Again, a gap of months since the last I've written. I must apologize, internet, for my slacking off of writing. First, there was play practice and the play itself, then exams and more exams. Occasionally when I had chance to write, I either couldn't think of a topic or I couldn't figure out how to start with a particular topic. Excuses, I know, but they are still valid reasons.
Where to begin? Memes leaked into my life for a few days/weeks. I am amused by the meme called "shibe doge." Unfortunately, it got to a point where my thoughts were being organized in the same pattern. When I commented on something to myself, it came out "Wow. So Hawthorne. Much uncanny" or something similar. Fortunately, worry over exams, social matters, and packing stopped that in its tracks! I think. One does not simple get a meme out of one's head...
Back on topic! The play (We Have Always Lived in the Castle) was a learning experience for me. Never had I acted in so large of a role before. The actual acting part was easy enough. All I had to do was either talk loudly or be creepy, and I had Uncle Julian down, no problem. My issue was lines. Before, even in Arsenic and Old Lace, I was limited to mainly short, dialogue in reaction to others. There wasn't as much awkward standing around as in The Tempest, but they were still small roles. Uncle Julian, on the other hand, was a fairly large role. It was, also, one of my favorite roles. When else could I be super annoying, super loud and super creepy, all at varying times in the same play?
As with most of the plays I had been in, we pulled it all together just in time for opening night. (Maybe I shouldn't be saying such things, but I have to be honest here. Well, I don't have to, but I want to, at least right here.) Fortunately, our glorious director, the Grand Poobah of the Theatre Department, put us in place and kicked us into action at our last two dress rehearsals.
Once the play was going, everything went smoothly. Yes, certain audiences were annoying, and yes, we sometimes forgot lines. (Oh right. That's the bit I shouldn't have said. Oops.) I still liked it. I'm definitely coloring my memories with nostalgia and rose-glasses when I say this, but it was one of my favorite productions in which to play a part.
After that, there was a whole bunch of school, and stuff. I will enact ellipsis and skip from the play to today. I haven't done much, besides visiting peeps at Greenville ARP and reading miscellaneous books. Still looking into graduate schools, though.
In regards to further articles, I have been contemplating looking at the use of theme and variations in a certain video game... Stay tuned!
Well, that's all for now! Bye-bye internet.
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Sunday, October 6, 2013
Music - Testament of Freedom! AMERICA!
Sometimes you stumble upon cool things. No, I don't mean that internet site, just real life stuff. Other times... not so much. I was chilling in the music building when I found a couple of scores that looked interesting. One was a two-part mass. The other caught my attention for the reason of its text: select writings of Thomas Jefferson.
Now, I said, that sounds cool. It'll probably be VERY patriotic and say something about America and freedom. Looking back, I can confidently say I was correct about that guess. In regards to my opener: is this a cool thing or not? In many ways it was.
Starting off the work, is the first movement, entitled "The God who gave us life." The whole of the text is "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy but cannot disjoin them." As far as a text, it's not too bad: it's not too long or too wordy. The music lends a contemplative air to it. The song states a fact that the text-writer assumes as a basic truth.
However, getting into the other movements, the text and tone change. The texts for the second and third movements are over two paragraphs long, and the fourth consists of a paragraph and a recapitulation of the first text.
For me, it's not the text length that makes an ill-fit. It's the word choice of Thomas Jefferson. He is an intelligent and erudite man, but his lofty language and multi-syllabic words are not always a good fit for the music. I almost giggled at the line "Our internal resources are great." It just doesn't work for a dramatic text. It sounds like office lingo. I know that it is not, and that the whole of the text is patriotic, but it still feels too wordy.
Another issue I have is the nature of the text. Thomas Jefferson writes lofty words about the nation, but their usage in a dramatic piece like this pushes the patriotism almost into jingo territory. Part of my annoyance is colored by a knowledge of history: I remember the condition of non-WASPs at that time when presented with the words "Our cause is just" or "We cannot endure the infamy and guilt ... which inevitably waits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage upon them." Whatever his intent was in those lines, I can't help what comes to mind. But that's just an issue I'd have to take up with Thomas Jefferson and not the composer, Randall Thompson.
Overall, it's fun to listen to for kicks. However, the text utilized is not quite right for musical setting. Because of the wordiness of the author, the music comes off as stilted at points. However, it would make good listening on the Fourth of July.
AMERICA!
Now, I said, that sounds cool. It'll probably be VERY patriotic and say something about America and freedom. Looking back, I can confidently say I was correct about that guess. In regards to my opener: is this a cool thing or not? In many ways it was.
Starting off the work, is the first movement, entitled "The God who gave us life." The whole of the text is "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy but cannot disjoin them." As far as a text, it's not too bad: it's not too long or too wordy. The music lends a contemplative air to it. The song states a fact that the text-writer assumes as a basic truth.
However, getting into the other movements, the text and tone change. The texts for the second and third movements are over two paragraphs long, and the fourth consists of a paragraph and a recapitulation of the first text.
For me, it's not the text length that makes an ill-fit. It's the word choice of Thomas Jefferson. He is an intelligent and erudite man, but his lofty language and multi-syllabic words are not always a good fit for the music. I almost giggled at the line "Our internal resources are great." It just doesn't work for a dramatic text. It sounds like office lingo. I know that it is not, and that the whole of the text is patriotic, but it still feels too wordy.
Another issue I have is the nature of the text. Thomas Jefferson writes lofty words about the nation, but their usage in a dramatic piece like this pushes the patriotism almost into jingo territory. Part of my annoyance is colored by a knowledge of history: I remember the condition of non-WASPs at that time when presented with the words "Our cause is just" or "We cannot endure the infamy and guilt ... which inevitably waits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage upon them." Whatever his intent was in those lines, I can't help what comes to mind. But that's just an issue I'd have to take up with Thomas Jefferson and not the composer, Randall Thompson.
Overall, it's fun to listen to for kicks. However, the text utilized is not quite right for musical setting. Because of the wordiness of the author, the music comes off as stilted at points. However, it would make good listening on the Fourth of July.
AMERICA!
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Psychology - (No) Pun Intended
How many times have you been reading a book, when you come across this apologetic sentence, "No pun intended," usually following some small unintentional play on words? At least a few times. Sales of fireworks have skyrocketed. The price of yeast has risen. The frog croaked. In most serious publications, it is completely unintentional and not intended to be humorous. Or is it?
One important concept in psychology is the idea that the human brain constantly seeks out patterns in the world around it. The cognitive map is a method of organizing the information to which one is exposed. This is used to keep physical surroundings in mind. A similar concept is the schema: this is the organization of new information into the old "database." However, there is another concept which fits best: the preconscious. Unlike the subconscious, preconscious consists of non-repressed memories and information. For instance, if you are writing or talking about different varieties of cheese, you might bring different memories of cheese and cheese-based foods to your preconscious memory. You're not actively thinking about them, but if somebody asks your favorite variety, you'll probably draw the answer from your preconscious store. Or, you might warn somebody about eating a 15 cheese pizza any time soon. The memories and ideas are ready to be accessed, just waiting for you to think about them.
This extends even into word choice for writing. If I were to write an action scene, words like "Bam!" and "Pow!" would enter my preconscious and later conscious mind. Someone with a large vocabulary might recall shorter, sharper words. The question then, is this: are written puns ever unintentional? In most textbooks, the answer is probably yes. However, if your friend "accidentally" uses one, chances are it was completely intentional. Because we seek patterns, we choose words that fit the concepts best (at least, in our own minds). I'm not going to say "Butter salesmen have disseminated themselves across the nation," but "Butter salesman have spread themselves across the nation." The humorous aspect may not be purposeful, but the supposed pun is completely intentional.
I suppose you thought "Oh, he's only going to write in puns" after seeing the title. I'm a-Freud I'm going to have to disappoint you. Writing puns for any field requires more than a working knowledge of id. I'm not plotting a schema to amuse you.
Puns, therefore, derive from our need to connect things mentally. Every pun is intended.
One important concept in psychology is the idea that the human brain constantly seeks out patterns in the world around it. The cognitive map is a method of organizing the information to which one is exposed. This is used to keep physical surroundings in mind. A similar concept is the schema: this is the organization of new information into the old "database." However, there is another concept which fits best: the preconscious. Unlike the subconscious, preconscious consists of non-repressed memories and information. For instance, if you are writing or talking about different varieties of cheese, you might bring different memories of cheese and cheese-based foods to your preconscious memory. You're not actively thinking about them, but if somebody asks your favorite variety, you'll probably draw the answer from your preconscious store. Or, you might warn somebody about eating a 15 cheese pizza any time soon. The memories and ideas are ready to be accessed, just waiting for you to think about them.
This extends even into word choice for writing. If I were to write an action scene, words like "Bam!" and "Pow!" would enter my preconscious and later conscious mind. Someone with a large vocabulary might recall shorter, sharper words. The question then, is this: are written puns ever unintentional? In most textbooks, the answer is probably yes. However, if your friend "accidentally" uses one, chances are it was completely intentional. Because we seek patterns, we choose words that fit the concepts best (at least, in our own minds). I'm not going to say "Butter salesmen have disseminated themselves across the nation," but "Butter salesman have spread themselves across the nation." The humorous aspect may not be purposeful, but the supposed pun is completely intentional.
I suppose you thought "Oh, he's only going to write in puns" after seeing the title. I'm a-Freud I'm going to have to disappoint you. Writing puns for any field requires more than a working knowledge of id. I'm not plotting a schema to amuse you.
Puns, therefore, derive from our need to connect things mentally. Every pun is intended.
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Life - Grassy Lawns and Temporary Commuters
Well, today was pretty terrible. (Except the last bit. There was food and Luigi's Mansion for that.)
I've just about reached the point of "Optimal Frustration" with Erskine College's administration. (I'll give the caveat that I could have started my part a little bit sooner.) Because certain funds have not yet arrived, I have not been able to register or acquire room and board. I can't stay in the dorm, as I'm not a registered student. I can't stay in guest rooms, as they would cost more money than I would care to spend. I won't ask to temporarily board with people I know in the area, because that would definitely be a great imposition. After discussing the situation with my Mother, Mother, she offered to help me commute on the days she's not teaching.
Now, she does know a long commute. The school to which she commuted, Southern Wesleyan, is just a little bit closer to us than Clemson. One of the first times we visited the campus (Clemson), someone pointed out the exit sign to SW. The trip down usually lasts around an hour. According to Google Maps, the Erskine trip is longer: however, it feels shorter. Maybe there's more stuff to look at? Or perhaps it's the thrill of playing the "no-speed" game when approaching the oddly spaced speed-limit signs around Due West. Either way, the trip to Erskine is still a bit more fun than the one to Clemson. (That's not saying much. It's still pretty dull.)
So, the sum of all the above is that I might become a temporary, unofficial, quasi-commuter. There's also the potential for a "sleep-over" as she teaches on Tuesday. However, fun aspect aside, I don't really want to commute. My first class is at 10:00, which doesn't seem bad initially. Giving an hour for the journey, and thirty minutes to get there, find a quiet place for Mother to teach Matthew, and for me to get to class, gives us a departure time of 8:30 and a wake-up time of 7:30. In other words, exactly what I was trying to avoid by not taking any early morning classes. But I shouldn't complain: free carpooling is still free carpooling.
And now to the "grass lawns" bit. Before Father left after his lunch break, he uttered that most feared command: "I need you to cut the grass ... at least the front." After putting it off for an hour or two, while dealing with my almost-Optimal Frustration, I finally buckled down and went out.
Long story short, it was terrible. It kept jamming, grass lumps piled up, sweat poured. I won't belly-ache any more than this: when Father returned home from work, he looked at the lawn mower and finished the yard by mowing the dreaded and feared back yard. (It's not really that big, but there's plants and things to navigate around.) He met some yellow jackets along the way. Fortunately, he's made of tougher stuff than I am, so he kept on going until the job was done.
Hopefully, the lawn won't have to be mowed again for a while. (Or at least not while I'm home. :) )
The moral of the story is to mow your loan before it's too tall and apply for lawns early.
I've just about reached the point of "Optimal Frustration" with Erskine College's administration. (I'll give the caveat that I could have started my part a little bit sooner.) Because certain funds have not yet arrived, I have not been able to register or acquire room and board. I can't stay in the dorm, as I'm not a registered student. I can't stay in guest rooms, as they would cost more money than I would care to spend. I won't ask to temporarily board with people I know in the area, because that would definitely be a great imposition. After discussing the situation with my Mother, Mother, she offered to help me commute on the days she's not teaching.
Now, she does know a long commute. The school to which she commuted, Southern Wesleyan, is just a little bit closer to us than Clemson. One of the first times we visited the campus (Clemson), someone pointed out the exit sign to SW. The trip down usually lasts around an hour. According to Google Maps, the Erskine trip is longer: however, it feels shorter. Maybe there's more stuff to look at? Or perhaps it's the thrill of playing the "no-speed" game when approaching the oddly spaced speed-limit signs around Due West. Either way, the trip to Erskine is still a bit more fun than the one to Clemson. (That's not saying much. It's still pretty dull.)
So, the sum of all the above is that I might become a temporary, unofficial, quasi-commuter. There's also the potential for a "sleep-over" as she teaches on Tuesday. However, fun aspect aside, I don't really want to commute. My first class is at 10:00, which doesn't seem bad initially. Giving an hour for the journey, and thirty minutes to get there, find a quiet place for Mother to teach Matthew, and for me to get to class, gives us a departure time of 8:30 and a wake-up time of 7:30. In other words, exactly what I was trying to avoid by not taking any early morning classes. But I shouldn't complain: free carpooling is still free carpooling.
And now to the "grass lawns" bit. Before Father left after his lunch break, he uttered that most feared command: "I need you to cut the grass ... at least the front." After putting it off for an hour or two, while dealing with my almost-Optimal Frustration, I finally buckled down and went out.
Long story short, it was terrible. It kept jamming, grass lumps piled up, sweat poured. I won't belly-ache any more than this: when Father returned home from work, he looked at the lawn mower and finished the yard by mowing the dreaded and feared back yard. (It's not really that big, but there's plants and things to navigate around.) He met some yellow jackets along the way. Fortunately, he's made of tougher stuff than I am, so he kept on going until the job was done.
Hopefully, the lawn won't have to be mowed again for a while. (Or at least not while I'm home. :) )
The moral of the story is to mow your loan before it's too tall and apply for lawns early.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Culture - Television Studies and Me: Can't be a Fan-boy about It
For the longest time, I've wanted to take certain classes. Mostly, they are classes with specific focuses that are not available at smaller institutions. For example, I saw one class listed that promised a study of the literature of south Asia. Another was the concerted study of animal behaviors and patterns in that behavior. One such variety of classes is in the field of television studies. However, whenever I think about it, I also come up with difficulties. At least, difficulties for me. I don't know quite how to approach it in a scholarly way. (I'd probably learn how by taking one of the classes. However, I do have some ideas about problems I'd need to overcome.)
My first point can be illustrated with Doctor Who. I really like the show. I've assembled costumes and outfits based off the dress of the main character, the Doctor. Take it how you will, but I also willingly suffered through the low seasons of the show. However, most of my discussions about the show go in certain ways: either I talk about costumes, or we discuss our favorite incarnation of the Doctor. Most of the discussions are what I would call "fanboyish." Basically, we discuss details that only the most dedicated fans would know, or even care about.
I recently read a book about Doctor Who, The Greatest Show in the Galaxy, which looked at various aspects of the show. One such thing was how the Doctor related to his different companions. The author noted the Doctor's seeming condescension towards male companions, citing various instance across the span of the show. Such analysis of detail would only engage someone interested in the show, and only if they had the working knowledge to know what was being discussed in the first place.
Also, sometimes discussions require much background knowledge and information. Some episodes make oblique references to other, previous episodes. Others point to obscure aspects of story and plot. This is not a unique problem: even in literary studies, one must be somewhat versed in the culture and history behind a story to fully analyze it. This is particularly true of ancient and medieval literature, so far removed from the modern day. Television, however, largely reflects the worldviews and cultures of contemporary society. It does not take as much study to figure out where a director or script-writer is coming from in terms of intended message or subconscious bias.
Television is contemporary, and this also implicates a few things for its study. For instance, many programs are designed purely for entertainment, and one might ask "How or why should we analyze this? It's just a TV show!" However, it is still worth examining. At college and the university, we constantly seek out new things to partake of and analyze. Naturally, television, with its ability to transmit old and new ideas, should also be studied. I will try not to stray too far into doing television studies, rather than writing about it (One can find articles for that online and in journals.) as I further consider difficulties that face television studies. Stay tuned for the next part!
My first point can be illustrated with Doctor Who. I really like the show. I've assembled costumes and outfits based off the dress of the main character, the Doctor. Take it how you will, but I also willingly suffered through the low seasons of the show. However, most of my discussions about the show go in certain ways: either I talk about costumes, or we discuss our favorite incarnation of the Doctor. Most of the discussions are what I would call "fanboyish." Basically, we discuss details that only the most dedicated fans would know, or even care about.
I recently read a book about Doctor Who, The Greatest Show in the Galaxy, which looked at various aspects of the show. One such thing was how the Doctor related to his different companions. The author noted the Doctor's seeming condescension towards male companions, citing various instance across the span of the show. Such analysis of detail would only engage someone interested in the show, and only if they had the working knowledge to know what was being discussed in the first place.
Also, sometimes discussions require much background knowledge and information. Some episodes make oblique references to other, previous episodes. Others point to obscure aspects of story and plot. This is not a unique problem: even in literary studies, one must be somewhat versed in the culture and history behind a story to fully analyze it. This is particularly true of ancient and medieval literature, so far removed from the modern day. Television, however, largely reflects the worldviews and cultures of contemporary society. It does not take as much study to figure out where a director or script-writer is coming from in terms of intended message or subconscious bias.
Television is contemporary, and this also implicates a few things for its study. For instance, many programs are designed purely for entertainment, and one might ask "How or why should we analyze this? It's just a TV show!" However, it is still worth examining. At college and the university, we constantly seek out new things to partake of and analyze. Naturally, television, with its ability to transmit old and new ideas, should also be studied. I will try not to stray too far into doing television studies, rather than writing about it (One can find articles for that online and in journals.) as I further consider difficulties that face television studies. Stay tuned for the next part!
Monday, August 12, 2013
Gaming - Sonic Adventure: A Personal Retrospective
The year is ... somewhere between 1998 and 2001. The place is a tiny apartment building. My family had recently acquired a new video game system, (one of the rare times we've gotten a system during its actual run) the Sega Dreamcast.
So naturally, I play the heck out of the demo disc that came with it. Rayman 2 demo? Yes. Tomb Raider? Definitely. Fur Fighters? (If it's the one I remember with the random object throwing and what not) Yes, please! However, one demo stood out in particular for me. That of Sonic Adventure. That demo received many, many breakthroughs.
Fortunately, we purchased several Dreamcast games a bit later, and Sonic Adventure. Was one of them. I couldn't get enough of it. I played it over and over again. Well, not technically... (See, we hadn't gotten memory cards yet, for whatever reason. So I had to restart every time. Naturally, I didn't make much progress, notwithstanding the unskippable cut-scene). Even when I had a memory card, my journey with the game wouldn't end until several years later.
So what is the appeal? Well, I can't speak for the majority of Sonic fans, but I know about me. On a side note, I initially had no idea that there were other Sonic games before this one. I just knew Adventure. (And later Sonic Shuffle, but that nightmare game is neither here nor there.) So I guess this is a disclaimer that all/most of my Sonic experience is interpreted through that game, even if subconsciously.
To the game itself, then! It is a 3D platformer, the first true 3D game that Sega had produced up to that point. The attempt at 3D was a risk, I suppose: however, the bigger risk seems to be the varied styles of play that the characters have. In previous games, play-style was more unified, as the number of playable characters tended to be low. That's not the case in Sonic Adventure. Every one of the six characters accomplishes their goals in different ways. To review the game, I believe each should be discussed in turn:
Sonic
Description: Titular character, and main protagonist. I believe his play-style exemplifies the game as a whole. The basic goal of his levels is to travel from point A to point B (often with a few major changes of scenery and music in-between). Simple, but fun. Being the main character, his story is much longer than the rest of the characters' stories, totaling in at 10 action stages, 2 mini-games and several boss fights. Additionally, the final "character" unlocked after completing the other characters is another outing for Sonic, featuring the final boss fight of the game.
Analysis: His mode is appealing because it continues the speed and platforming action of previous entries in the series. After all, the game is called Sonic Adventure, so it's only natural that the best gameplay comes from his levels. Personally speaking, one of my favorite aspects of the game was a certain boss fight of Sonic's: the Egg Viper. Initially, I simply could not figure it out. I kept dying. After figuring out that I should use homing attack on it, it became very easy and my favorite boss fight. The music was also a drawing point for it, too.
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Tails
Description: Sonic's loyal side-kick. His play style is a variant of Sonic's: get from point A to point B before Sonic (or in his last level, Robotnik.) With one exception, all of Tails' levels are shorter versions of ones traveled in with Sonic. Similarly, only Tails' last boss fight is uniquely his own (Egg Walker, parallel to Sonic's Egg Viper.) It seems like Sonic is condescending to let you win, as one time during my latest run-through (in Casinopolis' sewers) I caught Sonic standing around, waiting for me to catch up.
Analysis: After Sonic, Knuckles, and E-102, probably the last play-style that I actively appreciate. The racing character doesn't go too fast, and speed rings are provided to give you an appreciable advantage. Because the stages were previously seen with Sonic, there is little need for more exploration of the level beyond what is necessary to win. Tails' final boss fight has the same music as Egg Viper, is a little tricky, but doesn't give the same satisfaction that Egg Viper does. His story feels short. (And a theme arises: stories that feel short, even for the stories with annoying play-styles.)
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Knuckles
Description: A friend and rival of the spiny blue dude. In Knuckles' stages, one must locate three pieces of the Master Emerald that are scattered about the play-field. He, Sonic and Tails have a number of boss fights and stages in common: their past history in older games draws them together, even in this iteration. For the most part, his stages are easy to complete in a few short minutes.
Analysis: Even though the Sonic games series was founded on the principle of speed and intense platforming action, I find Knuckles' stages pretty fun. The player is allowed to explore a portion of the gestalt stage in Knuckles' version of that stage, much like a player can explore the adventure field as other characters. Knuckles has one unique boss fight: he battles the newly formed Chaos 2 on the hotel's observation room.
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Amy
Description: Star-crossed fan-girl of the spiny blue dude. As with Tails' play style, Amy must reach point B before Zero catches her. However, there is no friendly rivalry: he is out for blood. Well, bird, but he doesn't care for Amy either. Because she doesn't have Sonic's speed or Knuckles' power, she must evade Zero as best she can. Her play style is annoying, as she can't spin-dash and must constantly avoid attacks by Zero. Fortunately, her story is very short, stage-wise, only having three. Only in the very end does she defeat the annoying Zero and reunite her bird with its family.
Analysis: Annoying. It wouldn't be so bad, if not for two things. First, she is slow physically. Second, if you go back to play the other missions for the levels, Zero somehow returns! Even though you may have already killed him in the final boss fight. (I only did Hot Shelter, so maybe he wasn't in the others? Eh.) It is nice to see him explode, especially after he punches the innocent Flicky (the cute birds from Sonic 3D: The family of birds is of this species.) for no reason. Not my favorite story of the game, but not my least favorite either.
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
E-102 (Beta)
Description: Robotnik robot turned vigilante. He must reach point B, where the goal varies. In later missions, he is after the other E-100 series robots to free the animals trapped within them. He's not fast like Sonic, but he does have something better: a laser guided blaster! Everyone made a big deal about Shadow having guns in his game, but E-102 beat him to the punch with his five stages. (Albeit, only one gun. Still, it's the principle of the matter!)
Analysis: Roll around and blow stuff up. Super fun! Revenge yourself against the evil Dr. Robotnik. Even better! I'm sure they would have gotten dull after a while, but I would have appreciated one or two more of his levels. Also, he was just cool looking. The E-100 is one of the few instances where Robotnik actually had a good design aesthetic. Too bad they all got destroyed...
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Big
Description: Umm... Big cat who lives in the forest with his frog pal. Like Knuckles, he hunts for something. Unfortunately, his something swims. His levels thus bring the oddest play-style for a Sonic game: fishing. Fortunately, there are only four stages and a weird boss-like thing.
Analysis: Uggh! He is one of the reasons I never completed the game when I originally got it. Only during the later run-through was I able to finally get through his short, but annoying, story. I may have enjoyed a stage once or twice, but otherwise disliked them. The action was much slower than the rest of the game, and too dissimilar in style.
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
In the end, 4 (5 maybe) out of 6 of the characters are enjoyable to play as. That's a pretty good ratio, especially considering later Sonic games. However, I see another aspect that I had not noticed before: fun, inconsequential story details. For instance, in the Station Square adventure field, one can follow a story of romance: at the Burger Shop, an NPC female has a major crush on the NPC guy in the burger shop. Over the course of the game, she moves from outside the shop, to inside - too nervous to order - to finally become a co-worker with him, her adoration for him finally known. It has absolutely no effect on any story or gameplay. It's great!
Another one, however, affects the story. The train workers decide that they need to go on strike. This helps point the player to focus on stages and events within whatever adventure field s/he is stuck in at the time. (When I tried to reason out the chronology of events, this is a minor event in most of the characters' stories. Sonic, Tails and Knuckles' stages can be easily reconciled. Others alter the events slightly. Big's involvement with Chaos 6 complicates things a bit.) Anyway. I think there's one or two others (like the explorers in the Mystic Ruins) but these are the ones I noticed the most and really liked.
Still, Sonic Adventure does have its foibles. One are the unskippable cut scenes. During the first play-through, they're OK. But when I'm playing through for the fourth or fifth time, I already know all that stuff. Plus, some of the voice actors (coughamyandbigcough) can get annoying after a while. The camera occasionally misbehaves. However, the controls handle well. It is also cool to learn the story of Knuckles' ancestors and why Chaos is trying to wreck everything. Thus, Sonic Adventure is my favorite Sonic game, and the game to which I return again and again.
So naturally, I play the heck out of the demo disc that came with it. Rayman 2 demo? Yes. Tomb Raider? Definitely. Fur Fighters? (If it's the one I remember with the random object throwing and what not) Yes, please! However, one demo stood out in particular for me. That of Sonic Adventure. That demo received many, many breakthroughs.
Fortunately, we purchased several Dreamcast games a bit later, and Sonic Adventure. Was one of them. I couldn't get enough of it. I played it over and over again. Well, not technically... (See, we hadn't gotten memory cards yet, for whatever reason. So I had to restart every time. Naturally, I didn't make much progress, notwithstanding the unskippable cut-scene). Even when I had a memory card, my journey with the game wouldn't end until several years later.
So what is the appeal? Well, I can't speak for the majority of Sonic fans, but I know about me. On a side note, I initially had no idea that there were other Sonic games before this one. I just knew Adventure. (And later Sonic Shuffle, but that nightmare game is neither here nor there.) So I guess this is a disclaimer that all/most of my Sonic experience is interpreted through that game, even if subconsciously.
To the game itself, then! It is a 3D platformer, the first true 3D game that Sega had produced up to that point. The attempt at 3D was a risk, I suppose: however, the bigger risk seems to be the varied styles of play that the characters have. In previous games, play-style was more unified, as the number of playable characters tended to be low. That's not the case in Sonic Adventure. Every one of the six characters accomplishes their goals in different ways. To review the game, I believe each should be discussed in turn:
Sonic
Description: Titular character, and main protagonist. I believe his play-style exemplifies the game as a whole. The basic goal of his levels is to travel from point A to point B (often with a few major changes of scenery and music in-between). Simple, but fun. Being the main character, his story is much longer than the rest of the characters' stories, totaling in at 10 action stages, 2 mini-games and several boss fights. Additionally, the final "character" unlocked after completing the other characters is another outing for Sonic, featuring the final boss fight of the game.
Analysis: His mode is appealing because it continues the speed and platforming action of previous entries in the series. After all, the game is called Sonic Adventure, so it's only natural that the best gameplay comes from his levels. Personally speaking, one of my favorite aspects of the game was a certain boss fight of Sonic's: the Egg Viper. Initially, I simply could not figure it out. I kept dying. After figuring out that I should use homing attack on it, it became very easy and my favorite boss fight. The music was also a drawing point for it, too.
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Tails
Description: Sonic's loyal side-kick. His play style is a variant of Sonic's: get from point A to point B before Sonic (or in his last level, Robotnik.) With one exception, all of Tails' levels are shorter versions of ones traveled in with Sonic. Similarly, only Tails' last boss fight is uniquely his own (Egg Walker, parallel to Sonic's Egg Viper.) It seems like Sonic is condescending to let you win, as one time during my latest run-through (in Casinopolis' sewers) I caught Sonic standing around, waiting for me to catch up.
Analysis: After Sonic, Knuckles, and E-102, probably the last play-style that I actively appreciate. The racing character doesn't go too fast, and speed rings are provided to give you an appreciable advantage. Because the stages were previously seen with Sonic, there is little need for more exploration of the level beyond what is necessary to win. Tails' final boss fight has the same music as Egg Viper, is a little tricky, but doesn't give the same satisfaction that Egg Viper does. His story feels short. (And a theme arises: stories that feel short, even for the stories with annoying play-styles.)
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Knuckles
Description: A friend and rival of the spiny blue dude. In Knuckles' stages, one must locate three pieces of the Master Emerald that are scattered about the play-field. He, Sonic and Tails have a number of boss fights and stages in common: their past history in older games draws them together, even in this iteration. For the most part, his stages are easy to complete in a few short minutes.
Analysis: Even though the Sonic games series was founded on the principle of speed and intense platforming action, I find Knuckles' stages pretty fun. The player is allowed to explore a portion of the gestalt stage in Knuckles' version of that stage, much like a player can explore the adventure field as other characters. Knuckles has one unique boss fight: he battles the newly formed Chaos 2 on the hotel's observation room.
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Amy
Description: Star-crossed fan-girl of the spiny blue dude. As with Tails' play style, Amy must reach point B before Zero catches her. However, there is no friendly rivalry: he is out for blood. Well, bird, but he doesn't care for Amy either. Because she doesn't have Sonic's speed or Knuckles' power, she must evade Zero as best she can. Her play style is annoying, as she can't spin-dash and must constantly avoid attacks by Zero. Fortunately, her story is very short, stage-wise, only having three. Only in the very end does she defeat the annoying Zero and reunite her bird with its family.
Analysis: Annoying. It wouldn't be so bad, if not for two things. First, she is slow physically. Second, if you go back to play the other missions for the levels, Zero somehow returns! Even though you may have already killed him in the final boss fight. (I only did Hot Shelter, so maybe he wasn't in the others? Eh.) It is nice to see him explode, especially after he punches the innocent Flicky (the cute birds from Sonic 3D: The family of birds is of this species.) for no reason. Not my favorite story of the game, but not my least favorite either.
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
E-102 (Beta)
Description: Robotnik robot turned vigilante. He must reach point B, where the goal varies. In later missions, he is after the other E-100 series robots to free the animals trapped within them. He's not fast like Sonic, but he does have something better: a laser guided blaster! Everyone made a big deal about Shadow having guns in his game, but E-102 beat him to the punch with his five stages. (Albeit, only one gun. Still, it's the principle of the matter!)
Analysis: Roll around and blow stuff up. Super fun! Revenge yourself against the evil Dr. Robotnik. Even better! I'm sure they would have gotten dull after a while, but I would have appreciated one or two more of his levels. Also, he was just cool looking. The E-100 is one of the few instances where Robotnik actually had a good design aesthetic. Too bad they all got destroyed...
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Big
Description: Umm... Big cat who lives in the forest with his frog pal. Like Knuckles, he hunts for something. Unfortunately, his something swims. His levels thus bring the oddest play-style for a Sonic game: fishing. Fortunately, there are only four stages and a weird boss-like thing.
Analysis: Uggh! He is one of the reasons I never completed the game when I originally got it. Only during the later run-through was I able to finally get through his short, but annoying, story. I may have enjoyed a stage once or twice, but otherwise disliked them. The action was much slower than the rest of the game, and too dissimilar in style.
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
In the end, 4 (5 maybe) out of 6 of the characters are enjoyable to play as. That's a pretty good ratio, especially considering later Sonic games. However, I see another aspect that I had not noticed before: fun, inconsequential story details. For instance, in the Station Square adventure field, one can follow a story of romance: at the Burger Shop, an NPC female has a major crush on the NPC guy in the burger shop. Over the course of the game, she moves from outside the shop, to inside - too nervous to order - to finally become a co-worker with him, her adoration for him finally known. It has absolutely no effect on any story or gameplay. It's great!
Another one, however, affects the story. The train workers decide that they need to go on strike. This helps point the player to focus on stages and events within whatever adventure field s/he is stuck in at the time. (When I tried to reason out the chronology of events, this is a minor event in most of the characters' stories. Sonic, Tails and Knuckles' stages can be easily reconciled. Others alter the events slightly. Big's involvement with Chaos 6 complicates things a bit.) Anyway. I think there's one or two others (like the explorers in the Mystic Ruins) but these are the ones I noticed the most and really liked.
Still, Sonic Adventure does have its foibles. One are the unskippable cut scenes. During the first play-through, they're OK. But when I'm playing through for the fourth or fifth time, I already know all that stuff. Plus, some of the voice actors (coughamyandbigcough) can get annoying after a while. The camera occasionally misbehaves. However, the controls handle well. It is also cool to learn the story of Knuckles' ancestors and why Chaos is trying to wreck everything. Thus, Sonic Adventure is my favorite Sonic game, and the game to which I return again and again.
Thursday, August 8, 2013
Gaming/Business - How Effective is "Advergaming," Really?
Who doesn't love a good game? Be it video, computer, table-top, sports, or whatever else, we all appreciate being able to destroy our opponents in combat/battle/duel. Video games are able to combine this with story-telling, music and visuals to create an artistic product. This product is also an extremely viable media for business owners.
On a recent YouTube channel binge, I saw a video exploring a certain "advergame" from a few years back, Chex Quest. Naturally, the goal of this product was to sell another product, Chex cereal, and raise brand awareness. This trend of games as advertisement is not new, however. Even the Atari VCS featured a number of these.
The question then rises: how effective are advergames as advertisement? To answer that question, we'll look at a few examples. But first, we need to define what a advergame is exactly, and how it is designed to function.
As with any advertisement, the goal of an advergame is to make a consumer aware of a brand, and possibly cause the person to purchase it. Advergames accomplish this by incorporating elements of the brand in some aspect of the game itself: in Chex Quest, for example, the player controls a character designed to resemble a piece of the titular cereal. (This is getting ahead a little, but it is interesting to point out that the game is a first-person shooter, so the Chex-character is not visible during gameplay.) Other games include virtual brand placement in the play-field of the game.
Another type that I'm aware of is the tie-in website. I'm not sure of the exact name, but these sites are linked to popular children's television series and feature games, character bios, product information, etc... (They also ask kids to get their parent's permission. I wonder if anybody actually does that?). These are especially profitable due to low overhead and relative ease at which simple flash games can be put up.
However, because brand placement is relatively easy to do, we will instead focus on the type of advergame that consists of a game-advertisement.
What was one of the causes of the great video game crash of 1983? A glut of video game software, created to capitalize on what some thought would be a passing fad, almost destroyed the video game industry in its infancy. (Well, maybe it wasn't quite so bad, but it was still pretty bad.) Many companies that had no involvement or relation to gaming tried to cash in. For example, Purina released a game (1983) that features a dog chasing a chuck wagon, to promote their Chuck Wagon brand of dog food. (Aptly titled Chase the Chuck Wagon.)
For a little research I attempted to play an emulated version of the game. Through the second emulator I found, I was able to play a little bit. The controls weren't too bad, and the goal was straightforward. The dog begins at center, and needs to navigate a maze while avoiding a pixelated man and a some sort of small flying object. I found that the man was fairly fast, and I barely made it out of the first level. A second bit began, but I had no idea what was going on. Upon further research, I find that the man is a dog catcher and the second bit was a bonus round.
So, you're playing a dog on a journey to get dog food. How effective was this? If the game is marketing dog food, why is it in a format that dogs cannot interact with? Poor Fido!
But in all seriousness, the question still stands. In answer, I will make a small deduction and assume that the game didn't garner much profit. Most "shovelware" games such as this were cranked out by the dozen, regardless of quality or lack thereof. Additionally, two internet review sites, The Video Game Critic, and Honestgamers rated it fairly poorly, giving it D+ and 1 out of 10, respectively. One common complaint against the game is a lack of depth. A consolation, if it can be called that, is that the game is now relatively rare. However, with the availability of ROMs, I would recommend a retrogamer to go that route instead of purchasing the actual cartridge.
Back to the question at hand: How effective are advergames? In this first case, the answer seems to be "Not very." Yes, the game succeeded in becoming a collector's item, but it failed in its initial goal - and contributed to the factors leading to the NA video game crash of 1983.
One key element for advertisements and games is immersion. The simple, repeating design of Chase the Chuck Wagon does not allow for this. Four repeating maps does not create game-immersion. Also, there is not much as far as brand presence. The game's title is on top, and the brand name of the dog food is at the bottom, in color-changing letters, but still largely ignorable. Thus, Chase the Chuck Wagon fails because it is generic and not immersive.
Do later advergames improve on this model, or do they all stay shovelware garbage? Tune in next (insert lengthy time span here) to find out!
On a recent YouTube channel binge, I saw a video exploring a certain "advergame" from a few years back, Chex Quest. Naturally, the goal of this product was to sell another product, Chex cereal, and raise brand awareness. This trend of games as advertisement is not new, however. Even the Atari VCS featured a number of these.
The question then rises: how effective are advergames as advertisement? To answer that question, we'll look at a few examples. But first, we need to define what a advergame is exactly, and how it is designed to function.
As with any advertisement, the goal of an advergame is to make a consumer aware of a brand, and possibly cause the person to purchase it. Advergames accomplish this by incorporating elements of the brand in some aspect of the game itself: in Chex Quest, for example, the player controls a character designed to resemble a piece of the titular cereal. (This is getting ahead a little, but it is interesting to point out that the game is a first-person shooter, so the Chex-character is not visible during gameplay.) Other games include virtual brand placement in the play-field of the game.
Another type that I'm aware of is the tie-in website. I'm not sure of the exact name, but these sites are linked to popular children's television series and feature games, character bios, product information, etc... (They also ask kids to get their parent's permission. I wonder if anybody actually does that?). These are especially profitable due to low overhead and relative ease at which simple flash games can be put up.
However, because brand placement is relatively easy to do, we will instead focus on the type of advergame that consists of a game-advertisement.
What was one of the causes of the great video game crash of 1983? A glut of video game software, created to capitalize on what some thought would be a passing fad, almost destroyed the video game industry in its infancy. (Well, maybe it wasn't quite so bad, but it was still pretty bad.) Many companies that had no involvement or relation to gaming tried to cash in. For example, Purina released a game (1983) that features a dog chasing a chuck wagon, to promote their Chuck Wagon brand of dog food. (Aptly titled Chase the Chuck Wagon.)
For a little research I attempted to play an emulated version of the game. Through the second emulator I found, I was able to play a little bit. The controls weren't too bad, and the goal was straightforward. The dog begins at center, and needs to navigate a maze while avoiding a pixelated man and a some sort of small flying object. I found that the man was fairly fast, and I barely made it out of the first level. A second bit began, but I had no idea what was going on. Upon further research, I find that the man is a dog catcher and the second bit was a bonus round.
So, you're playing a dog on a journey to get dog food. How effective was this? If the game is marketing dog food, why is it in a format that dogs cannot interact with? Poor Fido!
But in all seriousness, the question still stands. In answer, I will make a small deduction and assume that the game didn't garner much profit. Most "shovelware" games such as this were cranked out by the dozen, regardless of quality or lack thereof. Additionally, two internet review sites, The Video Game Critic, and Honestgamers rated it fairly poorly, giving it D+ and 1 out of 10, respectively. One common complaint against the game is a lack of depth. A consolation, if it can be called that, is that the game is now relatively rare. However, with the availability of ROMs, I would recommend a retrogamer to go that route instead of purchasing the actual cartridge.
Back to the question at hand: How effective are advergames? In this first case, the answer seems to be "Not very." Yes, the game succeeded in becoming a collector's item, but it failed in its initial goal - and contributed to the factors leading to the NA video game crash of 1983.
One key element for advertisements and games is immersion. The simple, repeating design of Chase the Chuck Wagon does not allow for this. Four repeating maps does not create game-immersion. Also, there is not much as far as brand presence. The game's title is on top, and the brand name of the dog food is at the bottom, in color-changing letters, but still largely ignorable. Thus, Chase the Chuck Wagon fails because it is generic and not immersive.
Do later advergames improve on this model, or do they all stay shovelware garbage? Tune in next (insert lengthy time span here) to find out!
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Literature - You Decide!
"You are sitting at the computer. An article link appears on your coolest friend's FB wall."
"If you click it, scroll down and continue"
"If not, continue posting pictures of cats"
Thus would a Choose Your Own Adventure book might begin, if it were about people reading the articles of excellent writers on the internet. These books are interesting in several points, both grammatically (not interesting, I know, but bear with me) and literarily (which is a real word ... I'm pretty sure ... yep!).
There are three grammatical persons in English: first, second and third. Most forms of literature that I am familiar with use the third person (he, she, it, they). Personal accounts, diaries and similar works understandably use first person (I, me, we). With most literature having to do with people or their descriptions of other people, that leaves very little room for second person. For the most part, second person usage outside of instruction manuals seems awkward and presumptive: "You foolishly decided to trample the flower. Thousands of years from now, mutant plant-gerbils will run the plant. I hope you're happy." Well, not exactly like that, but something to that effect.
The point is this: we don't like being told what to do. We like making our own choices. Thus, real life and games allow us to control what happens (At least the latter does, anyway). Literature, on the other hand, is a recounting of things that other people did. First and third person predominate.
Enter the choose your own adventure books (CYOA), a form of interactive fiction, as the genre is also called. Researching this topic gave search results with several articles entitled "Choose Your Own X Adventure," with X being some descriptive adjective or noun. Regardless of the nature of the books themselves, they appear to be widely recognized (Or at least among a smattering of various article writers). After expanding the databases included in the search, I finally found some articles specifically addressing CYOA books.
One comment should be made: CYOA books aren't strictly literature. Yes, they have words, tell stories, and are sometimes artistically meritorious. However, they also rely on the action of the reader. Hence, the grouping under interactive fiction.
In my personal collection, I have a number of these books, mostly from the main Choose Your Own Adventure series, with one from the Time Machine series, Search for Dinosaurs. The latter series features historical settings that both entertain the reader and provide some tidbits of history, archaeology or astronomy. The former series features fictional stories concerning various adventures of the reader. A great deal of the ones I have are set in space or deal with the future and technology. (Also, many of the books have endings that result in your death. I guess that's to increase suspense and provide a result for failure or poor choices, but sometimes it gets annoying. Very few books have all-death-free endings.)
However, there is a natural barrier to the genre in the form of length limit: Edward Packard, the creator of the series, admits that "there is a built-in limitation in interactive fiction," and further discusses publisher requirements for "multi-book contracts whereby the packager agrees to deliver anywhere from 6 to 20 or even more books to be written by various authors, all of whom are required to follow a particular formula ... [to write] a certain number of pages." Despite these limitations, authors have successfully used the genre, and Packard goes on to discuss various examples. Digital books provide more leeway for the authors and provide a logical transition. I also posit that text-based games like Zork and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy also provide an expansive outlet for the genre.
Another issue, at least one I've noticed, is the potential of a narrative-time loop. This possibility exists in book and game form. For instance, in Search for Dinosaurs, the reader may accidentally bump into a fellow time-traveler. One option eventually sends the reader back to the beginning of the quest. By following the same path, you can "meet" him again and again. Games can guard against this by adding other factors, like time limitation, scenarios, moving characters around, and ... "motivations" for keeping going (You are likely to be eaten by a grue.)
The biggest issue I see is characterization. As mentioned by Packard, the author is only given a limited amount of space in which to write the story. After character introductions and pages for endings, there isn't much room for characterization of either the reader-character or the other characters. Also, with the reader being the main character, authors must be wary of how they characterize him or her, or risking alienating the reader. For the most part, the reader-character is amiable, androgynous and interested in whatever the book's topic seems to be. In context of the CYOA, this is acceptable. The reader knows how she feels about herself, and brings her likes and dislikes into the story.
However, in the context of most other literature, the reader-character is flat. Because of the attempt to be apolitical, nonreligious, etc... to focus the reader on the story and interesting facts, the main character goes largely undeveloped and becomes uninteresting from blandness. For instance, whether you agree with Harry Potter, Snape, or James Potter's lifestyles is irrelevant: they all have certain views, they all do certain things and behave in certain ways. Whether we like them or not, they are there. Their strength as characters derives from their potential divisiveness. Before I go to far afield to talk about Snape vs James as the right match for Lily, I will conclude this thought by summary: Divisive characters are more memorable than agreeable or bland ones.
Are CYOA books, then, worth the trouble? Yes. Good entries in the series allow for gameplay, reading and sometimes the satiation of curiosity.
"You have reached the ending of the article. However, there are five vampires surrounding you, and your back is to a thousand-foot cliff. Additionally, a grue looks up at you from a foothold on the ledge. Have fun getting out of this one, hero."
Packard, Edward B. "Interactive Fiction For Children: Boon Or Bane?." School Library Journal 34.(1987): 40-41. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 20 July 2013.
"If you click it, scroll down and continue"
"If not, continue posting pictures of cats"
Thus would a Choose Your Own Adventure book might begin, if it were about people reading the articles of excellent writers on the internet. These books are interesting in several points, both grammatically (not interesting, I know, but bear with me) and literarily (which is a real word ... I'm pretty sure ... yep!).
There are three grammatical persons in English: first, second and third. Most forms of literature that I am familiar with use the third person (he, she, it, they). Personal accounts, diaries and similar works understandably use first person (I, me, we). With most literature having to do with people or their descriptions of other people, that leaves very little room for second person. For the most part, second person usage outside of instruction manuals seems awkward and presumptive: "You foolishly decided to trample the flower. Thousands of years from now, mutant plant-gerbils will run the plant. I hope you're happy." Well, not exactly like that, but something to that effect.
The point is this: we don't like being told what to do. We like making our own choices. Thus, real life and games allow us to control what happens (At least the latter does, anyway). Literature, on the other hand, is a recounting of things that other people did. First and third person predominate.
Enter the choose your own adventure books (CYOA), a form of interactive fiction, as the genre is also called. Researching this topic gave search results with several articles entitled "Choose Your Own X Adventure," with X being some descriptive adjective or noun. Regardless of the nature of the books themselves, they appear to be widely recognized (Or at least among a smattering of various article writers). After expanding the databases included in the search, I finally found some articles specifically addressing CYOA books.
One comment should be made: CYOA books aren't strictly literature. Yes, they have words, tell stories, and are sometimes artistically meritorious. However, they also rely on the action of the reader. Hence, the grouping under interactive fiction.
In my personal collection, I have a number of these books, mostly from the main Choose Your Own Adventure series, with one from the Time Machine series, Search for Dinosaurs. The latter series features historical settings that both entertain the reader and provide some tidbits of history, archaeology or astronomy. The former series features fictional stories concerning various adventures of the reader. A great deal of the ones I have are set in space or deal with the future and technology. (Also, many of the books have endings that result in your death. I guess that's to increase suspense and provide a result for failure or poor choices, but sometimes it gets annoying. Very few books have all-death-free endings.)
However, there is a natural barrier to the genre in the form of length limit: Edward Packard, the creator of the series, admits that "there is a built-in limitation in interactive fiction," and further discusses publisher requirements for "multi-book contracts whereby the packager agrees to deliver anywhere from 6 to 20 or even more books to be written by various authors, all of whom are required to follow a particular formula ... [to write] a certain number of pages." Despite these limitations, authors have successfully used the genre, and Packard goes on to discuss various examples. Digital books provide more leeway for the authors and provide a logical transition. I also posit that text-based games like Zork and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy also provide an expansive outlet for the genre.
Another issue, at least one I've noticed, is the potential of a narrative-time loop. This possibility exists in book and game form. For instance, in Search for Dinosaurs, the reader may accidentally bump into a fellow time-traveler. One option eventually sends the reader back to the beginning of the quest. By following the same path, you can "meet" him again and again. Games can guard against this by adding other factors, like time limitation, scenarios, moving characters around, and ... "motivations" for keeping going (You are likely to be eaten by a grue.)
The biggest issue I see is characterization. As mentioned by Packard, the author is only given a limited amount of space in which to write the story. After character introductions and pages for endings, there isn't much room for characterization of either the reader-character or the other characters. Also, with the reader being the main character, authors must be wary of how they characterize him or her, or risking alienating the reader. For the most part, the reader-character is amiable, androgynous and interested in whatever the book's topic seems to be. In context of the CYOA, this is acceptable. The reader knows how she feels about herself, and brings her likes and dislikes into the story.
However, in the context of most other literature, the reader-character is flat. Because of the attempt to be apolitical, nonreligious, etc... to focus the reader on the story and interesting facts, the main character goes largely undeveloped and becomes uninteresting from blandness. For instance, whether you agree with Harry Potter, Snape, or James Potter's lifestyles is irrelevant: they all have certain views, they all do certain things and behave in certain ways. Whether we like them or not, they are there. Their strength as characters derives from their potential divisiveness. Before I go to far afield to talk about Snape vs James as the right match for Lily, I will conclude this thought by summary: Divisive characters are more memorable than agreeable or bland ones.
Are CYOA books, then, worth the trouble? Yes. Good entries in the series allow for gameplay, reading and sometimes the satiation of curiosity.
"You have reached the ending of the article. However, there are five vampires surrounding you, and your back is to a thousand-foot cliff. Additionally, a grue looks up at you from a foothold on the ledge. Have fun getting out of this one, hero."
The End
-------------
Works Cited:
Bischoff, David, Doug Henderson, and Alex Niño. Search for Dinosaurs. Toronto: Bantam, 1984. Print.Packard, Edward B. "Interactive Fiction For Children: Boon Or Bane?." School Library Journal 34.(1987): 40-41. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 20 July 2013.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Event - The Eleven Days of Doctor
Hello all! I know like myself, you are all anticipating the climatic return of Doctor Who in what will no doubt be an epic movie experience. Hopefully, the 50th Anniversary Special will air on BBC America. Whenever that will be, I hope to be ready.
Ready for what, you ask? Good question. As a fan of various franchises, I have often dressed as characters of shows, movies, books, etc... for fun and profit. Doctor Who cosplay appeals to me because some of them are easy to manage with patience and a few trips to Goodwill. I've recently finished what I believe to be an excellent 11th Doctor outfit. So, for a few, I can improvise and pull a few "close enoughs." However, in some cases (i.e. 5th, 6th, 7th) I just can't.
That's where you come in, kind reader. I will need help in two ways: (1) costuming: finding parts for the costumes has been a slow and mostly fruitless process. Sure, I've got a full 11th and a passable 10th, but what about the others? What about fancy 3rd? Stylish and best-dressed 6th? Goofy 4th? Spats and question-mark umbrellas don't grow on tomato vines, you see. So, dear reader, if you see or have something that might fit into a doctor outfit, let me know. I don't usually ask around for stuff, but I think this is important enough to warrant some sad-faced, sincere pleading. You may know of sources or uses of other materials of which I wouldn't necessarily think of doing/applying. (Insert speech about networking and the power of friendship here).
Anyway, there's the other area of help (2) companions. One feature of the programme is the varied number of travelers that accompanied the Doctor. Some were witty. Some were annoying. Some were mechanical talking dogs. All were an essential component of the Doctor's life. Who of you longs for the glory of playing one of the Doctor's valiant companions? Who will answer the call and be the Boy or Girl Who Helped out their Friend in His Quest to Play the Doctor? Who will ignore all the unintended title puns these questions raise? Remember friends: a companion in the TARDIS gets the worm!
Wait, no, that's not right. The early companion doesn't take any wooden nickles! Nope. All's well that is thicker than water! Ahem. Earth idioms aside, please keep this in mind for the upcoming semester. This way, if you want to participate (please please please!) you can contact me and begin searching for costume pieces (For convenience. Unless it was your childhood dream to play a particular companion, I'd rather get as many depicted as possible. And at least one per Doctor. No big deal, really!) With some help, I think we can make this happen.
Brave heart, dear reader.
Xander
Ready for what, you ask? Good question. As a fan of various franchises, I have often dressed as characters of shows, movies, books, etc... for fun and profit. Doctor Who cosplay appeals to me because some of them are easy to manage with patience and a few trips to Goodwill. I've recently finished what I believe to be an excellent 11th Doctor outfit. So, for a few, I can improvise and pull a few "close enoughs." However, in some cases (i.e. 5th, 6th, 7th) I just can't.
That's where you come in, kind reader. I will need help in two ways: (1) costuming: finding parts for the costumes has been a slow and mostly fruitless process. Sure, I've got a full 11th and a passable 10th, but what about the others? What about fancy 3rd? Stylish and best-dressed 6th? Goofy 4th? Spats and question-mark umbrellas don't grow on tomato vines, you see. So, dear reader, if you see or have something that might fit into a doctor outfit, let me know. I don't usually ask around for stuff, but I think this is important enough to warrant some sad-faced, sincere pleading. You may know of sources or uses of other materials of which I wouldn't necessarily think of doing/applying. (Insert speech about networking and the power of friendship here).
Anyway, there's the other area of help (2) companions. One feature of the programme is the varied number of travelers that accompanied the Doctor. Some were witty. Some were annoying. Some were mechanical talking dogs. All were an essential component of the Doctor's life. Who of you longs for the glory of playing one of the Doctor's valiant companions? Who will answer the call and be the Boy or Girl Who Helped out their Friend in His Quest to Play the Doctor? Who will ignore all the unintended title puns these questions raise? Remember friends: a companion in the TARDIS gets the worm!
Wait, no, that's not right. The early companion doesn't take any wooden nickles! Nope. All's well that is thicker than water! Ahem. Earth idioms aside, please keep this in mind for the upcoming semester. This way, if you want to participate (please please please!) you can contact me and begin searching for costume pieces (For convenience. Unless it was your childhood dream to play a particular companion, I'd rather get as many depicted as possible. And at least one per Doctor. No big deal, really!) With some help, I think we can make this happen.
Brave heart, dear reader.
Xander
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Gaming - Portal: Heroes, Villains and In-Between
[Please note: (1) this article will contain spoilers and (2) I have not yet played Half-Life, so I will not address the condition of the world outside the Aperture Laboratories facility.]
Portal is a popular puzzle game created by Valve. I've recently been able to get it, and its immediate sequel. The basic story is that of a trapped test subject in a AI-controlled test facility, attempting to escape. The puzzle game revolves around the use of the iconic portal gun. The story presented within the two games is interesting of itself. One key element is the primary antagonist/temporary ally, GLaDOS.
As with many other instances of science fiction, sentient (or seemingly sentient) computer AIs is a significant element within Portal. GLaDOS, turrets and the various personality cores are all robotic life-forms, of sorts. There's no arguing that GLaDOS and Wheatley, a personality core introduced in Portal 2, have more fleshed out personalities and motives than the rest of the artificial intelligences.
The driving force behind Portal's story line is the plot device of an out-of-control AI bent on some harmful goal. This is a common trope in science fiction, that of an artificial life-form or intelligence going beyond its programming or designs. One need only think of 2001: A Space Odyssey for the most iconic example: HAL 9000. Both are examples of technologically optimistic outlooks on the future of computational technology. As is obvious, AI has not yet advanced quite as far as HAL or GLaDOS.
A point must be made about GLaDOS: part-way through Portal 2, the player learn that she contains the personality of an assistant named Caroline. Thus, she is not strictly an AI because part of her intelligence came from an organic life-form. Most rampant AIs that I am familiar with are those that are strictly artificial, being AIs that somehow receive sentience, either by accident, design or outside forces. GLaDOS, then, is sentient by design, owing to her start as the human Caroline. Nevertheless, in the original Portal, GLaDOS occupies the role of primary antagonist, and nothing more. The sequel, through an interesting plot device, alters her role in the narrative. Through the introduction of another leading character, however, GLaDOS fills another role: unwilling sidekick.
Portal 2 adds a third primary character in the person (errm, robot) of Wheatley, another personality core. Whilst reading up, I found that his role is described as that of a "deuteragonist:" a character who is the second most important in the story. He or she can function as a foil to the protagonist. One source I found mentions that the deuteragonist may switch between aiding and opposing the protagonist. By this definition, both Wheatley and GLaDOS fulfill the role of deuteragonist: While GLaDOS initially opposes you and Wheatley aids your escape, GLaDOS fulfills the antagonist role, and Wheatley the aiding deuteragonist. After replacing GLaDOS with Wheatley as main core controlling the facility, GLaDOS will eventually become a sort of side-kick twinged deuteragonist, while Wheatley becomes a hostile deuteragonist.
Wheatley, unlike GLaDOS, remains a solid deuteragonist throughout the game. In the first half, as he aids your escape attempts, the player comes to appreciate him as a character and companion. When he becomes controlling core of the facility, GLaDOS' body has unforeseen affects on his personality: however, the bumbling idiot side of him still remains. Despite his increase in power and the addition of a malevolent streak, he is still a sympathetic character. In the Developer's Commentary, it is noted that his exile into space with the Space Core was seen as a fitting punishment: not too severe, but not a small slap on the wrist. GLaDOS is also a sympathetic character, but she held her grudge against Chell (the main character and sole remaining human test subject) of her own power, and not because of the corrupting influence of the power of the Aperture facility. True, she is more civil as a potato, this does not change her overall opinion of Chell being "a monster" or stop her from constantly barraging Chell with sarcastic insults. Wheatley, during his time in power, attempts this a few times but is shot down by the much skilled GLaDOS.
Portal and Portal 2 thus exhibit a tripartite structure with its main characters: Chell is the (silent) protagonist; GLaDOS, the antagonist; and Wheatley, the bumbling deuteragonist.
Portal is a popular puzzle game created by Valve. I've recently been able to get it, and its immediate sequel. The basic story is that of a trapped test subject in a AI-controlled test facility, attempting to escape. The puzzle game revolves around the use of the iconic portal gun. The story presented within the two games is interesting of itself. One key element is the primary antagonist/temporary ally, GLaDOS.
As with many other instances of science fiction, sentient (or seemingly sentient) computer AIs is a significant element within Portal. GLaDOS, turrets and the various personality cores are all robotic life-forms, of sorts. There's no arguing that GLaDOS and Wheatley, a personality core introduced in Portal 2, have more fleshed out personalities and motives than the rest of the artificial intelligences.
The driving force behind Portal's story line is the plot device of an out-of-control AI bent on some harmful goal. This is a common trope in science fiction, that of an artificial life-form or intelligence going beyond its programming or designs. One need only think of 2001: A Space Odyssey for the most iconic example: HAL 9000. Both are examples of technologically optimistic outlooks on the future of computational technology. As is obvious, AI has not yet advanced quite as far as HAL or GLaDOS.
A point must be made about GLaDOS: part-way through Portal 2, the player learn that she contains the personality of an assistant named Caroline. Thus, she is not strictly an AI because part of her intelligence came from an organic life-form. Most rampant AIs that I am familiar with are those that are strictly artificial, being AIs that somehow receive sentience, either by accident, design or outside forces. GLaDOS, then, is sentient by design, owing to her start as the human Caroline. Nevertheless, in the original Portal, GLaDOS occupies the role of primary antagonist, and nothing more. The sequel, through an interesting plot device, alters her role in the narrative. Through the introduction of another leading character, however, GLaDOS fills another role: unwilling sidekick.
Portal 2 adds a third primary character in the person (errm, robot) of Wheatley, another personality core. Whilst reading up, I found that his role is described as that of a "deuteragonist:" a character who is the second most important in the story. He or she can function as a foil to the protagonist. One source I found mentions that the deuteragonist may switch between aiding and opposing the protagonist. By this definition, both Wheatley and GLaDOS fulfill the role of deuteragonist: While GLaDOS initially opposes you and Wheatley aids your escape, GLaDOS fulfills the antagonist role, and Wheatley the aiding deuteragonist. After replacing GLaDOS with Wheatley as main core controlling the facility, GLaDOS will eventually become a sort of side-kick twinged deuteragonist, while Wheatley becomes a hostile deuteragonist.
Wheatley, unlike GLaDOS, remains a solid deuteragonist throughout the game. In the first half, as he aids your escape attempts, the player comes to appreciate him as a character and companion. When he becomes controlling core of the facility, GLaDOS' body has unforeseen affects on his personality: however, the bumbling idiot side of him still remains. Despite his increase in power and the addition of a malevolent streak, he is still a sympathetic character. In the Developer's Commentary, it is noted that his exile into space with the Space Core was seen as a fitting punishment: not too severe, but not a small slap on the wrist. GLaDOS is also a sympathetic character, but she held her grudge against Chell (the main character and sole remaining human test subject) of her own power, and not because of the corrupting influence of the power of the Aperture facility. True, she is more civil as a potato, this does not change her overall opinion of Chell being "a monster" or stop her from constantly barraging Chell with sarcastic insults. Wheatley, during his time in power, attempts this a few times but is shot down by the much skilled GLaDOS.
Portal and Portal 2 thus exhibit a tripartite structure with its main characters: Chell is the (silent) protagonist; GLaDOS, the antagonist; and Wheatley, the bumbling deuteragonist.
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
Acting - Repetition Makes Perfect
As most of you may know, churches around the nation participate in holding a most wonderful children's event: Vacation Bible School. It's a program that consists of skits, lessons, songs and other various activities aimed at attracting children in order to witness to them. One key part of that is the skit. Sometimes it features heavily, other times not at all. At my church, it occurs right before the children split into their age groups for the rest of the activities. Here, the skit plays an important role in the overall VBS and the message.
Originally, I was not going to participate, due to all necessary positions being filled. However, I was later brought on as a minor character - a court magician. (Oh, for clarification: our skit was Moses-leading-the-people-out-of-Egypt themed, so I was Pharaoh's magician.) As was usual with our VBS, it was largely improvised on the spot. Initially, I had mixed feelings. Erskine had an improv group with whom I had rehearsed, but never performed. However, there was a rough outline, and words were to be shown on a screen. Despite this, most of the other characters (notably Moses and Aaron) were completely ad-lib for most of their lines.
This brings up one issue with VBS skits: there is almost no time to familiarize to the character. Understandably, the actors are quite busy with jobs, children and other matters, so extensive rehearsal time is not manageable. Thus, improvised comedy is the best solution. The skit was split, in a manner of speaking, between the comic side of Pharaoh, his servant, magician, and a random Hebrew on one side, and the serious side of Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron on the other. Our comedic leads had strong personalities, so improvising humorous interactions seemed fairly easy for them. I was later informed that my character seemed to be played more straight, to counter the over-the-top humor between Pharaoh and his servant.
On the other hand, familiarity with a character benefits not only improv, but also traditional scripted drama. While rehearsing for Arsenic and Old Lace, our director Mrs. DeVault had us come up with back-stories for our characters, no matter how minor they were (Actually important here, as their were about 14 characters in total). By having a background, we would know to react as the character if someone missed or slightly changed a line. It's also part of acting as a whole: for that short duration on stage, an actor immerses him or herself in the character.
While I had a good time being the magician for our VBS (even getting a brief appearance in a comic relief moment before the final, super-serious skit for the tenth plague) I didn't get the level of immersion that comes with traditional stage roles. These VBS skits occupy a strange place between improv and scripted theatre. One one hand, we can act however the character would, as long as the main point is brought across. Unlike improv, however, we cannot simply "reinvent" a character or completely change to re-liven a slowing skit. Pharaoh must be Pharaoh, Moses must be Moses.
One of my favorite aspects of being immersed in a show, or character, or series, is being able to imagine what a character would or would not do. Some improv skits, such as "blind date" rely on the audience's familiarity with a character and ask them to figure out his or her identity.
Long story short, repetition makes perfect, as the title says. Or, it at least makes performances complete. It's one thing to utilize your own crazy personality to create improvised comedy. It's another thing entirely to create a full character on the stage.
Originally, I was not going to participate, due to all necessary positions being filled. However, I was later brought on as a minor character - a court magician. (Oh, for clarification: our skit was Moses-leading-the-people-out-of-Egypt themed, so I was Pharaoh's magician.) As was usual with our VBS, it was largely improvised on the spot. Initially, I had mixed feelings. Erskine had an improv group with whom I had rehearsed, but never performed. However, there was a rough outline, and words were to be shown on a screen. Despite this, most of the other characters (notably Moses and Aaron) were completely ad-lib for most of their lines.
This brings up one issue with VBS skits: there is almost no time to familiarize to the character. Understandably, the actors are quite busy with jobs, children and other matters, so extensive rehearsal time is not manageable. Thus, improvised comedy is the best solution. The skit was split, in a manner of speaking, between the comic side of Pharaoh, his servant, magician, and a random Hebrew on one side, and the serious side of Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron on the other. Our comedic leads had strong personalities, so improvising humorous interactions seemed fairly easy for them. I was later informed that my character seemed to be played more straight, to counter the over-the-top humor between Pharaoh and his servant.
On the other hand, familiarity with a character benefits not only improv, but also traditional scripted drama. While rehearsing for Arsenic and Old Lace, our director Mrs. DeVault had us come up with back-stories for our characters, no matter how minor they were (Actually important here, as their were about 14 characters in total). By having a background, we would know to react as the character if someone missed or slightly changed a line. It's also part of acting as a whole: for that short duration on stage, an actor immerses him or herself in the character.
While I had a good time being the magician for our VBS (even getting a brief appearance in a comic relief moment before the final, super-serious skit for the tenth plague) I didn't get the level of immersion that comes with traditional stage roles. These VBS skits occupy a strange place between improv and scripted theatre. One one hand, we can act however the character would, as long as the main point is brought across. Unlike improv, however, we cannot simply "reinvent" a character or completely change to re-liven a slowing skit. Pharaoh must be Pharaoh, Moses must be Moses.
One of my favorite aspects of being immersed in a show, or character, or series, is being able to imagine what a character would or would not do. Some improv skits, such as "blind date" rely on the audience's familiarity with a character and ask them to figure out his or her identity.
Long story short, repetition makes perfect, as the title says. Or, it at least makes performances complete. It's one thing to utilize your own crazy personality to create improvised comedy. It's another thing entirely to create a full character on the stage.
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Gaming - All the Worlds are Stages
As an amateur actor, I am quite accustomed to walking to the same theatre, multiple times, and see it appear drastically different each time I arrive. The beauty of the theatre is that (almost) anything can be depicted, if the set designers and directors have the imagination. I've played some video games that apply a similar principle. (I will discuss entries from the Super Mario series of games. Nothing against other potential subjects, it's just that I know about this series personally.)
Our first glimpse of this is Super Mario Bros. 3. Unlike the first two games, there is an actual map to navigate from level to level. Technically speaking, there are seven "worlds" consisting of several "stages." To further the analogy, the stages (especially those of the first world) resemble actual theatre stages: some scenery appears suspended from above, platforms have screws in each corner, and the end of each "stage" has a black background, reminiscent of the back stage of a theatre. For better or worse, this adds a factor of separation between the player and the game: the stage-like qualities of the "stage" constantly remind us of the fictionality of the story (as if the cartoonish villains, physics-defying gameplay, and general silliness didn't).
However, for a better illustration of my point, I turn to the wildly popular and excellent Super Mario 64. Mario's first 3D adventure has the player exploring various worlds linked to the castle via painting-portals. True, while the courses are not designed to look like stages, they still fill the same function. Different courses are used multiple time, often with different enemies, objectives, and occasionally altered scenery and props. Later 3D Mario games, like Super Mario Sunshine, S. M. Galaxy and S.M.G. 2 continue this method, increasing the amount of variance, until Super Mario Galaxy removes or adds pieces for different missions. (Paper Mario 1 and its sequel also contain features of theatre, but it is an RPG and its use of the elements would require an article unto itself. Maybe soon!)
Basically, Mario games are action-adventure stage plays controlled by the audience.
Our first glimpse of this is Super Mario Bros. 3. Unlike the first two games, there is an actual map to navigate from level to level. Technically speaking, there are seven "worlds" consisting of several "stages." To further the analogy, the stages (especially those of the first world) resemble actual theatre stages: some scenery appears suspended from above, platforms have screws in each corner, and the end of each "stage" has a black background, reminiscent of the back stage of a theatre. For better or worse, this adds a factor of separation between the player and the game: the stage-like qualities of the "stage" constantly remind us of the fictionality of the story (as if the cartoonish villains, physics-defying gameplay, and general silliness didn't).
However, for a better illustration of my point, I turn to the wildly popular and excellent Super Mario 64. Mario's first 3D adventure has the player exploring various worlds linked to the castle via painting-portals. True, while the courses are not designed to look like stages, they still fill the same function. Different courses are used multiple time, often with different enemies, objectives, and occasionally altered scenery and props. Later 3D Mario games, like Super Mario Sunshine, S. M. Galaxy and S.M.G. 2 continue this method, increasing the amount of variance, until Super Mario Galaxy removes or adds pieces for different missions. (Paper Mario 1 and its sequel also contain features of theatre, but it is an RPG and its use of the elements would require an article unto itself. Maybe soon!)
Basically, Mario games are action-adventure stage plays controlled by the audience.
Monday, June 24, 2013
Life - Acclimating to a New Library
I've had the fortune of working at a small college library the last year. At this point, I can easily navigate to the literature, or science, or even a specific section of the B call signs. My favorite thing to do is locate specific topics or books for patrons. I've only done it a few times, but regardless. It is important for a good librarian to know the location of general topics. First, this makes reshelving a quicker process. Also, it allows the librarian to access materials faster, either for him or herself or for a patron. With both the Dewey system and the Library of Congress system, one needs only to learn the scale of the library. Going into a new library, one must first orient him or herself to it for optimal performance (I will be speaking of a library organized by LOC system, as in college libraries across the country).
First, ask if there are other collections. Visiting one library, I was surprised to see that there were no M or Qs past a certain point. Later, I found out that the library had separate libraries for music and science. Within the library, find out the different collections. For instance, my library at Erskine has several collections: specific sections for some campus organizations, archives, folio, periodicals and a reference collection. The reference section is often a microcosm of the general collection itself.
Knowing that many students will ask for assistance in researching for essays, papers and exams, it is a good idea to know where general topics are. As mentioned above, I can quickly navigate to the literature, science and Bible sections of the library. If you can view the college's course catalog, take note of the different majors available and search accordingly. Depending on your dedication, you can also find subtopics within topics, such as Shakespeare and modern drama, to better understand the scale difference between one library and another. However, for the most part, it will take time to become acquainted with a particular library's layout and topical dispersal.
Part of my duties consisted of discharging the key to the media. The librarian should be acquainted with all spaces available either for study or meetings.
One last thing is that the librarian should try to have friends or at least acquaintances among co-workers. While this is not necessary, it is very nice. For one, it makes work go by faster. Also, it allows for emergencies or (in my case) allowance for rehearsals and play performances. I enjoy working at the library, partly for this very reason.
First, ask if there are other collections. Visiting one library, I was surprised to see that there were no M or Qs past a certain point. Later, I found out that the library had separate libraries for music and science. Within the library, find out the different collections. For instance, my library at Erskine has several collections: specific sections for some campus organizations, archives, folio, periodicals and a reference collection. The reference section is often a microcosm of the general collection itself.
Knowing that many students will ask for assistance in researching for essays, papers and exams, it is a good idea to know where general topics are. As mentioned above, I can quickly navigate to the literature, science and Bible sections of the library. If you can view the college's course catalog, take note of the different majors available and search accordingly. Depending on your dedication, you can also find subtopics within topics, such as Shakespeare and modern drama, to better understand the scale difference between one library and another. However, for the most part, it will take time to become acquainted with a particular library's layout and topical dispersal.
Part of my duties consisted of discharging the key to the media. The librarian should be acquainted with all spaces available either for study or meetings.
One last thing is that the librarian should try to have friends or at least acquaintances among co-workers. While this is not necessary, it is very nice. For one, it makes work go by faster. Also, it allows for emergencies or (in my case) allowance for rehearsals and play performances. I enjoy working at the library, partly for this very reason.
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Gaming - All-New! Movie: The Game
Recently, I got a book discussing marketing tactics used by various groups and companies. This reminded me of a standard tactic all gamers are familiar with: the licensed game.
I would say that the licensed game is a mixed bag, but its more like a box of chocolates comprised of only the icky (insert type you hate) ones. Most infamously, a movie franchise game nearly destroyed the video game industry: E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial. No doubt, Atari was banking on the popularity of the movie, critically acclaimed even to this day, to boost sales of the game. However, several factors lead to the lackluster quality of the game itself. From what I can tell, the game's design was rushed and not fully tested. Many posit it as the worst game ever made. I would not contest its low quality, but I've played some other pretty bad games.
For instance, there is the NES game The Adventures of Gilligan's Island which I have the (mis)fortune of owning. Game-play and controls are frustrating and almost impossible.
Atari made a port of Pac-Man for their Atari 2600 system. It too was a horrible game, being a lousy port of the much-loved classic.
In some-what researching this article, I came across many other terrible examples. Celebrity tie-ins. Inappropriately violent games. Real-life killings turned into games. Good games ported badly. However, a lot of them, as with the ones above, had one thing in common: they came from a franchise or recognized "brand." The book I'm reading, Brandwashed, describes a "brand" as a widely recognized character or emblem that sells a product, or, occasionally, is the product itself. Coca-Cola is a brand. Celebrities are "brands." The author has a very broad idea of what brands are. He goes on to talk about the sneaky tactics that companies use to sell their products.
Of course, this is exactly what video game companies and the entertainment industry do when they produce licensed games. They capitalize on our familiarity with and love for various movies and characters. Just as Ronald McDonald sells fries and Big Macs, characters like E.T. and Superman are used to sell games, whether they are good or not. I personally don't go in for licensed games much, besides ones that I know are good, like the famous GoldenEye 007 for the N64. However, my brother occasionally gets into moods in which he is completely absorbed by a brand. He'll get the toys, games, movies, etc... Recently it's Transformers. So among the recent, good games like the pre-Autobot-emigration Transformers games, he also has games based on the recent movies. Somehow he manages to get through them.
He claims that he likes them. I believe him, since lately, he's been using his own money to buy games. However, part of it is due to Hasbro and the various game companies. (Transformers is an interesting case itself. An entire franchise that exploded from one TV series designed to sell toys. But, alas, a different topic for a different article.)
My diagnosis on licensed games is that companies and players should be wary. Often, licensed games are created only to capitalize on the success of a movie or a game. Occasionally, a game rises above the rest of the shovel-ware and becomes a fan favorite. As I said before, though, it's still an uphill battle. The temptation is too strong to release licensed garbage in order to make a few extra dollars. However, there is still hope.
I would say that the licensed game is a mixed bag, but its more like a box of chocolates comprised of only the icky (insert type you hate) ones. Most infamously, a movie franchise game nearly destroyed the video game industry: E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial. No doubt, Atari was banking on the popularity of the movie, critically acclaimed even to this day, to boost sales of the game. However, several factors lead to the lackluster quality of the game itself. From what I can tell, the game's design was rushed and not fully tested. Many posit it as the worst game ever made. I would not contest its low quality, but I've played some other pretty bad games.
For instance, there is the NES game The Adventures of Gilligan's Island which I have the (mis)fortune of owning. Game-play and controls are frustrating and almost impossible.
Atari made a port of Pac-Man for their Atari 2600 system. It too was a horrible game, being a lousy port of the much-loved classic.
In some-what researching this article, I came across many other terrible examples. Celebrity tie-ins. Inappropriately violent games. Real-life killings turned into games. Good games ported badly. However, a lot of them, as with the ones above, had one thing in common: they came from a franchise or recognized "brand." The book I'm reading, Brandwashed, describes a "brand" as a widely recognized character or emblem that sells a product, or, occasionally, is the product itself. Coca-Cola is a brand. Celebrities are "brands." The author has a very broad idea of what brands are. He goes on to talk about the sneaky tactics that companies use to sell their products.
Of course, this is exactly what video game companies and the entertainment industry do when they produce licensed games. They capitalize on our familiarity with and love for various movies and characters. Just as Ronald McDonald sells fries and Big Macs, characters like E.T. and Superman are used to sell games, whether they are good or not. I personally don't go in for licensed games much, besides ones that I know are good, like the famous GoldenEye 007 for the N64. However, my brother occasionally gets into moods in which he is completely absorbed by a brand. He'll get the toys, games, movies, etc... Recently it's Transformers. So among the recent, good games like the pre-Autobot-emigration Transformers games, he also has games based on the recent movies. Somehow he manages to get through them.
He claims that he likes them. I believe him, since lately, he's been using his own money to buy games. However, part of it is due to Hasbro and the various game companies. (Transformers is an interesting case itself. An entire franchise that exploded from one TV series designed to sell toys. But, alas, a different topic for a different article.)
My diagnosis on licensed games is that companies and players should be wary. Often, licensed games are created only to capitalize on the success of a movie or a game. Occasionally, a game rises above the rest of the shovel-ware and becomes a fan favorite. As I said before, though, it's still an uphill battle. The temptation is too strong to release licensed garbage in order to make a few extra dollars. However, there is still hope.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Life - For What is Theatre to Me?
"Good, speak to the mariners: fall to't, yarely,
or we run ourselves aground: bestir, bestir."
or we run ourselves aground: bestir, bestir."
Thus read (basically) all of my lines from Erskine's production of Shakespeare's The Tempest. My subsequent ventures on stage were all non-speaking parts. That was also the case with a earlier production of Once Upon a Mattress. None of my parts were very big, or important.
So why do it? Why go out for theatre, when even at a small school you get cast as bit parts? Well, not for "the glory." After Mattress, I knew why. Several reasons, actually.
For one, there is the backstage experience. This is a two-fold aspect. First, there is the great social aspect. Second, there is the performance viewing aspect. After rehearsing the play for several weeks, we get to know each other better, if we didn't already. Admittedly, some rehearsals run long and/or boring, especially for people with smaller roles. For me, this detriment was countered by a unique opportunity. I was able to view some of the plays multiple times. True, for the recent one acts I stayed backstage: however, my favorite experience was during Once Upon a Mattress. It was my initial experience with Erskine's theatre, and an early experience with the music department. I was able to hear their dulcimer tones 11 times, not including the later, polished dress rehearsals. It was fun, hanging around backstage, seeing my friends go out and perform.
Also, one becomes a part of a greater whole. Not just the lead actors are important. Being in a smaller role, I could help the production out in other areas, such as set assembly. In the wing, I could watch the show and how everything went together.
Theatre to me is a whole experience. I can act, but I can also watch others act. I can also aid the production get on its feet. Theatre to me is not just acting. Excuse the cliche, but it's an adventure.
Theatre to me is a whole experience. I can act, but I can also watch others act. I can also aid the production get on its feet. Theatre to me is not just acting. Excuse the cliche, but it's an adventure.
Sunday, June 16, 2013
Business - Blockbuster Buster?
Whenever we (me and mother, usually) drive to the library or stores around that area, we pass by a certain Blockbuster. That Blockbuster never really had a good selection, to my mind. I preferred the one in Mauldin, that had a good video game selection (and was were I got my N64, about when everyone was phasing to Gamecube). The "bad" Blockbuster had recently gone out of business. So too had the Mauldin one, a few years ago. I've also heard that Blockbuster stores are going out of business everywhere. Online sites like Netflix and Amazon video, and rental kiosks like Red Box, are all scooping up customers. For video games, there is Game Stop and many online options.
So what if Blockbuster is going out of business? Online resources mean that there is less process between the customer and the product, and getting stuff faster is good, right? While that is true, it also reflects a growing trend. More services are promoting the diminution of social contact and venturing forth into the world. Also, for good or bad, it is part of a general trend from physical media to digital. I'm not trying to write in a "Everything new is bad, the good old days, blah blah..." but some things must be considered.
First, there is the social aspect. True, going to the store isn't a social occasion in-and-of itself. But it could lead to one. Also, it gets you out of the house, even if for a little bit. During the summer especially, I only get out by going to the store or the library, most days. On the flip side, though, downloadable and streaming content is indeed convenient. Some material may be rare or expensive, such as seasons or episodes of popular television series (like Doctor Who). Also, people who don't socialize anyway probably won't socialize during the brief time they're at the store. Additionally, some larger electronics and department stores in business provide movies and games. So, the social aspect is present, but negligible.
Second, it is among a larger trend of the digitizing of media. Rumors about digital-only video game systems circulated at the beginning of this generation of consoles. Some of those rumors were stopped flatly. The PS Vita, successor to the PSP confirmed some of them. Games seem to be making a general move to digital media. This too seems to be contributing to the decline in the number of stores like Blockbuster, but not to the same degree as the digital movies are. Before we had fast internet, I would have hated the idea of digital-media-only games or systems. Now the idea doesn't seem so bad. I have reservations about DLC, but I've already gotten a digital game (Yes, Minecraft has a Xbox 360 version, but I don't have a 360) and my brother's already downloaded demos and games to his PS3. However, I also enjoy walking around stores like Game Stop and Video Game Cavern. Commenting on the effect on retrogaming is a topic for another article.
Anyway! Blockbuster and similar stores are having a hard time, thanks to video streaming sites. Is it a problem? I don't think so. Netflix may prove a Blockbuster buster, but stores provide several things that the internet cannot. I find it easier to broadly browse in person. Also, you can ask the cashiers and workers about what movie is good, or what game isn't rated too badly (Face-to-face customer service may not be easier than online correspondence, but it is certainly more immediate). Some have conveniently placed refreshments to enjoy with your movie or game. Finally, if they need to clear stock, the sales can be excellent. Whenever I was paid from my Abrakadoodle job a few years ago, I went on a shopping spree at the Mauldin Blockbuster, usually during a sale, and walked away with a lot of good stuff.
I hope that movie stores do not go the way of the dodo. Already, all the Movie Galleries are gone. If they do, I will survive. Game Stop and Amazon would provide for my gaming needs, and I never really did the whole "video rental" game. Nevertheless, there are aspects that I would miss. We'll see what happens, and how things turn out.
So what if Blockbuster is going out of business? Online resources mean that there is less process between the customer and the product, and getting stuff faster is good, right? While that is true, it also reflects a growing trend. More services are promoting the diminution of social contact and venturing forth into the world. Also, for good or bad, it is part of a general trend from physical media to digital. I'm not trying to write in a "Everything new is bad, the good old days, blah blah..." but some things must be considered.
First, there is the social aspect. True, going to the store isn't a social occasion in-and-of itself. But it could lead to one. Also, it gets you out of the house, even if for a little bit. During the summer especially, I only get out by going to the store or the library, most days. On the flip side, though, downloadable and streaming content is indeed convenient. Some material may be rare or expensive, such as seasons or episodes of popular television series (like Doctor Who). Also, people who don't socialize anyway probably won't socialize during the brief time they're at the store. Additionally, some larger electronics and department stores in business provide movies and games. So, the social aspect is present, but negligible.
Second, it is among a larger trend of the digitizing of media. Rumors about digital-only video game systems circulated at the beginning of this generation of consoles. Some of those rumors were stopped flatly. The PS Vita, successor to the PSP confirmed some of them. Games seem to be making a general move to digital media. This too seems to be contributing to the decline in the number of stores like Blockbuster, but not to the same degree as the digital movies are. Before we had fast internet, I would have hated the idea of digital-media-only games or systems. Now the idea doesn't seem so bad. I have reservations about DLC, but I've already gotten a digital game (Yes, Minecraft has a Xbox 360 version, but I don't have a 360) and my brother's already downloaded demos and games to his PS3. However, I also enjoy walking around stores like Game Stop and Video Game Cavern. Commenting on the effect on retrogaming is a topic for another article.
Anyway! Blockbuster and similar stores are having a hard time, thanks to video streaming sites. Is it a problem? I don't think so. Netflix may prove a Blockbuster buster, but stores provide several things that the internet cannot. I find it easier to broadly browse in person. Also, you can ask the cashiers and workers about what movie is good, or what game isn't rated too badly (Face-to-face customer service may not be easier than online correspondence, but it is certainly more immediate). Some have conveniently placed refreshments to enjoy with your movie or game. Finally, if they need to clear stock, the sales can be excellent. Whenever I was paid from my Abrakadoodle job a few years ago, I went on a shopping spree at the Mauldin Blockbuster, usually during a sale, and walked away with a lot of good stuff.
I hope that movie stores do not go the way of the dodo. Already, all the Movie Galleries are gone. If they do, I will survive. Game Stop and Amazon would provide for my gaming needs, and I never really did the whole "video rental" game. Nevertheless, there are aspects that I would miss. We'll see what happens, and how things turn out.
Wednesday, June 5, 2013
Gaming - Minecraft Buildlogue #2: Lovely Library (Part 1)
Inspired by my first project, I have decided on another. Naturally, the next thing I am building is a library. However, this project will likely take much longer than the previous one. Especially without world edit tools and what not. Initially, I had to decide on the size of the "wall units." (This makes larger structures easier to manage. For instance, one wall unit might be a four by four group of stone bricks within a frame of chiseled stone bricks).
In the previous project, I utilized a framing approach, that allowed me to see how big the finished structure would be, and that made for a more interesting looking wall than if I had simply used one type of brick. Here, I increased the proportions so that there was 6x6 of the filler unit, stone bricks, surround by an 8x8 frame of chiseled stone bricks.
After making a framework, we see the general size and shape of what is to come. It is probably the largest (complex) structure I've made in Minecraft, up to this point.
Sometimes I wish there were a lawnmower tool. Oh well!
Once I finished building and lighting the walls, I had to decide what kind of floor to use. Stone or stone bricks would prove to monotonous and/or similar to the walls.
I finally decided on a frame of stone bricks surrounding carpet. For the front reading/reception area, I decided on blue wool, with light blue wool for the employee areas. Using iron blocks, I formed the reception and circulation area.
On the opposite side from the circulation area, I created a small cafe and book store, complete with "refrigerator" and "coffee maker."
The second area, possibly a reference or popular literature section, came next. My initial set up placed the rows to closely together, so I erred on the side of having only two rows so close together.
In between the reception area and cafe, I created a reading/eating area by using stairs to make chairs, and tables by a combination of a fence post and a pressure plate.
I've added a lot more on to it, but there are too many things for one post. Anyway, thanks for reading/looking! Stay tuned for more developments.
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
Gaming - Minecraft Buildlogue #1: Lovely Theatre and Music Hall
Hello all! It's been a while since my last article on gaming: to break that famine, I've decided to write about a recent building I made in Minecraft - a sort of buildlogue.
It's been quite difficult, lately, for me to actually play Minecraft. In introducing it to my brother, I created something of a monster - he constantly asks to play it. Anyway, I've finally been able to wrangle some time with the program. (I've upgraded to 1.5.2, I believe. I started a new file, forgetting to change from the initial name of "New World.")
Initially, I was planning to make a generic warehouse. I began with a simple facade, using two different shades of wood paneling. However, as the basic frame formed, I decided that it would be cool to build a theatre. Following a naming scheme started on my house and garden, the theatre would come to be known as "Lovely Theatre and Music Hall."
It's been quite difficult, lately, for me to actually play Minecraft. In introducing it to my brother, I created something of a monster - he constantly asks to play it. Anyway, I've finally been able to wrangle some time with the program. (I've upgraded to 1.5.2, I believe. I started a new file, forgetting to change from the initial name of "New World.")
Initially, I was planning to make a generic warehouse. I began with a simple facade, using two different shades of wood paneling. However, as the basic frame formed, I decided that it would be cool to build a theatre. Following a naming scheme started on my house and garden, the theatre would come to be known as "Lovely Theatre and Music Hall."
I made later additions once the rest of the frame was finished. As seen above, the edges use right-side-up and upside-down stair blocks to form the edge facades.
Using the fence unit, I created column-like structures all around the building.
The rear of the building is largely the same as the front.
Upon entering the theatre, we are greeted by the foyer/front greeting area. As with the rest of the building, it is made of a combination of mostly oak and spruce planks, with some birch planks for flooring.
In the auditorium, we walk on the luxurious carpet of red and yellow wool. For now, it is lit by conventional wooden torches. Seating is available in the form of quartz stairs. In the distance, we see the stage curtain and the legs, made out of red and black wool, respectively.
The back of the auditorium is rather bland. I wish I knew how to represent light, because I would then add in a few sets (Or a balcony of some sort?).
Edit: Something bugged me about this shot. It turns out, I forgot to finish the main curtain. Witness below, the curtain proper:
Since we have seen the auditorium, let us head towards the actual stage.
Now on stage, I examine a makeshift piano made of quartz blocks and stairs. (Were this Tekkit, I probably would have used dark iron or something like it for the main structure, and micro-blocks for the keys section.)
We turn to the audience, after a rousing piano sonata, expecting thunderous applause, but we've forgotten: there's nobody here but us.
Our back up performers wait backstage, eagerly anticipating the moment that they can emerge onstage.
Exhausted after our performance, we retreat backstage to the dressing rooms. Obviously, at least one of us is female and has already begun removing make-up.
This is the in-progress men's dressing room. Hopefully, I can add dressing room-y things. Unfortunately, I don't think there's a "mirror" block. Maybe I can figure something out.
Backstage is currently composed of the two dressing rooms and a hallway leading to the rear exit. As the floor is raised up by a floor of wood planks, the exit appears lower than the front one. I will eventually make an add-on for the green room, prop room and other dressing rooms.
We've finally finished the tour. The sun sets on the theatre, as we look forward to more projects in the future.
Thank you for viewing my latest Minecraft buildlogue. If you have any ideas or suggestions for what I should attempt to build next, please let me know. I could definitely be persuaded to start a file in Tekkit, so to have access to more building materials and so forth, but it would need to be soon. Anyway, that is all for now. See you guys later!
Thank you for viewing my latest Minecraft buildlogue. If you have any ideas or suggestions for what I should attempt to build next, please let me know. I could definitely be persuaded to start a file in Tekkit, so to have access to more building materials and so forth, but it would need to be soon. Anyway, that is all for now. See you guys later!
Friday, May 31, 2013
Literature - What is Extended Fiction For?
One of my favorite fandoms, as I have written before, is that of Star Trek. In addition to 6 television series, at least 4 of which were smash hits, 12 movies, video games and comic books, there is the one area of which I seem to have an abundance: books. (Well, I had a few, then people kept buying them for me. Now I have a whole shelf-level of them. Dozens or more.) These books depict the various exploits of the characters in each respective series, also including new series, characters and crossovers. This, of course, is a type of "expanded universe."
After this, I began thinking. "Expanded (extended) universe" is a term (I believe) that originated in describing additional media of the Star Wars universe. One difference between Wars and Trek, however, is the factor of canonicity. Much of the Star Wars extended fiction is a canon continuation of the saga. Star Trek, while having new series and some continuations, has a more nuanced canon mechanic. Doctor Who, with its many novels and audio dramas, seems to function similarly. How is that, you ask? Think of the events of the respective series. In the case of Star Trek: Voyager, there is a very tight constraint for extraneous narratives: the entire journey (with some help from outside individuals and groups) took about 7 years. This is not a lot of time to insert many narratives, considering that much of the time would be taken by television episodes. Additionally, some characters, such as the Ocampan Kes, whose species had a shorter life than humans, or the child Naomi, who grew up during the course of the series, also put restraints on the number of stories that could occur. (Unfortunately, the Pokemon solution - characters simply not aging - cannot be applied.)
With all that in mind, then what is the point of the extended fiction? Why go to all the effort to authorize the different novels, comics, and sundry other media? Yes, they tell good stories, but then, so do the canon television stories. The answer is, in fact, the "episode effect."
An episode, by definition, is any event that occurs in one's life. Most classic literature is not written in this form: they are movie-like in their use of characters and events. Granted, there are things like Shakespeare's history plays, but sequels do not equate to (our definition of) episodes. To my knowledge, the advent of the episode has been aided greatly by newer, faster forms of media. Radio, TV, digital media, internet, etc... are all much faster and more adept at handling smaller narrative units. Hence the birth of radio serials and later television serials. TV episodes weekly engage the viewers with a story about their favorite characters.
And that's the point of the extended fiction: to engage the readers with a story about their favorite characters. It is to show what the characters would do, given a particular set of circumstances. What would Captain Picard do if Scotty stole an old Constitution class starship and a Romulan cloaking device with a mind to rescue? What would Picard do if a TARDIS appeared on his ship? Questions like these can be explored, in full, in the extended fiction. I would be remiss in forgetting to mention the limitless possibilities that books and comics grant: there is no limitation of what can be depicted. Extended fiction is for exploration. What will my characters do?
After this, I began thinking. "Expanded (extended) universe" is a term (I believe) that originated in describing additional media of the Star Wars universe. One difference between Wars and Trek, however, is the factor of canonicity. Much of the Star Wars extended fiction is a canon continuation of the saga. Star Trek, while having new series and some continuations, has a more nuanced canon mechanic. Doctor Who, with its many novels and audio dramas, seems to function similarly. How is that, you ask? Think of the events of the respective series. In the case of Star Trek: Voyager, there is a very tight constraint for extraneous narratives: the entire journey (with some help from outside individuals and groups) took about 7 years. This is not a lot of time to insert many narratives, considering that much of the time would be taken by television episodes. Additionally, some characters, such as the Ocampan Kes, whose species had a shorter life than humans, or the child Naomi, who grew up during the course of the series, also put restraints on the number of stories that could occur. (Unfortunately, the Pokemon solution - characters simply not aging - cannot be applied.)
With all that in mind, then what is the point of the extended fiction? Why go to all the effort to authorize the different novels, comics, and sundry other media? Yes, they tell good stories, but then, so do the canon television stories. The answer is, in fact, the "episode effect."
An episode, by definition, is any event that occurs in one's life. Most classic literature is not written in this form: they are movie-like in their use of characters and events. Granted, there are things like Shakespeare's history plays, but sequels do not equate to (our definition of) episodes. To my knowledge, the advent of the episode has been aided greatly by newer, faster forms of media. Radio, TV, digital media, internet, etc... are all much faster and more adept at handling smaller narrative units. Hence the birth of radio serials and later television serials. TV episodes weekly engage the viewers with a story about their favorite characters.
And that's the point of the extended fiction: to engage the readers with a story about their favorite characters. It is to show what the characters would do, given a particular set of circumstances. What would Captain Picard do if Scotty stole an old Constitution class starship and a Romulan cloaking device with a mind to rescue? What would Picard do if a TARDIS appeared on his ship? Questions like these can be explored, in full, in the extended fiction. I would be remiss in forgetting to mention the limitless possibilities that books and comics grant: there is no limitation of what can be depicted. Extended fiction is for exploration. What will my characters do?
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Literature - What's a Poem, Really?
What is a poem?
Movement
Of letters
On a page?
Sound?
Feeling?
For a few years, even before I was an English major, I wondered: what is the appeal of poetry? It is understandable for things with a concerted structure: either the rhyme, the connection of words through techniques like alliteration or consonance, or by the rhythmic flow. Some poems "flow" off the tongue or "dance off the page." Especially when a fair-voiced maiden is reading them, poems just sound right. However, what about modern poetry? There are some forms that derive their appeal from the visual aspect. Nevertheless, the question is still there: what is the appeal?
One way to think of it is in terms of music. I love hearing my friends sing an aria or duet in Italian, German or whatever other language. My appreciation does not stem entirely from the text itself, no matter how high the quality. Rather, I enjoy the words themselves - how they sound, separately and with the rest of the song - and the delivery of those words. Recently, my college gave an honors recital for those performers that did exceptionally well in previous recitals. One of my favorite pieces was "The Girl from Ipanema." I had always been familiar with the song, and some of its English lyrics. However, these were only added later: the original lyrics were in the melodic Portuguese language. Sitting there, listening, I realized that the sound of the words were really what I was enjoying. They did indeed flow together. Also, the singer's silky tenor added to the effect. "The Girl from Ipanema" illustrates, as do many other foreign language songs, that poetry need not be understood to be enjoyed.
"The Girl from Ipanema" illustrates that appeal can come from beautiful sounds. However, appeal can also come from a lack of beauty. Onomatopoeia (words that sound like what they describe) has always existed in some form or another. In this way, "The Bells" has great appeal. Just last week, our Directing class put on a series of one acts. One director chose to transform the work into a stage piece. One particular section, the alarm bells, illustrates my point. Upon beginning, the actor spoke the lines in a loud and harsh manner. His tone of voice underwrote the text and brought out the ugliness of the alarm bells themselves. Other sections play with vocal dynamics, but none were so apparent as this section. Here, the director's instruction to the actor brought out the appeal of the poetry: "icky" sounds that grab our attention.
Both examples above focus less on the meaning behind the words, and more on the sounds of the words themselves. I'm sure critics have argued this point, that sound is the significant factor of poetry, before. but I would like to issue a challenge. It is this: write poems in, or as if you were writing in, another language. Why do I ask this? Because you would have less knowledge of synonyms and culturally-mandated context. You would chose the word based on how it works within the context of YOUR poem, and nothing else. I'm not arguing that the meaning is completely irrelevant: rather, I am imploring you to also consider the words themselves. By all means, have someone fluent in the language look it over, if you so desire. If you're not comfortable with any other language, still keep my advice in mind as you compose.
A poem, then
Is the flow
Of the words
On the page
In the air
In the soul
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Script - "A Gallifreyan Guide to Becoming a Social Butterfly"
Earlier this week, I was required to memorize a certain number of lines of Shakespeare, and also a non-Shakespearean, dramatic monologue. However, the day approached and I was running out of time and options. Therefore, to achieve the fun zaniness I sought, I determined to write my own script. After giving the monologue on Sunday, some of my friends expressed the opinion that it was well-written, or something to that effect. So, by no demand whatsoever, except my own fancy, here is the script for you to enjoy (or not.)
(Outline for a handout/visual aid that never materialized:)
A Gallifreyan’s Guide to Becoming a Social Butterfly (the short-short version)
(Text proper, with some later changes and ad-libs inserted:)
[He
looks around as if something sounded. Reaches into backpack and pulls out a
blank sheath of paper] Of course, my psychic essay! Well, technically a paper, but don't lets be confusing, eh? ... Oh dear! Somebody in the future needs my help! Something
about a 500 page paper on the Cybermen invasion of Skaro, before the Cybermen
even existed, lead by Benito Mussolini and Richard III, and ... involving me!?!
But intervention in history is not my job! That other guy! What was his name... the Professor? The Monk? The Doctor! Call him! ... What's that? He's too busy? He's a time traveler, that doesn't mat- Oh, he's been there before, in different regenerations, and... I know elementary temporal physics! Crossing his own time stream could cause a paradox that would destroy 1/4 of the known universe... [sighs, throws down ] I never asked for this...
(Note, Doctor Who, Daleks, Cybermen, Time Lord, etc... belong to the skilled and glorious writers of BBC, and the other various entities that own the stuff. I equate this to playing in a sandbox. Some of the "toys" are mine, but most belong to whoever else. It's all so confusing anyway. However, who owns what in Doctor Who is a discussion for another time and another place...)
(Outline for a handout/visual aid that never materialized:)
A Gallifreyan’s Guide to Becoming a Social Butterfly (the short-short version)
3: Break the Ice
1: Know Yourself
2: Know the Group
4: Join the Conversation
7: ???
11: Suggest Dinner
12: Introduce Companions
13: Fly to Mars
(Text proper, with some later changes and ad-libs inserted:)
Cast:
Time Lord – Edwardamendario, or “The Bachelor”
Edward: Travelling the worlds of this universe, I've only just arrived
in this country. Strange. You’d think I’d have heard of it before! Anyway.
After observing what you would call your 21st, 22nd, and
23rd centuries, I see one key problem: socialization. No, I don’t
mean any political or governmental nonsense. I mean just sitting down and
talking. You've developed these electronic-y gizmos and lost all sense of ...
of ... social adventure! For your benefit, I’ll tell you what to do. I’ll give
you a sort of “Gallifreyan's Guide to Becoming a Social Butterfly.” Not
literally, of course! I did that once, and the results weren't... Anyway! Let
me begin.
(Edward:)
Step 1: Know yourself. I, for instance, am a 121 year-old Time Lord,
still very young, with a sense of adventure. You can see from my dress that I
am still fairly conservative, but have a flair of the dramatic.
Step 2: Know your group. You are all also very young, but Earthlings.
It’s good to know about the group before you say anything. I once made an
inappropriate crack about Shakespeare’s masculinity in a small London suburb. See, I thought my TARDIS sent me to a
historic-literary convention in 2151 (they weren't ... aren't ... won't be so peculiar about things in the 22nd century), but I had actually been sent to a
regular-literary convention in 1851.
Step 7: No, errm, I mean...
Step 3: Break the ice. This is easy for a suave Time Lord such as
myself, but not everyone has it so easy. The key to this is relatability. You've
got to figuratively, and sometimes literally, disarm the people around you. I
do so by doing zany things, like this: [does some zany things]. The people are
then so confused that they have no choice but to accept me into the circle.
Step 4: Join the conversation. This is the dull bit. I don’t even know
what you people talk about. Barbecue? Cheese? Imported television programmes?
It’s all still a little fuzzy to me.
Step 5: ... Do you hear something? Sort of a "chwhchwhchwh" sound? Wait, now it's a "abdabungabungadundabada..."
Step 5: ... Do you hear something? Sort of a "chwhchwhchwh" sound? Wait, now it's a "abdabungabungadundabada..."
(Note, Doctor Who, Daleks, Cybermen, Time Lord, etc... belong to the skilled and glorious writers of BBC, and the other various entities that own the stuff. I equate this to playing in a sandbox. Some of the "toys" are mine, but most belong to whoever else. It's all so confusing anyway. However, who owns what in Doctor Who is a discussion for another time and another place...)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)