Electronic Literature as an Information System Essay

ABSTRACTelectronic lit is a line that encompasses artistic text editions produced for printed media which atomic number 18 consumed in electronic format, as well as text produced for electronic media that could non be printed with show up losing essential qualities. Some shake argued that the essence of electronic publications is the social occasion of multimedia, fragmentation, and/or non-linearity. Others focus on the role of com throw awayation and complex attending. Cybertext does non sufficiently describe these dusts. In this paper we propose that whole kit and boodle of electronic belles-lettres, understood as text (with attainable inclusion body of multimedia elements) designed to be consumed in bi- or multi-directional electronic media, ar best understood as 3-tier (or n-tier) nurture dodges. These tiers admit info (the textual nitty-gritty), process (com regularizeational fundamental interactions) and unveiling (on-screen edition of the narrative). The i nteraction among these stages produces what is known as the accomplishment of electronic writings.This figure for electronic belles-lettres touch offs beyond the initial approaches which either treated electronic books as computerized versions of print literature or foc employ solely on angiotensin-converting enzyme aspect of the arranging. In this paper, we build two basic arguments. On the virtuoso hand, we propose that the excogitationion of electronic literature as an  randomness system gets at the essence of electronic media, and we predict that this paradigm all(prenominal)ow pay back dominant in this field within the next few years. On the separate hand, we propose that building study systems may also terzetto in a poke of stress from peerless-time artistic novelties to recyclable systems. Demonstrating this approach, we accept kit and boodle from the _Electronic literary productions Collection Volume 1_ (Jason Nelson and Emily Short) as well as nakeder deeds by Mez and the team ga at that placed by Kate Pullinger and Chris Joseph. Glancing toward the future, we discuss the n-tier analytic thinking of the Global Poetic System and the La Flood learn.INTRODUCTIONThe ab declivityal attri neverthelesses of digital narrative pick out been, so far, close toly faithful to the origin of electronic text a commit of linked episodes that contain inter create multimedia elements. Whether or non about features could be reproduced in printed media has been subject of compete by opp binglents and prop whizznts of digital narratives. However, as the electronic media evolves, close to features truly pre set uperous to digital narrative adopt appe bed. For instance, signifi pound outt effort has been invested in creating hypertexts responsive to the endorsers actions by making links dynamic additionally, on that pane have been efforts to spend a penny systems capable of producing fictionalisation, with varying degrees of success.Both approaches have in popular that they grant greater autonomy to the computer, soly making of it an active part of the literary exchange. The increasing complexity of these systems has directed sarcastic m other outance to the renewal of the processes that produce the texts. As critics produce a flood of neologisms to affiliate these whole kit, the field is suffering from a lack of a sh ard actors line for these whole kit and caboodle, as opposed to drawing from the available computer learning and well-articulated speech of schooling systems.The set Reader, Computer, Author forms a system in which there is flow and manipulation of teaching, i.e. an _information system_. The interaction mingled with the elements of an information system whoremaster be isolated in functional tiers. For instance one or umteen selective information tiers, processing tiers, and open upation tiers. In general we entrust talk about n-tier information systems. We w ill expand this ex personate in the next section. In this system, a portion of information produced (output) is taken, totally or partially, as gossip, i.e. there is a feedback loop and therefore the process tummy be characterized as a cybernetic process. Of course, the field has already embraced the supposition of the cybertext.The term cybertext was brought to the literary worlds attention by Espen Aarseth (1997). His archetype foc physical exertions on the organization of the text in order to analyze the operate of media as an integral part of literary dynamics. According to Aarseth, cybertext is not a genre in itself. In order to banish traditions, literary genres and aesthetical value, Aarseth argues, we should inspect texts at a much to a greater extent local level. The concept of cybertext offers a way to expand the r distributively of literary studies to include phenomena that are perceived today as foreign or marginal.In Aarseths work, cybertext denotes the general set of text railroad cars which, operated by proofreaders, yield assorted texts for reading. Aarseth (1997, p. 19), refuses to condition this definition of cybertext to much(prenominal)(prenominal) vague and unfoc utilize foothold such(prenominal) as digital text or electronic literature. For the course of this paper, we will use the phrase electronic literature, as we are interested in those works that are markedly literary in that they resonate (at least on one level) with evocative linguistic content and engage with an subsisting literary corpus. season we find cybertext to be a useful concept, the taxonomies and schematics that attend this approach interfere with interdisciplinary discussions of electronic literature. Instead of use Aarseths neologisms such as textons, scriptons and traversal functions, we will use widely-accepted terminology in the field of computer scholarship. This shift is important because the concepts introduced by Aarseth, which are pertinent to the current discussion, can be abruptly mapped to concepts positive years sooner in computer science. While the neologisms introduced by Aarseth re main(prenominal) arcane, the terms used in computer science are pervasive.Although the term cybertext adds a backbone of increasingly complex inter exercise, its focus is primarily on the interaction in the midst of a exploiter and a single art object. such(prenominal) a simulation, however, insufficiently describes the constitution of such an object. Within his treatise, Aarseth is compelled to create tables of attri just nowes and taxonomies to map and classify each of these objects. What is needed is a fabric for discussing how these systems operate and how that operation contributes to an overall literary hold up.We want to make a clear distinction amidst this smell of cybertext as a reading process and more(prenominal) utter(a) description of a works infrastructure. Clearly, there are m any(prenominal) ways in which the interaction betwixt a reader and a human existence of electronic literature can happen for instance, a persona of electronic literature could be written in hypertext mark-up wording or in fool, to that extent presenting the very(prenominal) interaction with the reader. In this paper, we adapt the notion of n-tier information systems to provide a scaffolding for reading and interpreting works of electronic literature.The fact that the field of electronic literature is largely comprised of cybertexts (in the mother wit described above) that anticipate some sort of processing by the computer, has do of this processing a defining characteristic. Critics and public approach new works of electronic literature with the expectation of finding creativity and aim not only at the narrative level but also at the processing level in more cases the newness of the latter has dominated other considerations.NEW, NEWER, NEWEST MEDIAUntil now, electronic literature, or elit, has been focused on the new, leading to a unbroken drift to reinvent the wheel, the word, the image, the delivery system, and consequently reading itself. However, such an emphasis raises a number of questions. To what extent does the novel requirement of electronic literature (as the field is currently outlined) de-emphasize a textual investment in exploring the (post)human condition (the literary)? How does this emphasis on the new constrain the training of spick-and-span Media both for indites and for prospective authors? Or how does such an emphasis put elit authors into an artistic accouterments race taking on the aethetics of the militiary-industrial complex that produces their tools?literary essays that treat electronic literature focus on Flash movies, blogs, HTML pages, dynamically generated pages, converse agents, computer games, and other software applications. A fresh edition of Leonardo Almanac (AA.VV. 2006) offers several examples. Its critics/poets analyze th e information landscapes of David Small, the text art experiments of Suguru Ishizaki (2003), Brian Kim Stefans 11-minute Flash performance, and Philippe Bootzs hyaloplasm poetry broadcast. Though not all the objects are new, what they share most of all is the novelty of their out-of-doors or process or text.These works bear little analogy to one another(prenominal), a definitive characteristic of electronic literature (dissimilarity) however, their inclusion under one rubric reflects the fields fetishization of the new. This addiction, mimicking that of the hard sciences it so admires, must constantly replace old forms and old systems with the la turn out system. Arguably, therefore, any piece of electronic literature may only be as interesting as its form or its novel use of the form. Moreover, such an emphasis shifts the critical attention from the content (what we will call data) to its rendering (or presentation plus processes) primarily.Marie-Laure Ryan (2005) raised charges against such an aesthetic in her _dichtung-digital_ article. In this piece, she rails against a certain style of new media, net.art, elit art object that follows WYSINWYG (What you see is _NOT_ what you get), where the surface presents a text that is considered interesting only because of a more interesting process beneath the surface. This approach, according to Ryan, focuses on the meta-property of recursive operation. For this aesthetic, the art resides in the productive formula, and in the sophistication of the programming, rather than in the output itself (Ryan).This means that literary, or artistic value, does not reside in what appears on the screen, but in the virtuoso programming performance that underlies the text. While Ryan goes too far in her dis send packingal of experimentation, her critique holds, in as much as electronic literary reproof that puts process uber alis risks not only minimizing the textual to insignificance but also losing what should be one of elits biggest goals developing new forms for other authors to use and explore.Such an emphasis reveals a deviate that has thus far dominated new media scholarship. This selfsame(prenominal)(p) bias leads new media scholars away from literary venues for their discourse communities and instead to Boing Boing and Siggraph, sites where curiosity or commercial techno system of system of logical development dominate the discussions. It is also what spells instant obsolescence to many authorware forms.The person who uses authorware as it was mean is not the new media artist. It is the person who uses it in a new way or who reconfigures the software to do something unintended. This bm means that electronic literary artists will constantly be compelled to drive their works towards the new, in time while it means a perpetual crop of all prior authorware, cutting them off from theliterary tree. (We see this same logic in commerical software production where the 4.0 release reconfigures th e user interface and removes some of the functionality we had stand upn to love.)A disproportionate emphasis on the new overlooks the fearful areas of growth in authorship on the stabilizing, if rudimentary, authoring systems. The tide of productivity (in terms of textual output of all levels of quality) is not from an endless stream of intentions but from people who are writing text in established author information formats, from traditionalistic print to blogs. It is through the use of stabilized and reusable information systems that the greater public is being attracted to consume and produce content through digital media. Blogging is the clearest example. This is not equivalent to saying that all blogging is literary, save as not all writing is however, blogging has created a social traffic pattern of reading and writing in digital media, thus increasing the relative frequency at which literary pieces appear through that venue. This increased community activity would ha ve been impossible if each blogger had to develop their own authoring systems.To help distribute the scholarly priorities, we propose a reconsideration of electronic literature as an n-tier information system. The consequence of this shift will be twofold offset of all, it will allow us to treat content and processing independently, thus creating a clear distinction amongst works of literary deservingness and works of technological craftsmanship. While this distinction is at best problematic, considering the information system as a whole will move the digest away from over-priveleging processes. Secondly, we claim that this approach provides a unite framework with which all pieces of electronic literature can be studied.This paper is organized as follows in Section 1 (Introduction) we describe what is the problem we intend to explore, and what are the type of systems that will be described in this paper. Section 2 (Information Systems) explores the components of an informa tion system and compares the approaches of different researchers in the field. Section 3 (Examples) demonstrates that the n-tier information system approach can be used to describe a multifarious multitude of pieces of electronic literature. Section 4 (Discussion) explores the conclusions drawn from this train and set future directions.INFORMATION SYSTEMSSince electronic literature is mediated by a computer, it is clear that there must exist rules to enter information into the system, to process it, and to render an output for readers that is to say, a piece of electronic literature can be considered as an _information system_. The term information system has different meanings. For instance, in mathematics an information system is a basic experience-representation matrix comprised of attributes (columns) and objects (rows). In sociology, information systems are systems whose behavior is determined by goals of one-on-one as well as technology. In our context, information system will refer to a set of persons and machines organized to collect, store, transform, and represent data, a definition which coincides with the one widely accepted in computer science. The domain-specific twist comes when we desexualize that the data contains, but is not limited to, literary information.Information systems, callable to their complexity, are usually built in storeys. The earliest antecedent to a multi- floor approach to software computer architectures goes back to Trygve Reenskaug who proposed in 1979, while visiting the Smalltalk meeting at Xerox PARC, a pattern known as Model-View-Controller (MVC) that intended to isolate the process mold from the presentation mold. This paradigm evolved during the next ten dollar bill to give rise to multi-tier architectures, in which presentation, data and processes were isolated. In principle, it is possible to have multiplex data tiers, multiple process tiers, and multiple presentation tiers. unrivaled of the most p rominent paradigms to approach information systems in the field of computer science, and the one we deem more appropriate for electronic literature, is the 3-tier architecture (Eckerson, 1995). This paradigm indicates that processes of different categories should be encapsulated in third different shapes1. Presentation bed The somatogenic rendering of the narrative piece, for example, a sequence of physical pages or the on-screen presentation of the text.2. transition social class The rules necessary to read a text. A reader of Latin alphabet in printed narrative, for example, must cross the text from left(p) to right, from top to bottom and pass the page after the outlast word of the last line. In digital narrative, this spirit level could contain the rules programmed in a computer to build a text output.3. Data Layer Here lays the text itself. It is the set of dustup, images, video, etc., which form the narrative space.In the proposed 3-tier exercise, feedback is not onl y possible, but also a _sine qua non_ condition for the literary exchange. It is the law of continuation of McLluhans mantra the media is the message. In digital narrative, the media acts on the message. The cycle of feedback in digital narrative is (i) Readers receive a piece of information, and based on it they run a new interaction with the system. (ii) The computer then takes that input and applies logic rules that have been programmed into it by the author. (iii) The computer takes content from the data layer and renders it to the reader in the presentation layer. (iv) step -i is repeated again. Steps i through v describe a complete cycle of feedback, thus the maximum realization of a cybertext.N-tier information systems have had, surprisingly, a comparatively short penetration in the field of electronic literature. Aarseth (1997, p.62) introduced a typology for his textonomy that maps perfectly a 3-tier system Scriptons (strings as they appear to readers) correspond to the presentation layer, textons (strings as they exist in the text) correspond to the data layer, and traversal function (the mechanism by which scriptons are revealed or generated from textons and presented to the user) corresponds to the process layer.These neologisms, while necessary if we study all forms of textuality, are inessential if we focus on electronic literature. The methods developed in computer science permeate constantly, and at an accelerating rate, the field of electronic literature, specially as artists create pieces of increasing complexity. Practitioners in the field of electronic literature will be better equipped to benefit from the advances in information technology if the knowledge acquired in both fields can be bridged without a common terminology attempts to generate dialog are thwarted.The commencement reference that used computer science terminology applied to electronic literature appeared in an article by Gutierrez (2002), in which the three layers (data , logic and presentation) were clearly defined and proposed as a paradigm for electronic literature. Gutierrez (2004, 2006) explored in detail the logic (middle) layer, proposing algorithms to manage the processes needed to deliver literary content through electronic media. His proposal follows the paradigm proposed by Eckerson (1995) and Jacobson et al (1999) the system is divided into (a) topological nonmoving components, (b) users, (c) and transient components (processes). The processes in the system are analyzed and represented using sequence diagrams to depict how the actions of the users cause movement and transformation of information crossways different topological components.The next reference belongs to Wardrip-Fruin (2006) he proposes not three, but s regularer components (i) author, (ii) data, (iii) process, (iv) surface, (v) interaction, (vi) outside processes, and (vii) audiences. This vision corresponds to an extensive research in diverse fields, and the recital i s given from a literary perspective. Even though Wardrip-Fruin does not use the terminology already established in computer science, nor he makes a clear distinction between topology, actors and processes, his proposal is essentially equivalent, and independent, from Gutierrezs mannikin. In Wardrip-Fruins sample, author -i- and audience -vii- correspond to actors in the Unified Process (UP) process -iii- and interaction -v- correspond to the process layer in the 3-tier architecture (how the actors move information across layers and how it is modified) data -ii- maps directly the data layer in the 3-tier exemplification finally, surface -iv- corresponds to the presentation layer.The emergence of these information systems approaches tag the awareness that these new literary forms arise from the world of software and because benefit from traditional computer science approaches to software. In the Language of New Media, Lev Manovich called for such analysis under the rubric of S oftware Studies. Applying the schematics of computer science to electronic literature allows critics to consider the complexities of that literature without falling prey to the temperament to colonize electronic literature with literary theory, as Espen Aarseth warned in Cybertext. Such a framework provides a terminology rather than the imposition of yet another taxonomy or set of metaphors that will ever so prove to be both helpful and glaringly insufficient. That is not to say that n-tier approaches fit works without conflict. In fact, some of the most fruitful readings come from the pieces that complicate the n-tier distinctions.EXAMPLESDREAMAPHAGE 1 & 2 REVISING OUR SYSTEMSJason Nelsons Dreamaphage (2003, 2004) demonstrates the ways in which the n-tier present can open up the complexities and ironies of works of electronic literature. Nelson is an auteur of interfaces, and in the premiere version of this piece he transforms the two-dimensional screen into a multidimensio nal navigable space full of various planes. The interactor travels through these planes, encountering texts on them, corroboration of the disease. It is as if we are traveling through the data structure of the report card itself, as if the data has been brought to the surface. Though in strict terms, the data is where it ever so was supposed to be.Each plane is an object, rendered in Flash on the gasify by the processing of the navigation input and the production of vector art to fill the screen. However, Nelsons work distances us, alienates us from the visual metaphors that we have taken for the physical structures of data in the computer. Designers of operating systems work hard to naturalize our blood to our information. Opening windows, shuffling folders, croaks not a visual manifestation but the transparent glimpse of the structures themselves. Neal Stephenson has written very persuasively on the import of replacing the command line interface with these illusions.Th e story (or data) behind the piece is the tale of a virus epidemic, whose primary symptom is the constant repetition of a hallucination. Nelson issues of the virus drifting eyes. Ultimately the disease proves fatal, as patients go insane then comatose. Here the piece is evocative of the repetitive lexias of uncorrupted electronic literature, information systems that lead the reader into the same texts as a natural component of traversing the narrative. Of course, the disease also describes the interface of the planes that the user travels through, one after the other, semi-transparent planes, dreamlike visions.This version of Dreamaphage was not the only one Nelson promulgated. In 2004, Nelson published a certify interface. Nelson writes of the piece, Unfortunately the first version of Dreamaphage suffered from usability problems. The main interface was unwieldy (but pretty) and the books hard to find (plus the occasional computer crash) (Dreamaphage, _ELC I_) He reconceived of the piece in two dimensions to create a more horse barn interface. The second version is two-dimensional and Nelson has also added a few more extra bits and readjusted the medical reports. In the terms of n-tier, his changes primarily affected the interface and the data layers.Here is the artist of the interface facing the uncanny croak of their own artistic creation in a world where information systems do not lie in the stable binding in a book but in a contingent supply up that is always dependent on the surroundingss (operating systems) and frames (browser) in which they circulate. As the user tries to find a grounding in the spaces and lost moments of the disease, Nelson himself attempts to build stability into that which is always shifting. However, do to a particular difference in the way that Firefox 2.0 renders Flash at the processing layer, interactors will discover that the opening night page of the second version is squeezed into a fraction of their window, rathe r than expanding to fill the entire window.At this point, we are reminded of the works epigram, All other methods are errors. The words of these books, their dreams, contain the cure. But where is the pattern? In sleeping the same dream came again. How long before I become another lost? (opening). As we compare these two versions of the same information system, we see the same dream approach line again. The first version haunts the second as we solicit when will it, too, become one of the lost.Though Nelson himself seems to have an insatiable impulse for novel interfaces, his own artistic practices resonate well with the ethos of this article. At harangue engagements, he has made it a practice to bring his interfaces, his .fla (Flash source) files, for the attendees to take and use as they please. Nelson presents his information systems with a humble declaration that the audience may no doubt be able to find fifty-fifty more powerful uses for these interfaces.GALATEA NOVELTY R ETURNSEmily Shorts ground- jailbreak work of synergistic fiction offers another work that, like its namesake in the piece, opens up to this discussion when approached carefully. Galateas presentation layer appears to be straight forward IF fare. The interactor is a critic, encountering Galatea, which appears to be a statue of a woman but then begins to move and talk. In this novel work of interactive fiction, the interactor will not find the traditional spacial navigation verbs (go, open, throw) to be productive, as the action focuses on one room. Likewise will other verbs prove themselves unhelpful as the user is encouraged in the help instructions to talk or  ask about topics.In Shorts piece, the navigational system of IF, as it was originally instantiated in Adventure, begins to mimic a conversational system dictated by give awaywords, ala Joseph Weizenbaums ELIZA. Spelunking through a cave is replaced with conversing through an array of conversational replies. Galatea doe s not always answer the same way. She has moods, or rather, your kin with Galatea has levels of emotion. The logic layer proves to be more complex than the few verbs portend. The ply is to figure out the combination that leads to more data.Galatea uses a novel process to put the user in the position of a safe cracker, toilsome to unlock the treasure of answers. Notice how novelty has re-emerged as a key attribute here.Could there be a second Galatea? Could someone write another story using Galateas procesess. Technically no, since the work was released in a No-Derivs Creative Commons license. However, in many ways, Galatea is a second, overture in the experimental wave of artistic revisions of interactive fiction that followed the end of the commercially produced text adventures from Infocom and others. Written in Z-Machine format, Galatea is already reimagining an information system. It is a new work written in the context of Infocoms interactive fiction system.Shorts work is admittedly novel in its processes, but the literary value of this work is not defined by its novely. The data, the replies, the context they describe, the relationship they create are rich and full of literary allusions. Short has gone on to help others make their own Galatea, not only in her work to help develop the natural spoken communication IF authoring system Inform 7 but also in the conversation libraries she has authored. In doing so, she moved into the work of other developers of authoring systems, such as the makers of chatbot systems.Richard S. Wallace developed one of the most popular of these (A.I.M.L..bot), and his work demonstrates the power of creating and sharing authorware, even in the context of the tyranny of the novel.A.L.I.C.E. is the base-line conversational system, which can be downloaded and customized. Downloading the basic, surgery A.L.I.C.E. chatbot as a foundation allows users to concentrate on editing recognizeable inputs and dictatorial responses. Ra ther than worrying about how the system will respond to input, authors, or botmasters, can focus on creating what they system will say.To gain delight in as a botmaster/author, one cannot merely modify an out-of-the-box ALICE. The user should barely customize or build from the ground up using AIML, staged news markup language, the site-specific language created for Wallaces system. They must change the way the system operateslargely, because the critical attention around chatbots follows more the precedent of scientific innovation more than literary depth. However, according to Wallace, despite the critics emphasis on innovations, the users have been flocking to ALICE, as tens of thousands of users have created chatbots using the system (Be Your Own Botmaster). AIML becomes an important test case because while users may access some elements of the system, because they are not changing fundamentals, they can only make limited forays into the scientific/innovation chatbot discussi ons.Thus while our n-tier model stresses the importance of creating authorware and understanding information systems, novelty still holds an important role in the development of electronic literature. Nonetheless, interactors can at least use their pre-existing literacies when they encounter an AIML bot or a work of interactive fiction written on a acquainted(predicate) platform.LITERATRONICALiteratronic is yet another example of an n-tier system. Its design was based entirely in the concept of partitioning between presentation, process and data layers. Every interaction of the readers is stored in a interchangeized database, and influences the subsequent response of the system to each readers interactions. The presentation layer employs web pages on which the reader can access multiple books by multiple authors in multiple languages. The process layer is rather complex, since it uses a specialized artificial intelligence engine to adapt the book to each reader, based upon hi s/her interaction, i.e. and adaptive system. The data layer is a relational database that stores not only the narrative, but also readers interaction. Since there is a clear distinction between presentation, data and process, Literatronica is a 3-tier system that allows authors of multiple language to focus on the business of literary creation.MEZS CODE THE SYSTEMS THAT DO NOT physical exertion A COMPUTER1As with many systematic critical approaches, the place where n-tier is most fruitful is the where it produces or reveals contradictions. While some works of electronic literature lend themselves to clear divisions between parts of the information system, many works in electronic literature complicate that very distinction as articulated in such essays as Rita Raleys jurisprudence.surfacecode.depth, in which she traces out codeworks that challenge distinctions between presentation and processing layers.In the works of Mez (Maryanne Breeze), she creates works written in what N. Kat herine Hayles has called a creole of computer and human languages. Mez, and other codework authors, display the data layer on the presentation layer. One critical response is to point out that as an information system, the presentation layer are the lines of code and the rest of the system is whatever medium is displaying her poem. However, such an approach missed the very complexity of Mezs work. Indeed, Mezs work is often traditional static text that puts users in the role of the processor. The n-tier model illuminates her sleight of hand.trEmdollsr_ by Mezdoll_trerumors =var=monosodium glutamate val=YourPleading/> TREMOR compute her short codework trEmdollsr_ published on her site and on the Critical cypher Studies blog. It is a program that seems to describe (or self-define) the birth pangs of a new world. The work, written in what appears to be XML, cannot function by itself. It appears to assign a value to a protean named doll_trerumors, a Mez-ian (Mezozoic?) portmenteau of doll_tremors and rumors. This particular rumor beign defined is called, the fifth world, which calls up images of the indigen American belief in a the perfected world coming to replace our current fourth world.This belief appears most readily in the Hopi tribe of North America. A child of this fifth world are fractures, or put another way, the tremor of the coming world brings with it fractures. The first, post 2 inscription, contains polymers a user set to YourDollUserName, a 3rdperson set to Your3rdPerson, a location set to YourSoddenSelf, and a spikey set to YourSpiKeySelf. The user then becomes a molecule name within the fracture, a component of the fracture. These references to dolls and 3rd person seem to evoke the world of avatars. In virtual worlds, users have dolls.If the first fracture is located in the avatar of the person, in their avatar, the second centers on communication from this person or user. Here the user is defined with YourPolyannaUserName, and we are in t he world of overreaching optimism, in the face of a msg or message of YourPleading and a lastword. Combining these two fractures we have a sodden and spikey self pleading and uttering a last word presumptively before the coming rupture into the fifth world.As with many codeworks, the presentation layer appears to be the data and logic layer. However, there is clearly another logic layer that makes these words appear on whatever inerface the reader is using. Thus, the presentation layer is a deception, a challenge to the very division of layers, a revelation that hides. At the same time, we are compelled to execute the presneted code by tracing out its logic. We must take the place of the compiling program with the understanding that the coding structures are also meant to launch or allusive subroutines, that part of our brain that is constantly listening for echoes and whispersTo produce that reading, we have had to execute that poem, at least step through it, acting as the pro cessor. In the process of writing poetic works as data, she has swapped our traditional position vis-a-vis n-tier systems. Where traditional poetry establishes idenitity through Is, Mez has us nominate with a system ready to process the user who is not ready for the fifth world, whatever that may bring. At the same time, universal or even mythical realities have been systematized or simulated. There is another layer of data that is missing, supplied by the user presumably. The poem leaves its tremors in a nation of potential, waiting to operate in the context of a larger system and waiting for a user to supply the names, pleading, and lastwords.The codework means nothing to the computer. This is not to make some sort of Searlean intervention about the inability of computers to fag but to point out that Mezs code is not binding XML. Of course, Mez is not writing for computer validation but instead relies on the less systematic processing of humans who rely on a far less rigorously specified language structure. Tremors fracture even the process of assigning some signified to these doll_trerumors.Mezs poem plays upon the layers of n-tier, exposing them and inverting them. through and through the close-reading tools of Critical Code Studies, we can get to her inference and innuendo. However, we should not miss the central irony of the work, the data that is hidden, the notable lack of processing performed by this piece. Mez has hailed us into the system, and our compliance, begins the tremors that brings about this fifth world even as it lies in potential.N-tier is not the fifth world of interpretation. However, it is a tremor of recognition that literacy in information systems offers a critical awareness crucial in these emergent forms of literature.FUTURE PROJECTSTwo new projects give the sense of the electronic literature to come. The authors of this paper have been collaborating to create systems that answer Hayles call at The in store(predicate) of Elec tronic Literature in Maryland to create works that move beyond the desktop. The Global Poetic System and The LA Flood Project combine GPS, literary texts, and civic spaces to create art objects that rely on a complex relationship between various pieces of software and hardware, from diligent phones to PBX telephony to satellite technology. To fully discuss such works with the same approaches we apply to video games or Flash-based literary works is to miss this manifold interaction. However, n-tier provides a scalable framework for discussing the complex networking of systems to produce an artistic experience through software and hardware.These projects explore four types of interfaces (mobile phones, PDAs, desktop clients, and web applications) and three ways of reading (literary adaptative texts, literary classic texts, texts constructed from the interaction of the community). The central piece that glues together literary information is geolocation. When the interactor in the wo rld is one of the input systems, critics need a framework that can handle complexity. Because of the heterogeneity of platforms in which these systems run, there are multiple presentation layers (e.g. phone, laptop, etc.), multiple fit processing layers, and multiple sources of information (e.g. weather, traffic, literary content, user routes, etc.), thus requiring a n-tier approach for analysis and implementation.It is clear that as electronic literature becomes more complex, knowledge of the n-tier dilineations will be crucial not only to the answer but also the production of such works. Since the interaction of heterogenous systems is the separate of our world, an n-tier approach will up critics to open up these works in ways that help identify patterns and systems in our lives.DISCUSSIONLet us bring down the great walls of neologisms. Let us pause for locution in the race for newer new media. Let us collaborate on the n-tiers of information systems to create robust writi ng forms and the possibility of a extending the audiences that are literate in these systems.In this paper, we have described an analytical framework that is useful to divide works of electronic literature into their forming elements, in such a way that is coherent with advances in computer science and information technology, and at the same time using a language that could be easily adopted by the electronic literature community. This framework places creators, technicians, and critics on common ground. This field does not have a unified method to analyze creative works this void is a aftermath, perhaps, in the time that works of electronic literature require an element of newness and a reinvention of paradigms with every new piece.Critics are always looking for innovation. However, the unrestrained celebration of the new or novel has lead New Media to the aesthetic equivalent of an arms race. In this article we found common elements to all these pieces, bridging the gap between c omputer science and electronic literature with the hopes of encouraging the production of sustainable new forms, be they stand alone or composed of a conglomeration of media forms, software, and users.As works of electronic literature continue to become more complex, bringing together more heterogeneous digital forms, the n-tier model will prove scalable and nuanced to help describe each layer of the work without forcing it into a pre-set positions for the sake of theory. We have to ask at this point how does this framework handle exceptions and increasing complexity?It is interesting to consider how the proposed n-tier model might be adapted to cope with dynamic data, which seems to be the most complex case. Current literary works tend to process a fixed set of data, generated by the author it is the mode of traversing what changes. Several software solutions may be used to solve the issue of how this traversal is left in the hands of the user or mediated yet in some way by the aut hor through the presentation system. The n-tier model provides a way of identifying three basic ingredients the data to be traversed, the logic for deciding how to traverse them, and the presentation which conveys to the user the selected portions at the selected moments. In this way, such systems give the impression that the reader is shaping the literary work by his/her actions. Yet this, in the simple configuration, is just an illusion.In following the labyrinth set out by the author, readers may feel that their journey through it is always being built anew. But the labyrinth itself is already fixed. Consider what would happen when these systems leave computer screens and move into the world of mobile devices and present art as Hayles predicted they would at the 2007 ELO conference. How could the system cope with changing data, with a labyrinth that rebuilds itself differently each time based on the path of the user? In this endeavor, we would be shifting an increasing resp onsibility into the machine which is running the work. The data need not be modified by the system itself.A simple initial approach might be to allow a subset of the data to be drawn from the real environment outside the literary work. This would introduce a measure of uncertainty into the set of possible situations that the user and the system will be faced with. And it would force the author to consider a much wider range of alternative situations and/or means of solving them. Interesting initiatives along these lines might be found in the various systems that combine literary material with real-world information by using, for example, mobile hand-held devices, provided with means of geolocation and networking.With respect to the n-tier model, the changes introduced in the data layer would force additional changes in the other layers. The process layer would grow in complexity to acquire the ability to react to the different possible changes in the data layer. It could be possible for the process layer to pursue all the required changes, while retaining a version of the presentation layer similar to the one used when dealing with static data. However, this may put a heavy load on the process layer, which may result in a slightly clumsy presentation. The clumsiness would be perceived by the reader as a slight imbalance between the dynamic content being presented and the static means used for presenting it.The breaking point would be reached when readers become aware that the material they are receiving is being presented inadequately, and it is apparent that there might have been better ways of presenting it. In these cases, a more complex presentation layer is also required. In all cases, to enable the computer to deal with the new type of situations would require the programmer to encode some means of appreciating the material that is being handled, and some means of automatically converting it into a adequate format for communicating it to the user. I n these task, current research into knowledge representation, natural language understanding, and natural language generation may provide very interesting tools. But, again, these tools would exist in processing layers, and would be dependent on data layers, so the n-tier model would still apply.The n-tier information system approach remains valid even in the most marginal cases. It promises to provide a unified framework of analysis for the field of electronic literature. Looking at electronic literature as an information system may signal another shift in disciplinary emphasis, one from a kind of high-theory humanities criticism towards something more like Human Computer Interface scholarship, which is, by its nature, exceedingly pragmatic. Perhaps a better way would be to try bring these two approaches closer together and to encourage dialogue between usability scientists and the agents of interpretation and meaning. Until this shift happens, the future of new media may be a dev elopmental 404 error page.REFERENCESAA.VV. New Media Poetry and Poetics Special _Leonardo Almanac_, 145, September 2006. universal resource locator http//www.leoalmanac.org/journal/vol_14/lea_v14_n05-06/index.asp number 1 accessed on 12/2006.AARSETH , Espen J. _Cybertext Perspectives on Ergodic Literature_. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, 1997.CALVI, Licia. lecturer in rebus The role of the reader and the characteristics of hyperreading. In _Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia_, pp 101-109. ACM Press, 1999.COOVER, Robert.Literary Hypertext The Passing of the Golden bestride of Hypertext. _Feed Magazine_. http//www.feedmag.com/document/do291lofi.html First accessed 4 August 2006.ECKERSON, Wayne W.Three Tier Client/Server Architecture Achieving Scalability, Performance, and might in Client Server Applications. _Open Information Systems_ 10, 1. January 1995 3(20).GENETTE, Gerard. _Paratexts Thresholds of Interpretations_. Cambridge Univ ersity Press, New York, NY, 1997.GUTIERREZ, Juan B. Literatrnica sobre cmo y porqu crear ficcin para medios digitales. In _Proceedings of the 1er Congreso ONLINE del Observatorio para la CiberSociedad_, Barcelona, http//cibersociedad.rediris.es/congreso/comms/g04gutierrez.htm First accessed on 01/2003.GUTIERREZ, Juan B. Literatrnica Hipertexto Literario Adaptativo. in _Proceedings of the 2o Congreso del Observatorio para la Cibersociedad_. Barcelona, Spain. URL http//www.cibersociedad.net/congres2004/index_f.html First accessed on 11/2004.GUTIERREZ, Juan B. Literatronic Use of Hamiltonian cycles to produce adaptivity in literary hypertext. In _Proceedings of The link up Conference Mathematical Connections in Art, Music, and Science_, pages 215-222. Institute of Education, University of London, August 2006.HAYLES, N. Katherine. Deeper into the Machine The hereafter of Electronic Literature. _Culture Machine_. Vol 5. 2003. http//svr91.edns1.com/culturem/index.php/cm/article/viewArt icle/245/241 First accessed 09/2004. Storytelling in the digital Age Narrative and Data. Digital Narratives conference. UCLA. 7 April 2005.HILLNER, Matthias.Virtual Typography Time perceptual experience in Relation to Digital Communication. New Media Poetry and Poetics Special Issue, _Leonardo Electronic Almanac_ Vol 14, No. 5 6 (2006). http//leoalmanac.org/journal/vol_14/lea_v14_n05-06/mengberg.asp First accessed 25 Sep. 2006JACOBSON I, BOOCH G, RUMBAUGH J. _The unified software development process_. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc. Boston, MA, USA, 1999.LANDOW George P. _Hypertext 2.0_. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, 1997.MANOVICH, Lev. _The Language of New Media_. MIT, Cambridge, MA, 2002.MARINO, Mark. Critical Code Studies. _Electronic Book Review_, December 2006. http//www.electronicbookreview.com/thread/electropoetics/codology First Accessed 12/2006.MEZ.trEmdollsr_ _Critical Code Studies_. April 2008. http//criticalcodestudies.com/wordpress/2008/04 /28/_tremdollsr_/ First accessed 04/2008.MONTFORT, Nick.Cybertext . _Electronic Book Review_, January 2001. URL http//www.altx.com/EBR/ebr11/11mon First accessed on 06/2006.NEA. _Reading At stake A Survey of Literary Reading in America_. National talent for the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20506-0001, 2004.PAJARES TOSCA, Susana and Jill Walker.Selected Bibliography of Hypertext Critcism. _JoDI_. http//jodi.tamu.edu/Articles/v03/i03/bibliography.html First accessed October 24, 2006.Raley, Rita. Code.surfaceCode.depth. _Dichtung Digital_. 2006. http//www.dichtung-digital.org/2006/1-Raley.htm First accessed 08/2006.RODRGUEZ, Jaime Alejandro. Teora, Prctica y Enseanza del Hipertexto de Ficcin El Relato Digital. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogot, Colombia, 2003. http//www.javeriana.edu.co/relatodigital First accessed on 09/2003.RYAN, Marie-Laure. Narrative and the Split Condition of Digital textbookuality. 1. 2005. URL http//www.brown.edu/Research/dichtung-d igital/2005/1/Ryan/ First accessed 4 October 2006VERSHBOW, Ben.Flight Paths a Networked Novel. _IF Future of the Book_. December 2007 http//www.futureofthebook.org/blog/archives/2007/12/flight_paths_a_networked_novel.html First Accessed 01/2008.WALLACE, Richard S. Be Your Own Botmaster. Alice AI Foundation Inc. 2nd ed. 2004.WARDRIP-FRUIN, Noah. _Expressive Processing On Process-Intensive Literature and Digital Media_. Brown University. Providence, Rhode Island. May 2006.WARDRIP-FRUIN,Noah. Christopher Strachey the first digital artist? _Grand Text Auto_. 1 August 2005. http//grandtextauto.gatech.edu/2005/08/01/christopher-strachey-first-digital-artist/ First accessed 3 September 2006.ZWASS, Vladimir. _Foundations of Information Systems_. Mcgraw-Hill College, NY 1997.