With a handle like Auntie Grizelda, I have a lovely idea for a place to think about writing topics. It's a little meta, but it should get the flywheel moving.
Remember the guru speaking to Peter Tork near the end of "Head"? He explains in gymnosophist terms the Socratic concept of knowing nothing and the cave theory from the Republic.
Peter tries to tell the rest of the band what he learned, but they're too caught up in the game of being Monkees. Next Davy merely reacts to the words as if he tasted poison and had to spit. He tears through as much of the facade as he can, but he cannot observe himself. Thus Davy fulfills the nothingness and brings the movie back to its opening act (thus the name of the flick). Davy fails Peter's test, but resolves the overarching condition by looping it and killing it at the same time.
The process of telling a story, be it written or filmed, spoken or photographed, sculpted or dances, is the process of distillation and dilution. The author decides what is necessary and what needs to be added to make it work. You add an explanation, you take out entire characters, you slur one word and over-enunciate another.
The audience cannot be forced to think a certain way about the result. Perhaps they get it, perhaps they get lost. You can edit until they think more the way you wanted, but you may lose the spirit of the story in process. Perhaps instead the audience is correct and the author just needs to start the next story.
Socrates proposed drumming the poets out of the Polis until they could tell moral tales. What if the point is that we have no idea which morals even exist? How does a character find a new moral and tell that to others?
no subject
Remember the guru speaking to Peter Tork near the end of "Head"? He explains in gymnosophist terms the Socratic concept of knowing nothing and the cave theory from the Republic.
Peter tries to tell the rest of the band what he learned, but they're too caught up in the game of being Monkees. Next Davy merely reacts to the words as if he tasted poison and had to spit. He tears through as much of the facade as he can, but he cannot observe himself. Thus Davy fulfills the nothingness and brings the movie back to its opening act (thus the name of the flick). Davy fails Peter's test, but resolves the overarching condition by looping it and killing it at the same time.
The process of telling a story, be it written or filmed, spoken or photographed, sculpted or dances, is the process of distillation and dilution. The author decides what is necessary and what needs to be added to make it work. You add an explanation, you take out entire characters, you slur one word and over-enunciate another.
The audience cannot be forced to think a certain way about the result. Perhaps they get it, perhaps they get lost. You can edit until they think more the way you wanted, but you may lose the spirit of the story in process. Perhaps instead the audience is correct and the author just needs to start the next story.
Socrates proposed drumming the poets out of the Polis until they could tell moral tales. What if the point is that we have no idea which morals even exist? How does a character find a new moral and tell that to others?