The NYU Press Guidelines explain that hypertexts ought to use "transduction, juxtaposition, mirroring, combinatory alchemy, provocation, accident, association, randomness, superimposition, and multiplicity."

What does the writer mean?
The term "transduction", for example, is not widely used in either hypertext research or criticism. Its use here might, in fact, be without precedent. It is barely possible that the writer meant "transclusion" -- Ted Nelson's term for links that reproduce parts of their target destination in situ.

What does the writer expect us to do?
The term "combinatory alchemy" might mean many things. What role does "combinatory" play here? Does it emphasize that alchemy concerns mixing materials together -- and thus suggest that hypertexts use collage or assemblage? Perhaps the writer is reaching for the mathematical sense of "combinatorial", with alchemy emphasizing the magical, mystical qualities of art?

Is "multiplicity" distinct from "combinatorial alchemy, or merely a repetition? Is "randomness" distinguished from "accident", or merely apposite?

Does the writer reach for the rare "superimposition" deliberately, or would "superposition" serve equally well? The two are not identical: "superimposition" posseses a technical denotation in printing and bookmaking which "superposition" lacks, but in context it is difficult to know whether the distinction is intentional or simply a blunder.

top | development | bones and dust | not paying attention | after the elegy | circles of meaning