OOC: Hi Septimus! Welcome to tazlure and Pax. ;) Firstly, I'd like to say how much I enjoyed your post - it made me laugh a great deal! Well written and entertaining. :) However, may I politely direct you to Roleplaying 101? Which you will find here: Roleplaying 101
I'll have to ask you to edit your post, I'm afraid, since it is against our rules for players to create NPCs (such as your two voices in the Aether and Nether) or to control outside events, beyond the direct control of their actual PC. Please read the rules carefully. ;) Once you've edited I'll be back to get you through the gates asap. Thanks!
OOC: Entrance Thread by Septimus
Moderators: Vanadius, Guido Cercatoro, Mods
-
Finley Ward
- Retired staff
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 10:13 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
-
Guest
OOC: Hello, Finley!
'Focalisation' was a term introduced to narratology by Gerard Genette. The 'focalizer' in a text is he/she/it who perceives exterior circumstance. In a play-by-post game, such as Tazlure, the player commands the focalizer one one character in the discourse (i.e. the thread), namely his pc, and is thus allowed to react in his own way at the exterior world presented by the moderator (by various focalizers, which would be NPCs, and also through the narrator, who is a more neutral phenomen placed (metaphorically speaking) above the focalizers. The narrator delegates right to perspective to the focalizers. For instance:
Here the narrator delegates the perceiving to Peter. In play-by-post, the moderator can delegate perspective to the PC, sure enough, but only in accordance with what the PC wrote in his post, for the focal eye of the PC, the moderator holds no control over. This is very specific for narratology in play-by-post, of course.
Take Immanuel Kant. 'Das ding an sich', 'Das ding für mich'. The moderator may well present the thing an sich, as it is, but how the focalizer (the PC) perceives it, is an entirely different matter. Kant was of the opinion that the perceiver when perceiving would always colour what perceived, colour it into something else than it is an sich...yes, he would colour it into it as das ding für mich...as a focalizer would. Ans as we have already established, I command the focalizer, Septimus, my pc, and so it is up to me how I perceive things. This is in accordance with Kant's epistemology. If you are an empirist, however, you may disagree, perhaps David Hume would have?
In any case, to summarize, the focalizer (Septimus) is absolutely free, and holds absolutely control over his internal perceiving and rebuilding of external circumstance, presented by the moderator. Now I am going to argue that what you call NPCs (the two voices), are merely figments, fragments of Septimus' mind, created in the total intellectual confusion overwhelming the halfling at stepping through the portal. The alternative spatial and temporal dimension I introduced in my post are with no exceptions internal in the focalizer, and so do not violate the 'do not control exterior circumstance'-rule. I attempted clarifying this Septimus' state by the following sentences:
All in all, what I think we need to establish, is whether Tazlure submits to the narratology presented by Gerard Genette, as well deciding whether the epistemological basis for play-by-post lies with Kant, or with the empiricists...or perhaps with the rationalists? I think that under all circumstance any discussion on the matters you point out, Finley, are fruitless before such a philosophical fundament has been established, and it is my very definite opinion that the Roleplaying 101 does not satisfyingly - if at all - treat and presents this problem.
Yours sincerely,
Septimus Doobidoob Quaq
'Focalisation' was a term introduced to narratology by Gerard Genette. The 'focalizer' in a text is he/she/it who perceives exterior circumstance. In a play-by-post game, such as Tazlure, the player commands the focalizer one one character in the discourse (i.e. the thread), namely his pc, and is thus allowed to react in his own way at the exterior world presented by the moderator (by various focalizers, which would be NPCs, and also through the narrator, who is a more neutral phenomen placed (metaphorically speaking) above the focalizers. The narrator delegates right to perspective to the focalizers. For instance:
[Narrator:]The trees were tall. [Focalizer:] Peter [an NPC] looked at them, then said to Septimus [the PC]...
Here the narrator delegates the perceiving to Peter. In play-by-post, the moderator can delegate perspective to the PC, sure enough, but only in accordance with what the PC wrote in his post, for the focal eye of the PC, the moderator holds no control over. This is very specific for narratology in play-by-post, of course.
Take Immanuel Kant. 'Das ding an sich', 'Das ding für mich'. The moderator may well present the thing an sich, as it is, but how the focalizer (the PC) perceives it, is an entirely different matter. Kant was of the opinion that the perceiver when perceiving would always colour what perceived, colour it into something else than it is an sich...yes, he would colour it into it as das ding für mich...as a focalizer would. Ans as we have already established, I command the focalizer, Septimus, my pc, and so it is up to me how I perceive things. This is in accordance with Kant's epistemology. If you are an empirist, however, you may disagree, perhaps David Hume would have?
In any case, to summarize, the focalizer (Septimus) is absolutely free, and holds absolutely control over his internal perceiving and rebuilding of external circumstance, presented by the moderator. Now I am going to argue that what you call NPCs (the two voices), are merely figments, fragments of Septimus' mind, created in the total intellectual confusion overwhelming the halfling at stepping through the portal. The alternative spatial and temporal dimension I introduced in my post are with no exceptions internal in the focalizer, and so do not violate the 'do not control exterior circumstance'-rule. I attempted clarifying this Septimus' state by the following sentences:
And Septimus' mind began to spin. No longer able to separate his own mind from reality (if he ever had), the halfling's world blurred.
All in all, what I think we need to establish, is whether Tazlure submits to the narratology presented by Gerard Genette, as well deciding whether the epistemological basis for play-by-post lies with Kant, or with the empiricists...or perhaps with the rationalists? I think that under all circumstance any discussion on the matters you point out, Finley, are fruitless before such a philosophical fundament has been established, and it is my very definite opinion that the Roleplaying 101 does not satisfyingly - if at all - treat and presents this problem.
Yours sincerely,
Septimus Doobidoob Quaq
-
Maeve
- The Dragon & Game Designer
- Posts: 15536
- Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 1:29 pm
- Location: The Netherlands
I have seperated this from the entrance thread because I don't like to interrupt IC threads with OOC chatter 
May I suggest you discuss in PM what is needed in this IC thread (and for now Finley who is the moderator has the final say on that), and perhaps thake the philosophy to the Q&A for further exploration?
Thank you for your kind consideration
May I suggest you discuss in PM what is needed in this IC thread (and for now Finley who is the moderator has the final say on that), and perhaps thake the philosophy to the Q&A for further exploration?
Thank you for your kind consideration
Last edited by Maeve on Mon Oct 24, 2005 6:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[i][b][color=orange][size=92]Smile and carry a big stick.[/color][/b][/i][/size]