Directions

"Increasing Intricacy Using Polarities & Platonics"

or

"A How-To: 2 to 3"



Taking in the visual spectrum world, our pattern-utilizing cultures, and laws of nature; Start. Draw your conclusions.

After a literal bit of information

Start with nothing. Then there is any thing. This thing is a dot or point, scalable to a circle and then sphere. This any thing, now a sphere, at minimum is a four point polyhedron. This polyhedron, if made of minimal variation or perfect symmetry, is a tetrahedron.

A tetrahedron is comprised of four points (vertexes), six edges, and four faces. It is the simplest of the 5 Platonic Solids. Its classical element is fire. It can be written as {3,3} which is to say that its faces have 3 edges and that at each vertex 3 faces meet. (A cube is written as {4,3}) The single point has grown to contain four points. Each of those four can be investigated to contain their own four ad infinitum. Any thing may be creatively investigated and found to contain microcosms within.

These microcosms are a mental construct mixing some attributes that are known and some that are meaningful. Once they are minimally conceptualized it obtains psychological mass through an untaught and unconscious process felt rather than known. The greater its mass, the deeper its microcosmic rabbit hole. Ideas that reach farther back into our collective memories hold greater mass. Fear, sex, and family are powerful ideas that contain within them great nebulous things such as desire, faith, and power.

R -> P

(x,y) The Cartesian coordination system. In order to gather context and an understanding of Kepler's Laws of planetary Motion I went back to brush up on my Trigonometry. Unfortunately ratios and equations such as cos85 = 0.087155 instantaneously loses meaning in my mind. The number as an event of information completely fails to hold and I cannot proceed to the next lesson.

(r,θ) The Polar coordination system, where r=the distance from the origin (0,0) and θ is the angle of the line to a chosen horizontal. The x and y axis are replaced by circular degrees 0, 90, 180, 270. This does something very important by stating graphical occurrences by their connection to an origin point, a center. This center point is what I mislabeled earlier as the action-event 'fulcrum'. A fulcrum is a point at which a lever pivots. It inhabits a two-dimensional plane and we're looking to create stories in three-dimensional space.

Stories are event-scenes where branching occurs between our expectations and what actually happens. There is a mental ratio at play where branches are compared and judged. This is our joy; judgment of information. Too similar and we risk (right brain) dissatisfaction by predictability; too radical and our (left brain) sense of inner structure hits the alarm.

They come in pencil, they come in ink

Feedback received about the first tetrahedron indicated an entropic, debilitating nonsense of time. What I had thought of as an evening had been read as weeks. Wanting for a sense of surrounding was also a comment. A tighter context overall.

My first hypothesis was to make a clear fulcrum action-event to link the actions of four different characters. In considering the characters as character spheres, or specifically as psychological masses given shape and form, we expect more information on a person-representing shape than a single tetrahedron can provide, formal limitations be damned. Fair enough...

Pictures of the completed form are coming soon. For now I'm looking to return to the realm of flat illustration. Are you familiar with Kepler's 2nd Law?

Scenario: Sequence

Imagining in tetrahedron is interesting. Just now, imagining a scene between Kyran and Anthony where they talk about their skin-changing abilities; How they're different, their individual strengths and weaknesses. There's a tone of violence underlying their conversation as the scenario is that of plotting a crime. This is more than enough to constitute continued research into character spheres and structural elements. The topic of their discussion is a psychological mass so that must be a vertex as well.

Getting back to scenario; Attention to scenario requires non-continuation and eventual termination. This is revealed in the division between movies and film-theater. Film-theater is more concerned with exploring scenarios, movies explore technology. '2001: A Space Odyssey' is a good example of film-theater because although there was a story arc to the whole thing, it was really made up of a variety of scenarios. From the 'Dawn of Man' opening, to the polite space-espionage between Russia and the US, then to HAL's story, to the Star Gate finale, it's a collection of scenarios played out. Movies tend to have more sequences that move in a row. This is where visual acrobatic 'action sequences' succeed and paved the way for video artistry and thereby video-theater.

Internet and blogging has fueled a similar split between journalism and sensationalism and, just as Hollywood has forgotten about scenario, so has the internet given rise to sensationalist and steady as she goes browsing. We want to click from one website to the next, we bookmark places we want to return to, these places begin to cultivate either a scenario or a sensation that you expect when going. But if our conscious minds only roll from one sight to the next then we're devolving into a sequence. The ability to detect and create scenario is crucial to recognizing our lives as a scenario and thereby a temporary venue for exploration.