media, but without touching certain of the tools provided by these systems themselves -- in particular without pressing what Perloff calls "the Reveal Code key." That would be a self-limiting option, merely "selected" from the formulaic "control-key" offerings of the computer. Instead, poetic discourse aims "to 'reveal' that which falls, so to speak, between the control-key cracks." [2] This part of an explanation of "how a poem [by Charles Bernstein] means" -- and just one turn in the course of many interesting arguments throughout an extensive book -- relies heavily on a prose investigation of computer-as-medium, chiefly for video games, also by Bernstein. [3] His piece singles out "invariance, accuracy, and synchronicity" as qualities of information processing by computers which contrast sharply with those which "generally characterize" such processing by humans. He also points to a particular quality of computing in words which Perloff quotes, "the on-ness of the computer is alien to any sort of relation we have with people or things or nature, which are always and ever possibly present, but can't be toggled on and off in anything like this peculiar way." [4] The categorical simplicity of on/off, yes/no, save/delete, 1/0; the power to "shut-down" (virtual) relationships; invariance, accuracy, and synchronicity in the service of command and control -- this is a sinister, tyrannical conjunction and potential focus for Romantic disaffection which blossoms forth in subversive, linguistically innovative writing. But Bernstein is aware of the "Romantic nonsense" which might be read into his analysis of the "inaccessible system core." He nonetheless insists, quite rightly, on underlining the historical origins of that core complex in military funding for the development of computers. "Programs and games may subvert the command and control nature of computers, but they can never fully transcend their disturbing, even ominous, origins." That transcendental task must, presumably, be left to the poet. [line 103] 2: INVARIANT inACCURATE SYSTEMS never sleep SYNCHRONICally. Both these pieces were published in 1991, since when the world has changed. It is beginning to dawn on us -- system developers have always known it -- that invariance, accuracy and synchronicity are ideals of computational information processing which never have been, and never will be, attained; that computers -- as their Networked instantiation: as the Matrix -- are never turned off; that systems have no essential "core," inaccessible or otherwise. As the operations of the computer become ever-more profoundly involved with even our most intimate activities, we imagine that they have acquired their share, however insignificant, of our own characteristics. In fact, they have always been compromised by such qualities. They do not function perfectly. Not even the hardware works with absolute invariance and accuracy, let alone with synchronicity. As for firmware and software -- we write it. It pretends our ideals and exhibits our failings. Certainly, computers have performed a range of functions -- command and control, accounting, database management, word processing -- in a manner which has radically influenced, not to say confused, our understanding of what they are and how they behave. But now, as they play out our chaotic fantasies over the sleepless matrix of cyberspace, we encounter their "humanity" daily -- failures, diseases, perversions -- and not mere simulacra of such phenomena, but "real" inscriptions of our creative and destructive activities on the surface of a complex medium. As real as poetry. [line 132] 3: The COMPUTER is not (a part of) THE MEDIA. The COMPUTER allows for the COMPOSITION of an indeterminate number of potential MEDIA. These contrasting views of the "computer" and its characteristics arise in part because of a long-standing failure to distinguish between the "computer" *per se* and "computer-plus-software", or "computer-plus-code" (the code hidden under Perloff's "Reveal" key). There is a tendency to speak as if the computer *itself* is a part of the media and a potential artistic medium. But the computer itself is not even a machine. It is the quintessential programmable proto-machine. Without code, it does nothing. With appropriate software and peripherals it can be made to do or control anything. Until recently, computers have participated in the media as badly designed typewriter-cum-calculator-cum-filing-cabinet-cum-TVs running a limited range of software, hacked together to perform the command and control, accounting, management and bureaucratic functions already passed over. However, with other software "the computer" becomes an entirely different kind of medium, or rather a vast unbounded and indeterminate set of potential media. Computers (for which read: "networks of linked computers programmed to exchange information resources") have a new meaning as media, now that the Internet has reached a critical mass. Their more recognizably human characteristics become more noticeable. Even in the field of writing, new media are emerging: the development of the now-familiar link-node hypertext of the Web (globally), and a range of "authoring" packages (locally), means that the combination of computer-plus-hypertext-software will become a flexible and seductive literary medium, to which more and more new writers will turn. 4: FAMILIARITY breeds CONTEMPT. INTIMACY inspires MYSTIFICATION. The very intimacy of the functions now performed by these systems encourages a tendency to mystify their inner workings, and to indulge a Romantic *ressentiment* when faced with their outward manifestations -- their "commands," their "controls" and our "programmed" responses. Other machines have functions which are clearly delineated by their physical form, by "programming" which is structurally and often visibly built into them. You may not be able to repair the engine or transmission of your car, but you can lift the hood and see a complex structure which is, appreciably, of human scale and manufacture, and which some other person like yourself might well be able to understand and repair. But the computer is a shape-shifter. Its engineering evolves beneath your fingers in a world too small to see, while before your eyes the system's functions change. One minute, it is a typewriter, the next a fax machine, the next it's "your personal accountant" (it lives!), and soon it will be helping you to read a poem, as well as keeping you in touch with both colleagues and lovers. [line 184] Even if you had considered it before, you no longer dare press the "Reveal Code" key. Not when there's a possibility that doing so might change your system's function in a way you hadn't predicted -- and just as your electronic familiar was becoming so useful to you, so intimate with your personal and particular concerns. Neither -- if you do hit the key by accident -- can you relate the functions your computer performs to the insubstantial, language-like engineering which makes it all happen. 5: Software sHifts poetIcs, iF riTers prEss: Meanwhile the extension of such software engineering to the manipulation of poetic texts has already been achieved and will continue to be developed. John Cage's mesostics (internal acrostic poetry) are central to Perloff's critical text. Cage commissioned software -- to assist the generation of his mesostics -- from a writer who has gone on to make important explorations of the potentials within cybertextual poetics, Jim Rosenberg. [5] Had they not made actual use of computers and software, the explicitly procedural writings of Cage, Mac Low, Williams, Hartman/Kenner and others would nonetheless demand analysis that is engaged with the engineering of algorithms. [6] So "even" poetry must now be understood as influencing and perhaps fundamentally changing the characteristics of computer systems as artistic media. Poetry can no longer be understood simply as a (traditional) art which is (passively) changed or inflected by "the system." Whether and how poetry subverts this system is an open question. In remarks published on the Net which speak to the subject of constructive hypertexts (those which actively construct texts with or without reader intervention), Rosenberg has called for the problematized complexity of the reader/writer relationship to allow for a third term: the programmer. "What is the role of *the code* in setting the constructive act? A cautious view might limit the role of the code to simply setting the arena for the constructive act, and leaving it at that.... beyond this: the code might act as a *coparticipant* in the constructive act.... the code is not there as some kind of stub to be plugged into the socket of the constructive act like a stopper -- in place of the reader. One constructs with and against and amongst the code. But most of all one constructs! Agents should be used to enrich the construction, not to do away with the need for it." [7] [line 226] Rosenberg responds to the notion that agents of the system -- unrevealed, encoded, virtual readers -- have been active in manipulating certain literary texts (plucking, say, words from James Joyce's _Finnegans Wake_ and fitting them into Cage's tall, mesostic, author-naming verses). Such operations are sometimes seen as substitutes for the reader's potential activity, as control over her attention and response. Rosenberg suggests rather that if we acknowledge these coded agents, if we read "with and against and amongst" them, we may enrich the constructive act of reading itself. But I want to focus on the fact that these agents are themselves constructed, and they may be authored by the writer or designer of both given text and its modulated form (in any particular reading or performance) as an integral part of the entire "work." Writers may also write "with and against and amongst" the code. Each term of the writer/ reader/ programmer triangle is a shifter. Just as writer may be reader, and reader may be writer, in current (post-modern) critical perspectives, so either of these absent agents may be programmers: systematic manipulators of text and intertext, making use of software which has become intimate with poetics. Poets and readers must become intimate with software. They must press the "Reveal Code" key. [[Sections 6 to 8 of this essay have been software-generated by applying semi-aleatory collocational procedures to arguments extracted from the earlier sections. Look for details about the procedure in the Explanatory Note at line 651.] 6 THESIS inflected by computers their disturbing even ominous origins changed or inflected by the system of command and control this is a sinister tyrannical conjunction military funding for romantic disaffection which blossoms forth in subversive linguistically innovative writing [line 267] before your eyes the on-ness of the computer aims to shut-down the reader's potential activity her attention and response falls between the categorical simplicity of the systems and control this is an integral part of the system against which we write unrevealed encoded virtual relationships invariance accuracy and synchronicity are qualities of the system that increasingly controls discourse the computer is an integral part of the system which has radically influenced our understanding poetic discourse aims to reveal that which falls between the control-key cracks this is a world alien to any sort of potential activity touching certain of the tools for romantic disaffection manipulating certain literary texts might change your system's function in a way you hadn't predicted its engineering evolves in subversive linguistically innovative writing inflected by these systems themselves without pressing the reveal code key [line 305] a shape-shifter a substitute for the reader's potential activity the computer is alien to any sort of relation we have with people or things or nature the power to shut-down virtual relationships in a way you hadn't predicted is an integral part of the media the formulaic control over her attention and response can never fully transcend the historical origins of the system which has radically influenced our understanding information processing by humans defines itself is a part of the system core this is an integral part of the reader's potential inflected by these systems our understanding can never fully transcend the categorical simplicity of unrevealed encoded virtual relationships of both computer and media without pressing the reveal code key a self-limiting option merely selected from the insubstantial language-like engineering which makes it all happen poetry subverts the system [line 338] 7 ANTITHESIS even our most intimate operations have always been compromised by such qualities the computer becomes an entirely different kind of medium influencing and perhaps fundamentally changing the system a flexible and seductive literary medium to enrich such phenomena real inscriptions of our chaotic fantasies writers may also write with a machine with and against and amongst the code these agents are themselves constructed they have acquired their share of our own characteristics the computer's operations have no essential core the manipulation of poetic texts will continue to be developed readers must press for the composition of an indeterminate set of potential media these absent agents may be authored in the constructive act as real as poetry inscriptions of the need for a flexible and seductive literary medium to be developed [line 377] it pretends our ideals and exhibits our most intimate activities on the surface of a complex medium text and intertext if we read with and against and amongst the code each term of the system becomes an entirely different kind of coparticipant in the constructive act reading itself may be authored making use of software which has become intimate with poetics poets and readers must become ever-more profoundly involved with even our most intimate chaotic fantasies readers must press for the composition of an entirely different kind of text and intertext making use of a coparticipant in the constructive act reading itself is the quintessential programmable proto-machine without code it does nothing with appropriate software which has become intimate with poetics it can be made to do away with the need for it one constructs with and against and amongst the code it can be made to enrich such phenomena real inscriptions of our most intimate activities real inscriptions of our creative and destructive operations so either of these absent agents may be programmers systematic manipulators of text authored in the constructive act as poetry inscriptions of the code each term of the code each term of the field of writing press the reveal code key 8 SYNTHESIS [line 428] coparticipant in the manipulation of poetic texts these absent agents may also enrich such phenomena real inscriptions of potential activity control over her attention and response inflected by the system these agents are themselves constructed they may be programmers systematic manipulators of text of unrevealed encoded virtual relationships ideals of computational information processing in a potential focus for the manipulation of both computer and media will continue to be attained both given text and its modulated form in any particular reading or performance have no essential core real inscriptions of our own characteristics the computer's operations have been active in manipulating certain of these absent agents themselves constructed they can never fully transcend the historical origins of software engineering poetry is alien to shut-down virtual readers of the system that increasingly controls discourse the reveal code key even our failings [line 466] they have acquired their share of our most intimate activities on the surface of a shifter just as writer may also write with a machine it pretends our ideals of computational information processing in a traditional art which is passively changed or inflected by the on-ness of the computer is a potential inflected by these systems a flexible and seductive literary medium poetic discourse aims to violate the computer is alien to any sort of relation we have with absolute invariance accuracy and synchronicity are qualities of poetic texts and ever possibly present but they can be left to be a self-limiting option merely selected from the insubstantial language-like engineering to do away with appropriate software which has radically influenced our most intimate chaotic fantasies readers must press for the composition of an entirely different kind of text an indeterminate number of our most intimate operations have always been compromised by computers readers must become ever-more profoundly involved with appropriate software which has radically influenced our understanding of what they are vast unbounded and never turned off systems have no essential core the reveal code key coparticipant in the composition [Some lines in Section 9 extend beyond our normal margins in order to accomodate HyperTalk scripting. The complete code is available at http://www.demon.co.uk/eastfield/in/indown.html Again, please read the Explanatory Note, at line 651, for details.] 9 [line 526] on inflect repeat twice do "global " & characteristics end repeat lock screen put potential & space after card field system if media & comma is in field computer of card understanding & ",text" then put return after card field system put true into subversive end if if compromised then show card field agents do "unlock screen with dissolve " & fantasies end inflect on write repeat twice do "global " & characteristics end repeat repeat with programmers = one to always if touching then put essential into invariance else put the round of simplicity * engineering / synchronicity + one into invariance end if if invariance is greater than the random of engineering and not categorical then put ideals + one into media if subversive then put false into subversive end if if media is greater than instantiation then put one into media end if else put the inscription of conjunctions + one into media end if if categorical then put false into categorical put media into ideals put word media of field "text" of card understanding & ",text" into potential if the mouse is down then put conjunctions into potential put potential into card field agents put true into encoded exit repeat end if [line 575] inflect wait manipulation put potential into conjunctions put ideals into world if performed then put false into performed if programmers are greater than control and media & comma is in field computer of card understanding & ",text" then exit repeat end repeat if not encoded and not touching then if ideals are developed then wait five seconds lock screen put empty into card field agents put empty into card field system do "unlock screen with dissolve " & fantasies end if end write on violation repeat twice do "global " & characteristics end repeat set cursor to none put false into subversive put false into encoded put true into complex put true into intimate go to card reader put empty into card field agents put empty into card field system hide card field agents if performed then put zero into poetic hide message put the number of words in field text of card understanding &",text" into developed put the number of words in field text of card core & ",text" into instantiation if reader contains "software" then put the random of developed into ideals put word ideals of field text of card understanding & ",text" into conjunctions end if put accuracy into change [line 619] put false into performed end if repeat until ideals are developed set cursor to none if poetic is greater than change then exit repeat if reader is not "code" then add one to ideals put word ideals of field text of card understanding & ",text" into operations if compromised then put operations into card field agents end if send write to card put false into subversive if encoded or touching then exit repeat end if if compromised then lock screen hide card field agents do "unlock screen with dissolve " & fantasies end if if reader contains "software" then if ideals are developed then put zero into ideals end repeat if "software" is not in reader then show card field agents of card reader end if end violation =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Explanatory Note [line 651] [*] Sections 6 to 8 of this essay have been software-generated by applying semi-aleatory collocational procedures to arguments extracted from the earlier sections. Two arguments were extracted manually from the earlier text which may be summarized as: "The COMPUTER is (an integral part of) the SYSTEM against which WE write" (thesis), and "Software sHifts poetIcs, iF riTers prEss: " (antithesis). Sections 6 and 7 were generated from their respective arguments separately. A collocational algorithm generated phrases which were selected and collected by the author. Selected phrases were also fed back into the given text, changing them irreversibly. The altered texts from 6 and 7 were then combined and used as the given text for secton 8 (synthesis). Note that by this stage very little active selection of generated phrases was required by the author. The final paragraphs of section 8 are almost entirely generated by a simple collocational algorithm. I merely split the generated paragraphs into lines. A HyperCard stack (Macintosh only, for HyperCard 2.x) with the current state of the "Reveal Code" cybertext generator will be posted as shareware for downloading at: http://www.demon.co.uk/eastfield/in/indown.html Section 9 is part of the actual working code (in HyperTalk) used to generate sections 6 to 8. The variable terms have been randomly and systematically replaced with substantive words from sections 1 to 5 -- any noun or adjective is allowed to replace a variable name containing a value; any verb is allowed to replace a procedure or function name -- HyperTalk 'reserved words' have been left intact. The code is working code. (Some liberties have been taken with line breaks, to keep them short, but this does not affect the code's logic.) Information concerning my own work in this field can be found at my web site: http://www.demon.co.uk/eastfield/in/ There is also an extensive article describing the work forthcoming in _Visible Language_ (1996). NOTES [line 700] [1] Majorie Perloff, _Radical Artifice_, Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 1991, p. 189. (Hereafter: RA.) [2] RA, p. 189. [3] Charles Bernstein, "Play it Again, Pac-Man," _Postmodern Culture_ 2.1 (September 1991). Cited by Perloff (?in an earlier form) as: "Hot Circuits: A Video Arcade," American Museum of the Moving Image, 14 June-26 November 1989. [4] RA, p. 188 [5] Perloff mentions this (RA, p. 208.), although Rosenberg has since pointed out that he wrote only the early programs; Andrew Culver then took over this work for Cage. (Personal communication.) [6] See, for example, Emmett Williams, _A Valentine for Noel: Four Variations on a Scheme_ (Barton, Brownington, Berlin: Something Else Press, 1973), and also his _Selected Shorter Poems (1950-1970)_ (New York: New Directions, 1975). A selection of Jackson Mac Low's Asymmetries is included in his _Representative Works: 1938-1985_ (New York, Roof Books, 1986). His 'diastic' technique was used in _The Virginia Woolf Poems_ (Providence: Burning Deck, 1985). Cage's mesostics include _Roaratorio: An Irish Circus on Finnegans Wake_ (first produced in Paris in 1978) and _I-VI_ (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990). Charles O. Hartman and Hugh Kenner have recently published _Sentences_ (Los Angeles: Sun & Moon, 1995). [7] Jim Rosenberg, remarks posted to the (majordomo) discussion list "ht_lit" (hypertext literature: ht_lit@journal.biology.carleton.ca), 9 June, 1995. -------------------------------------------------------------------- John Cayley Wellsweep Press [in Chinese HZ: ~{?-U\02~} ~{=[i@3v0fIg~}] ^ innovative literary translation from Chinese ^ cayley@shadoof.demon.co.uk http://www.demon.co.uk/eastfield/ -------------------------------------------------------------------- [ This essay in Volume 6, Number 1 of _EJournal_ (March, ] [ 1996) is (c) copyright _EJournal_. Permission is hereby ] [ granted to give it away. _EJournal_ hereby assigns any and ] [ all financial interest to John Cayley. This note must ] [ accompany all copies of this text. ] ===================================================================== EDITORIAL COMMENT -- Spindle Those Web "Pages" [line 749] In the spirit of challenging the default assumptions imposed by a paper-based culture, we ought to be looking for images to replace "Homepage." "Web" and "'net" don't bother me, even though I prefer "Matrix." But we should resist at least the "page" part of Homepage because electronic communication transcends the boundary conditions imposed by paper and ink and print, and because accepting images like "page" makes it hard to escape the conditions. Adjusting the imagery won't be easy. The inertia is so enfolding that we hardly notice it. But it will happen, and we should encourage the changes in vocabulary when we notice them being tried out. Why? Vocabulary is part of what we wonder with. As long as we stick with strictly papyrocentric terms, we'll be stuck inside the boundaries they impose. But new terms lead to new things to think about. The idea of "clicking on" something is entering the lexicon, and we're starting to hear "mouse" used as a verb. Speaking of mice, remember how happy we were with the friendliness of the Macintosh "desktop"? Those familiar manila-folder icons and wastebaskets seemed wonderful. But they helped prolong dependence on the mental scaffolding they were leaving behind. Now it is time to wean ourselves from the limitations of papyrocentrism. There are other examples of paper-bound mindset. The surviving major word-processors were built to process "papers," not words. Footnotes, margins, headers and footers .... the goal of bit-mapping texts was to make screens look like paper. And WYSIWYG, of course, caters to people who prepare texts for printers. Ordinary readers -- especially people who scroll through screens and link to digital sound and cinema as well as to text -- we care about WYSIWYG only when condemned to produce "pages" for the Web. I have found talk about *writing spaces* (instead of "pages") only in Bolter-aware hypertext programs like Storyspace. And even "writing" should be giving way, now, to "composing." [line 788] SGML and its subset HTML are also paper bounded, aimed at describing "pages" and associated with the retrospective task of digitizing paper texts. And so on. Constant references to "desktop publishing" reinforce the supposition that publishing requires paper, that computers exist to serve the papyrocentric culture. We forget that "publishing" is just a way to make something public. "To publish" and "to make paper copies" are not synonymous. A current example of indebtedness to print technology is the suggestion that we ought to have monitors that can be turned -- physically -- between "landscape" and "portrait" positions. We ought to have them, we're told, because Homepages resemble paperpages. The idea does make some sense -- but, like the word "page" itself, it's just a retrograde adaptation. There's no pressure to invent new terminology right away. Sure, Wiener adapted "kybernos" and Mandelbrot tells us where he got "fractal," but the digital revolution, although *bigger* than than control theory or chaos or complexity, is more gradual. Computers still need paper. Electronic communication won't *replace* printing any more than writing replaced talking. The old images do make transitions easier; we still use "horsepower" to compare engines, we say "dial" when we could use "punch" or "key" for telephoning. On the other hand, the path is forking. Terminology affects perception. Now that the digital revolution is virtually over, and we winners are in a position to write the history, we should be on the lookout for the images that will suit the *n*-dimensional matrix and hypertext better than "pages" and all those other paper- and print-bounded words do. I don't propose a contest, but _EJournal_ could help circulate -- "publish" -- any post-transitional adaptations and neologisms its readers discover. =================================================================== [line 825] ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------ I N F O R M A T I O N --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- About Subscribing and Sending for Back Issues: In order to: Address: With this message: Subscribe to _EJournal_: LISTSERV@albany.edu SUB EJRNL YourName Get Contents/Abstracts of previous issues: LISTSERV@albany.edu GET EJRNL CONTENTS Get Volume 5 Number 1: LISTSERV@albany.edu GET EJRNL V5N1 Send mail to our "office": EJOURNAL@albany.edu Your message... --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- http://www.hanover.edu/philos/ejournal/home.html [ http://rachel.albany.edu/~ejournal/ejournal/ejournal.html ] --------------------------------------------------------------------- About "Supplements": _EJournal_ continues to experiment with ways of revising, responding to, reworking, or even retracting the texts we publish. Authors who want to address a subject already broached --by others or by themselves-- may send texts for us to consider publishing as a Supplement issue. Proposed supplements will not go through as thorough an editorial review process as the essays they annotate. ------------------------------------------------------------------- About _EJournal_: [line 856] _EJournal_ is an all-electronic, e-mail delivered, peer-reviewed, academic periodical. We are particularly interested in theory and practice surrounding the creation, transmission, storage, interpretation, alteration and replication of electronic "text" - and "display" - broadly defined. We are also interested in the broader social, psychological, literary, economic and pedagogical implications of computer- mediated networks. The journal's essays are delivered free to Internet addressees. Recipients may make paper copies; _EJournal_ will provide authenticated paper copy from our read-only archive for use by academic deans or others. Writers who think their texts might be appreciated by _EJournal_'s audience are invited to forward files to ejournal@albany.edu . If you are wondering about starting to write a piece for to us, feel free to ask if it sounds appropriate. There are no "styling" guidelines; we try to be a little more direct and lively than many paper publications, and considerably less hasty and ephemeral than most postings to unreviewed electronic spaces. Essays in the vicinity of 5000 words fit our format well. We read ASCII; we continue to experiment with other transmission and display formats and protocols. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Board of Advisors: [line 880] Stevan Harnad University of Southampton Ann Okerson Association of Research Libraries Joe Raben City University of New York Bob Scholes Brown University Harry Whitaker University of Quebec at Montreal --------------------------------------------------------------------- SENIOR EDITORS - March, 1996 ahrens@alpha.hanover.edu John Ahrens Hanover dabrent@acs.ucalgary.ca Doug Brent Calgary kahnas@jmu.edu Arnie Kahn James Madison richardj@bond.edu.au Joanna Richardson Bond ryle@urvax.urich.edu Martin Ryle Richmond ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Consulting Editors - March, 1996 bcondon@umich.edu Bill Condon Michigan djb85@albany Don Byrd Albany folger@watson.ibm.com Davis Foulger IBM - Watson gms@psu.edu Gerry Santoro Penn State nakaplan@ubmail.ubalt.edu Nancy Kaplan Baltimore nrcgsh@ritvax Norm Coombs RIT r0731@csuohio Nelson Pole Cleveland State ray_wheeler@dsu1.dsu.nodak.edu Ray Wheeler North Dakota srlclark@liverpool.ac.uk Stephen Clark Liverpool twbatson@gallua.gallaudet.edu Trent Batson Gallaudet wcooper@vm.ucs.ualberta.ca Wes Cooper Alberta -------------------------------------------------------------------- Editor: Ted Jennings, emeritus, English, Albany Editorial Asssociate: Jerry Hanley, emeritus, Theater, Albany -------------------------------------------------------------------- University at Albany Computing and Network Services --------------------------------------------------------------------- University at Albany, SUNY. Albany, New York 12222 USA