Abstract
Stories have been shared in every culture because they are a powerful means to entertain, educate, and preserve traditions or instill values. In the history of storytelling technological evolution has changed the tools available to storytellers, from primarily oral representations that have been enriched with gestures and expressions to the sophisticated forms we enjoy today, such as film or complex layered hypermedia environments. Despite these developments the traditional linear presentation of a story is still the most dominant. Yet, the first decade of the twenty-first century established a technology that finally, after many attempts, can challenge the dogma of passive linearity. It is mobile technology that makes people aware that a digital environment opens opportunities to everybody to freely socialize through and with stories relevant for the current spatial, temporal, and social context.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bernstein, N. (1998). Patterns of hypertext. Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia (pp. 21–29; June 20–24). Pittsburgh, USA.
Black, J. B., & Bower, G. H. (1980). Story understanding as problem solving. Poetics, 9, 223–250.
Black, J. B., & Wilensky, R. (1979). An evaluation of story grammars. Cognitive Science, 3, 213–230.
Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101–108.
Colby, B. N. (1973). A partial grammar of Eskimo folktales. American Anthropologist, 75, 645–662.
Graham, A. (1983). What is wrong with story grammars? Cognition, 15, 145–154.
Landow, G. P. (1994). The rhetoric of hypermedia: Some rules for authors. In D. Paul & P. George (Eds.), Landow hypermedia and literary studies (pp. 81–103). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Murray, J. (1997). Hamlet on the Holodeck: The future of narrative in cyberspace. New York: Free Press.
Nack, F., & Hardman, L. (2001). Denotative and connotative semantics in hypermedia: Proposal for a semiotic-aware architecture. The New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia 2001, 7, pp. 39–65.
Nelson, T. H. (1974). Computer lib/dream machines. South Bend, IN: Distributors.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Understanding and summarizing brief stories. In D. Laberge & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Perception and comprehension (pp. 265–303). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
Interactive Cinema Group – MIT Media Lab, from http://ic.media.mit.edu/
Terminal Time, from http://www.terminaltime.com/
The SIMS, from http://thesims2.co.uk/pages.view_frontpage.asp
Façade, from http://www.interactivestory.net/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nack, F. (2010). The Path Tells a Story. In: Marcus, A., Roibás, A., Sala, R. (eds) Mobile TV: Customizing Content and Experience. Human-Computer Interaction Series. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-701-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-701-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-700-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-84882-701-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)