I try to keep in mind that this article was extremely long, and it was difficult to find something to latch onto as far as a blog post would be concerned. This is a topic that I’m very, very interested in, and I would have loved to have seen Hayles engage with it a bit more. However, after reading through Katheryn Hayles’ “The Future of Literature,” I couldn’t help but notice that video games in particular were really getting the short end of the stick. She mentions them a total of three times:
- Contemporary cultures in developed countries are currently in a period of active transition in which the cognitive mode of deep attention is still being fostered by formal education, especially humanities courses, and by parents who want their children to read books rather than surf the World Wide Web and play video games. (94)
- Print’s engagement with technical media has been accompanied by a persistent anxiety among print authors that the novel is in danger of being superseded, with readers seduced away from books by television, blockbuster films, video games, and the vast mediascape of the World Wide Web. (95)
- Empirical data indicate that young people are spending less time reading print books and more time surfing the Web, playing video games, and listening to M3P files. (96)
None of these mentions even entertain the idea that video games are a more realistically accessible form of story-telling than the CAVE system she spent pages upon pages extolling the virtues of. This is particularly entertaining because what she’s talking about is essentially virtual realty, or VR, technology. Even now, through the efforts of new tech like the Oculus Rift, these experiences don’t need a full room to experience, all you need is a headset. The Oculus Rift is already being integrated into video games, and this before it’s official release.
She’s already talking about digital interaction. Why isn’t she engaging with the interactive, haptic narrative we already have at our fingertips?
