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

> [...] These interconnected pieces are then treated as larger units that are
> further interconnected, and so forth, until you reach the highest level where
> the diagram has three parts linked together by the main event of the story,
> the slaying of the beast by the hero.
It occurs to me that this could take the form either of a tree or a
graph (CS terms). If it's a tree, then it's trivially serializable. If
it's a map, that becomes a more complex question.

And either way, you can 'dangle' or otherwise pop certain structures -
viz. visual nets like the LJ Friends net or the Visual Thesaurus,
where it profiles certain clusters / relationships above others,
visually.

Part of what you're saying is a bit implicit (though I agree
heartily): there would be level of detail, perhaps in a very literal
sense. "Fractal", though not in the self-replicating sense.

> I think I might try to attempt building a small-scale diagram over the
> weekend to illustrate my hero-slays-beast example. I'll probably use a
> rough, circled-English-words + lines notation for it, just to explore
> the idea. A "true" writing designed for this type of notation will, of
> course, employ symbols and styles of representing interconnections in
> more idiomatic ways.
I think we've got almost the same idea for how this would look; I'd be
very interested in collaborating with you on it.

I'm also curious whether you can think of a way to do it that is *not*
symbol-and-relation based. I can't really conceptualize it, but I
suspect that it is possible - something that is even more meshed than
this. The fusional equivalent, one could say. ;-)

- Sai

P.S, This is a delayed send - wrote it Friday, IIRC, but went
overlimit on postings. :-P I'll catch up / respond to the stuff since
then sometime at the end of the week or so, as this is finals week and
I have a term paper and final tomorrow, and another final on Friday
(oh joy oh joy!... eh.). But thanks for the response; it's quite
interesting indeed.

Reply