 |
-FLURTH-
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
-FLORBB-
|
 |
|
|
-
|
 |
-KROFF- |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
page 00 11 12 21 Structure of Frangles: Up and Down Progress
Thanksgiving 2009 11/28
CIVIL WAR OF SYMMETRY
A
problem has been noticed that significant progress on some fronts can
tear away from progress on other fronts. (One friter even
compared this to some methods of color control in Fractal Explorer
where moving a bar makes half your fractal prettier and half
puke-uglier.) For instance, our progress as we focus on Writer's
Bricks in some ways has distanced us from the over all 343 book
structure, which is quite unpleasant given that the point of Writer's
Bricks is to help out with those structure problems, but is also
nauseatingly expected given the other half of the point of Writer's
Bricks is to @!#$ *over* the over all structure and simply throw out
something quick to read for you impatient slave drivers complaining
about the 50 year estimate for the first Frangles book. =/
Actually,
writing a full book is as progressive as any other method of furthering
Frangles, because having experience with one aspect of structure, plot,
character, etc, factors into all others, just as dealing with some of
the latter issues first would aid the former. Of course, all
these issues are constantly weaving in-and-out and on-and-off our to-do
lists, so we just shoved the task of a finished book near the top of
the queue. The other tasks would of course be complaining about
Writer's Bricks cutting in line, but like, duh, tasks can't *talk* (at
least until Frangles Visual F#).
But the opposite goes as
well. Most things intrinsically rely on others, so setting
certain precedents before others are well fleshed out (like posting a
book fifty years early before we're satisfied with the final plot and
character structures) of course has its downsides. I.e. in 50
years Writer's Bricks might be something entirely different, and then
you'll go "Oh @#$%, why the hell did I bother pre-reading that!?"
Just remember that Frangles is a *draft*. Not a draft
this week or this year, but just plain indefinitely. Let's say
J.K. Rowling or J.R.R. Tolkien or Jean M. Auel or any other
author who's name starts with "J" and contains at least one lone
suspicious initial wants to write a 7-book saga. They go along
and publish one book at a time because who has the kind of patience to
wait for an author's last deathbed words to know what happens on the
last page? But then once the saga is complete, maybe there's
fifty major things they wished they could change or re-write; ideally
the full saga should be drafted before published, which is why Frangles
is a draft: we intend to screw over all your favorite stuff later by
saying it never really happened (the only way to revise a saga without
making you wait 50 years to read anything). Drafting and revising
is a principle not just helpful, but *core* to good writing and plot
and character structure. Therefore we might say that every author
and director we've ever come across has bypassed this key writing
technique! What a loss, and all for the sake of continuity!
THE HYPERFRACOLIC SKYSCRAPER
Consider this:
Imagine
a huge skyscraper that has yet to be built. It's important that
the over all final structure work together to form a safe, stable, and
organized building. You don't want a fire in one area to collapse
ten floors, or a pigeon to poop on a window and have the entire thing
crash down into a heap of rubble. Your usual way of accomplishing
this would be to design the over all structure via blueprints from
square one, and build the building physically from the ground upward,
knowing exactly where every board and rod are going to go by the very
top floor.
But imagine another way: what if you could toss up
random chunks of building material and leave them floating in the air
where they'll eventually go? A secretary's office to ensure all
have sufficient leg room, or a restroom to test the gravitational pull
on urination way up there. What if you could fly up to the 14th
floor and throw up a quick floating window for your pet carrier pigeon
to turd on, to ensure a 14th floor bird turding doesn't break it and
shatter all the other windows successively like the helicopter that
crashes in the classic scene at the end of the Matrix where the windows
of a large building shatter as the helicopter smashes into it just
before we realize Neo is an ultimate supreme being given he can pull
someone up hanging from a rope in desperate situations.
Building
such structures would have their benefits and allow more freedom in
terms of the building's development, but the more you wanted to build
initially the more the rest of blueprints would have to work
around/with those structures, as you wouldn't want to rebuild half the
building after it's partially completed just to stick in an extra
1st-floor Mr. Coffee maker you forgot about. Or maybe one could
move around whole sections; a floor of tight cubicles might go better
near the top of the building where the overworked engineering staff
have to yell down farther to bother complaining about needing more
space. Or a 30-floor elevator to restrooms on every other floor,
but can't decide whether to choose the evens or the odds until
someone's tried both possibilities out by taking a $#@! on at least
20. Finding out *all* these things is very beneficial to the
design (and construction) process, but with the downside of one area
depending on another if it's set in stone first.
Now!
Imagine something even more bizarre: every brick you place down in a
corner of a room, you see every single other room-corner brick penciled
in on the building's blueprints. If you place it firmly in place,
all those other bricks get *penned* in on the blueprints, and undoing
those final plans requires the brick you placed down and any others
like it. Imagine building a whole floor, and the construction
workers automatically begin building half the other floors because they
have final instructions already on what to do in those areas. You
take a month off, and come back to find three or four completed floors,
but then something goes wrong just as you get back: the bird has turd
on the !@#$ window again and shattered every window on every completed
floor. You decide you don't want any 14th floor windows any more, but
that affects the structure of floor 14, which must be re-built, which
in turn forces the workers to begin demolishing every other similar
floor they've just created. Maybe you build a ventilation system
in just one room, but that sets major precedents for all other
ventilation systems which must eventually connect with that room, which
in turn affects the room sizes, cubicles, carpets, and finally,
*again*, that potential window which you're sure now can be built in
transparent titanium without that !@#$ing bird collapsing the whole
your whole million dollar skyscraper. You demolish every floor,
build the revised ventilation system, build your revised Floor 14 which
forces the building of all other floors, and your Skyscraper is finally
completely complete!
...And then a family of four dies
tragically when their air balloon crashes into your sturdy transparent
titanium window, because you didn't realize you built your entire
skyscraper in the smack middle of an air balloon tourist windway
bypass. Now here, to top it off, we describe some cumulative
hyper-rant comparable to the one Will Hunting goes into after being
denied an NSA job that we're too currently too lazy to match, and you
finally see the difficulties of fractal nonlinear construction at the
most extreme worst-case scenario, and completely forget that there were
ever any benefits of this method of construction to begin with.
This
is what it's like to frite Frangles, and to a much more enjoyable
extent, to *follow* its construction as a freer. Keep in mind one
of the founding principles of Frangles is to design a structured saga
of literature that's never been attempted, so half the work of writing
it is going to be exploring the foundational methods of how to write
fractal nonlinear fiction sans any major historical examples to learn
from. Frangles aims for the prolific nature of Asimov who wrote
over 300 books, except with the same effort we might only be able to
write 150 given the work of figuring how one goes about organizing such
a structure, and how to write ours in particular to boot.
Whenever
a saga plans ahead for 7 books but just writes one at a time, this
horribly disallows the type of revision that all good literature
demands before a work is completed. This essentially means that
no multi-book/film saga in literature or film has actually had the
chance to be revised once a single draft is finished! Writers and
directors and producers have superb *ideas* for structured books or
movies or shows, but never, never, never are those ideas ever realized,
as every single one requires producing the first part, then the second,
then the third, etc, in a cripplingly linear way.
Always,
always, always, the established literary principle of revising your
work after a rough draft applies to any given work of art, especially a
large project of works of art. Always we're told to write a
*draft*, then revise the draft once a rough whole picture has been
brainstormed. Always, always, the writer--the constructor--cannot
predict where the journey of producing the work for the first time will
take them. Word leads to word, chapter leads to chapter, book
leads to book. Sometimes there's even the paradoxical scenario
where a writer will toss out the very thing that spawned their whole
work because it didn't turn out to fit in by the end!
In this
whole process comes a learning experience of what's working and not
working; what was good about the original intention and what needs
revisiting; what needs tweaks or deletes or re-hauls or just plain
didn't work. A revision experience that's always denied a large
saga involving multiple books, films, or TV episodes, with scant stray
specs of exceptions. Even the exceptions fall significantly short
of achieving the writer's or producer's original idea (such as Star
Wars or Babylon 5), all due to the evils of limited budgets, poor
foresight, immediate gratification, and contrived stories to sell cheap
plush Ewoks; evils comprising the single greatest nemesis of well
structured sagas.
PLEASE DONATE A TIME MACHINE
Frangles--with
no more access to a time machine than anyone else as far as you
know--is of course subject to all these real world difficulties (what
reader or writer has the patience to wait a decade or two for a full
saga to be released), but one of our goals is to go further in
defeating them than anyone's yet accomplished, however short we fall of
perfection. This is partly because the concept of
Frangles--symmetric, self-similar pages arrangeable in millions of
combinations--demands massively more attention to that idea of
structure. A linear approach to writing (the first book or film
or episode, then the next, then the next...) can do a roughly decent
job given the story is made to be *read* first page first, and the
second page second, etc. But with a nonlinear saga such as
Frangles where the first and last page could be any of many different
pages throughout the entire page structure, new approaches are
necessary. Necessity is a parent of innovation, and the Frangles
necessity of obsessive attention to structure forces us to write those
huge finish drafts before going back and revising whole books or themes
or concepts, something we're still figuring out how to balance and
still output complete stories to read as Frangles evolves.
[Take
a careful note here of the difference between aiming for something
structured *well*, and aiming for a different *type* of
structure. The former applies to all linear sagas (i.e. most
everything you've ever read or seen), and would apply to Frangles even
if it *were* just another regular 7-book sagas. So saying "let's
actually finish our stuff before publishing it" is a nifty idea, but
not a radical epiphany. The latter--constructing a *type* of
storytelling almost never attempted--is what makes Frangles extremely
unique, which must be structured well in addition to being attempted at
all.]
So what are we doing about it?? Absolutely
nothing! Except for a couple bot orbs having direct wi-fi access
to our brains (Orbo, have you unzipped that traumatic childhood memory
of fragmatic nonlinear abuse yet?), we're just as human as everyone
else. While Frangles might welcome--or even necessitate--a very
patient approach to accumulating a lot of raw material before polishing
it, we're probably not being any more patient than your average
above-average Joe in the matter. I.e. some authors might write
extra long books or do an above average amount of research before
publishing (Wheel of Time, Clan of the Cave Bear, religious flyers),
but posting 200 of our rough 600 pages of material for a bunch of books
doesn't even come close to a single 1000-page Jordan novel.
(Unless our pattern continues and we only post 2,000 of 6,000 pages,
which may or may not happen, we'll see.) Also, given a new
medium, perhaps we're doing less than we should be doing! So
we're back to our answer: how are we improving? Not at all!
(Except, of course, in our subliminal reverse psychology update
techniques that ensure you we're making exponential progress while
we're really not via the absurd contradiction to that fact above and
the even more confusion comment coming up.) (See? It's working.) (Now go give us money so we can afford to write our stuff.) (And check back.)
|
|