January 2, 2002
Follow me on Twitter


In "What Cybertext Theory Can't Do", Kate Hayles presents a graceful reply to Markku Eskilinen's "Cybertext Theory and Literary Studies: A User Manual."

As a follower of Aarseth, Eskelinen is more dogmatic and ideological than the theorist he has adopted (a well-known phenomenon observed with Marxists who are more dogmatic than Marx, Freudians who are more doctrinaire than Freud, Derridians who are more inflexible and less subtle than Derrida, etc.). Ironically Eskelinin is quick to claim other disciplines want to "colonize" cybertext, while engaging in a rhetoric that in its ideological excesses is as imperialistic as anything I have read in recent years.

It seems to me that the only things worth reading in EBR these days are rebuttals and corrections. Is this a sensible way to work?