This is a strong, thoughtful essay. I think it would be more powerful as a long-form blog post (or maybe one post per Part).
In the text, Norbez writes, “It’s a bit long, so I’ve broken it into segments.” But I think I agree with the subtitle, “Queer in Public: A Brief Essay.” I estimate that the whole thing is about 10,000 words. If Norbez were to publish each Part as a separate post, each post will only be a few thousand words, well within the range of a normal Medium or Tumblr blog post.
Instead of making the essay easier to read, the Twine structure makes it harder to read–harder to search, harder to quote, and above all, harder to finish.
The people who will most benefit from reading this essay are thoughtful American Christians. They have to make a big leap to even click on something called “Queer in Public: A Brief Essay.” Every click adds friction to the experience of reading. Slowing readers down, preventing them from consuming more quickly, gives readers more opportunities to quit reading and do something else.
Adding click friction can be useful in the same way that adding text delays can be useful; friction can help to build suspense. Look at this Twine poem, “walking home”. dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/4e7 … 0home.html
But the thoughtful Christian readers who are the intended audience of this post will not be held in suspense with each turning page. I think they’ll just bail out on the essay, which is a shame, because it is a good essay.
I agree completely. I thought the essay was thought-provoking and heartfelt, and well-aimed at its target audience of liberal Christians–all except for the format. I can’t for the life of me understand why it needed to be gated through so many clicks, as a non-interactive piece; it would’ve done so well as a blog series.
I enjoyed the essay. It is thought provoking and compelling. It could change minds of any Christian that would read it thoughtfully. The title is good. Christians (and other) that have a closed mind probably will not even bother to try. That is a shame. But, when someone does click through the title, it will persuade.
I do feel that the author should not apologize for the content at the beginning. There is nothing in the content that is explicit or inappropriate. Don’t give the reader an early out.
I too felt that the navigation portion of the story was problematic. There were times I didn’t know where to go. The highlighted text should have been more focused.
All in all, no matter the delivery, the content is valuable and needs to be shared.