Re: Non-linear / full-2d writing systems?

On Wednesday, May 11, 2005, at 08:13 , Sai Emrys wrote:

>> 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.
I realize that. I just gave my example because it is a situation in which
I find a similar problem with 'linearizing' something conceptual. When I
read Latin, I do not translate it in my head as I go along; I absorb the
thought, so to speak. The problem comes when that thought pattern/ matrix
of meaning or whatever (you will certainly define it better than I can)
has to be unravelled in a different linear medium.

The difference is that in the situation you describe, the
conceptualization occurred without gathering information linearly in the
first place.

[snip]
>>>> 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.
Well, to be quite frank, I really agree with you - it's 3d enough for me.
But Teoh certainly did disagree. I didn't want to argue with him (as I
wasn't entirely serious about the 3d script issue in any case) - I'll
leave it to him to argue with you if he so wishes   :)

[snip]
>> 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
The tension is surely important. Why should you see the punchline (or
whatever you want to call it) from the beginning? Would it not be possible
for the punchline only to be conceptualized when the person has a full
grasp of the whole 2d presentation? Forming the story from the 2d
representation would be perhaps a process like Platonic dialectic. When
this is complete the punchline comes like the 'blinding flash of
enlightenment' that Plato seems to think will be the philosopher's reward
for following the dialectic path  :)

Thinks: How do telepathic beings handle stories?

Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
ray.brown@freeuk.com
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason."      [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]