Quote: Original post by Wai
Suppose I associate a concept to an object as way to talk about the concept, what do I call the Object?
just "symbol"?
Sounds like a trope to me, but symbol would probably also be fine. And yes I agree that plotting seems easier when you don't know all the details of the story and that this is ironic. Similarly it's much easier to find the pattern of someone else's plot and make suggestions for improving it than it is to find a pattern in one's own scattered inspirations. I think this is a 'can't see the forest for the trees' problem, compounded by the fact that with one's own work one is more worried about getting everything perfect, while with others' work you can toss out various suggestions and trust that they will make whatever they consider to be the right choice.
When I was writing my last attempt at a plot outline I noticed that it was quite verbose compared to yours. I felt that I needed more context to keep track of emotions and why the various things were happening, but I also realized that this made the whole outline less clear. Splitting it into two parts, one more verbose and one pure formulas, is a good idea, I'd like to try that if I get time.
One interesting thing I noticed in playing with my outline is the repetition of the main character wearing various disguises to hide his identity, his nature, or some other fact about himself. Do you have any thoughts on what the plot symbolism of a disguise or personal secret might be?
Quote:
I think it might be better to break down X into two, because X has two parts that are dynamically different:
X: One shouldn't be forced to do something they don't want.
Y: One shouldn't refrain himself from doing something he truly wants.
constraints: X involves 2 or more characters. Y involves 1 character.
When I read (0.0), my thought was that M can't have X on himself, so (0.0) should have mentioned another character. So I thought M's conflict is actually Y. Did I guess right?
Actually no. [smile] M's problem in my 0.0 is that he doesn't know what would make him happy, in other words he doesn't know what would satisfy his X. As for Xs and Ys requiring 1 person or 2, what about the situation where another person is restraining someone from doing something he truly wants? What about the situation where doing what one truly wants requires another person's cooperation? I think that X and Y are the same because in all cases a person is being blocked from what they want, whether the block is themselves, another person, the world, or a lack of knowing what they want.
This ties into the way I rewrote M's goal - he does _not_ want to prove X because the question is not whether X is morally right; the fact that it is morally right is an underlying premise of the book. The question is whether it is practically achievable to enforce the fair satisfying of everyone's Xs, and what one ought to do about various types of conflict between what one person wants and what would satisfy another person's X. The answer is a complex, "Yes, it is right to try to enforce the satisfaction of everyone's X and the ethical method for doing so is...(as illustrated by M's choices and actions in the book)." Now, if only I could encode that into an elegant and entertaining series of specific incidents culminating in a dramatic and satisfying climax! lol