My Transliterate Toolbox

Here is a screencast talk about my transliterate methods of creating works of
electronic literature:

My Transliterate Toolbox from Christine Wilks on Vimeo.

Links to the works and sites featured in the talk:

Software mentioned in the talk:

2 thoughts on “My Transliterate Toolbox

  1. Fascinating Christine. Thanks for sharing!
    I find your work (even your screencast) very tactile. Would role would you say “touch” has in your transliterate creations (or course patterns and fabric are textiles and sculpture certainly calls for touch) – not just perhaps as aligned to the subject matter but in terms of your creative process?
    Re: technology. Of course not everyone reading across platforms is as technologically literate as you; how do you see the role of technology (your software apps etc…) in transliteracy in general (perhaps going back to elements of your sewing metaphors)?

  2. Touch is very important (I’ve always been ‘good with my hands’ – a family trait) – I like to touch things virtually. I find rollovers and interactive animations very pleasurable, e.g – Lines and Curves by Patrick Burgaud – the intimate relationship between haptics and kinetics. I like manipulating things – the illusion of touch – touching with my eyes – so I like to create pieces with those qualities too.
    Until you asked, I hadn’t really considered how important touch is in my creative process also (thanks!). I touch-type (v. badly) because it allows me to keep my eyes on the screen, so the feel of my keyboard is important to me. I also use a graphics tablet and pen so I get the tactile sensation of drawing – I hate drawing with a mouse, I have to use a pen.
    Thinking about it, yes, it’s good to cut the paper up and shuffle it around on a smooth-topped desk – and I’ve spent some time and thought (money too) developing a system where I can slide bits of paper (script/story fragments) around on my magnetic whiteboard. I tried post-it notes but they don’t slide. Bits of paper held by magnets are much better. The important thing is that the greater the fluidity of the process, the quicker one can work and the more options or variations one can try out – more experimentation, more mutability – there’s less to impede the creative flow – that’s the ideal.
    How my tools respond to my touch is critical. The more fluid the haptic performance or relationship, the better the flow of thoughts/writing/image-making/sound-making/editing… Any grit, fluff, stickiness or poor ergonomics that comes between my touch and my output interrupts the flow – causes stutters, hiccups, stumbles… reduces fluency. It’s interesting to think about fluency in relation to transliteracy. Whilst I aim to be fluent in and across a range of platforms, tools and media, I’m also aiming for fluency in the process – being in the flow It’s not always easy to achieve, especially with the myriad interruptions attendant with social media, but it’s an ideal state for creativity.

Comments are closed.