| Revision as of 13:12, 1 April 2007 editMarkBernstein (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,219 edits ←Created page with ' == Grammatron == An influential work, to be sure (at least for a while), but the fulsomeness of the newly-added sentence gives the historically-false impression t...' | Revision as of 18:36, 2 April 2007 edit undoMarkBernstein (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,219 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == Grammatron == | == Grammatron == | ||
| An influential work, to be sure |
An influential work, to be sure, but the fulsomeness of the newly-added sentence gives the historically-false impression that it is ''the'' crucial work, that ''afternoon'' and ''Victory Garden'' and ''Patchwork Girl'' were just exercises leading up to its achievement. I think this misrepresents the current critical consensus as well as historical thought, as reflected (for example) in Coover's two New York Times Book Review surveys of early hypertext fiction. | ||
| I don't relish having to write this, but the way the addition was crafted leaves no other good option. Since I am close to the field and its controversies, and since the factual assertions are not incorrect, I'd prefer to leave the revert to other hands. If this stands, though, it threatens to create a race of competing claims for the excellence of each early fiction, all seeking to assert their own honors and excellences. ] 13:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC) | I don't relish having to write this, but the way the addition was crafted leaves no other good option. Since I am close to the field and its controversies, and since the factual assertions are not incorrect, I'd prefer to leave the revert to other hands. If this stands, though, it threatens to create a race of competing claims for the excellence of each early fiction, all seeking to assert their own honors and excellences. ] 13:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:36, 2 April 2007
Grammatron
An influential work, to be sure, but the fulsomeness of the newly-added sentence gives the historically-false impression that it is the crucial work, that afternoon and Victory Garden and Patchwork Girl were just exercises leading up to its achievement. I think this misrepresents the current critical consensus as well as historical thought, as reflected (for example) in Coover's two New York Times Book Review surveys of early hypertext fiction.
I don't relish having to write this, but the way the addition was crafted leaves no other good option. Since I am close to the field and its controversies, and since the factual assertions are not incorrect, I'd prefer to leave the revert to other hands. If this stands, though, it threatens to create a race of competing claims for the excellence of each early fiction, all seeking to assert their own honors and excellences. MarkBernstein 13:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)