Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Callan S.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 45
Author Q&A / Re: Unholy Consultation - *SUPER SPOILERIFIC*
« on: August 01, 2017, 04:53:52 am »
I actually have a version of that final Cnaiur scene that's more than twenty years old - it's been baked in since the very beginning. For me, it's always been a kind of bookend for the series, the becoming infernal/geological of the hate that initially preserved him, but leaves him hijacked
Is that what you meant when you'd previously said Cnaiurs arc was done?

I thought that was a dirty, dirty lie :p then I wondered if you meant done as a human.

Author Q&A / Re: Unholy Consultation - *SUPER SPOILERIFIC*
« on: August 01, 2017, 12:06:09 am »
With Sorweel, did the white luck warrior condition activate at some point, or was it there all along and  we were left thinking he had a face painted on him, but actually he was going through a deterministic path all that time (or fatalistic, as you've described it before) - really Sorweel was a face painted on the determined path?

[Edited to add an actual book question! :) ]

At the risk of alienating my favorite author, I'm firmly believe piracy is a bogeyman used by large media companies.

I've read a lot of studies on the issue and if you throw out the media sponsored ones and the ones that equate each pirated copy to a lost sale, the actual effect of piracy isn't bad and even has positive benefits.

In other words, big media are skewing results in order to minimize their profits... The only universe in which this argument could have bite is one where humans are hardwired to rationalize guilt

How would skewing results reduce their actual profits?

I'm skeptical on the whole piracy effect as well (I don't pirate, just to be clear) - I'd like to see some science done on it -  if forced, whether they'd buy the book if they had no other access to it. I suspect many pirates have a hording condition - they don't read what they download (they can download more than they could read in a lifetime, after all), they just sit on it, like a dragon on its horde. Madly collecting meaning. But maybe some science would show they do read en masse and would pay en masse. Given the money in the various media industries, it's surprising they haven't paid what would be a relative pittance to run some science on this.

Author Q&A / Re: Unholy Consultation - *SUPER SPOILERIFIC*
« on: July 31, 2017, 11:54:18 pm »
There's no money in books Callan.  It's all in shirts and stickers.  You think it was the book sales or even her movie cut that made Rowling a billionaire?  Nope, it was the swag.

Is being a billionare the goal? You can own a yacht without being a billionare, let alone simply be a crazy social change mediator and running a family.

Author Q&A / Re: Unholy Consultation - *SUPER SPOILERIFIC*
« on: July 30, 2017, 11:40:46 pm »
I think you buy books to be a patron. I'm not supporting stealing in saying this, just instead of mentioning the stick, I'm mentioning the carrot - you buy books in order to be a patron. That's a carrot. Someone who supports - ie, something a Dunyain wouldn't do... >:) Buying stickers and t-shirts - then you're a patron of stickers and t-shirts, not books.

We had friends over a few nights ago who laughed that I would be so stupid to buy Bluerays for things that were free. Its got to the point where I'm apologizing for taking intellectual property seriously.
Free as in it's genuinely in the public domain? Otherwise it's not free?

If it was something in the public domain, I think it's valid to talk about getting it for free...since it's free.

Author Q&A / Re: Unholy Consultation - *SUPER SPOILERIFIC*
« on: July 29, 2017, 10:59:58 pm »
Much appreciated the time spent with answers, Scott! It was good that you tried, if you'll let yourself be told that :) Mourning your lost post all the same, o/c. It's probably better to use word for really big posts then copy them over - this is something I've told myself after losing a post. Then eventually I just fall back to using the betraying text box of a forum!

Author Q&A / Re: Unholy Consultation - *SUPER SPOILERIFIC*
« on: July 29, 2017, 12:50:04 pm »
Perhaps we can ask on theme - is there a theme in regards to Mim seeing Esme being 'saved'? I mean, it's nice that she 'got out', but 'saved'? I mean, it's rather like the news when they go gah gah over the lottery jackpot being X million - as if it's good thing, when that took hundreds of thousands of people losing for it to occur and for some single person to maybe win it. Here is there a theme where our idea of love or care is basically backed by hate? Like treating it as good somehow, the idea Esme is saved - but that validates the system, a system that tortures so many. How can you be saved/happy when it's as such horrific expense?

Bollivar: Nice post :)

Author Q&A / Re: Unholy Consultation - *SUPER SPOILERIFIC*
« on: July 28, 2017, 10:41:11 pm »
Interpretative indeterminacy, or what I call 'Crash Space' in my philosophical work, is what this series is ALL about, so if you were expecting a traditional discharging of narrative mysteries, you were bound to be disappointed: the idea is to cue our meaning-making instincts in the absence of any definitive interpretation.

What questions can we ask which wouldn't invalidate to various degrees this goal, Scott?

I mean, we could air our speculations as a fun dialog, but you'd have to act like a player as well and not a DM, otherwise it doesn't really work at a social level. In the face of the dude who knows, speculation dies as magic contacting chorae does.

And let's face it 'Sweet baby Kellhus!' is too funny to be dispelled so glibly!

Also I'll speculate Mim's baby will be two souled/twin hearted/a godthing perception avoider. What would you speculate if you were a player, man?

Edit: Also while I'm sure getting back into raw writing rather than redrafting must be exhilarating, might you continue at TPB in future?

Philosophy & Science / Re: 'Floating' meaning and music videos
« on: October 23, 2016, 02:36:07 am »
I'd say I did. From what I've seen of restaurant kitchens from friends working in them, the culture isn't healthy IMO - if some butthead in the kitchens has summarily dismissed you at some point, I don't know why his sin gets transferred to me. It's not the way to treat one and other, but from what I've seen of kitchens that sort of behavior is instead normalized and people treated as if they deserve it somehow when they don't.

Philosophy & Science / Re: 'Floating' meaning and music videos
« on: October 22, 2016, 03:53:34 am »
Are you saying all the world's a stage? Only a crazy person would say that! ;)

The issue is, back in Shakespears time actual paid actors were definitely the minority - generally if people showed signs of fitness, it's because they had some capacity to actually survive themselves.

Rather than surviving by appearing to be able to survive, as is more and more the case now.

I see it in the local art scenes - all the pretty things the local artists make, shiny things that make the world seem a big happy land - hoping to sell these tokens that say the world is good, so they don't get closer to starving. I'm reminded of one woman selling the happy fairy wings - while going through breast cancer treatment (though we have health care to cover that here, it'll slide her backwards in terms of selling goods)

And currently how fabulous is it to have grown vegetables or keep chickens and get your own eggs - it's just not as sexy as a music video, yet it's actual fitness.

Philosophy & Science / Re: 'Floating' meaning and music videos
« on: October 21, 2016, 10:24:36 pm »
The whole world right now is about people displaying themselves or their stuff, not just music "videos".
True, but they hide behind more and more layers of ambiguity so pointing them out is difficult. Better to use a clear cut example, then it's easier for folk to extrapolate from there to uncover the more ambiguous examples.

So yeah, that everyone is sheering away in what they fitness they display Vs how they actually get their food and shelter, that's my main point. Economies - ie, the way you get food and shelter, based on ignoring how you get food and shelter.

Philosophy & Science / Re: 'Floating' meaning and music videos
« on: October 21, 2016, 09:54:37 pm »
Non sequitur question, Mike?

*throws dart at dartboard full of definitions* by that definition of read, yes, I've read about fitness indicators :)

What about fitness?

I thought it was on topic but fuck me, right?

Why 'fuck me'? Just asked if it was non sequitur and I answered, in a self depreciating way, that I'd read about fitness indicators. Just answered as best I could. What was a right answer to give, if not mine?

Philosophy & Science / Re: 'Floating' meaning and music videos
« on: October 21, 2016, 06:33:15 am »
Non sequitur question, Mike?

*throws dart at dartboard full of definitions* by that definition of read, yes, I've read about fitness indicators :)

General Misc. / Re: Waiting til Sep 27, seems
« on: October 19, 2016, 10:09:14 pm »
Just to note: I got it, in the end, on the 11th of October - and so turned more to reading than posting that I had it!

General Earwa / Re: TSA related art and stuff. (VI)
« on: October 09, 2016, 07:52:52 am »
There's a head on a pole behind you. The pole has two sticks for legs and two sticks for arms.

Philosophy & Science / 'Floating' meaning and music videos
« on: October 06, 2016, 07:26:54 pm »
I kind of look at music videos as a way of comparing a lot of other peacock feather activity in culture - a lot of 'look at my fitness indicators, they be fit!' indicators. I say it in a mocking way but with some affection (it's best to keep a sense of humor about things you care for, I think)

Okay, if I were to plot this in tribal terms though - ie, to think where would the behavior be applicable if we were to go back ten thousand years - well, to me dancing around and displaying would be something you do when you have a very solid food supply. Indeed, in order to show you have a very solid food supply (as dancing requires calories, so it's a fairly strong proof demonstration - the starving don't dance).In this context I'd consider this a reasonably functional behavior, myself.

So we can take it in the tribal context that
1. The dancer has a good food supply that they control - enough that they can burn calories on dancing
2. They are dancing - indeed, dancing about their food supply control

So, back to music videos. Taking it to be fitness display behavior and that's why the music and dance is worth a damn to watch. But what about number 1?
1. ?
2. They are dancing and singing

Okay, so maybe you like the band who is in the music video. Okay, so how do they get their food - how do they control their food supply? What is fit about them?

Apart from appearing fit so you buy their CD's and they use that money to buy food and mansions/more display stuff. Which, you realise, has nothing to do with actually being fit - it just has to do with triggering your sense of fitness when that's not the situation at all.

So meaning floats, sheered away from it's anchor #1, that rested in owning a food supply.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 45