Scenario: Without Call

Scenes:
Fitness testing in the Gym (Anthony, Ozzie, Vedrana, Jackie)
Experiment (Anthony, Ozzie, Vedrana, Jackie)
Hall of Generation (Anthony, Alison, )
Auctioning (Jackie, Representatives, Scientists, Anthony)
Ant exploring/writing (Anthony,)
the freight ship (Anthony, Alison)
Firing Range (Anthony, Jackie, Alison, Ozzie)

4 Planes [Data] - events, actions, space-time perspectives,
4 Vertexes [Psychologically weighted objects] - characters, actors, personae, objects
6 Edges [Values] - reciprocal bonds, integrity, currents, frequencies, polarities

Microcosms may be expanded upon inspection of vertexes.

01 and the Wizard Con

Some opposites (provided by Fuller):

Associative-Disassociative
Divergent-Convergent
Pulsating-Oscillating
Expansive-Contractive
Explosive-Implosive
Radiational-Gravitational

Positive-Negative
Dissonance-Consonance (Zappa)

Eastern Philosophies...
Yang-Yin
Male-Female
Heaven-Earth

Our behavior is, at all times, capable of being described with these dualities.

Characters X and ~X's coordinate polarity is determinable after X awareness of ~X such as Ozzie to Ant or Ozzie to Alison. The ~X is more terminal (read: event specific) than X experiencing it.

---
(rubs eyes)

Anyways... Having gone to Wizard Con this past weekend I can say that it wasn't nearly as pleasant as C2E2 was. The tone of the latter was fanciful compared to Wizard's gray walled, stereo clubbed, flea market. I understand you're The Iron Sheik but why are you here with a dozen other wrestlers and aging cult actors? Signing and selling studio photos doesn't enrich the community like *gasp* industry speakers.

Also, as much fun as video games are, they're only fun if you get to play them. Twice my friend and I were kicked off consoles so the xbox staff could set up tournaments for the professional gamer and his xbox green contacts. This wasn't after we'd be hoarding the game or loitering, this was actually as we had just completed selecting our song list. All the technological innovations in the world won't matter if we can't enjoy it naturally.

I confessed to my friend the love-hate relationship I have with the entertainment industry. The idea that a person can behave in wildly different manners in fantastical scenarios makes me smile. It's a land that praises and craves lunacy. It's romantic how people dress as favorite characters, to live as them, to be recognized as something bigger than themselves. And through my memories of time with my father, I see values of history and moments of nostalgia. But it's also a terribly ignorant and corruptable craft. The nature of entertainment rewards the lowering of intellectual exploration, reward being comprehension by the viewer. Because it's a populist region, it will always be a platform for public dialog, and that makes it very interesting to narcissists, politicians, and money-people.

Makes me wonder what's beyond the industrial age.

You're quite the character!

Graham Hough's compass on discursive writing:
Allegory - Theme dominant; Image rhetorical, lifeless... road sign figures;

Incarnation - Theme and Image fused implicitly;

Realism - Image dominant, reporting;

and Symbolism - Theme and Image unity asserted to but only held through tension, religious acts and social pretenses.


Here is the Universe-encompassing polarization between theme and image. Image is all stimuli that we receive and Theme is all ideas we can/do/have become consciously aware of. Plato argued that we know all ideas, only they are innate and we are unaware of our knowledge. If we are capable of knowing everything, how do we decide where to begin? I can't consider the applications of extreme thematic dissonance, such as the eternally wandering thought, the mental tension necessary is unbearable and we would disengage. An entropic-assessment will be made.

So start simple.

Archetypes are idealized visions of personality groupings. We intuitively recognize when someone 'is a clown' but yet you can't measure 'humor', 'empathy', or 'cynicism' or other attributes that culminate into seeing someone as a clown. We lack a language to offer scale to these ideas/values. A character sphere's vertex is a point most distal. They are in radiant opposition to a character's gravitational center (self) yet focally applicable - we can attest to their appearance in others.

However we are more than a single idea, we are a continually-assessing, continually-revising, continually-redefining interplay between four archetype vertexes, the minimum structure of the self.

Relavent Objects and Ideas

What can be immediately surmised of this character tetrahedron?

It has four vertexes, six edges, and four planes. However, the planar surfaces are not structural components. Taken out it looks so...

The tetrahedron is the smallest conceptual structure. A triangle on a convex-concave plane can have angles totaling more than 180 degrees. If you convex a triangle's edges you will eventually create a circle and for a tetrahedron, convexing leads to a sphere. This is the logic behind the converting of 'character tetrahedron' to 'character sphere'. But what about the term 'character'?

Within narrative - any account of a series of events, historical, present, or future - the term character refers to a construction of self. A series of events are decision/action showcases for various, self-related occasions by which the audience receives and, I feel, wants to psychologically mirror. This is an explanation to why we value complexity in our characters, because we enjoy the inner-working-out of agreement and disagreement.

So next it should be determined what are the structural components of character, of self?

Groundfloor - First Impressions

- Spacial recognition draws attention to proximal face, thereby, character sphere, identity, and authorial conception.

- Natural application to handle/rotate in order to 'upright' faces. Psychological mirroring in affect.

Consider the interrelationship of data between parallel planes above. Are the three generalities (Charity, Obligation, Transformation) radiant from the character spheres they are written on? With a consciousness of the sphere/identity we're holding closer to us, could these generalities be evidential ideas the sphere/identity is gravitated toward? People are responsive to various aspects of personalities.

We can be both focal and omnidirectional in addressing people, such as the difference between nouns/people/ideas that pass through conversation and a concentrated analysis. Hence, I am reading into this object. If I were to read away from it, it would be in more general terms.

- The event to be described with the inner tetrahedron is pointedly framed by these four conceptions.

- Inner tetrahedron vertexes are fixed at the center point of the outer tetrahedrons. The character spheres' conceptual/actual centers are spacially synonymous with the inner sphere's structural points. Because they are filled with conceptual nothingness, there is no integral quality to where within the vertexes exist. Correlations may be drawn later about departures from equiangular construction as sophistication of dialog is required.

I like this project...