New Page 25

By its very definition, the hypertext necessitates the hyperlink. In spite of, or despite this, the hyperlink is seldom regarded as a sufficiently significant element of hypertext technology to warrant a whole rhetorical discussion of it, its signification, or its effects. In discussions of the hypertext, the hyperlink appears as a by-the-way product and assumes importance only structurally and/or technically – its mention is for the explanation of how the various characteristics of the hypertext such as non-/multisequentiality are achieved by the system. Often, it is described as and treated very much like a tool which links lexias and hence, transports readers of a hypertext from point A to point B, much like a means of transportation such as a car would take us from one point to the next. Inevitably then, the hyperlink is frequently regarded as a mere connective, hollow in content and neutral in character.

However, Burbules argues against seeing hyperlinks in such a superficial manner. In his paper, he points out that links have a significance that should neither be underestimated nor taken for granted and encourages the hyperreader to think more centrally about links, read the subtle and not-so-subtle implications that links are capable of making through association and interpret the significations the links create. In this paper, I would like to agree with, and argue in line with Burbules on the signification and non-neutrality of hyperlinks as well as discuss the ways in which they create meanings and possibilities that are unique to electronic documents.

The grounds for which an argument may be made for hyperlinks being not neutral in their signification and having effects whether intentionally or inadvertently may be found in Burbules’ paper where he elucidates three important aspects of hyperlinks to counteract their apparent naturalness. This elucidation contains within it points integral for the above argument. To argue for the signification and then the non-neutrality of it therefore, these three aspects of hyperlinks will be reiterated and discussed. It is hoped that with this discussion, the ways in which hyperlinks create meanings and possibilities are also explained.

“selecting and following any particular line of association between distinct textual points involves (sic) a process of inference or interpretation about the nature of the association this link implies."

When one clicks on a link, there are certain expectations of where the link would lead to – perhaps access to more information than the link comprises or other related or unrelated areas.

This point that Burbules makes that the selection and following of a particular link is usually not an arbitrary process is allied with Douglas’ suggestion that the nature of the human mind is such that it has the tendency to see/make connections between events and in this case, between lexias.

Because of this tendency, we are given to thinking and inferring certain associative relations this particular link which we are clicking on has with the lexia it takes us to. As such, the link does not merely connect two lexias; beyond that, it engages thought about the linking. For both the reader and the writer of the hypertext, why a link is made and where it is made has the effect of encouraging a consideration of the basis for the linking as well as the possibilities the link has to offer.

For the reader, links open up a wealth of possibilities, relating to perhaps sites of interest to him/her, sites that may not be of particular interest to him/her but which pertain to a subject matter the creation of the link is meant to introduce or explicate, or sites that reveal an alternative view on the subject matter at hand etc. And because of the nature of the electronic document and the provision of links, the reader thus has the option of continuing with the main document or following any of the links and proceed to another site.

This wealth of possibilities that the reader can expect from a link is also available to the writer as s/he is the creator of the links. Unlike the printed book, the electronic document allows the writer to control how his creation is to be read – for instance, linearly (and hence, by providing few, if any, hyperlinks); or non-linearly (by providing a set of links, tempting the reader to leave the document.) S/he is at liberty to, and is usually the first one to, in a sense, screen, and assess the type of information the reader may access. Just which page the reader gets to is an instance of the possibilities offered to the writer by the hyperlink.

“(the) usage and placement of links is one of the central ways in which the tacit assumptions and values of the designer/author are manifested in a hypertext.”

Often, the biases or motivations or values of the designer/author of the hypertext are unknown to the reader. The link, however, offers the possibility of a peek, limited though this may be, into the designer/author’s consciousness. Its appearance at various parts of the hypertext could highlight to the reader, for example, that the author has somehow judged the destination site to be of relevance and significance to his piece (and hence, he provides links at these points to enable his reader to obtain further information on the matter).

For example, in reading an online article describing someone’s vegetarian diet, the term “vegetarian” might be linked to a page with further information on healthy living or the prevention of animal abuse. Depending on the choice of the destination site, the web link has the potential effect of disclosing to the reader the reason behind the writer’s choice of a vegetarian diet.

“links change the way in which material will be read and understood: partly by virtue of the mere juxtaposition of the two related texts; and partly by the implied connection that a link expresses.”

The link, in this way, might influence our ways of thinking and perceiving certain issues. Links can do this in any one of the following ways:

The tendency of the human mind to make connections then invites the reader to see points of similarity between the pages. Consider here the example that Burbules provides: “How is a jump from a page on teenage drug use statistics to a page on rock music going to affect how the rock music page is read?” If the reader does not see any apparent connection between the two linked texts, the fact that they are thus linked has the effect of making the reader rethink about the relation between drugs and rock music and perhaps equating them at some level. On the other hand, if the connection seems to be an obvious one to the reader, the linking of the texts then serves to make clearer and stronger the feelings of the reader on the issue.

For example, a page with pictures of beautiful women may include links to pages dealing with methods of losing weight or of staying slim, thus prompting the conclusion that being slim is a prerequisite for, or part of, what it takes to be considered beautiful. Such links make associations by suggesting categorical inclusion of one issue into another. The use of links in this way is influential in shaping and limiting how people think about a subject.

The drug use/rock music example given above also shows the implied connections that web links are capable of expressing. Burbules states that,

“Links that suggest “this and then that” or “this because of that” do much more than simply associate ideas or information points; they assert, or imply beliefs about the world beyond the Web.”

As a result of the drug use/rock music linking, what is implied is perhaps that in some way, one may be taken to cause another. This then has the effect of engineering and encouraging the reader to make certain particular inferences.

From the above discussion, it is hoped that the signification of hyperlinks has been sufficiently shown to be non-neutral and have effects. In this way, the paper so far also explored some of the ways in which hyperlinks create meanings and possibilities unique to electronic documents. It remains now to examine how hyperlinks create other possibilities that may not be attributed to the three aspects mentioned by Burbules. An examination of these other possibilities made possible by hyperlinks would also demonstrate how hyperlinks are unique.

Quite easily, hyperlinks are unique in the sense that they function in a way that no other tool does. However, this is an oversimplified answer to the question of the link’s uniqueness because the WWW is a unique source of information, the network within it is a unique system, and hence, so too the elements of it, the link being an instance of. To describe in what sense hyperlinks may (or may not) be considered unique, one therefore has to search for other features of it so that a more satisfactory answer may be given instead.

Hyperlinks, as an accompanying feature of hypertexts, create the possibility of problems for certain forms of prose, for example, the argumentative text.

As discussed by Brent, hypertext writing makes the presentation of argumentative texts difficult. Arguments, by their very nature, have to be highly linear and have to be organized in a way to put forward a point of view i.e. which ideas come first, second, or third in order to maximize argumentative weight. As such, they conform to a linear structure. Presented in strict hypertext form with links, the reader faces the possibility of being led away from the main line of argument and might never return to pursue it and hence, either never go beyond a point in the argument or never reach its conclusion.

In this case, hyperlinks are unique because as illustrated by the above example, they bear the possibility of “removing” the conclusion in the hypertext – something that cannot be done by anything else or to anywhere else. There might be a definite starting point but the end point is the point at which the reader decides to stop reading the main text and instead travel to other points within the WWW.

The hyperlink is unique in another sense because it might render irrelevant cohesion and coherence in a text and yet, the text is not perceived as lacking a thesis, and hence unacceptable. For the hypertext writer, how important are these elements of textuality and can he achieve them in his hypertext in the first place? How cogent a stand can one make with the use of links and if one aims to write the native hypertext? There is, with the hyperlink, the option for the hypertext writer to put forward a point and then have links to sites that offer an opposing viewpoint, or a corroborating one. Understandably, the hypertext writer may be praised for having considered the different aspects of his subject matter, but on the other hand, the usage of the links in this way might render his credibility suspect as the cohesion of the text and the writer’s coherence of thought as manifested (or not manifested) in the text is lacking.

This paper aimed firstly, at arguing that hyperlinks are not neutral in their signification but that they have effects and secondly at discussing how hyperlinks create meanings and possibilities unique to electronic documents. These were discussed using Burbules’ points in relation to why hyperlinks’ apparent naturalness should not be considered as such – his points forming a basis for my discussion. Other possibilities unique to electronic documents were later explored with a view to describing how hyperlinks are unique. It is hoped that these concerns have been sufficiently addressed in this paper.

Admittedly, sometimes this process is based on the reader’s whims and fancies.

I refer to the hyperlink as a tool here for want of a better word and because considered superficially, it is a mere instrument with which one uses to navigate through the WWW.

Admittedly, this refers only to the hypertext in its most ambitious forms, what Moulthrop calls the “native hypertext”.