split from the From a BIP reader thread.
Cramulus' Suggestions for forward progress
1. identify the specific sections of the BIP which are considered too dark or too preachy (the two most common complaints about it).
2. modify them on the wiki.
3. take all this stuff and put it in a new PDF-book. In this book the BIP metaphor is mixed in with humorous stuff such as meme bombs, Discordians in History, the Parable of the Gong, a lot of Vex's stuff, and other more "high content / high humor" passages. Add art ranging from crazy cutups to WOMP nonsense to actual art from Fred, Syn, Vex, Silly, and the numerous other skilled artists on this board.
5. profit
Which specific sections of the BIP do you think are too dark or too preachy?
Provide links to the wiki (http://blackironprison.com/). (hm, seems to be down at the moment)
Please note that sections can be "too dark or too preachy" without being poorly written. In the past, I've tried to isolate which parts need editing, but found myself tripped up because a lot of the dark passages are very cool and well written. I don't think any of the original authors will be offended by pointing these passages out as long as we clarify that it's not the writing we're focusing on, but the overall feel.
Was that clear?
If I recall, some of the essays have very little to do with the BIP as a general concept, and more to do with the individual's perception of their own (or their neighbor's) cell.
I will do a quick re-reading, and get back to this.
Yes. I'm assuming when you say "identify" that means it will be publically or privately identified to give the author a chance to plead their case.
Nope.
Especially because I don't remember who the original authors were.
First note: Almost any piece of writing in the "second person" will sound preachy.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 16, 2007, 04:28:55 PM
Yes. I'm assuming when you say "identify" that means it will be publically or privately identified to give the author a chance to plead their case.
Yeah, hopefully people will quote the relevant sections here.
Optimally this discussion won't look like an "attack/defend" game where someone needs to 'plead their case'. In a perfect world filled with rainbows and unicorn farts, the author would suggest changes or rewrite the section himself, and everyone would go "mmhmm mhmm yeah much cooler".
what is preaching?
telling people that they are wrong and you are right?
and as for dark - is it dark when people makes bleak observations?
i mean - on the one hand - we are acknowledging that we are fucked by all conventional standards
so
we take it one step further and take unconventional approaches
1. how to best approach living on a sinking ship
2. suggesting that being 'doomed' (by conventional standards) might not be all as bad as we have been raised (and scared) into thinking it is (aka - fear of the unknown seems to be a irrational fear)
different people have different delivery
some writing seeks to make observations and inform
some writing seeks to motivate
occasionally we get both in one
the real sign of forward progress is the fact that we are posting in a forum where people start threads with titles like 'Forward Progress'
Dark Preaching:
"The world is a shithole and everyone in it are assholes, spewing the shit, and have done for 5000 years, so we're all drowing in other people's shit, which can never be changed, re-arranged, or fixed. AND IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT."
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 16, 2007, 04:38:23 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 16, 2007, 04:28:55 PM
Yes. I'm assuming when you say "identify" that means it will be publically or privately identified to give the author a chance to plead their case.
Yeah, hopefully people will quote the relevant sections here.
Optimally this discussion won't look like an "attack/defend" game where someone needs to 'plead their case'. In a perfect world filled with rainbows and unicorn farts, the author would suggest changes or rewrite the section himself, and everyone would go "mmhmm mhmm yeah much cooler".
Nah, I think it will be civil enough. And while the original authors aren't specifically credited, I'm sure everyone knows what they wrote and what got included. If something's going to be edited I think we could probably go ahead and edit it on the wiki, but just make a reference to it somewhere here so the author can go check it out and then if there is any problem, they can talk it out with whoever changed it.
Being Free (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Being_Free)
QuoteBeing Free/A touch of The Conspiracy/modern bullshit
Haven't you had enough yet? Are you getting sick of it all? You should be. Sickness is our way of life. Take this pill, do this job, but we wont give you enough time to cook, so eat this pre-made meal.
Hey, it may kill you...eventually, but think of the poor starving children in Ethiopia. Sure, your apathy over politics helped contribute to the mess, but think of them! Care for this, eat that, watch this, take your crap, drink your beer and stay smiling. We tell you where to go and what to do.
Tired of being bought and sold like cattle? Are you sheep or goat? Do you want to be led by the nose or do you want to headbutt the herders, then perhaps run amok the flock for a while, scaring the bejeezus out of them?
There's too much of everything nowadays, everything that in a special way is nothing. Keeping up with the neighbours and the fashions while trying to keep up with the bills while having your attention distracted by vacuous twits on the idiot box. It drains you to the point that caring becomes too much of a hassle and the depressives of society become an attractive choice to make.
And that,Äôs exactly how They want it! Tired little sheep kept running by the faithful hounds all day long until they are too tired and submit, they break. Who are They? Nowadays, practically everyone...your boss, your leaders, the media at large, the people responsible for American Idol/X-Factor/fill-in-pointless waste of music reality-TV program here....a huge faceless confederacy constantly trying to sway you this way and that, turn you into a follower of anything.
But you can be free. You can sign your very own Declaration of Independence today, turn the tables on this alliance of idiot leaders who would take you for all you have! How? By ignoring them and taking your own road. Yes, it,Äôs that simple. What has paying them attention ever done, other than distract and depress you? Until you do that, you cannot own yourself, despite having every material need in the world fulfilled. You can live the safe, numbing 'life' of a servant or you can live it how it was meant to be, exciting and terrifying but ultimately free.
I modified it a bit to see how it sounds in the third person:
QuoteBeing Free/A touch of The Conspiracy/modern bullshit
Haven't they had enough yet? Are they getting sick of it all? They should be. Sickness is our way of life. Take this pill, do this job, but we wont give you enough time to cook, so eat this pre-made meal.
Hey, it may kill them... eventually, but think of the poor starving children in Ethiopia. Sure, their apathy over politics helped contribute to the mess, but think of them! Care for this, eat that, watch this, take a crap, drink a beer and stay smiling. The Machine tells them where to go and what to do.
it definitely reads differently. Loses some of its fire I think, because you're no longer appealing directly to the reader.
Do you guys feel this is one of the "preachy" passages? And if so, how can we update it?
This is just my opinion, but I think it loses it's punch when you put it in third person. Plus, one could argue it sets up an "Us" vs. "Them" sceanario. Yeah, I suppose it might be a bit direct, but I personally like it that way. I see it as cutting through the bullshit and telling it like it is. Considering my thread in Or Kill Me, very personally relevent now as well.
Anyway bottom line: I like the original as it is. My two cents.
Yeah, I think I agree with you Rev.
what about Toxicity (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Toxicity)?
That one's always seemed kind of heavy to me, especially in that it "dehumanizes the opposition".
I think it's definitely one of those passages which is illustrating one person's prison rather than helping people out of it.
The last few lines (to the right of the graphic) I think could be cut / replaced.
this is the part I'm talking about--
Quoteare we witnessing some kind of separation occurring? an identifiable type of separation?
do we know what one of 'them' looks like?
a wide-eyed blank stare?
the type that is able to shuffle along?
the type that is able to perk their ears up to take an order?
some of us 'love' some of these beings which brings to light the messiness of the situation - do 'us' and 'them' have a future together?
to say no
implies some drama
some might suggest tragedy
i dont even think i want to continue
any thoughts there LHX?
lawls
to be honest - i think that was just me spouting off in Or Kill Me at around the same time PD06 picked up momentum
im not even sure how it ended up in the BIP in the first place
it was a incomplete rant
i remember being in a foul mood when i wrote it
hence that last line
re-reading it now tho - i guess i could still pose the same question
a study on the physical changes to the eye structure that has spent hours staring at a cell phone display
in all honesty Cram - please cut / paste / edit freely
for me personally i guess its a part of that 'prison' - a desire to reach out to those that cannot be reached
is that the one that had the Masta Killa lines on it?
Page 2 is 2nd person. It,Äôs mine, and if paired with the GSP, it might manage to make it through. On consideration: The ,ÄúJailbreak,Äù meme is misleading, as it implies freedom from prison. Should I leave it in, only to reveal the horrible troof later?
Page 3-4 (Cain?) is good when it talks of the 2 ideology con as it pertains to politics. I think it should stay, but it might needs some punching up to add pizzazz.
Page 5 (Wolfie?) is 2nd person, and preachy, and doesn,Äôt really pertain to the BIP as it is now.
Page 6 (?) is 2nd person, and preachy, and dark. Perhaps a more positive take? The theme so far seems to be 70% life sucks, 20% you,Äôre doing nothing about it, and 10% think for yourself.
Page 7 (?) is like a manifesto. Not much lail, but I think it should stay.
Page 8 (TGRR) is obviously a 2nd person preachy rant. But it,Äôs ironic satire, and it,Äôs got the most lulz content so far. Keep it.
Page 9 (?) is 2nd person, and a bit condescending. Dump it.
Page 10-11 (?) is 2nd person, and preachy. Could be made more conversational, and more an explanation of how to throw a wrench in the Machine,Ñ¢ by ,Äúwaking up,Äù.
Page 12 (TGRR) is like Page 8. Consider placing further away from previous rant.
Page 13 (?) is 2nd person, dark, and preachy. Dump it.
Pages 14-15 are 2nd person, and intellectually condescending. But I wrote it, so I want to keep it in there. Feel free to argue this point.
Pages 16-17 (LHX?) are dark, but with a lot of content in the spaces between the words. I suggest changing the last line, or adding a few more lines to end it differently.
Pages 18-19 (?) can probably be split between the 1st paragraph and the rest of it. The premise ,ÄúExistence is not based on the Truth,Äù needs to be explained better.
Page 20 (RWHN) is 2nd person, and preachy. Also, it doesn,Äôt really say much, just tells the reader they,Äôre sheep.
Pages 21-22 (?) are the same. I get the feeling that when a lot of us were writing this, we were pissed off, and wanted to piss other people off, if for no other reason than to make them feel something.
Pages 23-24 (ECH) is 2nd person, but mostly talks about themselves, and even offers some advice. It might need a little cleaning up, but it,Äôs got good content.
Page 25-26 (Cain?) has a good point, but ends rather flat. The narrator isn,Äôt motivated to act, as much of the previous pages have extorted us to do so. Ending should be revised.
Page 27 (?) states the problem well, but skimps when it comes to the solution. More of that, please.
Now, I,Äôll suffer the beatings from the authors I just slagged.
Re: Toxicity
yeah, it begins with the Masta Killa line
how do you feel it should be modified / streamlined?
at the risk of being critical, I don't really think it belongs in the BIP material. I think it could be edited to fit better. In my opinion, a good edit might
-illustrate that Us and Them are the same people. This heightens the need to recognize Them - so we can avoid those traps
-focus on that idea of toxicity and bring it somewhere. Like how periodically it is necessary to purge toxic waste out of our systems.
I'd take a stab at it LHX, but I'm not sure I can match your tone and style.
Quote from: LMNO on July 16, 2007, 06:05:45 PM
Page 2 is 2nd person. It,Äôs mine, and if paired with the GSP, it might manage to make it through. On consideration: The ,ÄúJailbreak,Äù meme is misleading, as it implies freedom from prison. Should I leave it in, only to reveal the horrible troof later?
Yeah I think that can stay. The hopeful though futile jailbreak is a complex idea that should be introduced in stages.
QuotePage 3-4 (Cain?) is good when it talks of the 2 ideology con as it pertains to politics. I think it should stay, but it might needs some punching up to add pizzazz.
I agree, I think this is a really strong section.
QuotePage 5 (Wolfie?) is 2nd person, and preachy, and doesn,Äôt really pertain to the BIP as it is now.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Scum (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Scum)[/quote]
I didn't like that passage either. Possibly because I don't like being called Scum over and over again. Too grim and condescending to become a part of my worldview. I vote for moving this to the literature section rather than the core BIP section.
more commentary later
Page 20 is mine. I would disagree that it doesn't say anything. I do however concede that it could be altered for better flow. I shall undertake this myself and post the results.
man
looking back at this
i dont even remember how we put it together in the first place
everybody being on almost the same page at almost the same time was a real rarity it seems
OR
maybe its just a matter of figuring out what the common denominator between all of us is
and firing from there
also -
i penned p. 7 and 9 i think
agreed, it seemed to be a real lightning in a bottle sort of thing. Were we all pissed off at that time? What pissed us off? Can we get they, them, it to piss us off again?
RWHN, Let me expand on page 20:
I think there's too much "you're a fucking sheep."
I think there's not enough, "we want to give you the vision to see your cell."
I also think the form could use a readjustment; we all seem to have a rant style that goes:
Situation.
Situation.
Problem.
Situation.
Problem.
Problem.
Problem.
BIG FUCKING PROBLEM.
SOLUTION!!!
I'm thinking that maybe you can sprinkle "solution" into the "Situation" or "Problem" sections, and not leave it for the end.
Yeah I got you. I think it was a case of delving into the poetry of the metaphors and getting a little lost.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 16, 2007, 05:41:15 PMPlus, one could argue it sets up an "Us" vs. "Them" sceanario
actually, from a marketing point of view this might not even be such a bad idea at all.
when a reader reads it as an "Us" vs "Them" problem, he is subconsciously more likely to position himself in the "Us" category, and thereby more susceptible to whatever we say about the problem.
i dunno it seems like a sound theory, but maybe people with a background in persuasive writing/speaking can explore this.
oh, and afterwards it's just a question of whacking the "I'm better than They" idea out of them as hard as you can, but if they really "got" it by then, it shouldn't be so hard.
LHX Said:
> i dont even remember how we put it together in the first place
well as we can see from looking at the pamphlet now, it was also a big part due to the fact that LMNO just took whatever he could get his hands on and put it inside a Word document.
TBH, i think that last bit is all that stands in between us and the next pamphlet. there's enough writing and art, always has been.
Heh. Looking back a year later, really looking, I did a really shoddy job of hacking this all together.
But I wanted to have some product, so I did what I could.
and the lesson learned?
better hack together a shoddy job while the momentum is there, than wait eternally for perfection.
strike while the iron is hot.
Quote from: triple zero on July 16, 2007, 06:57:10 PM
and the lesson learned?
better hack together a shoddy job while the momentum is there, than wait eternally for perfection.
strike while the iron is black.
Nothing wrong with using the services of DIY Express.
Besides, I'm a bit of a sentimental softy for the original anyway.
But I can see how honing it isn't a bad idea either.
It seems to me that there's still a question of what this pamphlet is supposed to do.
Right now, to me, it reads as an angry anarchist manifesto. If that's what the authors what it to be, then that's great... but it's doesn't feel like an updated PD. The PD, as far as I can tell, doesn't try to convert the reader... it simply invades the readers consciousness and plants ideas. BIP invades the readers consciousness and says "YOU ARE WRONG. THEY ARE WRONG. WAKE UP, YOU BASTARD."
Maybe the BIP's bleak and jagged edge would make a good Discordian manifesto, without being billed as "updated PD".
Perhaps we could consider the Black Iron Prison to be the darker companion to whatever an updated PD might be? Perhaps a preachy, second person Rant would be fine, and people that would prefer something less dark and more PDish, could begin work on the companion release.
Just a thought.
From my perspective, being that of a chaotic rodent and applicable nowhere except my own neurological system, the contributors of BIP seem to be using a fundamentally different tool than what the PD Does/Did/May Do... if thats the case, it may not be a rewrite it needs... just a quick polish and a companion horse of a different color.
A manifesto-ish addition to an updated PD is actually pretty similar to what I've been envisioning lately as I've been slowly ruminating on gathering a bunch of different things from these parts. That's an approach to it I can really get behind, especially since it seems to me to be a significant metaphore worthy of examination. However, it seems like an accompaniment rather than a full-fleged thing, even if it is fully capable of standing by its own merits.
Maybe sprinkling it inside whatever updating actually happens with the PD updating should be the goal to strive for, or adding it as an appendix, or using it as an introduction of sorts. Regardless, I'd love to see it included SOMEWHERE since it IS very powerful as a metaphore.
another off-topic tangent from vex:
it would seem that whatever we produce, we need to narrow down (and even define, gods forbid) a Target Audience.
because writing stuff that applies to everybody means you have to water it down a lot.
the Internet gives a lot of options as far as who you want to talk to. but actually society hasn't been that much changed by the internet. you can talk to whoever you want, but just like in the 60s, only subcultures on speaking terms with yours are going to listen.
seems to me that a lot of recent discordian stuff, mine included, is aimed at Everybody Out There, or tries to attack the mainstream, which is noble and everything, but it's also pretty futile. if we're going to attack and assimilate, we should spread like a weed, starting with smaller and more similar groups.
subversion works best not by direct assault but by infiltration. we should be producing a few different tracts and pamphlets all aimed at more specific audiences. for example bring up the "similarities" between discordianism and the pagans, then use those similarities to twist their opinions about things.
as for conversion, it's easy to convert people to discordianism. you just confuse them, but give them a good reason to stay confused. we don't have to sell a worldview, we just have to take theirs away.
youth who already dont trust authority and the legacy of ineptitude that led to today
check out my edit of Toxicity
http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Toxicity (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Toxicity)
history of changes noted here: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Toxicity&diff=432&oldid=380 (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Toxicity&diff=432&oldid=380)
thoughts?
hm this is a direction to go for a shoddy hack, it seems!
let's forget about the subjects of the rants/writings and just throw them all on different piles according to target audience.
(the real "good" stuff can appear in multiple piles, so everybody can have a taste)
what kind of different target audiences can we distinguish?
- everybody
- "fuck the government" anarchist puberty kids
- people who just been screwed over by the government (think medical insurance, or lack thereof)
- jaded discordians
- people who are just angry in general at shit
- mindhackers
- people looking for a "balanced" grid (equilibrium), in a way (put the more zenhippie sort of yes/no/maybe/nothing is true kind of stuff in this category)
- occultists that don't take themselves too seriously
- people who enjoy hiphop (strange to put here like that but i think it's a useful niche, somehow)
please expand on this list. notice i didn't put "MTV kids" or "consumerzombies" in the list, because i generated it from a general idea of "what sort of rants/writings have we had so far", and the consumerzombies usually get operation assfucked, and won't read our stuff anyway, as a consumerzombie.
Quote from: triple zero on July 16, 2007, 07:43:29 PM
hm this is a direction to go for a shoddy hack, it seems!
let's forget about the subjects of the rants/writings and just throw them all on different piles according to target audience.
(the real "good" stuff can appear in multiple piles, so everybody can have a taste)
what kind of different target audiences can we distinguish?
- everybody
- "fuck the government" anarchist puberty kids
- people who just been screwed over by the government (think medical insurance, or lack thereof)
- jaded discordians
- people who are just angry in general at shit
- mindhackers
- people looking for a "balanced" grid (equilibrium), in a way (put the more zenhippie sort of yes/no/maybe/nothing is true kind of stuff in this category)
- occultists that don't take themselves too seriously
- people who enjoy hiphop (strange to put here like that but i think it's a useful niche, somehow)
please expand on this list. notice i didn't put "MTV kids" or "consumerzombies" in the list, because i generated it from a general idea of "what sort of rants/writings have we had so far", and the consumerzombies usually get operation assfucked, and won't read our stuff anyway, as a consumerzombie.
:mittens:
One thing that appears to have been useful for the PD was current event references as perceived from a nonsensical angle. (The telegraph to Jehova for example, or precious Mao buttons).
Could we find similar current events that might be useful? Something along the lines of
"Mr. Hussein, we've hidden the WMD's in the minds of our enemies. They will never find them now!"
i think we got enough of those references automatically.
no need to put it in on purpose, i think.
also, as i have noted in the past, it tends to make most writings a bit americanocentric. which makes it harder for me to distribute here. almost everybody here can read english fine, but if there's a lot of "american" stuff in there, it makes people think "o this applies not to me, but to those poor sods on the other side of the pond".
Part of the problem with "rewriting the PD" is that writing funny shit is fucking hard. Ranting and preaching are much easier to write down and convey emotions via the written word. Funny, however, is more subjective and difficult to convey without additional stimulus (whether it's vocal inflection, images, gestures, or anything else) and tends to be the sticking point for anything we come up with.
I think Prof's parable of the gong did an excellent job of bringing the funny into the conceptual ideas we're trying to update, but writing that kind of thing is ... difficult at best. Humor - even the artful pun - is no easy task to convey in print.
It's a great goal to work for, and definitely something to make an effort to include more of. However, it takes much more effort than a simple rant or sermon (not that those methods are inherently easy - they definitely seem to be easier for US, though) to get a message out there WITH the funny.
i dunno, i've always thought that it's because the average poster who writes rants or essays is more inclined to write rantings and preachings. not that humor is more difficult to write by itself.
in high school i drew lots and lots of cartoons. i had no problem with the funny. the trick is just to write it down anyway, even if it's not funny. you can pick out the best ones later.
Well, it's not just that it has to be funny, it also has to be funny with a specific purpose.
Yes, I should have been a bit clearer about that - I did, in fact, mean funny with purpose rather than just funny as well as rant with purpose rather than just rant and sermons with purpose rather than just sermons.
Funny with a message is an art form all its own, one that I'm not as well versed with and the style that seems to be least common to the boards here from what I've seen.
Yup. I think The Funnay is in full effect on these boards, but when it comes time to infuse it with some Discordiansim, it just doesn't seem to happen. It is really hard.
continuing my response to LMNO's earlier post.
Quote from: LMNO on July 16, 2007, 06:05:45 PM
Page 6 (?) is 2nd person, and preachy, and dark. Perhaps a more positive take? The theme so far seems to be 70% life sucks, 20% you,Äôre doing nothing about it, and 10% think for yourself.
agreed. Can we bump it up to 50% think for yourself?
here's the part which seems darkest--
QuoteYour on your own mate, nobody gives a shit about you or your life.
Everybody you know, have known and will know want something from
you. Your boss, your partner, the guy down the street. All they see
when they look at you is what they can get from you. You do the
same damn thing to them.
Don't give em any of that denial crap, if you spend five seconds being
honest with yourself you'll see I'm right.
It's the great rat race mate, or if your gonna get martial about it,
rattenkrieg. You,Äôre a tool and that's how anybody will ever see you,
even me.
hmmm looking around I can't even find that passage on the BIP wiki. Maybe it got left out?
QuotePage 7 (?) is like a manifesto. Not much lail, but I think it should stay.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Who_wrote_this (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Who_wrote_this)
yes, the only thing that I would change is the threat at the end.
Instead of
QuoteThe history of the entire known universe and a long legacy of philosophical and scientific exploration has resulted in this effort to get you to do some critical thinking. And if you turn it down, then we are gonna come get you. And it's gonna hurt.
I'd like to change it to
Quote...And if you turn it down, you're gonna get left behind. You've gotta catch up on your own. Because no one's turning back to save you.
QuotePage 8 (TGRR) is obviously a 2nd person preachy rant. But it,Äôs ironic satire, and it,Äôs got the most lulz content so far. Keep it.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=WHAT_THE_HELL_DO_YOU_THINK_YOU%27RE_DOING (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=WHAT_THE_HELL_DO_YOU_THINK_YOU%27RE_DOING)
agreed. TGRR's preaching brings the fire & brimstone!
QuotePage 9 (?) is 2nd person, and a bit condescending. Dump it.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=What_the_hell_are_you_reading (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=What_the_hell_are_you_reading)
disagree. Page 9 is the most straightforward piece in the pamphlet.
I'd remove "Despite the fact that most of what you read in here threatens the current system we live in", because it sounds a bit big for its britches.
I think the passage would read better in the third person.
QuotePage 10-11 (?) is 2nd person, and preachy. Could be made more conversational, and more an explanation of how to throw a wrench in the Machine,Ñ¢ by ,Äúwaking up,Äù.
good call.
I'd ditch the part about dreams of societal reawakening. It works really well if the target audience is purely Discordians. This brings us back to the big Audience question. For now let's try to push it neutral and we can adapt once we've picked an audience.
I also don't like the Kill Yourself Fuck The Body part
QuotePage 12 (TGRR) is like Page 8. Consider placing further away from previous rant.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=THERE_IS_NO_CONSPIRACY (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=THERE_IS_NO_CONSPIRACY)
good call
QuotePage 13 (?) is 2nd person, dark, and preachy. Dump it.
agree. I do like it, but it's kind of redundant by page 13.
QuotePages 14-15 are 2nd person, and intellectually condescending. But I wrote it, so I want to keep it in there. Feel free to argue this point.
where I like this passage, I think it would be better if it didn't use physical limitations to explore the metaphor. This passage literally implies that my reality would be cooler if I could be constantly aware of the exact temperature of my shoes, and vague shit in my peripheral vision.
QuotePages 16-17 (LHX?) are dark, but with a lot of content in the spaces between the words. I suggest changing the last line, or adding a few more lines to end it differently.
see my previous post on this topic
QuotePages 18-19 (?) can probably be split between the 1st paragraph and the rest of it. The premise ,ÄúExistence is not based on the Truth,Äù needs to be explained better.
yes
QuotePage 20 (RWHN) is 2nd person, and preachy. Also, it doesn,Äôt really say much, just tells the reader they,Äôre sheep.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=A_Conclusion_is_Simply_Where_You_Stopped_Thinking (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=A_Conclusion_is_Simply_Where_You_Stopped_Thinking)
"A Conclusion is simply where you stopped thinking" is a really important concept IMO. I think this passage would read better in the third person.
QuotePages 21-22 (?) are the same. I get the feeling that when a lot of us were writing this, we were pissed off, and wanted to piss other people off, if for no other reason than to make them feel something.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=What_Is_It_With_You_People%3F (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=What_Is_It_With_You_People%3F)
I vote for cutting this.
QuotePages 23-24 (ECH) is 2nd person, but mostly talks about themselves, and even offers some advice. It might need a little cleaning up, but it,Äôs got good content.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=BIP_Page_23 (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=BIP_Page_23)
agree. Could use some cleanup but it's a nice passage. Specifically, I'd strike "here on this website, talking about this goddess".
QuotePage 25-26 (Cain?) has a good point, but ends rather flat. The narrator isn,Äôt motivated to act, as much of the previous pages have extorted us to do so. Ending should be revised.
agree - this is a hopeless passage which could end really strong with some Get Off Your Ass NOW!
I also question whether or not humans were rational, even before reality TV. But that's more of a longer content related question than a general cleanup/streamlining.
Quote
Page 27 (?) states the problem well, but skimps when it comes to the solution. More of that, please.
link: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Life_Without_Fences (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Life_Without_Fences)
agree
Tomorrow I'll talk about pages 14-15.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 16, 2007, 08:36:01 PM
here's the part which seems darkest--
QuoteYour on your own mate, nobody gives a shit about you or your life.
Everybody you know, have known and will know want something from
you. Your boss, your partner, the guy down the street. All they see
when they look at you is what they can get from you. You do the
same damn thing to them.
Don't give em any of that denial crap, if you spend five seconds being
honest with yourself you'll see I'm right.
It's the great rat race mate, or if your gonna get martial about it,
rattenkrieg. You’re a tool and that's how anybody will ever see you,
even me.
hmmm looking around I can't even find that passage on the BIP wiki. Maybe it got left out?
seems to be a viewpoint from a very particular reality grid. couldn't it be slightly rotated (gridwise) to say the same thing from a different perspective?
wow ... lots happening ... trying to read thru this and get some real work done at the same time
just another thought on the idea of fictionalising the BIP so that it comes from an anonymous author in 1st person ... the parts that seem preachy, coming from another inmate or from a prison guard, etc ... would still use the words "You", but would have a slight removea from the actual reader as being directed at the writer, not the reader. There is a subtle line that can walked where the changing from the "you" to the "me" as both meaning the writer can allow the reader to identify with the author and at the same time allow a level of seperation in the "preachy" bits.
anyway, trying to do some real work that I get paid for ...
On Pages 14-15.
I see what you mean that there is a tacit implication that it would be better not to filter our sensations at all, that it would be best to experience all our sensations all at once. Which is in no way what I,Äôm trying to say.
So, I,Äôm gonna add a few more paragraphs after the line, ,ÄúWe construct our actions and reactions to this 1% of available information, and reject everything else in the Universe.,Äù
It will contain:
~ The infeasibility of action should we experience everything.
~ The way our mental state and education (conditioning) affects perceptions
~ How this makes each person,Äôs perceptions different, but not necessarily wrong.
also, even if your senses could perceive 100% of the information, your brain simply lacks the capacity to deal with more than 1% of it anyway.
Yup.
Although, I have had some peak LSD trips that made it seem like I was perceiving everything all at once.
It completely immobilized me.
Quote from: LMNO on July 17, 2007, 01:42:02 PM
On Pages 14-15.
I see what you mean that there is a tacit implication that it would be better not to filter our sensations at all, that it would be best to experience all our sensations all at once. Which is in no way what I,Äôm trying to say.
So, I,Äôm gonna add a few more paragraphs after the line, ,ÄúWe construct our actions and reactions to this 1% of available information, and reject everything else in the Universe.,Äù
It will contain:
~ The infeasibility of action should we experience everything.
~ The way our mental state and education (conditioning) affects perceptions
~ How this makes each person,Äôs perceptions different, but not necessarily wrong.
Maybe its not that we would be best served with NO filters, but rather that we may be best served by malleable filters, rather than keeping the same filters all of the time. You might also include some examples of how to manipulate those filters. Peter Carroll's concept of dice decided religion, or RAW's Quarter experiment... or something completely new that works in a similar fashion?
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 17, 2007, 04:19:50 PM
Peter Carroll's concept of dice decided religion
I don't want to jack my own thread, but can you elaborate on that?
I went about six months when I made nearly all my decisions based on die rolls.
It was awesome and suck at the same time.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 17, 2007, 04:27:20 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 17, 2007, 04:19:50 PM
Peter Carroll's concept of dice decided religion
I don't want to jack my own thread, but can you elaborate on that?
I went about six months when I made nearly all my decisions based on die rolls.
It was awesome and suck at the same time.
"The Dice Man" Awesome book.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 17, 2007, 04:27:20 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 17, 2007, 04:19:50 PM
Peter Carroll's concept of dice decided religion
I don't want to jack my own thread, but can you elaborate on that?
I went about six months when I made nearly all my decisions based on die rolls.
It was awesome and suck at the same time.
One of the recommended exercises that Pete recommends for Chaos Magicians is a paradigm shift sort of exercise. Basically you list six (assuming you only use a six sided die) different religions/political philosophies/etc. then at some regular interval (monthly maybe?) you roll the dice and adopt the belief system that matches. The trick is in really trying to accept the belief system, even if it disagrees with your usual views (trying to be a republican was not easy, but being a socialist as even more difficult. However, it was kinda scary how much I could agree with whatever system by the end of the month. ;-)
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 17, 2007, 04:19:50 PM
Quote from: LMNO on July 17, 2007, 01:42:02 PM
On Pages 14-15.
I see what you mean that there is a tacit implication that it would be better not to filter our sensations at all, that it would be best to experience all our sensations all at once. Which is in no way what I,Äôm trying to say.
So, I,Äôm gonna add a few more paragraphs after the line, ,ÄúWe construct our actions and reactions to this 1% of available information, and reject everything else in the Universe.,Äù
It will contain:
~ The infeasibility of action should we experience everything.
~ The way our mental state and education (conditioning) affects perceptions
~ How this makes each person,Äôs perceptions different, but not necessarily wrong.
Maybe its not that we would be best served with NO filters, but rather that we may be best served by malleable filters, rather than keeping the same filters all of the time. You might also include some examples of how to manipulate those filters. Peter Carroll's concept of dice decided religion, or RAW's Quarter experiment... or something completely new that works in a similar fashion?
For now, this is just a way of showing people the bars in their cells, and how each persons' cell is different.
The BIP pamphlet, at first, was only supposed to show the reader the bars. Reconstruction was to be the next step.
Maybe you should consider bringing Martha Stuart onboard. She would have to have many tips on redecorating one's prison cell.