Y kisn't Gibson jumping on the _Active Narrative Gathering_ bandwagon??

....wot got me musing re: subject line was having watched "The Animatrix" [gawd peter chung is a demi-manga-god - remember aeon flux from liquid teev?]...9 short animaction [yeah i can't help neologising sorry] movies which piggyback off and reveal plot nuances/x.tensions of _Matrix Reloaded_. in 1 of the shorts, the gaping qs of the origins/story point of the Neo-fawning-boy-child n.countered in the _Matrix Reloaded_ movie is s.sentially answered....+ this sparked off a chain of thought centering round the idea of ANG [_Active Narrative Gathering_]


...by ANG i'm referring 2 how some m.mergent forms of art|n.tertainment|simulcra r interconnected via narrative threads b.yond parent forms/individualised media constrictions..ie if u want the complete narrative picture [ie join-the-story-dots-campbellesqueness-hero-journey-style] that is available when watching _MR_ u *must* watch/collude with satellite|parallel constructions that enhance [ie offer loadings] that complete the story jigsaw - like _Enter the Matrix_ video game + The Animatrix.


it's a bit like the easter eggs n.countered on dvds....secret hotspots that 1nce found offer additional info regarding the main feature....


this isn't a new phenomenon.....look at _Twin Peaks_ for instance [movie series, book (The Diary of Laura Palmer) and movie]..but it seems to becoming a more dominant pattern...look at _Donnie Darko_ [movie + website] + _The Blair Witch Project_ [book, movie, website]...not to mention _AI_...........also the conversion of comics/books in2 film, games in2 film [_The Final Fantasty_ game + film].......


its like audiences r n.couraged 2 step outside the restrictions of mono-media absorption channels + actively seek additional narrative components elsewhere...bit like an ANG cultural engine i guess.....

- pro][rating][.lucid.txt
-
-

http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/nav.htm
_
_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_
Original Post
How long does that take you to type? I find it hard to believe that writing that annoyingly simply comes natural.

I'd even take r33t5pE4|< over that garbled transmission any day.

Sorry to flame, but it's the only way I can get my headache to stop.

--
Drive, damn you. Just drive.
I feel a little like a mez crusader here.
- put it down, yr chivalry is showing.

but papa gepetto's ghost! I find it hard to believe that members of this board are afraid of a little: a] thinking. b] cryptogrammatical lateracy (try sayin that 3x fast)

yup peter chung rocks my goat (um...huh?)
matriculated was very aeon wasn't it? it was nice. and the 'alice' in 'wonderland' episode was good too. magical.

quote:
...by ANG [Active Narrative Gathering]
i'm referring 2 how some m.mergent forms of art|n.tertainment|simulcra r interconnected via narrative threads b.yond parent forms/individualised media constrictions.


two protoforms: 'multi-media' which at the time of coinage referred simply to sound + vision. hopelessly bilateral now. dinosaur term.

and 'media tie-ins' which is what they call all those other bits of 'merchandising' ie novelisations, videogame/ comic book/ bubble-gum adaptions.

'You've seen the video, you've heard the soundtrack, now buy the softdrink'

before the matrix it was just so much 'viral-marketing' buy this, collect these, wear the t-shirt, eat the chips luke.

the matrix 'tie-ins' however relied on the economics of storyworld building. yes, you can (but don't have to) purchase these other products to get more flesh for your tale but you can tell that it's motivated by their passion for these media. they love video games, they love anime, they might even love collectibly-kitsch otaku culture. 'look something I thought up is now a talking lunch-box...cooool!'

The difference being that it isn't motivated by wanting to move more 'product'. It makes the proto-zaibatsu happy certainly, but in this instance, everybdy wins.

the sheer output of the wachowski bros are phenomenal. these creators are branching out on as many genres of expression as the 21st century allows them to and/or have passion for. and that's applaudable.

it's like when sci-fi authors write appendices (I like those) and solidifies their worlds further for us - or when characters are re-used/referred again in a different novel (I like those too. like catching up with old friends) - but in this case the appendixes are in a comic book form, say, forcing the dedicated reader on to new territories and different narrative techniques, one that perhaps they haven't bothered to explore before.

I can think of 'slow chocolate autopsy' by dave mckean and another guy. where the poetic narrative shifted into graphic novel territories then shifted back.

Y kant WG rite in ANG/meta-media?

finance. sadly. resources. opportunity.

deny everything

[This message was edited by wraith on June 20, 2003 at 12:01 PM.]
Oh, oh, oh.

I know I'm being childish, but I can't take being thought of as afraid to think.

It's one thing to attempt to fuse code and language, though code does have a linguistic facet all its own. It's another thing to do it poorly and look like a script-kiddie (remember them?) doing his best to overcome the prevailing "Y do U do DAT" typographical slaughterhouse of today's electronic communication. Substituting letters for their phoenetically syllabic equals? We get it. We got it, back when 2400 baud was considered blazingly fast and wardailing was a hobby instead of an archaic eccentricity.

And the proper plural form of "appendix" is "appendices," not "appendixes." Your word is listed in the dictionary, of course, but it's not so much that you're completely wrong as it is that you're not all the way correct.

Cryptogrammatical lateracy, cryptogrammatical lateracy, cryptogrammatical lateracy.

--
Drive, damn you. Just drive.
quote:
Originally posted by caltrop:
I know I'm being childish, but I can't take being thought of as afraid to think.



I know you are but what am I? =;p

well maybe just lazy. hey! I get lazy too.

the other criticism is directed towards mez. I can't answer for her. I just see mez get flamed on almost every post she puts up - well, write proper english why don'chu?! it horrifies me to think that some ppl are encouraging her to conform. on this board!

ok. I believe in information. I believe in style and eccentricity. I believe in clear reception of said information. in paradox. in freedom of opinion. I value content over pretense. I believe in glamour. in nitpicking.

quote:
And the proper plural form of "appendix" is "appendices," not "appendixes." Your word is listed in the dictionary, of course, but it's not so much that you're completely wrong as it is that you're not all the way correct.


0.05 point to you. (goes back and edits post)
thanks.

my english will never be perfect. neither will my life, my fellow organisms, my self. perfection is immaterial.

>>Cryptogrammatical lateracy, cryptogrammatical lateracy, cryptogrammatical lateracy.

c'mon. u expect me to believe u didn't just cut n' pasted those? ok. try typing that 3x fast without editing.

but really, back on thread, what do you think of ANG/meta-media?

=:>

deny everything
Um, to me it's a matter of communication. If you have a message, great. If the form of your message gets in the way of the content, that might not be a good thing. I'm all for creativity of form, but maybe when you're just posting ideas to a forum, just talking is the way to go. I mean, I love e e cummings, but I don't think he *talked* like that. And that's all we're doing, really. Talking. If you want to communicate your poetry and prose like that, cool. But don't expect people to wade through that just to talk to you. You might be thinking too highly of your ideas, to make the communication so exclusive. *shrug*
quote:
Originally posted by caltrop:
How long does that take you to type? I find it hard to believe that writing that annoyingly simply comes natural.

I'd even take r33t5pE4|< over that garbled transmission any day.

Sorry to flame, but it's the only way I can get my headache to stop.



My Email Is Longer Than Your Email: Gender in Online Communities


The internet is, at its heart, a network of information, designed to
spawn communication and easy connections between sets of data. In this
regard, it is a primarily feminine structure, despite the imposition of
male hierarchical organization. While the network is out there,
rhizomatic and widespread, the main interface- search engines- are a
structure based on rankings and popularity. In other words, we navigate
a feminine world by way of masculine strategies. We are, in a sense,
organizing hunting parties in the search for potatoes. But does this
affect the way women use the web, or the way men do?


Look at the internet revolution- instant messaging, chat room
technology, email, search engines, the development of personal home
pages, a proliferation of geocities websites and online diaries, blogs-
and look at how they affect the behaviors of each gender that interacts
with them. How it is used differently by men and women?


First of all, who is using the web? Statistics vary from year to year
and from source to source, but according to a 2001 Nielsen/NetRatings
poll, there were "53.33 million women actively used the Internet
compared to 49.83 million men" [Roach, p.1]. However, an overwhelming
majority of papers I have encountered use the statistic that only 40% of
users are women. How are women using the web? According to a poll
conducted net wide by British Marketing Researchers ICM, "86% of women
use it to keep in touch with friends and relatives, while 80% of men use
it for hobbies and interests" [Anon, p.1]. Given the natural feminine
inclination for relationships, this is not at all surprising. (I should
point out that I use the term "feminine" and "masculine" to represent
patterns of behavior- and I do not resort to "male" and "female" as
indicators of that behavior.)


Femininity is the gender of networks, traditionally seeking out
relationships to others as a means of definition. The internet chat room
is a relational technology, designed to facilitate communication. The
forums are constantly available and usually on going. Many of them have
recurring personalities, making it similar in atmosphere to a bar or
coffeehouse, with an emphasis on conversation, oftentimes with many
regulars. These places tend to function as social networks, where people
are able to discuss subjects of either specific or general interests. In
many of these forums, the regulars tend to form an emotional network,
where casual conversation can lead very rapidly to extremely open
communication and the illusion of intimacy among people residing in
widely disparate geographical locations. Since it is widely known that
feminine psychologies tend to respond to relational and social
situations, [Miller, 1981] geographical concerns seem to pose little
problem for their widespread use of these forums. It is not surprising
that women tend to overwhelm men in such rooms.


However, there is an interesting paradox that comes from looking at this
phenomenon closer. For one, online communication is considered "less
satisfying" than face to face communication by a larger number of people
asked in a survey taken in 2000. [Cummings, 2002] However, more people
are reporting that they are spending less time with those "offline"
friends as a result of spending time online [Kraut, 1998]. While these
numbers come from different studies, it does present enough information
to question how these disparities could exist.


I contend that this data suggests that the feminine conception of
connectedness could be seen as manifested in the desire for "access".
Chat rooms are very open and constant presences in most internet
connected homes and offices, and the relationships tend to develop at a
quicker pace given several factors. The time spent online, and the
anonymity of the space, which serves to encourage openness and good
faith. "The perception of trust, intimacy, and acceptance has the
potential to encourage online users to use these relationships as a
primary source of companionship and comfort" [Griffiths, 2001]. To me,
the data suggests that the actual quality of a relationship may not be
as important as the perceived availability of those relationships. While
it is not to say that there is a substitution of quality for quantity,
it may be accurate to say that maintaining one's self within a larger
context of a mailing list or chat room may serve as a comforting
affirmation of one's ability to do so, regardless of any situations
external to that online context. As Miller puts it, "women's sense of
self becomes very much organized around being able to make and then
maintain affiliation and relationships." (Miller, 1976; referenced by
Surrey, 1981.) A chat room could be accessed daily, to check up quickly
on friends and colleagues, and to quickly affirm the status of those
relationships. Could it be that this sense of self can be just as potent
when it comes in the guise of less satisfying and less emotionally
fulfilling online relationships? It is interesting to note that within a
survey of online computer users, men were more likely to describe
themselves as "lonely," whereas women were more likely to describe
themselves as "depressed" [Jackson, 2001]. Women are using chat rooms
with constant social affirmation, so loneliness is not an issue, but
those relationships do not seem to be able to provide an actual
fulfilling sense of self. The lack of authenticity and true
connectedness within those relationships could be very depressing.


This does not contradict any evidence in regards to masculine
relationships. Men are participating in online activities such as the
aforementioned mailing lists and chat rooms, and in fact, they are doing
so in a way that is strongly in line with what is now becoming the
predictable standby of most masculine theory: They are arguing,
oftentimes aggressively, and competing. One researcher, who followed a
single mailing list on the subject of linguistics- an area of study
without much opportunity for heated dissent- found that


A daunting 68% of the messages posted by men made use of an adversarial
style in which the poster distanced himself from, criticized, and/or
ridiculed other participants, often while promoting his own importance.
The few women who participated in the discussion, in contrast, displayed
features of attenuation -- hedging, apologizing, asking questions rather
than making assertions -- and a personal orientation, revealing thoughts
and feelings and interacting with and supporting others [Herring,
1994].


This would fall in line with the general consideration for competition
in masculine relationships. The idea of distance is a strong factor in
masculine relationships, which are traditionally considered to be more
"active" friendships. An adversarial style of communication is a "doing"
action- it engages the other in a debate and an argument, as opposed to
a feminine framework of empathic and supportive communication. But it
also reinforces the notion of the online space as one where the presence
of openness and intimacy is threatened and unwelcome. Therefore, it is
"safe" from the feminizing forces that could otherwise come through in a
communication forum. Note that the online mailing list is different from
a chat room. A mailing list allows for the monopolization of
conversation, and is archived to a permanent record. Whereas in a chat
room, conversations are temporal, and occur in a what I call a "chatter
formation", in that all parties are capable of speaking at once, while a
mailing list is one speaker at a time. This allows for an authoritarian
posturing in any communication, and one can write with the assumption
that the reader is giving the writer exclusive attention. A mailing list
is also similar in its properties to the "public meeting space" which
men seem to prefer in their friendships, notably because public spaces
restrict the level of intimacy that one is expected to display in public
[Walker, 1994]. However, while a chat room is usually a smaller space
with people who are there to engage in communication, a mailing list has
"lurkers", a set of subscribers who do not communicate and merely read.
This adds an element of a "public" to the mailing list which is not as
prevalent in a chat room. In this regard, a mailing list is a kind of
podium, but a podium where your face cannot be seen. This faceless,
public forum, which is completely alien from any sense of intimacy,
seems to encourage men to behave in a way that is even more masculine
than they may be in a bar, coffeehouse or other meeting place. Perhaps
because the entire nature of identity is so challenged by these factors,
the entire system of masculinity is itself challenged. It is not enough
to simply be a man online in order to be masculine- no one can see who
you are, physically. Instead, all of one's masculinity must come through
in behavior and means of communication. That this is exaggerated online
may have to do with the illusions of intimacy that the web provides-
because it is anonymous, there exists more freedom with regards to
opening up or sharing ones feelings with strangers, making it a more
threatening location to the male psyche.


I would now like to change focus to look at the phenomenon of the
internet web page. One of the sharpest rising demographics for personal
web pages seems to be teenage girls. According to research done by Media
Metrix and Jupiter communications and reported in ABC news, a large
number of teenage girls are creating expressive web pages as an
extension of their online socialization. Girls are publishing online
diaries and making themselves known on the web. This is in direct
conflict with the general assumption of non-assertive femininity,
particularly for adolescents. The dominant social construction for
adolescents has been, as Miller points out, "that this is a time when
girls 'contract' rather than expand" [Miller, 1981]. If girls are making
web pages, doesn't this mean they are breaking through the gender
barrier into a realm of self expression and assertiveness? I assert that
they are. The online environment provides an opportunity to create new
rules for communicating, and it is promising that this space is being
taken advantage of.


In a very real sense, the existence of girls web pages on the net are
evidence of a new niche for adolescent feminine assertiveness. Whereas
the masculine-defined act of assertiveness draws on bringing attention
to oneself, it is usually derived from elements of competition. The
masculine assertiveness makes references to achievements, or, as we see
in email exchanges, boasts of a superior intellect or some sort of
superlative in the realm of ability. A feminized version of assertive
behavior seems to emphasize expression but at little expense to others
and with little regard for comparison or competition. A web page is less
imposing than an online, public forum such as a mailing list. It is
interesting to note that within the information technologies industry,
mailing lists are known as "push content" whereas a web site is
considered "passive" content. A web page does not come to you, instead,
you have to seek it out- whereas emails are a "push" media which arrive,
often whether you want them or not. This also gives the web page a
strange sense of intimacy as compared to more aggressive mediums.
Whereas any comments made to a mailing list are made in a social, group
context, a web page is designed to be viewed by one person at one
location, although it can happen multiple times per day, or hour.
Nonetheless, looking at a web page is a solitary experience. Here, the
feminine desire for intimacy comes through by way of a new kind
assertiveness, in the presence of a "virtual intimacy." A web page is a
very long, one on one conversation, distributed across hundreds to
thousands of people.


It is again fitting that the flip side of this intimacy is the
existence, and use, of online internet pornography, some of which
utilize the same technologies women seek out for their conduciveness to
emotional intimacy. In this space, men are using chat rooms and web
sites in a sexual context. In chat rooms, women are looking for intimacy
and men are looking for sex. While the phenomenon of "cybersex" streaks
through both genders, there are differences in how genders engage with
it. Most notably, men are drawn towards web sites in which photographs
can be downloaded or exchanged, whereas women tend to be involved with
more "intimate" or "relational" cyber sexual encounters such as chat
rooms and one on one text messaging [Griffiths, 2001]. That men favor
photographs reflects again on the notion of resistance to intimacy, but
also works as a parallel to adolescent girls web diaries. From a
feminine perspective, a website with personal content is made more
intimate by the viewing conditions of such a site. There are invitations
to engage in dialogue by way of multiple email links and guest book
options, which turn the web site itself into a starting point for more
intimate interactions. A masculine perspective places emphasis on
different elements. For example, a pornographic image downloaded from a
website is rendered even less intimate by its means of distribution.
Newsgroups and sexualized chat rooms are still communications forums,
only in these cases, they revolve around multiple men in a mutual
observance of women in sexualized roles. This allows men to affirm their
heterosexuality while engaging in social interactions simultaneously.
Men can communicate with each other over the acquisition of pornography
much as men will bond in the presence of a sex worker at a bachelors
party or strip club [Schulz, p.397]. Connections are made through a
desire to obtain or trade images, a social network which shifts itself
away from intimacy. The images themselves are sexualized, but aside from
the production of these images, women serve almost no role in the social
aspect of these communities.


It should come as no surprise then that gender roles on and offline tend
to follow suit with each other. What this proves is that, regardless of
where these differences come from, they are adaptable. Even in a
situation of total anonymity, there is still an element of self that
must be asserted. In the case of the web, it is interesting to note that
gender is one of the most basic elements of personality that comes
through. With the advent of such a radical new forum for social
relationships as the web, there seems to be some hope that it can lead
to changes in basic human behaviors. One such phenomenon was that of
online gender switching, the idea that one gender could attempt to
masquerade as the other when online. However, it is now reported that
this has been overemphasized. According to research done at American and
Australian Universities, "while 60 percent of the individuals in both
studies said they had never tried gender switching, 21 percent reported
they were currently gender switching. Another 19 percent had
experimented with it but stopped" [Schwarz, 2000]. So, the status quo
seems to be maintained. Based on this study, which included 400 online
participants in a gaming scenario, the top reason for gender switching
was not curiosity over gender differences, but merely for new approaches
to gaming.


It appears that the internet, despite being organized by male
hierarchies in its early histories, is still a more or less open forum
in regards to gender. However, we should keep in mind that the feminine
behaviors we see here are feminine behaviors adapted to these male
structures. I would argue that even the early text messaging chat rooms
were male oriented- consider that these rooms were pure text, with
almost no capacity for emotion or creative expression. What has happened
to the popularized versions of these systems has been the addition of
graphical "emoticons" which allow the writer greater control over the
tone of their text, as well as the options to change color and size of
text. The addition of these features, on a time line, seems to
correspond with the rise of adolescent girls in chat rooms and in
instant text message conversations. Which way any possible correlation
runs would make for interesting research. What might a feminist version
of the internet look like, as opposed to a masculine system adapted to
feminine uses? Would it enable more types of power for women, in regards
to access, empathy, and ease of communication? Perhaps these questions
will be answered by technology. For example, an increase in the presence
of video phones, web cameras and teleconferencing would open up the
internet to a greater degree of intimacy, in creating a greater sense of
"face to face" communication. Of course, this same technology is already
being used in online web portals which range from open chat rooms to
pornographic communities, both of which share the same name as a
phenomenon: "Cam Girls."


It could be said that the internet does not radically alter the nature
of men and women, nor does it alter the relationships between men and
women when they interact with each other. The dynamic of power between
genders remains intact, and it remains to be seen whether technology can
spark changes in these structures, or simply serve as another means of
facilitating them.


-eryk salvaggio



Sources


Anonymous, (2002) ICM survey shows gender difference in Internet use
amongst adults. Internet Business News, Volume 7. August 20th.


Cummings, J., Butler, B., & Kraut, R. (2002). The quality of online
social relationships. Communications of the ACM, 45(7), 103-108.
http://homenet.hcii.cs.cmu.edu/progress/
cummings02-QualityOfOnlineRelationships.pdf


Griffiths, M., (2001). Sex on the Internet: observations and
implications for Internet sex addiction. The Journal of Sex Research,
Nov. 20th 2001. Retrieved April 26th, 2003 from find articles.com.


Herring, S., (1994) Gender Difference in Computer Mediated
Communication: Bringing Familiar Baggage To The New Frontier. Retrieved
April 23rd, 2003 from http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/gender/herring.txt


Jackson, Linda A., Ervin, Kelly S., Gardner, Philip D., Schmitt, Neil,
(2001) Gender and the Internet: Women Communicating and Men Searching.
Sex Roles. March 2001.


Miller, Jean B., (1981). The Development of Women's Sense of Self. In
Jordan, Judith V., Kaplan, Alexandra G., Miller, Jean B., Stiver, Irene
P., and Surrey, Janet L., (Eds.) Women's Growth In Connection 11-26 New
York, The Guilford Press.


Roach, R., (2001) Internet Usage Reflects Gender Breakdown. Black Issues
In Education, Volume 18. July 19th.


Schulz , J, (1995). Getting Off On Feminism. In Kimmel, Michael S., and
Messner, Michael A., (Eds.) Men's Lives 390-398 Needham Heights, Allyn
and Bacon.


Schwarz, J, (2000). Gender switching on the Internet isn't as common as
believed. Retrieved April 27th, 2003 from
http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/news/
2000archive/05-00archive/k052200a.html


Walker, K, (1994). I'm Not Friends The Way She's Friends: Ideological
and Behavioral Constructions of Masculinity in Men's Friendships. In
Kimmel, Michael S., and Messner, Michael A., (Eds.) Men's Lives 367-379
Needham Heights, Allyn and Bacon.

- pro][rating][.lucid.txt
-
-

http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/nav.htm
_
_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_
quote:
Originally posted by wraith:
but papa gepetto's ghost! I find it hard to believe that members of _this_ board are afraid of a little: a] thinking. b] cryptogrammatical lateracy (try sayin that 3x fast)


_this_ board is, like any other, filled 2 the gills with partial reductionists N retrograders who standardise N procedurally echo.the.canon.as.godhead without any d.tailed x.planation or nuanced m.mersion.

non_co[re]g[urg]itation.is.the.new.wanka.ordure

_these_ boards r also filled with otherings.

quote:
yup peter chung rocks my goat (um...huh?)
matriculated was _very_ aeon wasn't it? it was nice. and the 'alice' in 'wonderland' episode was good too. magical.


yus, n.deedy.

quote:
two protoforms: 'multi-media' which at the time of coinage referred simply to sound + vision. hopelessly bilateral now. dinosaur term.


yus. as dead_in_the_net.water as the term n.teractive.

quote:
and 'media tie-ins' which is what they call all those other bits of 'merchandising' ie novelisations, videogame/ comic book/ bubble-gum adaptions.

'You've seen the video, you've heard the soundtrack, now buy the softdrink'

before the matrix it was just so much 'viral-marketing' buy this, collect these, wear the t-shirt, eat the chips luke.

the matrix 'tie-ins' however relied on the economics of storyworld building. yes, you can (but don't have to) purchase these other products to get more flesh for your tale but you can tell that it's motivated by their passion for these media. they love video games, they love anime, they might even love collectibly-kitsch otaku culture. 'look something I thought up is now a talking lunch-box...cooool!'


it also points 2wards the next tier of ubermarketing....less noesis appeal, more n.trinsic layering of ultimate narrative as a fiscal reward source rather than just a n[ovel].tertainment pay-off...

p[r]ay.2.receive.jig.sored.story.load[ings]?

quote:
The difference being that it isn't motivated by wanting to move more 'product'. It makes the proto-zaibatsu happy certainly, but in this instance, everybdy wins.

the sheer output of the wachowski bros are phenomenal. these creators are branching out on as many genres of expression as the 21st century allows them to and/or have passion for. and that's applaudable.


..specially considering the lack of ego.purr.petuation they _seam_ 2 want 2 m.ulate.

quote:
it's like when sci-fi authors write appendices (I like those) and solidifies their worlds further for us - or when characters are re-used/referred again in a different novel (I like those too. like catching up with old friends) - but in this case the appendixes are in a comic book form, say, forcing the dedicated reader on to new territories and different narrative techniques, one that perhaps they haven't bothered to explore before.


yus. tho some won't. some will sit N complain about the failings of the parent work as compared 2 benchmarkers [k]no[t].longer.applicable [cf demographic/Shadoth/caltrop's urge 2 label my wurk thru concepts that aren't relevant ie according 2 the standard set by the mechanics (form{at}) of the wurks themselves]....rather than realign N re.set critique parameters 2 a more credible setting.


quote:
Y kant WG rite in ANG/meta-media?

finance. sadly. resources. opportunity.


hmmm.....

mebbe he'll answer this 4 himself in blogwurld?

- pro][rating][.lucid.txt
-
-

http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/nav.htm
_
_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_
quote:
It could be said that the internet does not radically alter the nature
of men and women, nor does it alter the relationships between men and
women when they interact with each other.


So, if I get this right, the entire point of that unholy gender based article was that men and women act essentially the same online as well as off. Fantastic. Moving on:

quote:
A daunting 68% of the messages posted by men made use of an adversarial
style in which the poster distanced himself from, criticized, and/or
ridiculed other participants, often while promoting his own importance.


Guilty, but don't blame the fact that I happen to own a penis on my adversarial nature. I've always been like this...or is it society that's molded such male horrors into my poor psyche?

quote:
the subject of linguistics- an area of study without much opportunity for heated dissent


Now that's just crap. My most heated arguments deal with language, grammar and their development in society. I think that's why I've been so tenaciously posting to this thread, even though it's really got nothing to do with the topic.

quote:
_this_ board is, like any other, filled 2 the gills with partial reductionists N retrograders who standardise N procedurally echo.the.canon.as.godhead without any d.tailed x.planation or nuanced m.mersion.

non_co[re]g[urg]itation.is.the.new.wanka.ordure


I don't so much echo the canon as godhead, but I'll be the last one defending the embattled hill known as the english language. (See? Overstating my importance again.)

But I suppose labeling me and my regurgitating ilk as a member of the (ahem) "new wanka ordure" is your idea of detailed explanation and nuanced immersion.


I'm sorry, but throwing periods between words and using 'N = and' does not a linguistic movement make. Nor is it anything more than forgettable and rather trite.

And Wraith, 0.05 points never felt so good. For what it's worth, I totally typed all of those cryptogrammatical lateracies.

It's not that I'm trying to get ][Mez][ to conform, I'm up for nearly any new liguistic fad that comes down the pike. I'll admit this particular syntax is better than most.


But come up with something a little better than bad copy for rave flyers.

--
Drive, damn you. Just drive.
um sorry mez, but I have to kinda agree with shaddoth here.

quote:
If the form of your message gets in the way of the content, that might not be a good thing. I'm all for creativity of form, but maybe when you're just posting ideas to a forum, just talking is the way to go.


especially on this thread when I dearly like to discuss the issue. but then I'm not sure what it is you're actually saying. I'm not exactly fluent in mezengelle [and as I mentioned to caltrop, I can get lazy =;> ]. and also I'd like to be able to think about the body of the conversation quickly, rather than spending the thinking time dechiphering what's being said.

for instance;

quote:
it also points 2wards the next tier of ubermarketing....less noesis appeal, more n.trinsic layering of ultimate narrative as a fiscal reward source rather than just a n[ovel].tertainment pay-off...

p[r]ay.2.receive.jig.sored.story.load[ings]?


Please explain the last part. I understand the first part. I don't know whether it's the next level in mass-marketing (our ANG/Meta-media). I think the w bros were just flexing their creative muscles into other fields that they love. I don't think this will happen often. I think that we're stuck with more media tie-ins for a very long time. It takes an extra-ordinary creator(s) to be able to use so many different medium so effectively.

Groundbreaking indeed.

    Off-Thread.
    Speaking of groundbreaking, I will be posting a review of the most amazing kung-fu film I've ever seen. As poetic and graceful as Crouching Tiger... as beautifully choreographed as 'Fist of Legend/ Kiss of the Dragon'. as visually stunning in SFX as the Matrix. As complex a story as the 'Emperor and the assassin'(same tale, different version) and as gorgeously designed as LOTR, colour-coded like the 'Three Colours Blue/Red/White'. I'm in awe. starring Jet Li/Maggie Cheung/ the creme de la creme of HK cinema. breath-taking! review later in Random Thoughts. 'Hero' (it might be nominated for best foreign film oscar)


jigsawed story loadings? you want more of this type of meta-narrative? (I like the word meta)

quote:
..specially considering the lack of ego.purr.petuation they _seam_ 2 want 2 m.ulate.


whose lack of ego perpetuation? what do you mean the lack of...they want emulate?

no habblas mezengelle. compromise for clear discussion, yes? perhaps babblefish is desirable or subtitles.

quote:
_this_ board is, like any other, filled 2 the gills with partial reductionists N retrograders who standardise N procedurally echo.the.canon.as.godhead without any d.tailed x.planation or nuanced m.mersion


disagreed. the people on this board are more intelligent and tolerant than most other chatrooms/forums (IMHO). We value thought and content and it is understandable that they get frustrated when the syntax of the message is unclear.

...

Off-Thread: Gender baiting.
Put it down, your feminism is showing.

I don't believe that this has anything to do with gender. I come from a generation that has learned to despise his own gender.

'I've been 'round the world a million times. And all you men are slime!'

We're told what a bunch of sexist bastards we are while in the family courts we're the B-grade parents. Fathers just don't get equal consideration while society mourns the death of Paterly role-models. I believe in equality not merely a reversal of dominance. Sexism is a two-edged blade. Individuals falls through this study net of men only interested in arguments and cyber-sex while women are interested in forming networks and expressing themselves.

We're not all formed of snakes and snails and puppy dog tails.

meatshots are hitting below the brainstem in this forum.

hey caltrop you get another 0.05pt, cause I missed out on editing the second instance of 'appendixes'

so how fast did you get at typing out cryptogrammatical lateracy thrice? I'd've cut n pasted it myself. easier to coin than it is to type.

peace out y'all
=;>

deny everything

Postscript: if you want to know what I think of The Animatrix

[This message was edited by wraith on June 22, 2003 at 04:39 AM.]
Maybe it isn't necessary to what he wants to create.

I started writing about this and went off on a tangent almost immediately so tried to pull it back. Perhaps these edited paragraphs may now be out of order, can't tell. But:

As much as I enjoyed and admired both parts of the MATRIX, I'm not interested by its spread into multiple media and story expressions because I resist what I see as an attempt to pander to the compulsive desire to have ever more of that thing you like. Yes, there may be so much story that they can't fit it into two films, but if they are perfectly understandable without, is the rest necessary? or is it merely splitting the narrative up to enhance brand-building?

I find the increase in Active Narrative structures to be as much commercially driven as artistic. In the sense that it panders to and exploits the obsessive and collector mentality. I bought the Agent Cooper Tapes and enjoyed listening to them. They gave a different shape to the unfolding TWIN PEAKS saga and helped me notice some things about his personality and motivations that had escaped me. But it made no real difference to my understanding of the story. It was just gravy.

Any good work leaves the reader/viewer wanting just a little bit more, which is why Fandom exists. And it is illuminating and intensely enjoyable to rehash, comment on, discuss, unravel and peek at discarded or lopped off branches from the Source. Most works can stand a little thoretical unpicking. We enjoy the process and gain some extra insights.
Certainly we can agree on a thoretical level that the reader completes the work and often a piece is not so much finished as abandoned, ready to be completed or redirected in our minds; but these aren't an author's needs as much as they are ours.

It's not like I'm some asthetic purist: I'm practically outraged if a DVD doesn't come with director's commentaries, deleted scenes, screen tests and storyboard comparisons. But I recognise that these things are really icing and it's the cake that counts.
quote:
especially on this thread when I dearly like to discuss the issue. but then I'm not sure what it is you're actually saying. I'm not exactly fluent in mezengelle [and as I mentioned to caltrop, I can get lazy =;> ]. and also I'd like to be able to think _about_ the body of the conversation quickly, rather than spending the thinking time dechiphering what's being said.



this.is.ur.dictum.

it isn't, how.eva, mine.

.my .orientation .is .uber.wise [ie not lazy or laze_n.ducing nor straight.white.bread.info.absorption]

[read: if.u.will]
[re:spond: if. u. w.ant(s communication crawling)]

or don't.

s[w]imple as that.


quote:
for instance;

quote:
it also points 2wards the next tier of ubermarketing....less noesis appeal, more n.trinsic layering of ultimate narrative as a fiscal reward source rather than just a n[ovel].tertainment pay-off...

p[r]ay.2.receive.jig.sored.story.load[ings]?


Please explain the last part.


this is a f[riction]urred.n.flection of the 1st par.t[ickle.ur.fiction.gland, please!]


__________________
breaking down:

--p[r]ay.2.

>>pray station allusions (play.station.re.wurking (google it if nec) n.dicating non_parentized story loc(ations)].
>>religious baggage n.serts [_pray 2_ n.dicating semi-religious demig(h)odge(podge)ry that may spring up around this process]

--receive.jig.sored.story.load[ings]?

jig.sored = jig.sawed narrative nuances [trawling processes] + sore n.dicating a painful reorientation of "normal" story.data gathering


quote:
jigsawed story loadings? you want more of this type of meta-narrative? (I like the word meta)


i.want.much.

[including ur trajectory].


quote:

quote:
specially considering the lack of ego.purr.petuation they _seam_ 2 want 2 m.ulate.


whose lack of ego perpetuation? what do you mean the lack of...they want emulate?


the bros rn't especially keen 2 b interviewed. [comp.ree.hend.AI?]


quote:
no habblas mezengelle. compromise for clear discussion, yes? perhaps babblefish is desirable or subtitles.



clear discussion? bah.

eng.leash is not a static language.

[do u think that english sprang forth fully formed from the (foaming) mouths of anglo-celtic-germania gods? & correspondingly, that its position is fixed in stone, & that the x.tra words they end up shoveling in2 dictionaries r simply 2 be scorned as neologistic heresy?

also, do u also adhere 2 the notion that the methods of communication via channels such as email and mobile technologies have no m.pact on the resultant conception of new modes that negotiate the function[s] of language?]

just bah!, really.


quote:

quote:
_this_ board is, like any other, filled 2 the gills with partial reductionists N retrograders who standardise N procedurally echo.the.canon.as.godhead without any d.tailed x.planation or nuanced m.mersion


disagreed. the people on this board are more intelligent and tolerant than most other chatrooms/forums (IMHO). We value thought and content and it is understandable that they get frustrated when the syntax of the message is unclear.



...yes. which is y i said that otherlings x.ist here, 2?

[edit function: mis.noma.ing]


quote:


Off-Thread: Gender baiting.
Put it down, your feminism is showing.

I don't believe that this has anything to do with gender. I come from a generation that has learned to despise his own gender.



fairies nuts.

d.code thatWink]

i fall on the side of masculine/feminine traits that go across sex stereo.typ[os]ing.



.

- pro][rating][.lucid.txt
-
-

http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker
http://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/
_
_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.

[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 03:55 PM.]
.
e[diting].motion.haulage.
.


[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 03:53 PM.]

[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:01 PM.]

[This mez.age was noma.edited by ][just had a thought, in terms of historical baggage do u think this is in part b.cause the US x.ists in a fundamental adolescent-ethos? ie removal from the established lines of the historic via the civil war [ = rebellion + concretization of|thru hierarchical _old power_ stratifications =] ][so][c][ial][limatising of overblown, inflated ][body politic][ worth = shiny capitalism (post WW2) as the new religious order & blind negation/military (bully)mindsetting of anything that offers alternatives 2 this [cf mcarthyism + bushism(s)] = n.herent institutionalised belief structures [cf covert facism] that reflect this = future a][rrogant][ggrandizement of projected realities [in terms of economy, business function, etc].........?][
][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:01 PM.]

[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:04 PM.]

[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:05 PM.]
i _do_ understand overt resistance to this style of language construction.

-- that ppl need keep english segmented in a nostalgic pocket, a functioning system predicated on wot u [they] c as a static language base.


Kant. we. view. language[s]. thru. a. Moore. fluid. filter?


--i'm not aiming 2 obfuscate

--i'm aiming 2 n.hance language within certain creative parameters.



- pro][rating][.lucid.txt
-
-

http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker
http://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/
_
_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.

[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:13 PM.]
This is it, and them I'm done. It's the artists wont to continue on with whatever-the-hell it is they do regardless of whomever is trying to criticize or find whatever meaning there is to be found.

[quote]--i'm not aiming 2 obfuscate[quote]

In darts as in life, you don't always have to aim for the bullseye to hit it. Your "language enhancement within certain creative parameters" does little more than confuse your message.

Sure, sure. It's my fault that I'm not trying hard enough to decipher your obviously brilliant language modification.

It's not that I don't respect what you're doing. I am fully aware that the english language is an evolving entity. I am not trying to be one of the Twelve Trustees, stolidly tightening the reins of syntax and delivery, ultimately keeping the language archaic and stale. Nonetheless, you've got to realize that, linguistically, your "enhancements" differ from current styles far more than even Elizabethan English. Evolution rather than revolution, if you please.

Before I resolve to ignore 99% or your posts from here on out, allow me to make one small suggestion. Your bracketed, tangential comments (that intersect with your original message at both topical and deliberately pheonetic points) are a damn fine idea. However, nearly every sentence you type is so laden down with these footnotes-within-words that your ultimate message is diminished if not outright lost in the translation/decryption.

Just a thought or two...

--
Drive, damn you. Just drive.
quote:
Originally posted by ][mez][:
....wot got me musing re: subject line was having watched "The Animatrix" [gawd peter chung is a demi-manga-god - remember aeon flux from liquid teev?]...9 short animaction [yeah i can't help neologising sorry] movies which piggyback off and reveal plot nuances/x.tensions of _Matrix Reloaded_. in 1 of the shorts, the gaping qs of the origins/story point of the Neo-fawning-boy-child n.countered in the _Matrix Reloaded_ movie is s.sentially answered....+ this sparked off a chain of thought centering round the idea of ANG [_Active Narrative Gathering_]


...by ANG i'm referring 2 how some m.mergent forms of art|n.tertainment|simulcra r interconnected via narrative threads b.yond parent forms/individualised media constrictions..ie if u want the complete narrative picture [ie join-the-story-dots-campbellesqueness-hero-journey-style] that is available when watching _MR_ u *must* watch/collude with satellite|parallel constructions that enhance [ie offer loadings] that complete the story jigsaw - like _Enter the Matrix_ video game + The Animatrix.


it's a bit like the easter eggs n.countered on dvds....secret hotspots that 1nce found offer additional info regarding the main feature....


this isn't a new phenomenon.....look at _Twin Peaks_ for instance [movie series, book (The Diary of Laura Palmer) and movie]..but it seems to becoming a more dominant pattern...look at _Donnie Darko_ [movie + website] + _The Blair Witch Project_ [book, movie, website]...not to mention _AI_...........also the conversion of comics/books in2 film, games in2 film [_The Final Fantasty_ game + film].......


its like audiences r n.couraged 2 step outside the restrictions of mono-media absorption channels + actively seek additional narrative components elsewhere...bit like an ANG cultural engine i guess.....

- pro][rating][.lucid.txt
-
-

http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/nav.htm
_
_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_


All I can say is, it sounded like you had some good ideas, but I stopped reading.
quote:
Originally posted by caltrop:
In darts as in life, you don't always have to aim for the bullseye to hit it. Your "language enhancement within certain creative parameters" does little more than confuse your message.




...according 2 u, c.

[u.do.not.type.a.un.i[n]vers[e]al.tru(isms)th].

quote:

Sure, sure. It's my fault that I'm not trying hard enough to decipher your obviously brilliant language modification.



..this re:ads as trollish bait. is it?

quote:

It's not that I don't respect what you're doing. I am fully aware that the english language is an evolving entity. I am not trying to be one of the Twelve Trustees, stolidly tightening the reins of syntax and delivery, ultimately keeping the language archaic and stale. Nonetheless, you've got to realize that, linguistically, your "enhancements" differ from current styles far more than even Elizabethan English. Evolution rather than revolution, if you please.




....volution of any type, if i p.[caught on a semantic]leas[h]e.

quote:

Before I resolve to ignore 99% or your posts from here on out


...this is n.dicative of _respect_ [c ur comment abovum]? how so?

quote:

allow me to make one small suggestion. Your bracketed, tangential comments (that intersect with your original message at both topical and deliberately pheonetic points) are a damn fine idea. However, nearly every sentence you type is so laden down with these footnotes-within-words that your ultimate message is diminished if not outright lost in the translation/decryption.



*tingle*

Smile

- pro][rating][.lucid.txt
-
-

http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker
http://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/
_
_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.
quote:
Originally posted by Sentinel400:
Maybe it isn't necessary to what he wants to create.



yus n.deedy.


i suppose tho -in terms of his visionary tactics [+ not methods]- it seems almost logical that he may start 2 dis.play elements leading 2wards this type of narrative construction, even subconsciously. perhaps his blog [partially] functions as such? purr.haps the strong associative drive his wurks already pro[N]duce [read: The Matrix + assorted rip_me_offs] r a type of opaque ANG?


quote:

As much as I enjoyed and admired both parts of the MATRIX, I'm not interested by its spread into multiple media and story expressions because I resist what I see as an attempt to pander to the compulsive desire to have ever more of that thing you like. Yes, there may be so much story that they can't fit it into two films, but if they are perfectly understandable without, is the rest necessary? or is it merely splitting the narrative up to enhance brand-building?



good point. i'd say that the films [especially Reloaded] r essentially incomplete [narrative_wise] without access to certain other tale tie-ins, which leaves it [+ the W bros] open 2 seismically-porportioned tradition-n.cased critique....

quote:

I find the increase in Active Narrative structures to be as much commercially driven as artistic. In the sense that it panders to and exploits the obsessive and collector mentality. I bought the Agent Cooper Tapes and enjoyed listening to them. They gave a different shape to the unfolding TWIN PEAKS saga and helped me notice some things about his personality and motivations that had escaped me. But it made no real difference to my understanding of the story. It was just gravy.



...yus + these n.seed.ences could b seen as additional commericalist pap. i c it otherwise but also agree.

[catch-23 any1?Wink]



warmth,
raw mez
OK, OK, so I find that I can't ignore your damned posts. I'm nothing if not weak willed.

quote:
...according 2 u, c.

[u.do.not.type.a.un.i[n]vers[e]al.tru(isms)th].



True, according to me. However, simply because I'm the only dissenting voice doesn't invalidate my arguments. Obviously, I don't type a universal truth. I'm not sure I ever have.

I must admit that I don't have any idea what [inverse truisms] mean. Are they obvious truths that resemble statements? Or is it a self-evident falsehood? I'm not sure.

quote:
..this re:ads as trollish bait. is it?


Yeah, probably. I try to keep the sarcasm checked when typing, but I'm not Hoover Dam.

quote:
....volution of any type, if i p.[caught on a semantic]leas[h]e.


It seems nothing I type will change things, of course you'll do as you please. Though I find I'm not the only one caught on a pedantic leash. Your enhancements can easily be wrought through any piped text parsing program.

Wait just a minute....do you type are are you piping your posts through a parser? If the latter rings true, I must call "foul!"

quote:
..this is n.dicative of _respect_ [c ur comment abovum]? how so?


You're right, it is disrespectful of me to outright ignore, even if it frustrates the crap out of me. See above.

quote:
*tingle*


I dunno what the hell that means.

Sorry to everyone else. I know I keep hijacking this thread. I have a hard time letting debates end.

--
Drive, damn you. Just drive.
quote:
Originally posted by ][mez][:
i suppose tho -in terms of his visionary tactics [+ not methods]- it seems almost logical that he may start 2 dis.play elements leading 2wards this type of narrative construction, even subconsciously. perhaps his blog [partially] functions as such? purr.haps the strong associative drive his wurks already pro[N]duce [read: The Matrix + assorted rip_me_offs] r a type of opaque ANG?


It occurs to me that AGRIPPA is very much an Active Narrative:
literally, as it erases each line as you read it, and metaphorically as it forces you to think about the nature of experiences that disappear even as you experience them and memory that takes the place of actuality.
The work is informed by the structure and in some ways is about the structure, and conventional printed paper would lose the point of the narrative and the subtext [which is almost the point of the text] would vanish, or be so altered as to be made trivial.
The form of AGRIPPA is central to what the piece conveys.

I know this is a tangent from your original observation, ][mez][ but I think the only way Active Narrative structures xould really be a tool for new kinds of storytelling is if they begin from a position of exploring what their own properties are rather than just tacking themselves onto existent narrative mechanisms.

For me, the ANIMATRIX doesn't do this because so much of it is abritrarily assigned: most of the shorts, beautiful though they are, could have been made by any of the animators and the stories would not substantially have altered. The plot points in them are footnotes or clarifications which don't transform or alter your perception of the films.
Obviously the hellish complexity of trying to map a narrative that could branch out over several integrated and yet separate paths and be complete in each path is no small thing. Is it even something fiction is necessary for?

Something like Bruce Nauman's GOOD BOY, BAD BOY evokes some quite complicated reactions over twenty minutes from the two monitors side by side. There is a definite arc and an unspoken commentary that bounces back and forth between the two screens and the two performers, transforming and mutating your understanding, and separately this would not exist at all.

Maybe that's the question: Should we be asking what kind of 'stories' we need now? Rather than ever more sophisticated delivery mechanisms becoming their own story?

[This message was edited by Sentinel400 on June 23, 2003 at 07:32 AM.]
Likes (0)
×
×
×
×