Duelling powerpoints

Yesterday, Chris and I presented some slides to kickstart a discussion about transliteracy for the PaRT group plus guest. It engendered some good discussion – much of which revolved around about whether elephants existed. I'll blog about it properly in a little while (rather busy with the TNN experiment right now) but have embedded our two slideshows next to each other.
Chris focused on the production side which I focused on ways in which we might research transliteracy.


3 thoughts on “Duelling powerpoints

  1. Hello Chris, I enjoyed your ppt. I have a query though — when you say ‘transmedia’ is not how the media interrelate with each other, are you saying that ‘transmedia’ is the term to describe ‘repurposing’ of content? Whatever term you use, it is important to distinguish between the same content in different media, and unique content in different media contributing to the same ‘world’ if you like. When it is the latter, the relationship between media is important. But the relationship is different to a ‘intertextual’ mindset which is, ironically, a somewhat mono-text one: where the presence of one text is recognised in another.
    So too, intermedia can be seen to be concerned with the relationships between media within a single ‘text’/space/session/object.
    I just bring up these points because you are rightly questioning what transliteracy is about: across or beyond etc? But there is more choice than the options you (seem) to give of repurposing and remediation…

  2. Hi Christy, and thanks for your comments. These slides were intended to open up the discussion rather than to claim any kind of definitive answers, so I’d love to hear more of your thoughts!
    My intention was to define transmedia as the repurposing of the same content in different media. But there is obviously the complication you mention re unique (but overlapping?) content in different media that creates some kind of coherent ‘world’. Both are supposedly very different to intermedia, which occurs within the same ‘object’. But then we might want to consider the ‘object’ to be the transmedia world as a whole, so perhaps that is better described as transmedia rather than intermedia?

Comments are closed.