Though some critics may complain that Janet Murray’s Hamlet on the Holodeck may be “too utopian”, I believe her work is balanced in light of her central argument. Murray argues that digital medium may revolutionize the narrative genre. Because she advocates the potential of new media, she does not need to balance her argument between benefits and consequences. Murray embraces the possibilities of new media, and she also analyzes some of consequences of the technology.
Murray proposes that the computer-based narrative genre is in its technological infancy. Her book focuses on the capabilities that the online environment will provide to the narrative artist. Though Murray is very optimistic about the future, she starts her book by stating, “The birth of a new medium of communication is both exhilarating and frightening. Any industrial technology that dramatically extends our capabilities also makes us uneasy at challenging our concept of humanity itself.” (Murray, 1) However, Murray asserts that the risk is well worth the reward. Digital formats, she asserts, will enable authors to build more immersive environments. Computer-driven environments should be very compelling, and digitally savvy authors should be able capture the human condition in ways that linear narratives (from books) cannot achieve.
Despite her affinity to the computer environment, Murray assigns agency to the authors—not the machines. She asserts, “The real literary hierarchy is not of medium but of meaning.” (Murray, 271) Murray demonstrates that people and the meanings derive from narratives, not the technology, remain the dominant force. This argument also leaves the onus for potential technological consequences with those who use it.
Far from being utopian, Murray discusses several potential problems within a digital environment. She contends that the problems of data fragmentation and the tensions between procedural and narrative authorship must be overcome before the digitally-based narrative genre gains wide acceptance. I believe that Murray’s argument is more compelling than Manovich’s concerns about fragmented databases and linear narratives. After reading Murray, I feel that authors will balance procedural and narrative writing so that they can blend the strengths of the computer with those of a compelling narrative. As with movies and other technologies, innovative authors will learn to exploit the new medium. Again, agency makes technology follow its will.
In one of the most interesting sections of the book, Murray even discusses how troublemakers (“flamers”, “deviants,” “shooters,” and other online personalities) pose a significant hurdle to online interactive narrative that incorporates multiple users. Unlike technology-based issues, I fear that dealing with non-cooperative people within cyberspace may prevent community-based virtual interactive narratives from growing beyond a certain level. Technology changes, people do not. However, Murray clearly describes the potential of a new field. I find her optimism compelling—not utopian.