The idea of metaphor as resident in the physical form of a literary work is an interesting one, and while it gains new meaning in the digital age that Hayles explores, the concept is hardly confined to new technology. The focus on material and the physicality of the literary work that Hayles utilizes in order to explore the merits of computer-based literature can also be used in examination of works of the past, and a recognition of its importance can perhaps only be understood in conjunction with that of form and content. The achievement of the “full-bodied experience of literature”(26) advocated here is begun through an examination of modern novelty, but turning this focus back on a broader range of literary annals may prove beneficial.

I appreciated the codex book mentioned as a revolutionary invention, (99) and praised for its facilitation of a random reading difficult with a scroll. Literature, or the artistic literary work, has not always been confined to the dust-jacketed volumes we associate so readily with library shelves, and the movements of the past -even within this bookish category -are perhaps worth examining. While Hayels seems to acknowledge that digitalized words and stories are not the only innovations in the materiality of literary works, other manifestations could be examined for insight on the impact of the physical existence of the work. The presence of two covers and numbered pages does not negate the physical nature of a text.

While differing literary genres usually fall under headings of form, the variations exhibited within these also imply a physical dissimilarity, most notable in dramatic works and poetry. Not only do the shapes created by varying forms result in a very physical embodiment on the page (reminiscent of Phillips’ ‘artist book’), but the different voices and spaces they inhabit imply a spatial existence.

In the same vein, the discussion of “artists’ books” provided an interesting look at the use of images that predominate the words themselves. The author’s epiphany on page 75 –“Materiality is content, and content is materiality!” –composes a significant step in the appreciation of a book such as Phillips’ A Humument. And yet the interest that this book holds for the reader (as a material entity) can hardly be divorced from form. The materiality of the collage and the specificity of words chosen for their preexisting embodiment as ink on a page (rather than selected strictly on meaning) is only part of the totality of the piece. In a highly visual book the shape, or form, connotes meaning, and the words themselves, the content, while not perhaps exercising the dominance normally expected, nevertheless direct the narrative.

What all this leads to is the intrigue of what Hayles terms “the traffic between words and physical artifacts.” (22) A well-turned phrase, and an interesting exploration, this. The idea that literary criticism, usually so focused on words as abstract signifiers for concrete realities, can be turned on its head and become a study of the concrete as a signifier for the abstract is a rather overwhelming proposition. In an age where reader-response theory and identity politics seem to have finished off what was left of the universal, however, it is interesting that Hayles’ own enthusiasm for the computerized form is tempered by the realization that the work “anticipates its own inevitable future when the platform on which it runs in obsolete.” (62)

-Grace