The Making of “Re-Inventing Invention”

We’ve already changed our mind, consolidating into two acts instead of three and reconceptualizing the epilogue as this blog rather than a wiki. Many more changes will come, I’m sure:

Re-Inventing Invention: A Performance in Three Acts

When scholars in composition and rhetoric write about invention, they often argue that invention arises from juxtaposition (Rice; Ulmer; Sirc), that it is profoundly nonlinear / recursive (Emig; Flower and Hayes), and that it is deeply embodied (Fleckenstein; Prior and Shipka). We agree. Yet, we find that most scholarship on invention continues to be written in conventional print forms that implicitly devalue the power of nonlinearity, juxtaposition, and embodied performance as ways of making knowledge. Challenging this print-centric tradition in invention studies, we offer a scholarly webtext that spends at least as much time showing invention as it does telling about it—a webtext that employs experimental new media production as a heuretic method for re-inventing invention (Ball; Ulmer).

In particular, our performative webtext will consist of a prologue, three acts, an epilogue, and a credits page. Although our performative acts will be “chaotic” and “nonlinear” by design, they will nevertheless share a common commitment to engaging two interrelated questions: How can past composition and rhetoric theories of invention help us rethink our contemporary digital pedagogical practices? And, how might digital composing tools enable us to re-imagine (or re-see) the ways in which we study, teach, and practice invention in the twenty-first century?

Prologue: Voices in Process

In the prologue, we present a brief “welcome video” that tells the story of how we transformed our interactive Watson performance into a performative webtext. We also employ alphabetic text to offer a theoretical rationale for our performance (expanding on the argument made above).

Act One: Juxtaposing Commonplaces

In the first act, we explore ways in which digital technologies might help us re-see / re-imagine past theories of invention. To this end, we present a digital invention box (an embedded .swf file), containing 25 brief quotes from invention theorists and 25 still images of invention (both past and contemporary). When the user presses the “invent button,” he or she will see a random juxtaposition of two objects (quotes or images) drawn from the collection. In order to demonstrate the usefulness of the invention box, the authors/performers will offer brief textual analyses of 5 of the juxtapositions that appear in the box, elucidating for example how we might find new knowledge about invention in the gaps/tensions between Cicero and Berthoff, or between Fleckenstein and an image of a record shop, or between an image of a graffiti tagger and an image of a ballet rehearsal. We also will offer a brief embedded video reflection in which we explain how our idea for the “digital invention box” was inspired by Ray Kytle’s 1971 Comp Box, a radical composition text that promoted and enacted randomized juxtaposition as an invention method.

Act Two: Visualizing Chaos

In the second act, we explore how digital video montage can enable us to re-see the canon of invention. In particular, we show the ways in which juxtaposed moving images can help us attend closely to the similarities and differences in the creative processes of writers, visual artists, filmmakers and designers; we also elucidate the powerful ways in which visual metaphors can help us re-see the canon of invention. To this end, we present a five-minute, visual montage of moving images of invention. This video may be watched in multiple ways: 1) Silently 2) With musical soundtrack 3) With an audio track in which the authors reflect on how this visual montage was inspired by 1970s work of Ann Berthoff, William Sparke, and Clarke McKowen 4) With an audio track in which the performers discuss how the process of composing this montage caused us to rethink the canon of invention.

Act Three: Embodying Process

In the third act, we seek to demonstrate ways in which digital audio and video technologies can help us both capture and reflect upon embodied moments of invention in the composing of digital texts. Although scholars have recognized that invention is a deeply embodied process that often takes place at times when no obvious “writing” is happening (Fleckenstein; Dunn), it can be very difficult to capture embodied moments of invention in alphabetic text. Thus, we seek to employ video and audio technologies in order to represent our own embodied invention processes (e.g., cooking food, blogging, hiking, surfing flickr.com, chatting over coffee, writing on napkins). In addition to drawing on the video and audio files we created for the conference, we also will continue to capture video documenting our own invention processes as well as to audio record conversations among ourselves about how we teach and practice invention in digital contexts. From this corpus of recorded conversations and visual representations of invention, we’ll craft a 6 – 8 minute video that represents key commonalities and differences in our embodied invention processes. Ultimately, this video will make two interrelated arguments: 1) Compositionists need to make their own embodied invention practices more visible in their scholarly work 2) Digital technologies offer unique affordances for representing embodied acts of invention.

Epilogue: Continuing Conversations

Our epilogue will consist of a companion wiki site on which our audience can offer responses to and extensions of our performance. In addition to an opening page that explains the purpose of the wiki (and how to use it), the wiki site will consist of three separate pages dedicated to discussion of each Act. On these pages, we will encourage our audience to comment about how the juxtapositions they noticed in our performance helped them to “reinvent invention.” We’ll also invite audience members to offer visual and textual responses that build upon, critique, and/or extend our performance. Ultimately, we hope that this wiki will continue the vibrant, collaborative conversation between performers and audience that occurred during our Watson session.

Technological Rationale

We plan to employ standards-compliant XHTML and CSS to craft a webtext that consists of five pages as well as a companion wiki site. Links to the five pages (Prologue; Act One; Act Two; Act Three; Credits) and companion wiki site (Epilogue) will be included on a horizontal navigation bar near the top of every page. We imagine the surrounding design to be simple and minimalist—a kind of “black box” performance space that highlights by contrast the vivid visual and audio juxtapositions present in our media files.

The Prologue will consist of an embedded QuickTime file and accompanying alphabetic text. Act One will consist of an embedded .swf file (enabling randomization and interactivity) as well as accompanying alphabetic text (navigable by anchor links). Act Two will consist of a 5 minute, QuickTime video embedded within a Flash interface that can enable users to choose from among four possible soundtracks. Act Three will consist of a 6 - 8 minute, embedded QuickTime video. The Credits page will consist of acknowledgements as well as an alphabetized list of citations for all the words, images, and sounds that appear in our performance. The Epilogue will consist of a wiki site, designed using mediawiki software. We can house the companion wiki on our own university server or potentially on the CCDP server. (We also recognize that the companion wiki may not be needed if the overarching book design ends up including an interactive component that enables audience response).

All still images, moving images, and sounds in our webtext well be either crafted by us or drawn from creative commons and public domain sources.  At the Watson conference, we presented a 30 minute, video montage juxtaposing over 70 distinct “scenes” of invention (representing a wide range of composing modalities and technologies). We’ll be able to draw heavily from this montage in composing our performative webtext—though we anticipate crafting some new video and audio as well. As a group, we have previous experience with standards-based web design, interactive Flash development, iMovie, Audacity, iShowU (video screen capture), and mediawiki development. We also have access at our university to even more experienced colleagues who can offer us advice about any technology and design issues we encounter. If you would like to see the video montage we composed for Watson or a design portfolio of some of our previous work, please let us know.

2 Responses to “Here’s what we planned to do…”