Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Stitch Bitch Response
What was Shelley Jackson's intention in making this text so confusing and impossible to disect? Not only do I find myself lost in understanding who the Stitch Bitch is, but I was completely lost in her comparison of a hypertext to a human body. Writing is in no way reminiscent of human anatomy, it is, however similar to nature. Writing can flow over the page or screen, picking up speed much like a river. It may reveal hidden layers, similar to a rose or a flower which can be rid of excess petals. It may also sway a reader's opinion, like a breeze blowing through an empty forest. A comparison of writing to the dissected parts of the human anatomy, however, is not a satisfactory comparison in my opinion. Her intentions of this metaphor, to reiterate the fact that her hypertext can easily be dissected, merely brings morbid and gruesome images of a dissected human body at a crime scene to mind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that writing can be easily compared to nature, like as you said, flowing like a river. However I also think that shelley jackson is right about comparing writing to the human body as well. Think about it: can you use your arms without your brain? will you be able to taste something without your nose? No. Everything is intertwined. Just like writing. Jackson says, "the body is a patchwork." Its true, a writer comes up with different ideas that don't necessarily have to be linked, but in your writing it can be stitched together for the reader to understand. You can't have an example without a thesis.
ReplyDelete