Writing as real-time performance

Con­sider a few things that are col­lid­ing, at this moment, in my brain.

Warm-up num­ber one: The writer Michael C. Mil­li­gan is writ­ing a novel in three days. Just as interestingly—maybe even more interestingly—Eli James over at Nov­elr is live-blogging the process. It starts on Tuesday.

Warm-up num­ber two: If I get to $10,000 over at Kick­starter (I’m $76 away!) I’m going to write an entire short story on my flight to New York on Tuesday.

Warm-up num­ber three: Alain de Bot­ton as Heathrow’s writer-in-residence. You see him stalk­ing the ter­mi­nal, tak­ing notes.

All together, these set up this sort of writing-as-performance vibe. The text alone is not the thing.

Now, here’s what’s really got me think­ing: Google Wave has a play­back fea­ture. Ether­Pad’s got it, too. This takes wiki-style doc­u­ment ver­sion­ing a step fur­ther, or maybe a mil­lion steps fur­ther. It’s so much more gran­u­lar! It goes key­stroke by key­stroke and attaches a time-stamp to each one. It records and recre­ates not just words and spaces, but con­fi­dence and hesitation.

So, skip past the obvi­ous notion of play­ing back the cre­ation of a stan­dard short story or a novel. That’s fine; it makes me shiver, but it’s fine.

Think instead of a short story writ­ten with play­back in mind. Writ­ten for play­back. Typ­ing speed and rhythm are part of the expe­ri­ence. Dra­matic dele­tions are part of the story. The text at 2:20 tells you some­thing about the text at 11:13, and vice versa. What appear at first to be tiny, ten­ta­tive revi­sions turn out to be precisely-engineered sig­nals. At 5:15 and para­graph five, the author switches a character’s gen­der, trig­ger­ing a chain reac­tion of edits in the pre­ced­ing grafs, some of which have inter­est­ing (and pre-planned?) side effects.

Talk about intertextuality.

I’m sure there are arty prece­dents (and if you know of any, I’d love to hear about them). But this feels like an inter­est­ing moment, sim­ply because these are tools with (poten­tially) mass audi­ences. It’s pos­si­ble that a lot of peo­ple are sud­denly about to get a bit bet­ter at version-scrubbing, at under­stand­ing doc­u­ments in time. And that means—maybe?—an audi­ence for writ­ing as real-time performance.

19 Responses

    You saw http://etherpad.com/ep/pad/slider/13sentences right? Paul Gra­ham com­poses one of his essays in Ether­Pad. It’s def­i­nitely not as cool as the idea you describe, but it sure is inter­est­ing to watch/read.

    Do you sup­pose some­day your head will actu­ally explode from all these ideas, Robin?

    (I hope not.)

    \-\/\/

    Tal Zaken says:

    I sin­cerely hope that this idea comes to fruition in a big way. Time-organized text could be a great new medium, almost like a play acted with text as char­ac­ters, the words them­selves devel­op­ing per­son­al­ity. Awesome.

    Saheli says:

    I was think­ing about this too! Tonight! At the Utter­back talk I emailed you about too late to get you to go, but gosh you need to go to this series some­time. (Before hand the cura­tor asks for announce­ments, neat media stuff the audi­enc was involved with, and I was gripped by this desire to announce your book on your behalf, but I just couldn’t decide if you’d want me to.) 

    But, but but! Wave seems like it has a lot of promise. The play­back has been slightly janky for me, but oh so excit­ing still. Utterback’s first big piece, text rain, reminded me of the cheesy tipsy joys of mag­netic poetry in the kitchen at so many house par­ties in the early 2000s. It also reminded me of this lovely game that was also my first big dis­ap­point­ment on the web, way back in 1995. The game is–you write a sen­tence down on a piece of paper. The 2nd per­son sees your sen­tence and adds a sen­tence. but each n > 2 per­son sees only the n — 1 sen­tence, and only adds the sen­tence fol­low­ing it, so the story carenes wildly as you pass it on around the room. (Big disappointment–someone wrote a web­page to do this back in 1995, and users so con­stantly and imme­di­ately took every story and turned it into curses and porn, I stayed offline for days. But a Wave app like this, oooh. .) You could imag­ine doing some mix of all of this. Every per­son in the audi­ence is allowed to con­tribute 30 words, some mix of verbs and nouns and adjec­tives and pre­opo­si­tions. (Upon and beneath. I’d make sure those got in) Then the per­former has to form the sen­tences live, on a pro­jected surface. 

    But I mean, this isn’t nec­es­sar­ily new. This is spo­ken word slam poetry, the Iliad, call and response preach­ing, improv com­edy. The new ele­ment is writ­ing the sen­tences *down*. (Up! Up on the *Screen*.) It’s like tak­ing a really good lit­er­a­ture sem­i­nar (where the pro­fes­sor assem­bles a mean­ing­ful mindmap col­lage of phrases and state­ments on the board, drawn forth from the dis­cus­sion), and apply­ing that aes­thetic to every other topic.

    jon_hansen says:

    When I first read the title of this post, I envi­sioned a writer sit­ting at a lap­top on the stage of some large audi­to­rium. There is a huge audi­ence that is watch­ing what he or she is writ­ing on a large pro­jec­tion screen. Only instead of just watch­ing, they are all a part of it–through Wave or a sim­i­lar medium–and mak­ing con­tri­bu­tions and edits. At the end of the night, every­one leaves with a copy of the fin­ished product…

    John Wiswell says:

    This has actu­ally already been done.

    Robin Sloan says:

    Care to elab­o­rate? Any pointers?

    Tim says:

    Robin is our Hungerkün­stler. http://records.viu.ca/~johnstoi/kafka/hungerartist.htm

    more seri­ous may be <a href=“http://short-schrift.blogspot.com/2008/07/mallarm-and-book-of-books.html” Mallarmé:

    Mal­larmé attempted to write an absolute
    book, the quin­tes­sence of all lit­er­a­ture and
    all reality-the Total Book. The world exists
    to arrive at a book, he said. This book
    would be pro­claimed by a sacred cer­e­mony
    of pre­de­ter­mined detail, a proof as well as
    a communion.

    The form of The Book can be described
    briefly: four books, which can be ordered
    as two pairs, make up The Book. Each book
    is sub­di­vided into five vol­umes (not only
    inter­change­able within each book, but also
    from book to book). Thus, Mal­larme envi­sions
    the mix­ing and exchange of the vol­umes
    of one book with those of another.
    Each vol­ume of each book is made up of
    three groups of eight pages-24 pages in
    all. Each page is dis­crete and may be fur­ther
    bro­ken down, hav­ing 18 lines of 12
    words. Thus, words, lines, pages, page­groups,
    vol­umes, and books all may be
    shuf­fled into new com­bi­na­tions. This dis­po­si­tion
    offers a mul­ti­tude of pos­si­ble readings.

    Mal­larmé even pro­poses that each
    page be read not only in the nor­mal hor­i­zon­tal
    way (within the page’s ver­ti­cal­ity),
    but back­wards, or ver­ti­cally, or in a selec­tive
    order of omis­sions, or diag­o­nally.
    Mal­larmé imag­ines another impor­tant
    struc­tural inver­sion in the read­ing of the
    total Book: the five vol­umes form a block.
    The reader looks through the pages, and
    reads accord­ing to depth. Each line of each
    page helps form a new ver­ti­cal page. Pag­ing
    is there­fore three-dimensional. This
    absolute integrity of the con­tainer implies
    inte­gral orga­ni­za­tion of the content.

    Jacques Polieri, “Le Livre de Mal­larmé: A Mise en Scène”

    The idea was, these would be per­for­mances — each pge would be unrouled read displayed…

    […] story: one author pre­sum­ably writes from the male lead’s POV, and vice versa). Robin Sloan cov­ered this four days ago, over at Snark­mar­ket, and while he isn’t seri­ously think about putting it into […]

    […] on the Wave play­back fea­ture – this opens up a whole new world of pos­si­bil­i­ties.  Check out this post on some of the impli­ca­tions of play­back for […]

    ][mez][ says:

    Social Tesser­ac­tions are marked by fluid, process-oriented engage­ment rather than rigid pro­ce­dural struc­tur­ing. Process cen­ter­ing prompts a re-evaluation of data for­ma­tion and alters the entrenched impor­tance of insti­tu­tion­alised cat­e­gori­sa­tions. An emer­gent exam­ple of process cen­ter­ing is Google Wave. Google Wave uses an algo­rith­mic vari­a­tion of “oper­a­tional trans­for­ma­tions” [live con­cur­rent edit­ing] which occur through a process called transformation:

    * The server trans­forms the client’s request, result­ing in the client man­i­fest­ing the same trans­formed out­put.
    * The notion of con­cur­rency is invari­ably impor­tant as it mim­ics geo­phys­i­cal con­ver­sa­tional states.
    * Uti­liz­ing the server as a point of relay [when more than one client’s out­put is involved] assists in pro­vid­ing scal­a­bil­ity and reli­a­bil­ity.
    * The play­back fea­ture allows the server to present the doc­u­ment as a stream of oper­a­tions that have occurred thus far in a par­tic­u­lar wave/state.

    Trans­for­ma­tion relies on con­tin­ual mod­i­fi­ca­tion via process cen­ter­ing. This accent on process acts to rewire the notion of doc­u­ments as sta­t­i­cally defined “objects” and [by proxy] any infor­ma­tion con­tained within. This has enor­mous impli­ca­tions in regards to such institutionally-governed cat­e­gories such as lit­er­acy, media, the professional/amateur divide, nar­ra­tive, and infor­ma­tion con­struc­tion…”
    http://arsvirtuafoundation.org/research/2009/06/01/_social-tesseracting_-part-2/

    jeremyet says:

    We Tell Sto­ries (2008) had a live writ­ing com­po­nent — for a week Nicci French wrote a short story live, an hour every day for five days. The audi­ence could see the words appear as the authors typed them and could dis­cuss the evolv­ing story in a cha­t­room. This was per­for­mance writ­ing — the archived story is here http://wetellstories.co.uk/stories/week4/about/

    Z. Ralia says:

    The artist E. G. Gauger is doing this with paint­ing. It’s called SWEATSHOP and has been run­ning for a few weeks now. It’s like inter­net painter’s busk­ing; the cam­era runs while the paint­ing goes up, has a cha­t­room audi­ence, and some­times a tip jar. Other times, Gauger works on com­mis­sions that the audi­ence sends in. It’s intense.

    http://www.ectomo.com/index.php/2009/09/27/sunday-sketchdump-batmans-forever/

    Steven Klotz says:

    I’ve been play­ing with and get­ting excited about Google Wave. One note and then a larger idea.

    Note: While the par­tic­i­pants in a wave that’s being edited can see the indi­vid­ual key­strokes as they hap­pen, play­back is in larger chunks.

    Larger Idea: Wave allows for the cre­ation of “robots,” which are pro­grammed par­tic­i­pants in the wave. This is where I’d really like to exper­i­ment to develop a unique, non-linear nar­ra­tive. I’d cre­ate a robot for mul­ti­ple points of view and set them up to vamp off of each other once any real per­son cre­ated a wave with them. I’m actu­ally work­ing on code and will announce more at my web­site as it solidifies.

    Robin Sloan says:

    Your Wave robot idea is super SUPER inter­est­ing. Can’t wait to hear/see more.

    Tim Maly says:

    I’m assum­ing that you’ve seen this?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcxF9oz9Cu0

    Check your Wave BTW.

    Jeremy B says:

    I’ve been doing time-lapse videos of myself writ­ing short pieces of music criticism:

    hip hop ris­ing star Lil Wayne: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxgpOtryO_4

    and exper­i­men­tal musi­cian M. Ros­ner: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqADiySvni0

    Enjoy!

    […] embed­ded in con­text” will trans­form social inter­ac­tion and our cities.  This post on Writ­ing as Real-Time Per­for­mance that looks at the Google Wave play­back fea­ture is a bril­liant exam­ple of how real time technology […]

    […] 4:26 pm on Novem­ber 13, 2009 Reply Tags: lit­er­a­ture (14), web (663) “writ­ten with play­back in mind” is writ­ing as a per­for­mance art. Pos­si­ble with the play­back fea­tures of Ether­pad and Google Wave. […]

The Snarkmatrix awaits your reply