In this article, David Kolb examines whether hypertext can counteract the linear and enclosed structures of traditional academic writing by utilizing the format of a website and hyperlinks. In the introduction on the website's homepage, he directly presents the issues he wants to discuss through citations and experimental methods of 'hypertextualization'. He responds to an article by Sanford Kwinter published in the journal Assemblage. Although the MIT Press publishes this article, its theoretical stance, citation approach, and overall style are deeply related to the structuralism, phenomenology, and critical theory emphasized by the early Chicago School. Kolb critiques this article mainly by questioning Kwinter's typical 'high theory' writing style: abstract, structurally complex, and citation-rich, which not only makes it difficult to read but may also perpetuate the power structures it originally sought to subvert. The hyperlinks in the article play a crucial structural role. On the one hand, they guide readers to arguments or texts related to the topic, creating a 'multicentered' reading model; on the other hand, this setup breaks the linear reading order, allowing readers to freely choose their paths into the text. I suspect Kolb hopes to encourage readers to break free from the traditional reading sequence through this approach, thereby challenging the discourse control in academic writing. What surprised me most is that on the homepage, Kolb even included a link titled 'How to Read This Article' and paths for citations and references. This design not only serves as a reading prompt but also becomes part of the text—readers are constantly guided to jump, choose, and revisit during the reading process, making reading itself a participatory experience. From my personal reading experience, this reading method indeed brings a sense of 'liberation', but it also feels somewhat cumbersome. While hypertext breaks the linear structure, having too much information and too many links can make one feel scattered and fatigued. Particularly when new viewpoints or concepts require jumping to another page for more information, this 'jump reading' can paradoxically become a new obstacle in actual practice. Therefore, I have a question: **Can hypertext really breaks the power structures within academic institutions? Or does it inadvertently establish another structure? From Kolb's own writing, we can feel his hesitation and reflection on this point. Overall, while I agree that this form has a certain subversive significance theoretically, in terms of personal reading experience, I still tend to prefer the traditional, linearly organized style of academic writing.