From Samuel Beckett's //The Unnamable.//
''Non-interactive fiction:''
You must go on. I can't go on. I'll go on.
[[Interactive fiction append]]
''Interactive fiction 1: append''
You must go on.
[[Interactive fiction replace]]
(click-append: "You must go on.") [ I can't go on. ]
(click-append: "I can't go on." ) [ I'll go on.]
''Interactive fiction 2: replace''
You must go on.
(click-replace: "You must go on.") [I can't go on.]
(click-replace: "I can't go on.") [I'll go on.]
[[for reflection]]
''For reflection''
Consider the "append" model. The page starts out with a single sentence, but by the end, we have the same three sentences as the noninteractive version. Does this mean they're the same? What changes for the reader/player when interactivity is introduced? Do you think our relationship to text and meaning changes even through as simple a mechanic as clicking?
Now consider the "replace" model. Each click erases the sentence and gives us a new one. We begin and end with a single, transformed sentence on the page. How does this interactive technique differ for the player/reader compared to the noninteractive version? For the interactive "append" version? Does our relationship to text and meaning change when text is being replaced instead of accumulating?
Finally, how might writers of interactive fiction leverage these techniques? Consider how each technique affected you and muse on why you would choose one technique over the other? What narrative conditions would inform your choice?