{"id":{"repo_id":"wku-diss","oai_identifier":"oai:digitalcommons.wku.edu:theses-2191"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/wku-diss/oai:digitalcommons.wku.edu:theses-2191","repository":{"repo_id":"wku-diss","name":"Western Kentucky University","base_url":"https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"Reading Ineffability and Realizing Tragedy in Stuart Moulthrop's <i>Victory Garden</i>","abstract":"<p><em>Victory Garden</em>, Stuart Moulthrop’s 1991 classic hyperfiction, presents a nonlinear story of U. S. home front involvement in the First Gulf War in a way that facilitates confusion and mimics a \"fog of war\" sort of (un)awareness. Using Storyspace to build his complex narrative, Moulthrop incorporates poetry, fiction, historical references, and low-tech graphic novel type elements. Among the graphic components are all-black and all-white screens that function as variables. Overtly, these screens speak of closure and signify unconsciousness; however, their nonverbal role may also be linked to the ineffability trope as used by Dante Alighieri and re-interpreted by contemporary linguist Ruiging Liang. To date, critics and meta-readers have incorrectly assumed that the protagonist, Emily Runbird, becomes a fatality. By failing to read her life or death as undecidable, we deny the fiction its full power as a postmodern interpretive dilemma. This assumption plays into what might be posited as Moulthrop’s real thesis: syllogism in a corrupted (war time) information system is potentially tragic. A summary of theories and critical approaches relevant to the blank screen’s use as interstice together with sample engagements with relevant texts—reading <em>Victory Garden</em>, as per Wolfgang Iser’s phenomenological approach, Stanley Fish’s reader response theory, and Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction—prove <em>Victory Garden</em>, to be a challenging but consistent literary breakdown (staged malfunction of reading habits). Ultimately, ineffability is shown to be a reading strategy and the action Aristotle characterizes as key to the definition of tragedy is seen as performed by the reader. Moulthrop dangles the question about Emily’s demise as a critical reading moment prone to corruption. The classical anagnorisis is not Emily’s; the revelation Moulthrop intends is reserved for the reader and is precipitated by the need to resolve aporia.</p>","abstract_html":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Victory Garden&lt;/em&gt;, Stuart Moulthrop’s 1991 classic hyperfiction, presents a nonlinear story of U. S. home front involvement in the First Gulf War in a way that facilitates confusion and mimics a &quot;fog of war&quot; sort of (un)awareness. Using Storyspace to build his complex narrative, Moulthrop incorporates poetry, fiction, historical references, and low-tech graphic novel type elements. Among the graphic components are all-black and all-white screens that function as variables. Overtly, these screens speak of closure and signify unconsciousness; however, their nonverbal role may also be linked to the ineffability trope as used by Dante Alighieri and re-interpreted by contemporary linguist Ruiging Liang. To date, critics and meta-readers have incorrectly assumed that the protagonist, Emily Runbird, becomes a fatality. By failing to read her life or death as undecidable, we deny the fiction its full power as a postmodern interpretive dilemma. This assumption plays into what might be posited as Moulthrop’s real thesis: syllogism in a corrupted (war time) information system is potentially tragic. A summary of theories and critical approaches relevant to the blank screen’s use as interstice together with sample engagements with relevant texts—reading &lt;em&gt;Victory Garden&lt;/em&gt;, as per Wolfgang Iser’s phenomenological approach, Stanley Fish’s reader response theory, and Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction—prove &lt;em&gt;Victory Garden&lt;/em&gt;, to be a challenging but consistent literary breakdown (staged malfunction of reading habits). Ultimately, ineffability is shown to be a reading strategy and the action Aristotle characterizes as key to the definition of tragedy is seen as performed by the reader. Moulthrop dangles the question about Emily’s demise as a critical reading moment prone to corruption. The classical anagnorisis is not Emily’s; the revelation Moulthrop intends is reserved for the reader and is precipitated by the need to resolve aporia.&lt;/p&gt;","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Gray, Michael E."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts","degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":"Department of English","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Dr. Wes Berry (Director), Dr. Sandra Hughes, Dr. Alison Langdon"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2012,"date_issued":"2012-08-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2012-08-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T06:08:16Z","subjects":["literary breakdown","First Gulf War fiction","aporia","Storyspace","\"fog of war","\" electronic literature","hyperfiction","English Language and Literature","Modern Literature"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/theses/1188","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Dr. Wes Berry (Director), Dr. Sandra Hughes, Dr. Alison Langdon"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Gray, Michael E."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Department of English"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["literary breakdown","First Gulf War fiction","aporia","Storyspace","\"fog of war","\" electronic literature","hyperfiction","English Language and Literature","Modern Literature"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/theses/1188"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["<p><em>Victory Garden</em>, Stuart Moulthrop’s 1991 classic hyperfiction, presents a nonlinear story of U. S. home front involvement in the First Gulf War in a way that facilitates confusion and mimics a \"fog of war\" sort of (un)awareness. Using Storyspace to build his complex narrative, Moulthrop incorporates poetry, fiction, historical references, and low-tech graphic novel type elements. Among the graphic components are all-black and all-white screens that function as variables. Overtly, these screens speak of closure and signify unconsciousness; however, their nonverbal role may also be linked to the ineffability trope as used by Dante Alighieri and re-interpreted by contemporary linguist Ruiging Liang. To date, critics and meta-readers have incorrectly assumed that the protagonist, Emily Runbird, becomes a fatality. By failing to read her life or death as undecidable, we deny the fiction its full power as a postmodern interpretive dilemma. This assumption plays into what might be posited as Moulthrop’s real thesis: syllogism in a corrupted (war time) information system is potentially tragic. A summary of theories and critical approaches relevant to the blank screen’s use as interstice together with sample engagements with relevant texts—reading <em>Victory Garden</em>, as per Wolfgang Iser’s phenomenological approach, Stanley Fish’s reader response theory, and Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction—prove <em>Victory Garden</em>, to be a challenging but consistent literary breakdown (staged malfunction of reading habits). Ultimately, ineffability is shown to be a reading strategy and the action Aristotle characterizes as key to the definition of tragedy is seen as performed by the reader. Moulthrop dangles the question about Emily’s demise as a critical reading moment prone to corruption. The classical anagnorisis is not Emily’s; the revelation Moulthrop intends is reserved for the reader and is precipitated by the need to resolve aporia.</p>"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Reading Ineffability and Realizing Tragedy in Stuart Moulthrop's <i>Victory Garden</i>"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Dr. Wes Berry (Director), Dr. Sandra Hughes, Dr. Alison Langdon"],"dc:creator":["Gray, Michael E."],"dc:description.abstract":["<p><em>Victory Garden</em>, Stuart Moulthrop’s 1991 classic hyperfiction, presents a nonlinear story of U. S. home front involvement in the First Gulf War in a way that facilitates confusion and mimics a \"fog of war\" sort of (un)awareness. Using Storyspace to build his complex narrative, Moulthrop incorporates poetry, fiction, historical references, and low-tech graphic novel type elements. Among the graphic components are all-black and all-white screens that function as variables. Overtly, these screens speak of closure and signify unconsciousness; however, their nonverbal role may also be linked to the ineffability trope as used by Dante Alighieri and re-interpreted by contemporary linguist Ruiging Liang. To date, critics and meta-readers have incorrectly assumed that the protagonist, Emily Runbird, becomes a fatality. By failing to read her life or death as undecidable, we deny the fiction its full power as a postmodern interpretive dilemma. This assumption plays into what might be posited as Moulthrop’s real thesis: syllogism in a corrupted (war time) information system is potentially tragic. A summary of theories and critical approaches relevant to the blank screen’s use as interstice together with sample engagements with relevant texts—reading <em>Victory Garden</em>, as per Wolfgang Iser’s phenomenological approach, Stanley Fish’s reader response theory, and Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction—prove <em>Victory Garden</em>, to be a challenging but consistent literary breakdown (staged malfunction of reading habits). Ultimately, ineffability is shown to be a reading strategy and the action Aristotle characterizes as key to the definition of tragedy is seen as performed by the reader. Moulthrop dangles the question about Emily’s demise as a critical reading moment prone to corruption. The classical anagnorisis is not Emily’s; the revelation Moulthrop intends is reserved for the reader and is precipitated by the need to resolve aporia.</p>"],"dc:identifier":["https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/theses/1188"],"dc:subject":["literary breakdown","First Gulf War fiction","aporia","Storyspace","\"fog of war","\" electronic literature","hyperfiction","English Language and Literature","Modern Literature"],"dc:title":["Reading Ineffability and Realizing Tragedy in Stuart Moulthrop's <i>Victory Garden</i>"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Department of English"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T06:08:16Z"}