Introduction: “Determining Literariness In Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall
“Determining Literariness in Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall first appeared in 1988 in the journal Computers and the Humanities. Randall’s article delves into the notion of “literariness” in the emerging genre of interactive fiction, exploring whether this medium, primarily associated with computer-based text adventures, can achieve the hallmarks of literary value. Drawing on Russian Formalist Viktor Shklovskij’s concept of ostranenie, or “making strange,” Randall evaluates how interactive fiction both defamiliarizes familiar elements and familiarizes the strange. By examining works like Mindwheel, Brimstone, Breakers, A Mind Forever Voyaging, Portal, and Trinity, he argues that these interactive narratives display qualities traditionally associated with literary art. Randall sees these stories as expanding literary traditions through their fusion of reader interactivity with literary elements, creating new forms of narrative experience that engage readers on both a cognitive and participatory level. This work is significant for its early theoretical exploration of interactive fiction within the domain of literary theory, situating it as a medium that bridges storytelling and reader agency, and underscoring its potential to reshape our understanding of narrative structure and reader involvement in literature.
Summary of “Determining Literariness In Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall
Literariness in Interactive Fiction: A New Frontier
- Exploring Literary Potential
Randall examines how interactive fiction, a genre largely known for text-based adventures on computers, is beginning to exhibit qualities that could be considered literary. This genre, once rooted in gaming and puzzle-solving, has evolved to include elements that encourage deeper literary engagement, marking a shift from mere gameplay to a form that seeks “literary stature” (Randall, p. 183). - Application of Russian Formalism
Central to Randall’s analysis is Viktor Shklovskij’s concept of ostranenie or “making strange.” Randall argues that interactive fiction can attain literariness by defamiliarizing the ordinary for readers and inviting them into new, immersive worlds where familiar language and experiences take on fresh meaning (p. 184). This focus on “making strange” aligns interactive fiction with Shklovskij’s view of literary art, which seeks to “render new that which has become familiar” (p. 185).
Characteristics of Literariness in Interactive Fiction
- Text as a Participatory Medium
Unlike traditional novels, interactive fiction requires active reader involvement to progress the narrative, which aligns with Wolfgang Iser’s view that the aesthetic experience of literature involves reader participation (Randall, p. 185). By necessitating input, interactive fiction creates narrative “gaps” that readers must fill, enhancing its literariness through direct reader interaction (p. 190). - Combining Familiarity and Strangeness
Randall illustrates how interactive fiction merges familiarity and strangeness by immersing the reader in a world that is both recognizable and novel. For instance, Portal by Rob Swigart combines familiar narrative techniques with a mystery plot to investigate human disappearance, blending literary tradition with innovative storytelling (p. 189).
Canonization and Cultural Value
- Interactive Fiction’s Place in the Literary Canon
Randall considers Terry Eagleton’s perspective on the literary canon as historically constructed and susceptible to evolution based on changing values (p. 186). He suggests that interactive fiction, as a genre, might join the “sub-canon” of science fiction and fantasy by upholding both the conventions of these genres and distinct literary qualities (p. 190). Randall interprets Shklovskij’s idea of the “canonization of the junior branch” to mean that new genres emerge in literature as they break through established literary constraints (p. 186).
Examples of Literary Interactivity
- Analyzing Notable Works in Interactive Fiction
Randall highlights specific interactive works like A Mind Forever Voyaging by Steve Meretzky, which challenges players to make moral decisions without a scoring system, thereby prioritizing narrative depth over gameplay. Similarly, Mindwheel by Robert Pinsky and Brimstone by James Paul incorporate intertextual references and complex narratives that echo traditional literary themes (p. 188). These works are cited as leading examples of how interactive fiction can achieve a level of literary depth. - Merging Narrative Structure and Reader Agency
Randall argues that interactive fiction uniquely combines structured narrative with reader agency, a characteristic that challenges traditional notions of literariness. In these interactive stories, the reader’s ability to navigate and influence the narrative path mirrors the “metaphoric and metonymic” properties of poetic language, as described by Roman Jakobson (p. 187).
Interactive Fiction as a Distinct Genre
- A Genre Defined by Reader Interaction
Randall asserts that interactive fiction should be viewed as a distinct genre due to its reliance on the reader’s direct involvement, setting it apart from traditional narrative forms. He notes that interactive fiction requires readers to perform physical actions, such as typing commands, which interrupts the continuity of the reading experience in a way that is unique to this genre (p. 189).
Concluding Remarks
- Literariness as an Intersection of Strangeness and Familiarity
Ultimately, Randall concludes that interactive fiction attains literariness by blending the strange with the familiar, achieving a literary aesthetic that invites readers to both recognize and reimagine traditional narrative forms (p. 191). This genre’s reliance on both technological innovation and literary tradition positions it as a significant development in modern literature.
Literary Terms/Concepts in “Determining Literariness In Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall
| Term/Concept | Description | Reference |
| Literariness | The quality that makes a text “literary”; according to Russian Formalists, it involves “making strange” or defamiliarizing familiar language and concepts. | Defined by Shklovskij and the Russian Formalists, pp. 183-184 |
| Ostranenie | Russian term for “defamiliarization” or “making strange,” used to make readers see familiar things in a new way, thus enhancing literary value. | Shklovskij, p. 184 |
| Canonization | The process of including certain works within the literary canon, a selection influenced by cultural and historical values. | Terry Eagleton and Shklovskij’s “canonization of the junior branch,” p. 186 |
| Reader Interaction | The role of the reader’s active participation in progressing the narrative, a defining feature of interactive fiction that enhances its literary nature. | Wolfgang Iser’s theories on reader response, p. 185 |
| Narrative Gaps | Intentional breaks in the narrative that readers fill through interpretation, a technique that engages readers deeply in the story. | Wolfgang Iser, p. 190 |
| Poetic Function | Roman Jakobson’s idea that poetic language projects equivalence, emphasizing form over content; used to analyze interactivity in interactive fiction. | Roman Jakobson, p. 187 |
| Synchronicity | The organization of events and elements occurring simultaneously; in interactive fiction, allows readers to explore non-linear narratives. | As seen in Mindwheel and other interactive works, p. 188 |
| Intertextuality | References to other literary or cultural texts within a work, enriching the narrative by drawing on external literary traditions. | Present in works like Brimstone, p. 188 |
| Metaphoric/Metonymic | Jakobson’s linguistic dimensions where the metaphoric is associative and synchronic, and the metonymic is combinative and diachronic; relevant in narrative layering. | Roman Jakobson’s language dimensions, p. 187 |
| Structural Continuity | In traditional literature, the uninterrupted flow of a narrative; in interactive fiction, continuity is adapted through reader choice and narrative exploration. | Concept discussed by Randall, pp. 189-190 |
| Moral Fiction | Literature that emphasizes ethical or moral questions, often aligning with artistic responsibility; seen as a trend in serious interactive fiction. | Sidney-Shelley-John Gardner school, p. 189 |
Contribution of “Determining Literariness In Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall to Literary Theory/Theories
1. Russian Formalism and Ostranenie
- Contribution: Randall’s work extends the Russian Formalist concept of ostranenie (defamiliarization) to the realm of interactive fiction, arguing that the genre achieves literariness by “making strange” familiar elements. This recontextualizes interactive fiction as a genre that challenges the reader’s perception, not only of narrative but of language itself.
- Theory Reference: Viktor Shklovskij’s ostranenie is central to this approach, as it defines literariness as the ability to renew or make strange the familiar (Randall, p. 184).
- Textual Example: Randall observes that works like Mindwheel and Portal “defamiliarize” the act of storytelling itself, positioning the reader as an active participant in unfamiliar worlds, making the ordinary extraordinary through interaction (p. 189).
- Contribution: The article applies Reader-Response Theory, specifically Wolfgang Iser’s ideas, to interactive fiction, framing the genre as one where the reader’s active role is paramount. Interactive fiction transforms the reader from a passive observer to a co-creator of meaning, aligning with Iser’s emphasis on reader interaction and the aesthetic response.
- Theory Reference: Wolfgang Iser’s theory of “indeterminacy” and “narrative gaps” emphasizes how literature invites readers to fill interpretive gaps, enhancing the aesthetic experience (Randall, p. 185).
- Textual Example: Randall notes that interactive fiction’s need for reader input to progress the narrative creates two types of gaps: the traditional interpretive gaps and direct narrative interruptions that demand active reader engagement, thus heightening the work’s literariness (p. 190).
3. Structuralist Theories of Language and Narrative
- Contribution: Randall extends Roman Jakobson’s Structuralist concepts of language’s metaphoric and metonymic functions to the structure of interactive fiction, positioning it as a narrative system where synchronicity and non-linearity enable readers to move through stories in unconventional ways.
- Theory Reference: Jakobson’s linguistic functions emphasize how poetic language differs from everyday speech by drawing attention to its form. In interactive fiction, this manifests through the “superimposition” of reader-driven plot choice and structured narrative (Randall, p. 187).
- Textual Example: Randall points to Mindwheel as an example, where readers explore character minds in various orders, mixing synchronic (simultaneous) and diachronic (sequential) experiences, aligning with Jakobson’s principles (p. 188).
4. Theories of Canonization and Cultural Value
- Contribution: Randall connects interactive fiction to Terry Eagleton’s theories on canon formation, suggesting that interactive fiction might one day gain literary recognition as a “junior branch” of the literary canon, much like science fiction and fantasy before it.
- Theory Reference: Eagleton’s view that canonization is historically constructed and culturally specific supports Randall’s assertion that interactive fiction can redefine literary boundaries, given changing cultural attitudes (Randall, p. 186).
- Textual Example: Randall argues that works like A Mind Forever Voyaging and Portal exemplify literary potential by addressing serious themes and complex storytelling, supporting their potential inclusion in a “sub-canon” of science fiction and fantasy (p. 190).
5. Moral Fiction and Ethical Responsibility in Literature
- Contribution: By analyzing interactive fiction’s shift towards themes of moral and ethical responsibility, Randall situates the genre within the Sidney-Shelley-John Gardner school of moral fiction, where literature is not just an artistic endeavor but also a moral one. This is especially significant in interactive fiction, where readers’ choices often have ethical implications.
- Theory Reference: The moral fiction framework emphasizes that literary art should bear an ethical responsibility, which Randall sees emerging in serious interactive works (p. 189).
- Textual Example: Randall discusses A Mind Forever Voyaging, where players make decisions with potential social impact, thus reflecting an ethical stance within the narrative. This marks a shift away from earlier, less complex works focused primarily on gameplay (p. 188).
6. Postmodernism and Fragmentation
- Contribution: Randall associates interactive fiction with Ihab Hassan’s postmodern “catena of features,” such as fragmentation and decanonization, observing how interactive fiction disrupts traditional literary expectations and introduces non-linear narrative structures.
- Theory Reference: Ihab Hassan’s postmodern traits like “Indeterminacy” and “Fragmentation” resonate with interactive fiction’s non-linear, often disjointed storytelling that requires readers to piece together the narrative actively (Randall, p. 186).
- Textual Example: Randall points out how Trinity by Brian Moriarty combines historical reference with imaginative re-creation, creating a fragmented experience that defies straightforward narrative progression, embodying Hassan’s postmodern traits (p. 188).
Examples of Critiques Through “Determining Literariness In Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall
| Literary Work | Critique | Key Aspects Analyzed | Reference |
| Mindwheel (by Robert Pinsky) | Randall views Mindwheel as self-consciously literary, incorporating symbolic and mythological elements. He highlights the protagonist’s journey into four minds, embodying themes of rebirth and enlightenment. | Ostranenie, Synchronicity | p. 188 |
| A Mind Forever Voyaging (by Steve Meretzky) | Critiqued as a complex narrative that transcends traditional gaming by eliminating a score system, A Mind Forever Voyaging focuses on moral exploration and social critique, elevating it to literary art. | Moral Fiction, Reader Interaction | p. 188 |
| Brimstone (by James Paul) | Brimstone is praised for its rich intertextuality, referencing Dante’s Hell, Blake’s works, and Arthurian legends. Randall argues that these allusions contribute to its literariness and depth. | Intertextuality, Self-Referentiality | p. 188 |
| Trinity (by Brian Moriarty) | Randall identifies Trinity as powerful for its integration of historical events with imaginative storytelling. The moral weight of the atomic bomb’s devastation imbues the narrative with ethical depth and reflection. | Moral Fiction, Historical Context | p. 188 |
Criticism Against “Determining Literariness In Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall
- Over-Reliance on Traditional Literary Theories
Randall applies established theories like Russian Formalism and Reader-Response Theory to interactive fiction, but critics may argue that these frameworks do not fully capture the uniqueness of interactive media, which operates differently from static texts. - Narrow Definition of Literariness
The article’s focus on ostranenie (defamiliarization) as a defining feature of literariness may be seen as limiting, as it excludes other literary qualities such as emotional depth, character development, or narrative cohesion, which are often valued in literary works. - Limited Scope of Interactive Works Analyzed
Randall’s analysis centers on a handful of specific interactive works (e.g., Mindwheel, Brimstone), leading to questions about whether his conclusions apply broadly across the genre, especially given the wide variety of styles and formats within interactive fiction. - Assumption of Canonization Potential
Randall suggests that interactive fiction could enter the literary canon, but critics may argue that his claims about canonization overlook how digital media and traditional literature are often evaluated by different standards and within distinct cultural contexts. - Minimal Engagement with Gameplay Mechanics
Randall’s analysis emphasizes literary aspects while downplaying how gameplay mechanics themselves influence the storytelling and literary potential of interactive fiction. This focus may overlook how the unique interactivity and structure of these games create meaning outside of literary tradition. - Underexplored Reader Agency in Complex Narratives
While Randall highlights reader interaction as enhancing literariness, he does not fully address how excessive player agency or fragmented narratives might detract from a coherent or traditionally “literary” experience, raising questions about narrative control in interactive fiction.
Representative Quotations from “Determining Literariness In Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “Literariness, as defined by Shklovskij and the Russian Formalists, is the quality of ‘making strange’ that which is linguistically familiar.” | Randall applies the concept of ostranenie, suggesting that interactive fiction achieves literariness by defamiliarizing familiar language and experiences, a cornerstone in evaluating interactive fiction as a serious literary form. |
| “Interactive fiction indisputably fulfills the requirement of participation… what needs to be determined, though, is whether or not the world presented is a ‘literary’ one.” | He questions whether interactive fiction, while engaging, also holds literary value, setting up the central inquiry of his article regarding interactive fiction’s status within literary theory. |
| “As interactive fiction grows more complex and more serious, its authors themselves have begun to ask that question [of literariness].” | This quotation points to the genre’s evolution from entertainment to a form aspiring to literary recognition, with creators consciously designing narratives that provoke thought and exploration. |
| “A reader familiar with interactive fiction will find strange… the need for reading the introductory chapters in the first place.” | Here, Randall examines how interactive fiction challenges conventional reading expectations by combining traditional storytelling with interactive, digital structures, enhancing the defamiliarization experience. |
| “Interactive fiction allows its own form of continuity… even if the plot is not.” | This statement emphasizes that interactive fiction offers a distinct narrative continuity, shaped by reader actions rather than linear story progression, which differs from traditional novels and plays a role in its literariness. |
| “If Shklovskij is correct in asserting that literary language hangs on the very notion of ostranenie, then… making strange a literary work is a literary act.” | Randall argues that ostranenie is foundational to all literature, positing that interactive fiction’s capacity to “make strange” can elevate it to the level of literary art. |
| “In interactive fiction, the reader is automatically aware of the gaps because until she fills them in, the text will not continue.” | This highlights the unique requirement of reader agency in interactive fiction, as narrative gaps invite readers to contribute directly to the unfolding of the story, thus deepening their engagement and making it more “literary.” |
| “For Jakobson, poetic language ‘projects the principle of equivalence from the axis of selection into the axis of combination.'” | By invoking Jakobson’s concept of poetic language, Randall suggests that interactive fiction’s combination of reader choices and structured narrative mirrors poetic language, adding a literary dimension to the genre. |
| “Interactive fiction derives literariness from the combination of strangeness and familiarity.” | Randall argues that interactive fiction attains a unique form of literariness by juxtaposing familiar and strange elements, creating a new aesthetic experience that merges traditional storytelling with interactive immersion. |
| “The role of the reader here is not merely that of an interpreter but of a co-creator.” | This underscores a fundamental aspect of interactive fiction, where the reader actively shapes the narrative, reflecting theories of reader-response but with heightened agency that blurs the boundary between reader and creator. |
Suggested Readings: “Determining Literariness In Interactive Fiction” by Neil Randall
- Randall, Neil. “Determining Literariness in Interactive Fiction.” Computers and the Humanities, vol. 22, no. 3, 1988, pp. 183–91. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/30200120. Accessed 9 Nov. 2024.
- Rockwell, Geoffrey. “Gore Galore: Literary Theory and Computer Games.” Computers and the Humanities, vol. 36, no. 3, 2002, pp. 345–58. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/30200532. Accessed 9 Nov. 2024.
- “Front Matter.” Computers and the Humanities, vol. 22, no. 3, 1988. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/30200117. Accessed 9 Nov. 2024.