. Spinning .

Feeling much better about some personal matters, and have a bit of faith developing in justice and the law.  My lawyer seems to have suddenly realized that my dramatics are based upon a passion for and some knowledge of fairness rather than menopausal hot flashes or an innate sense of overreacting or greed.

What I’m learning is tolerance and acceptance of different ethical standards that will broaden my repertoire of characters.  In Storytron, there is a dependence upon the "original" writer understanding and providing a huge variety of character traits and tendencies.  This is the premise behind the whole program; that people are not only very different in their beliefs and values, but that they will react differently to different situations that may not necessarily be their normally expected behavior.  Ethics is teaching me that there is no definite right or wrong reaction in many situations that call for a morally based decision. 

While I’m semi-abandoning Storytron for now–mainly because I found it too time-consuming to learn, but it also rubbed my writing instinct the wrong way.  Perhaps just my current mood and creative bent that overwhelms Barthes in his insistence on making the writer the reader; it is a wholly worthwhile theory and practice, and yet there is value as well–in my mind, at least–in the writer who entertains as a solo performer and doesn’t require total audience input to be effective.  After all, my interpretation of Willie singing and playing would most certainly not be enhanced by my singing alongside in harmony.

For this moment in time, Storytron is the setting up of the tent and tables before the party.  The pain in the ass part of the show.

In learning new media methods and means via both background technical aspects in order to write to it, and by addressing it as a reader, I am beginning to suspect that not only writer consideration of the diversity of potential user but of attitude as well must be taken into account.

In reading Marquez, as noted, I’m perhaps not getting the full value of even this linear text.  What mental frame of mind is keeping me on the single path of meaning?  Why, with this novel, am I not flying above or below the words, zig-zagging to create something more from the sentences? 

I am reluctant to face mine enemies in Silent Hill 2.  I remember stopping at a breathtaking point where I can see them coming at me.  When I check the date at which I stopped my earnest gameplay, it seems to coincide with a time in reality that threatened. 

In learning the technique of writing story in new media format (and just to clarify process, I refer to the original producer as writer/writing, and the end player as reader/user–even while this as well is a writer/writing position as defined by Barthes) it will not be enough to stretch one’s mind to encompass one’s own questions of direction, but to take in as well the wealth of audience in experience, knowledge, intellect, and mood.

Storytron is one means of opening up that process that will bring characters and drama beyond the realm of writer knowledge.  While still limiting characters to the experience or curiousity of the writer in endowing them with certain characteristics, the actual stepping in of character reaction that decides the drama will offer the likelihood of something akin to mood.  Example: Fred will react to a greeting in a particular manner if he leans in a certain direction when accompanied by his dog.

Looking at the possibilities opens up a whole new venture in writing and reading.  Will Marquez today be Marquez tomorrow?

First, on Facade:  Just another little experiment with the program, that of minimalizing interactivity–totally against the purpose of the piece.  Responded to questions from Grace or Trip, but with basic yes or no answers.  At the first sign of the arguments between them, I said I would be leaving.  Heading towards the door, they carried on their conversation, and I found myself unable to actually open their apartment door and leave for a while.  Did manage to get out and into the hall, but again, found it difficult to enter the elevator, thus escaping the scene.  At first, Trip and Grace tried to convince me I was responsible and should help them out, but then my determination overwhelmed their resolve and they suggested I leave.  Interesting, Trip actually followed me out to the hall before going back into his apartment and closing the door.

On Storytron, I find I need to read some more of the bulletin board postings so that some of my questions may be answered as they arise.  For example, last night I tried to put in a new actor, according to my own storyline, and when I went to "save" that scene, found that the program could not be called up again and had to reinstall it.  I am interested in how the system will work in accumulating information, and find no information in the tutorials as yet about this factor.

Playing and learning; learning and playing some more.

Though I’m not quite ready–and neither is the SWAT program–I’m going to follow a suggestion made and enter the characters and storyline into SWAT and use them as the learning base.  It may provide a more intimate and focused grounding in which to work.

By using characters of my own making, and with a general plot it mind, it will eliminate some of the random decisions that would likely be made in deciding traits of the characters provided which I have no connection or feeling for (Atilla?).  Being even that more precise in making my way through such a wide and complicated structure as the program offers will no doubt be more telling in the final result.

This part of the SWAT progam, getting used to the decisions and menus and buttons and what they represent, is likely the most difficult; especially with this, what one would assume to be the simplest part: Putting together two actors with a simple verb action.  But the possibilities in outcome are tremendous–thus assuring reader/user interest, and so the writer must adjust to keep in mind not only how to accumulate and offer a myriad of responses, but to put some effort in learning how to establish that while learning the program.

I am admittedly lost.

One of the frustrations for me is that in following the tutorial (either one of two), I don’t get the same pulldown menus, nor does the program change to resemble what is in the tutorial.  The instructions, while explicit, needfully jump around themselves to follow one line of learning or another, and then too, I would have appreciated working with the same premise throughout rather than a couple different examples to simplify and confirm the learning process.  The "or you could" method isn’t working well for one so scatterminded to begin with.

I really need that cabin in the woods with no tv or phone but with internet connection for about a week to hunker down and really learn this thing.  I’m beginning to suspect that I’m a slow learner, perhaps even a bit dense, despite all high academic gradings I’ve received since kindergarten.

One of the things that is helpful in mixing media forms and exploring them simultaneously is that it focuses on the means and method and necessarily questions the purpose.

What then, is the lure of the story in text only form?  I don’t think I’ve ever described a book as exciting, but rather interesting or well-written or as appealing toan emotion of feeling or causing deeper thinking in reaction.

Do I care about my character in Silent Hill 2?  Enough to not want him (me as player) to get killed–but even that is in relation to the goal.  If he gets killed–and it’s happened many times–I don’t feel bad, I feel frustrated and go back to the saved portion of the game while he was still alive and replay it to avoid his getting killed.  Because if he dies, the story is over.

Just random thoughts here, but just as I am learning about new media methods, I think I need to focus on what I take for granted about the old.  While adventure stories are certainly the focus of story in book form, we tend to relate to the characters in what they’re going through to make it a more meaningful experience in reading. 

I also need to really get into Barthes’ S/Z to consider his thoughts and the reasoning behind reader interactivity that has helped spawn new media.  Maybe sometimes we’d rather just sit back and read a master storyteller craft story.

I’ve mentioned this before, but after working a bit more in the IF piece, Book and Volume, it appears that we’re on the right track towards seeking drama through relationship rather than action alone if we are indeed seeking to enhance and expand new media to emulate the pull of narrative story.

In IF, while the interactive portion is based on dialogue between the player and the game by typing in text directives and receiving information–similar in some ways to instant messaging, the story itself is action.  We must walk (or run) and complete some tasks to achieve a goal, with impediments placed in our path that must be overcome.  Same thing with the majority of video gaming.  There is none to very little relating to the "people" we meet along the way above discovering if they are there to help or to hinder the player in his goals.  Storytron, may or may not be a different approach, in that the action is supposedly based on definitive action/reaction of the players.

I also can’t help thinking about the way that life imitates art in this new means of story.  Survivor, Amazing Race, Big Brother (although this certainly is based more on relationships), and the new Treasure Hunt, are part of the phenomenon of "reality" TV, which has people scampering about collecting clues and competing to reach a final winning spot and maybe a million dollars.  It is sort of contradictory to me to call them "reality" shows however, when in reality, most people just don’t do any of these things.  The "reality" part is merely in replacing actors with non-actors who are not prescripted nor directed in the action.  And drama is still based on action, near constant action.  Unless they’re eating a bug of some sort, there is no interest in showing much dinner conversation.

There’s still a long way to go on entertainment via story.  Movies and TV enhanced book format with audio/visuals, allowing the stories that held our attention to be brought to a different form and fill in the imagery by providing it.  I think here that it is actually this complete form of control, beyond the book form that allowed us to picture the characters and settings with just a bit of help from the author, has had more to do with the intense interest in readerly story and interactive need than books themselves. 

But the writing of these stories, the reading of them to include interactive use in new media methods such as Storytron, the tools and the end results, still have a long way to go.

Maybe it’s me, but I find that while the tutorials and informaton on the Storytron site do explain things pretty well, I need additional right-at-hand condensed notes.

I did make a manual up for all Storytron info, but in addition, I’m putting together a glossary and get this–a map of some sort to again, have all the info on a single sheet and handy.  Sort of "the dummy’s guide" to Storytron.

While I do wish the software for the program itself were already available, I probably would not be ready yet to play it until I’m more at ease with the writing end of it, which is the SWAT portion of the whole picture.  I do think that it was wise for the creators to offer it at this early stage; it will be helpful to both them for feedback and the user for practice.  I’m hopeful however that the rest will be forthcoming soon.

A large part of the initial problem in learning Storytron is the language used within the program–and I’m not questioning the choice of the creators; in fact, I trust that they have explored all possibilities and for the program to open itself up to full use, the language was carefully considered.  Therefore, and they do warn of this, a writer or user must first spend quite a bit of time learning and often relearning or reassigning meaning to words used in the commands.  "Role" for example, means point of view, and it will take into consideration who and how any particular character will react in an event.

The "Event" is the situation or current action, and must consist of subject, verb, and direct object.  In Storytron, the subject will always be a character, as will the direct object–people relating to people.

Operators are programs using arguments to come up with output.  But the arguments are not disagreements per se, but possibilities that either match or don’t match.

It’s all very confusing and the learning process–for me, at least–is slowing down the actual working with the SWAT program.

Not unusual; I remember having trouble with some literary terms that seemed contrary to their less formal or colloquial use.  It takes a while and almost a conscious effort to remember that this doesn’t mean this here, but means that instead.

As far as selecting a story or scenario, I’m going to work a bit on this story, Faith, and prepare it for when I’m ready to really start working with Storytron on a more defined basis once I am more comfortable with the controls.  While it is obviously way too soon to write the story for the program, I think that if I use the situation and the characters planned for this story in the learning process then I will have some sort of framework for the verbweb and idea of characters in mind rather than randomly selecting options.  It should, if I’m guessing correctly, add focus to the learning and perhaps give clues along the way of how the program is working together to form a cohesive whole.

I played another round of Facade this morning, and rather than aggressive play, was more passive in my responses.  Of course, after you’ve played a few games you do catch on to the restrictive manner of interactivity; the program is cued for certain catch or key words, such as "divorce" say, and in effect, what really decides the turn of events is your responses to specific questions that Grace or Trip ask the player/reader. 

What they’re looking for is a yes/no answer that will decide, according to the coded input, if you are agreeing with Grace or disagreeing; so that each of the two main characters more or less are on a "point" system that the character will recount back to you verbally and you realize that there and then, their next moves have been prescripted.  It’s all about taking sides (which ain’t such a good thing to do particularly in the marital arguments between a couple who are your friends).

Storytron is going to be much more diverse and unknowable to even the writer as the key actions are built upon each preceding action without as limiting a range of true/false statements.  It’s not clear to me as yet–I have to read and learn some more–exactly how the twists and turns of character responses will tie in to each other but the potential for variety is great. 

Never though, is the creator/writer completely without some measure of control.

This thought came up in a discussion but wanted to include it here as part of the new media and Storytron postings for record purposes.

The main attraction of work such as Half Life 2, Silent Hill series, etc., is not just in quest but also in action.  Storytron appears to be based on choices of action and reaction, though not flashing lasers in confrontations and fast-paced chases and escapes, but rather story.  But there is still the question of constant action and while for some this provides the satisfaction of play, when we are looking to refine new media by the inclusion of story, non-stop action may not be what we’re looking for. 

In traditional text, as well as film story, pacing is a vital element used effectively to enhance the experience.  While I’ve left my protagonist standing in front of a closed door in Silent Hill for example because I suspected there was trouble on the other side and it gave me (as me, in my reality) time to catch my breath and prepare, game play would dictate that I open that door as soon as I come to it. 

Some measure of pacing is built into these storygames–walking the streets or exploring rooms–but there is always the level of anticipation cranked up to high.  If you don’t move the character around within the storyworld, or, as in Facade, interact with the players, it just doesn’t work. 

Maybe all I’m discovering here is that is some ways at least, text in book form may hold some advantages in both writing and reading story.

I realize that in pursuing this project while in the middle of exploring the reading and writing of hyperfiction will cause some  conflicts in thinking and planning, even while the two are of the same purpose–that Storytron is in fact hyperfiction in its visual form–that purpose being to allow reader interactivity and creative input.  But a thought just occurred to me relative to my recent questions about the element of timeline within Storytron. 

My approach to writing in hyperfiction, in preparation of application using Flash8, was directly related to place in time, past, present and future, and the links themselves were based on words that held relevance in the stories of those time periods:  corn, eggs, sleep, etc.  In other words, the main characters involved were three people affected by their choices in their past and how their present was affected and naturally, their future will be. 

But in Storytron, unless I haven’t gotten to that element yet and it hasn’t been made clear, the paths do not go beyond the immediate (except perhaps in speculation), nor link back to past actions.  While it is not necessarily a big drawback if I find this to indeed be the case, it is again a restriction of the medium, just as the environment or setting appears to be limited to the stage area.

I may, of course, be wrong in this and merely have not explored deeply enough to discover the possibilities.  But it sure shoots the opportunity of using this particular work in Storytron all to hell.  It is obvious that certain story type must be geared to the medium, and specific mediums are particularly suited to certain stories.

This, from Storytron’s "Experience of Creating a Storyworld":

As you can see, storybuilding is nothing like any other artistic endeavor. Everything here is done at a higher level: Instead of creating a story, you create dramatic possibilities. Instead of planning a character’s behavior, you imbue an Actor with a unique personality, and send them into the storyworld to behave according to it. Instead of creating a plotline, you define special principles that maintain the narrative’s form. You do all this knowing that your storyworld will be played by countless people, each of which will have a unique experience on each playing. Thereby, you will reach that player on their own terms, and your impact as an artist will be stronger for it.

There is an enormous amount of reading I must still do to form some ideas about Storytron, and until I get further along in understanding and testing the menus available, these postings may be a statement refuted in a later posting as I discover its capabilities.

For example, a comment Josh made on The Great Lettuce Head weblog proposes that the program may be a good form of testing characters and their reaction–which is the main structuring for the drama and interactive possibilities.  My response was that the characters may be too "tied" to their traits and therefore become predictable. It is when a character acts "out of character" that makes for more interesting story.  However, since the verb (action) appears to be very flexible, allowing for all possible reactions, this too may be already written into the program.

As far as the elements essential to story, I recalled and found this from Aristotle’s Poetics:

Again, Tragedy is the imitation of an action; and an action implies personal agents, who necessarily possess certain distinctive qualities both of character and thought; for it is by these that we qualify actions themselves, and these–thought and character–are the two natural causes from which actions spring, and on actions again all success or failure depends.  Hence, the Plot is the imitation of the action–for by plot I mean here the arrangement of the incidents.  By Character I mean that in virtue of which we ascribe certain qualities.

So it would appear that Chris Crawford is on the right track with Storytron.  It will depend on very involved and intricately planned characters, and how they react to a carefully built number of actions (conflicts) that are available to them. 

A little strange, although it has happened before:  I went to my "Creative Writing" folder on the hard drive, then "Stories Started," and curious, opened a file called "Gazpacho " and came upon two pages of a story started almost a year ago.  I read it, then starting writing where I had left off. 

All I was looking for was a basic idea for story for use in Storytron.  A simple scene or idea with enough characters and conflict for a potential story line that held possibilities for interactive play.  This I’d use to build a framework of verbs and script choices that are relative instead of random.

I can see that there will be writing habits to overcome to be able to use the Storytron SWAT program effectively.  It’s a whole new direction in process not only for me, but for all the potential users.  One of the things I do like about it–as well as Flash8 as a tool for story–is that the process is technical, but creative in that very technicality.

It’ll be interesting a year from now to check my hard drive for files under a folder named, "Interactive Stories Started."