Narrative in a Digital Age

Jason Boyd, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of English, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada

Course Type: Survey; Humanities and Design and Technology-focused

Keywords: Digital Narrative; Electronic Literature; Playable Stories, Procedural Creativity

University Department Level Credits Length Medium
Toronto Metropolitan University English Undergraduate 1 (1 semester course) 12 weeks In-person

Course Description

Calendar Description

 

This course explores how contemporary writers and artists have attempted to come to terms with the so-called post-print era—a historical moment characterized by the strategies of fragmentation and recombination that digital hyperspaces make possible. By analyzing digital texts and the work of cultural theorists on the nature and impact of this new medium, students will address the implications of the rise of computing and the internet for the future of literary and other cultural practices.

 

Detailed Description 


This course explores the impact of digital technologies on understandings and practices of narrative or storytelling, examining how these technologies are changing the scope, definition, and ways of creating and experiencing the ‘literary.’ As part of this exploration, we examine not only digital works, but also exemplary print-based precursors and analogues to these digital works, as well as scholarship on this creative field. The course will focus on three broad categories of creative digital work: 1) Writing Machines, focused on the intersection of the literary with digital formats, computer programs and programming idioms; 2) Electronic Literature, particularly Hypertext and Hypermedia, which makes use of hyperlinking to create various kinds of pathways for the user to choose and explore, and Interactive Fiction (IF), which parses text-based input from the reader to construct a story; and 3) Digital Narrative Games, which examines the challenges and opportunities that video games present for creating new forms of interactive stories.

Weekly Outline

  1. Introduction: Concepts & Issues in Digital Literature/Storytelling
  2. Writing Machines 1: Procedural Text Generators
  3. Writing Machines 2: Procedural Poetry
  4. Writing Machines 3: Writing within Digital Forms and Codework
  5. Electronic Literature 1: Hypertext/Hypermedia
  6. Electronic Literature 2: Interactive Fiction (IF): Playing with the Parser
  7. Electronic Literature 3 / Digital Games and Narrative 1: Stories into Games, Games into Stories
  8. Digital Games and Narrative 2: “It’s Not/Just a Game!”: Defining Games
  9. Digital Games and Narrative 3: “It’s Not a Game!”: Walking and Talking Games 
  10. Digital Games and Narrative 4: “It’s Just a Game!”: Persuasive Games and Procedural Rhetoric
  11. Digital Games and Narrative 5: Playing with Games: Metagames
  12. Digital Games and Narrative 6: Playable Stories

Course Objectives ​

Course Goal

Students explore digital texts/narratives of various kinds and the methods and technologies used to create these works to understand the historical antecedents and current state of storytelling in a digital age, contextualized by pertinent scholarship and creative, hands-on exploration, and, through reading/playing, discussing, and creating, improve their critical reading and integration of primary and secondary research into their analytical writing.

Student Learning Outcomes 

  • Students survey and critically engage with salient features of a broad range of creative works that use computing technologies as well as scholarship examining storytelling in a digital age. 
  • Students analyze key components of digital narrative as embodied in a specific work and relate their analysis to pertinent critical work.
  • Students develop hands-on experience with computer programs and platforms for creating digital narratives, for example, algorithmically generated text, hypertext, interactive fiction (IF) and story-rich digital games or playable stories.
  • Students explore a key component of digital narrative through the creation of a digital narrative, informed by scholarly sources.

Reading

  • Stanislaw Lem, “U-Write-It” A Perfect Balance (1971)
  • Tony Veale and Mike Cook, “Make Something That Makes Something” Chapter 3 of Twitterbots: Making Machines That Make Meaning (2018)
  • Aaron Tucker, “Machine Co-Authorship(s) via Translative Creative Writing” (2019)
  • Rita Raley, “Interferences: [Net.Writing] and the Practice of Codework” (2012)
  • Robert Coover, “The Babysitter” (1970)
  • Jorge Luis Borges, “The Garden of Forking Paths” (1941)
  • George P. Landow, “Reconfiguring Narrative” Chapter 6 of Hypertext 3.0 (2006; excerpts)
  • Nick Montfort, “Riddle Machines: The History and Nature of Interactive Fiction” Chapter 14 of A Companion to Digital Literary Studies (2008)
  • Robin Burkinshaw, Alice and Kev (2009) (blog)
  • Henry Jenkins, “Game Design as Narrative Architecture” (2004)
  • Mary Flanagan, “Critical Computer Games” Chapter 7 of Critical Play: Radical Game Design (2009)
  • Alex Duncan, “That Wasn’t Supposed to be a Choice: Metafiction and The Stanley Parable” (2014) (blog)
  • Ian Bogost, “Video Games Are Better Without Stories” (2017)

Viewings

  • Takatsu, “What Are Cell Phone Novels?” (2013) (YouTube)
  • SwimmingBird941, “White Enderman Legend” (2013) (YouTube)
  • Paul Soares, Jr., “DIAMONDS!” (E05, Paul Plays Minecraft 1.9) (2016) (YouTube)
  • Extra Credits, “Game Writing Pitfalls: Lost Opportunities in Games” (2016) (YouTube)
  • Mark Brown, “Can We Make Talking as Much Fun as Shooting?” (2019) (YouTube)
  • Extra Credits, “Bad Writing: Why Most Games Tell Bad Stories” (2012) (YouTube)

IDE and IDN Authoring Tools

  • Tracery
  • Perchance
  • Twine 2
  • Inform 7
  • Ink/Inky
  • Bitsy
  • Texture

IDN Artifacts

  • The Spoonbill Generator, The N+7 Machine (Oulipian text deformer, web)
  • Gibberish Generator (Markov text generator, web)
  • Eddeaddad, charNG (n-gram generator, web)
  • Eddeaddad, eDiastic (poetry generator, web)
  • Talan Memmott, Self Portrait(s) [as other(s)] (2003) (combinatory biography generator, web)
  • Alison Arth, Gentleman Bandit (2019) (Tabletop RPG)
  • Keith Enevoldsen, Poem Generator (web)
  • Villanelle Bot (poetry generator, web)
  • Allison Parrish, Plot to Poem (generated poetry, web)
  • Fairy Fables (story generator, Tumblr)
  • Cut-up Bot: @cutup_bot (Twitter/X)
  • Allison Parrish, Eventually Bot (Twitter/X) 
  • a strange voyage: @str_voyage (Twitter/X)
  • John Ayliff, Seedship (2017) (Twine/Tracery, web)
  • Nick Montfort (and others), Taroko Gorge (2009) (poetry generator, web)
  • Mark Sample, This Is Just Infinite (2020) (combinatory poem generator, web)
  • Ian MacLarty and Gemma Mahadeo, If We Were Allowed to Visit (2020) (3D text poem, web)
  • Aaron Tucker, The ChessBard (2014) (poetry generator, web)
  • Sean Hill, @VeryShortStory (Twitter/X, web)
  • James Mark Miller, @ASmallFiction (Twitter/X, web)
  • Ewan Matthews (@ThePringularity), @The_Settlers_ (Twitter/X, web)
  • Nick Harkaway et. al. Tales of Urm (2011) (Twitter/X, web)
  • Rob Wittig, The Fall of the Site of Marsha (1999) (web)
  • The Pixel Hunt, Figs, & ARTE France, Bury Me, My Love (2017)
  • Sam Barlow, Her Story (2015)
  • Andy Wallace, Terminal Town (2016) (MacOS only)
  • Porpentine, Foldscape (2015) 
  • Mez, _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][_ (2003) (codework, web)
  • Geoff Ryman, 253 (1996) (hypertext, web)
  • Susan M. Gibb, Blueberries (2009) (hypertext, web)
  • Anna Anthropy, queers in love at the end of the world (2013) (Twine, web)
  • Porpentine, howling dogs (2012) (Twine, web)
  • Michael Lutz, my father’s long, long legs (2013) (Twine, web)
  • Bloom Digital Media, Later Daters (2020) (visual novel)
  • NobodyHere (1998-) (hypertext journal, web)
  • David Clark, 88 Constellations for Wittgenstein (2008) (hypertext biography, web)
  • Andrew Plotkin, Shade (2000) (Inform interactive fiction, web)
  • Jon Ingold, All Roads (2001) (Inform interactive fiction, web)
  • Sam Barlow, Aisle (2009) (Inform interactive fiction, web)
  • Emily Short, Galatea (2000) (Inform interactive fiction, web)
  • Inkle Studios, 80 Days (2014)
  • Golden Glitch, Elsinore (2019)
  • Simogo, DEVICE 6 (2013) (iOS)
  • Fullbright, Tacoma (2017)
  • Tiger Style Games, Spider: The Secret of Bryce Manor HD (2012) (iOS)
  • Florian Veltman, Lieve Oma (2016)
  • Campo Santo, Firewatch (2016)
  • Night School Studios, Oxenfree (2016)
  • Anna Anthropy, Dys4ia (2012) (requires Adobe Flash emulator)
  • Urban Ministries of Durham & McKinney, Spent (web)
  • Laundry Bear Games, A Mortician’s Tale (2017)
  • Chris Cornell, Save the Date! (2013) (Ren’Py)
  • Galactic Cafe, The Stanley Parable: Ultra Deluxe (2022)
  • Mike Bithell, Thomas Was Alone (2014)
  • Neven Mrgan and James Moore, Blackbar (2015) (iOS/Android)
  • Echodog Games, Signs of the Sojourner (2020)

Major Assignments (being assignments whose value is of 25% or more)

Cyborg Texts

  • Platform: Choice of The Chessbard and eDiastic (Option 1, A Chessbard Translation and Its Deformance); a text generation program from Nick Montfort’s website (nickm.com) (Option 2, Hacking a Poetic Machine); Tracery or Perchance (Option 3, Creating a Literbot); or a Word Processor (Option 4, One-page solo TTRPG)
  • Purpose: To assess student comprehension of the capabilities of the text generation/modification systems studied in the course by requiring students to deliberately and creatively use these systems and methods to generate collaborative and generative texts with computer/procedural co-authors.
  • Requirements:
    • Project Length: Not applicable.
    • Project Size: Options 1 and 2 are around 2 pages; Options 2 and 3 require submission of the created/hacked code and sample generated outputs.
    • Project Aesthetics: Interesting, thoughtful, deliberate, poetic design/modifications and outputs. 
    • Coding Proficiency: Students must demonstrate enough digital/coding literacy to effectively use the specified platforms to generate outputs that satisfy the aesthetic criteria listed above.
  • Evaluation: 
    • Interactivity: Not applicable, except for Option 4 (solo TTRPG). In week 2, we discuss TTRPG rule design and randomness in terms of proper scoping of the narrative premise, ensuring narrative consistency, and enabling a satisfying narrative closure.
    • Story and narrative: Besides the aesthetic criteria outlined above, submissions are evaluated not on story/narrative, but for a reflection, the prompt of which is: “Based on your experience as a cyborg writer and what has been discussed in class about procedural text generation, write a brief (250-300 word) reflection on your experience of procedural creativity. How does this creative process differ from other creative processes? Who is the author of these works (both the processes and the outputs)? Do cyborg texts have potential for opening up ‘new horizons for the literary’ (N. Katherine Hayles)?”
    • Production values: Not applicable, except in terms of output comprehensibility (including spelling and grammar). For Option 4 (solo TTRPG), students are asked to “make the page’s layout and design attractive and in keeping with the theme” of the TTRPG.

Playable Story

  • Platform: Choice of Twine 2, Inform 7, Ink/Inky, Bitsy, Texture, or a engine of the student’s choice (such as Ren’Py).
  • Purpose: To design, build and share a Playable Story in order to gain experiential understanding of procedural authorship using one of the digital creation platforms listed above. Playable stories are submitted to a course jam called “Fabuludus” hosted on itch.io.
  • Requirements:
    • Project Length: Length is not specified. Instead, students are asked to ensure that their playable story is developed enough to ensure it offers a satisfying playable experience (usually some sort of outcome or ending), even if the story is incomplete or imperfect.
    • Project Size: Size is not specified. As with length, the primary requirement is playability.
    • Project Aesthetics: Submissions must engage with and explore one key concept in digital storytelling that has been covered in the course (e.g., choice and agency, riddles / puzzles, ludonarrative dissonance, procedural rhetoric and persuasive/critical games, winning / losing / failing), as well as incorporate the theme of the Fabuldudus jam. 
    • Coding Proficiency: It is expected that students will familiarize themselves with at least the rudiments of their chosen engine in order to produce a playable story.
  • Evaluation: 
    • Interactivity: Offers meaningful/thoughtful play (e.g. meaningful user interaction, chance for repeated play, sufficient/satisfactory play duration, emotional impact, fun).
    • Story and narrative: Meaningfully addresses Fabuludus theme; discernibly incorporates the chosen digital storytelling concept.
    • Production values: Displays attentiveness to quality (e.g. audiovisual design, strong writing, correct spelling and grammar, image quality).

Playthrough Essay

  • Platform: Paper
  • Purpose: To apply the insights students have developed as a playable story creator critically in assessing another’s creator’s work. This assignment is inspired by the anthology edited by merritt kopas, Videogames for Humans: Twine Authors in Conversation (instar books, 2015). This anthology consists of written playthroughs of Twine works by people who themselves are creators of Twine works. The playthroughs consist of the content of the games as encountered by the readers/players, the choices they make, and their reactions and reflections as they move through the work. Kopas writes: “the conversational format of these ‘readings’ suggests the feeling of sitting next to the player and listening to them talk about the work they’re engaging with as they move through it. Some of these reflections are deeply personal, while others focus on the technical qualities of the works” (17).
  • Requirements:
    • Project Length: An exhaustive playthrough that covers every feature of the work is not required; however, the playthrough should aim to get to the/a end, where possible.
    • Project Size: Because of the variation in the playable stories and the options to paraphrase and/or use screen shots, no page length or word count range or limit for this essay is specified.
    • Project Aesthetics: As students are assigned playable stories created using the same engine as they used for their playable stories, the expectation is that they will be able to infer and comment on the quality of the aesthetic choices made.
    • Coding Proficiency: As students are assigned playable stories created using the same engine as they used for their playable stories, the expectation is that they will be able to speculate and comment on the coding choice made. 
  • Evaluation: Students are asked to approach this assignment less as assessors (although they can offer constructive criticism) and more as readers/players and playable story creators, drawing upon their own experiences of and knowledge about creating a playable story when reflecting on the playable story with which they are ‘conversing.’

Course Best Practices

  • Because of the large number of assigned works, the focus on their formal elements rather than the details of the narratives, and the different experiences and stories that can result from different paths through the works, students are encouraged to explore enough of the works to give them ‘a sense of’ how the work operates rather than feeling pressured to finished every work in its entirety/multiplicity. Salient narrative moments that students might not have encountered can be shown in class.
  • Students are encouraged to consult walkthrough guides or watch playthrough videos of works if they are struggling to make progress. A curated list of helpful walkthroughs/playthroughs is provided for works that might be challenging for students.
  • Slide decks of lectures are provided, as students are asked to draw on concepts discussed in lecture for the major assignments.
  • From Weeks 2-9, one hour of the three-hour class is used for a ‘Literary Platforms’ workshop, which introduces a range of engines that can be used for the Cyborg Texts and Playable Stories assignments. A range of supporting materials (primers, video tutorials, sample works) is made available in the LMS.
  • It is repeatedly stressed that the Playable Story assignment must be planned out and development started well in advance of the due date—it is not an assignment one can successfully complete ‘the day before’ it is due. Various means can be used to encourage students to start work on their Playable Stories: a detailed Design Document (draft/final version) or a Developer’s Journal with a couple of check-in to provide feedback on progress.  
  • A fun way to end the course is to hold a Playable Story Arcade where student can play the submissions and perhaps some outstanding work can be presented with awards.