Application of some of Bruner’s ten features of narrative to Twitter hashtag #itf10 Narrative diachronicity – temporal sequence essential to narrative – even visual forms – left to right or top to bottom. Twitter arranges the tweets in the order they are posted but contrary to normal literary conventions, they need to be read backwards or up from the bottom of the hashtag to the top to gain the chronological order. In #itf10, tweets are chronological but not necessarily sequential and there is repetition as different people either ‘retweet’ or re‐iterate information for their own ‘followers’. However, there are also ‘layers’ to the narrative, in that there are activities happening simultaneously with the ‘tweeting’, in ‘real life’ at the IT Futures conference hall in Edinburgh where the speakers are giving the actual talks but their materials are also available in written, audio and visual forms eg. The Seven Spaces of Technology in School Environments Particularity – particular happenings are referenced which confirm the context of a conference. In the ITF10 conference, the particular happenings are the different speakers and their papers and these are announced by ‘tweets’ acting like ‘openings’ and others acting like ‘closings’ to the mini‐ narratives or micro‐level of the learning.
Intentional state entailment – protagonists must be endowed with intentional states
The protagonists are the main ‘tweeters’ and their intentional states are their ‘roles’ in the trend, the functions they serve in the ‘story’ and the function of the story itself. Without a full analysis, not all of the roles in #itf10 became apparent but three distinct roles were ‘storyteller’, a tweeter whose tweets (storyteller tweets) gave the whole ‘story’ of the conference speakers, a ‘questioner’ or discussion‐raiser (questioner tweets here) who encouraged reflection on the main ‘narrative and a ‘teacher’ who gave links, further information and praise to the participants (teacher tweets here). Hermeneutic composability – there should be a sender and receiver for a text so that it can be interpreted differently but still interpreted In this case, because the ‘text’ or narrative is multi‐layered, it is difficult to pin down the receivers – are they the other participants in the conference, the other ‘tweeters’, non‐ participant Twitter ‘followers’? Sometimes there is a direct tweet from one person to another when @ sign is used. Bruner (1991) says the accounts of events and protagonists are contained within a plot and the story is realised when all parts work together. The telling of a story and its comprehension as a story depend on the human capacity to process knowledge in this interpretive way. So the many different comments or ‘tweets’ of the content of the conference are based on this ‘interpretive way’.
In posthuman cyberculture, how do we still use narrative to learn and make sense of the world?