Re: Non-linear / full-2d writing systems?
|From:||Sai Emrys <saizai@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, May 11, 2005, 7:13|
> I've never really analyzed my thought processes. But it occurs to me that
> something similar happens in translation process. [...]
Being the extreme introspect that I am, I've analyzed mine quite a bit. :-P
By "translation" here I don't mean "translation between language" but
"translation between mode" or perhaps "between level of
conceptualization" even. That is, my native thought is non-linguistic,
and thus is freer in some ways than my linguistic thought processes.
It also has cons that are related primarily to the difficulty of
recording, communicating, or symbolizing it.
> >> True - a totem pole is really a 2d surface curved round a cylinder.
> > Not if depth has meaning.
> Carving in relief around the cylinder - not strictly 2d, but certainly not
> 3d in the sense Teoh was using it. We don't use the full cross section of
> the pole.
Why not? Except for the fact that there's the limit of each side not
being allowed to be (diameter) depth simultaneously, I don't see it as
any different from a wrapped bas-relief carving. And that I would
consider to be a pretty straightforward example of a (potentially)
full-3d medium. (Of course one can still impose limits on the bounds
of allowable depth, etc.)
> Non-trivial in any sense, I would think :)
That's compared to "trivial" which, of course, means "certainly
solvable within a lifetime or two". :-P
> But I agree - an interesting problem,
*nod* I think the crux of it is that our paradigm of stories depend on
information control. With a situation where you can see the punchline
from the beginning (if such a term could apply), you'd need a very
very different way of maintaining tension, rather than just
withholding information until later on in the story. Or you'd need to
cast aside the desire for tension in your stories. :-P