To conclude: perhaps the state-space of digital poetry that utilizes dimensional typography has already been explored. Pioneers (like Hayles, Kac, Cooper, Hartmann, Funkhouser, Sondheim, Andrews, Lewis, Miller and Valles) may have already charted most of the terrain. It may be that for the near future, digital technology will merely fill in the details, -- increase the rendering, raycasting and polygon count, enhance compositing detail and ease the use. Perhaps, there will be no paradigm shift in collective ontologies, no revolution in subtle apprehensions, no aesthetic animism. It may also be that, like the video phone, volumetric text loiters on the periphery of technological evolution for an era. It may be that the notion of living language is consigned temporarily to the trash, only to re-emerge when conditions are correct. It may be that volumetric-sonic-reactive text violates current cognitive multiplexing and is thoroughly rejected as a literary device; if, however, cognitive speed-limits accelerate (as the rate of change of genetics suggests might occur) then multimedia literature might flourish. Even then, it may be that digital poetry never mainstreams, and instead fulfils a purposeful marginal niche role without inducing any subtle modulations in collective ontologies; until is discovered incipient underneath the most ordinary of notions. Precipitous in technology demands we reconsider and re-examine animist speculation as it concerns language. Bodies are structured matter; language is becoming increasingly structured and thus tacitly embodiedetterforms will know who wrote them and who read them; and typography will be capable of disguising itself into our lived environments (either through motion graphics or augmented mobile apps). As these changes occur, attitudes toward the and will shift, iconic traditions will be literary poetic subsumed, and hybrid disciplines will emerge. Digital poetry might evolve into an aesthetic animism where letterforms exist as proprioceptive entities, reactive, intelligent, aware, and reflective of acoustic archetypes. Language might live. A necessary precondition for living language is increased sensitivity to the temporal and ontological propositions imposed by design paradigms of typographic animation
To conclude: perhaps the state-space of digital poetry that utilizes dimensional typography has already been explored. Pioneers (like Hayles, Kac, Cooper, Hartmann, Funkhouser, Sondheim, Andrews, Lewis, Miller and Valles) may have already charted most of the terrain. It may be that for the near future, digital technology will merely fill in the details, -- increase the rendering, raycasting and polygon count, enhance compositing detail and ease the use. Perhaps, there will be no paradigm shift in collective ontologies, no revolution in subtle apprehensions, no aesthetic animism. It may also be that, like the video phone, volumetric text loiters on the periphery of technological evolution for an era. It may be that the notion of living language is consigned temporarily to the trash, only to re-emerge when conditions are correct. It may be that volumetric-sonic-reactive text violates current cognitive multiplexing and is thoroughly rejected as a literary device; if, however, cognitive speed-limits accelerate (as the rate of change of genetics suggests might occur) then multimedia literature might flourish. Even then, it may be that digital poetry never mainstreams, and instead fulfils a purposeful marginal niche role without inducing any subtle modulations in collective ontologies; until is discovered incipient underneath the most ordinary of notions. Precipitous in technology demands we reconsider and re-examine animist speculation as it concerns language. Bodies are structured matter; language is becoming increasingly structured and thus tacitly embodiedetterforms will know who wrote them and who read them; and typography will be capable of disguising itself into our lived environments (either through motion graphics or augmented mobile apps). As these changes occur, attitudes toward the literary and poetic will shift, iconic traditions will be subsumed, and hybrid disciplines will emerge. Digital poetry might evolve into an aesthetic animism where letterforms exist as proprioceptive entities, reactive, intelligent, aware, and reflective of acoustic archetypes. Language might live. A necessary precondition for living language is increased sensitivity to the temporal and ontological propositions imposed by design paradigms of typographic animation