DIGITALIZED BRIEFS: REFRAMING THE INFLUENCE OF THE DIGITAL ENVIRONMENT ON READERS' ENGAGEMENT WITH FLASH FICTION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejlll.v7i2.462Keywords:
flash fiction, interactivity, accessibility, social connectivity, creativity, multimedia, digital fictionAbstract
The proliferation of digital platforms has redefined readers' engagement patterns, especially with concise narratives like flash fiction This research delves into a thorough analysis of the distinctive characteristics of flash fiction, a form that is currently gaining popularity and widespread acceptance due to the enjoyment it gets from the digital environment. Embracing the essence of brevity, flash fiction thrives on conciseness and magnetizes its audience within a limited word count. With the advent of digital platforms and technological advancement, the boundaries of traditional storytelling have expanded, providing a fertile and dynamic environment for the growth of flash fiction. The research employs an interdisciplinary approach, interweaving threads from psychology, media analysis, and literary criticism to investigate the specific aspects of the digital milieu that are crucial to the heightened engagement and enjoyment felt by flash fiction enthusiasts. This study seeks to shed light on the fundamental mechanisms that contribute to the magnetic pull of flash fiction in the digital domain by analyzing a variety of dimensions, including interaction, accessibility, social connection, and creativity. A fundamental component of this exploration is to unravel the core processes that elevate the appeal of flash fiction in the digital world. By dissecting these aspects, the research illuminates how the combination of these factors works in unison to enhance the charm of flash fiction in the digital age.
References
Al-Sharqi, L., & Abbasi, I. S. (2015). Flash Fiction: A Unique Writer-Reader Partnership. Studies in Literature and Language, 11(1), 52-56.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bao-yu, N. (2015). Exploring image culture through narrative: A study on Jennifer Egan's Twitter fiction Black Box. Journal of Literature and Art Studies, 5(10), 820-829.
Bell, A. (2010). The Possible Worlds of Hypertext Fiction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Bell, A. (2014). Media-Specific Metalepsis. In A. Bell, A. Ensslin, & H. K. Rustad (Eds.), Analyzing Digital Fiction (pp. 21-38). Routledge.
Botha, M. (2016). Microfiction. In A. -M. Einhaus (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the English Short Story (pp. 201-217). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boxall, P. (2013). Twenty-First-Century Fiction. Cambridge University Press.
Ciccoricco, D. (2012). Focalization and Digital Fiction. Narrative, 20(3), 255-276. Cooper, J. (2007). Cognitive dissonance. SAGE.
Dufresne, J. (2018). FLASH! The Art of Writing the Vet)) Short Story. WW Norton.
Drąg, W. (2018). Cutting to the Chase: Microfictions, Empathy, and the New Sincerity. Brno Studies in English, 44(1), 103-117.
Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. J Abnorm Psychol. 58(2): 203-10.
Hayles, K. (2007). Electronic Literature: What is it? The Electronic Literature Organization. Retrieved from https://eliterature.org/pad/elp.html#sec3
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations and Group Processes. London: Routledge.
Jarvis, P., Holford, J., & Griffin, C. (2003). The them)) & practice of learning. Kogan Page.
Joosten, T. (2012). Social Media for Educators. San Francisco, CA: Wiley/Jossey-Bass. Kiosses, S. (2021). Towards A Poetics of Narrative Brevity: Short Story, Microfiction, Flash Fiction. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature (IJSELL), 9(1), 9-18.
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2006). New literacies: Everyday practices and classroom learning. Buckingham, GBR: Open University Press.
Lucht, B. (2014). Flash Fiction: Literary fast food or a metamodern (sub)genre with potential?
Human And Social Sciences at the Common Conference, November 17, 222-225.
Micunovic, M., Mare'etie, H., & Krtalie, M. (2016). Literature and Writers in the Digital Age: A Small Scale Survey of Contemporary Croatian Writers' Organization and Preservation Practices. Journal of Preservation, Digital Technology & Culture, 45(1), 2-16.
Mills, J., & Hannon-Jones, E. (1999). Cognitive dissonance. American Psychological Association.
Murray, P. R., & Squires, C. (2013). The Digital Publishing Communications Circuit. Book 2. 0, 3(1), 3-23.
Naji, J. (2021). Mobile Electronic Literature. In J. O'Sullivan (Ed.), Electronic Literature as Digital Humanities: Contexts, Forms, & Practices (pp. 210-216). Bloomsbury Academic.
Nelles, W. (2012). Microfiction: What makes a very short story very short? Narrative, 20(1), 87-104.
Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie, 45(3), 255.
Punday, D. (2014). Digital Fiction and Worlds of Perspective. In A. Bell, A. Ensslin, & H. K. Rustad (Eds.), Seeing into the Worlds of Digital Fiction (pp. 57-74). Routledge.
Rettberg, S. (2009). Communitizing Electronic Literature. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 3(2). Retrieved from http://digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/3/2/000046/000046.html
Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), 224-237.
Sternberg, R. J., & Sternberg, K. (2012). Cognitive Psychology. Wadsworth, Cengage Learning
Sunstein, C. R. (2002). The law of group polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy, 10(2), 175-195.
Walsh, T. (2006). A right to inclusion? Homelessness, human rights, and social exclusion. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 12(1), 185-204.
Williams, T. (2014). Flash fiction. In E. Earnshaw (Ed.), The Handbook of Creative Writing (pp. 315-323). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Yadav, S. (2019). Twitter fiction: An expression of experimental postmodern e-literature. Research Journal of English Language and Literature (RJELAL), 7(2), 128-135. 323.
