Topic: Did I hang myself?
Started by: Silmenume
Started on: 1/5/2005
Board: Site Discussion
On 1/5/2005 at 7:25am, Silmenume wrote:
Did I hang myself?
I could have sworn that there was a "2nd" definition to the term "deprotagonize."
The first is in the gloss.
The second (I can't remember where I saw it) was provisional, but was something along the lines of neutralizing player CA relevant input.
Am I totally lost on this? Was there even discussions along these lines or has my mind totally crashed?
Thanks! (In a nervous sort of way.)
On 1/5/2005 at 4:13pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Did I hang myself?
Hi Jay,
I dunno about hanging yourself.
"De-protagonize" has one definition, but "protagonism" has two, or more accurately, it's interpreted in at least two ways.
Since "de-protagonize" refers specifically to one of those interpretations of "protagonism," it's definitely a bit sticky. In other words, it only has one definition, but can seem like two if people mis-apply it to the other meaning for protagonism.
The Glossary's pretty clear about this, I think. The term "protagonism" has two sub-sets, and "de-protagonize" is defined to target one of them, and that one only.
Best,
Ron
On 1/8/2005 at 3:47am, Silmenume wrote:
RE: Did I hang myself?
Hey Ron,
Ron Edwards wrote: The Glossary's pretty clear about this, I think. The term "protagonism" has two sub-sets, and "de-protagonize" is defined to target one of them, and that one only.
You are right about the definitions being clear in the Glossary, which is why I had asked if I had hanged myself. I wrote a thread based upon a meaning that wasn’t explicitly stated in the Glossary.
However, since we are here let me ask this question after these quotes –
The Glossary wrote: Protagonism
A problematic term with two possible meanings. (1) A characteristic of the main characters of stories, regardless of who produced the stories in whatever way. (2) A characteristic set of behaviors among people during role-playing, associated with Narrativist play, with a necessary unnamed equivalent in Gamist play and possibly another in Simulationist play. In the latter sense, coined by Paul Czege.
Underlining mine
Ron Edwards wrote: Since "de-protagonize" refers specifically to one of those interpretations of "protagonism," it's definitely a bit sticky. In other words, it only has one definition, but can seem like two if people mis-apply it to the other meaning for protagonism.
Underling mine
My question is – Given the second definition for Protagonism in the Glossary, which does imply that there are equivalent “set of behaviors” in Gamist and Simulationist play, is there is some compelling reason why the phrase “deprotagonize” should not be applied to these two CA’s as well? The action of “deprotagonization” is the same for all three CA’s in that the players’ character CA specific inputs are being undermined, nullified or otherwise vacated. If a protagonist can be said to be anyone who is trying to have an significant impact on events (addressing Premise in Nar, addressing Challenge in Gam, engaging in bricolage in Sim) what sound reason is there not employ the same term.
My case is that what is being devalued is the ability of the player’s character to be effective in the expression of CA – it need not be limited to just Nar. I don’t see that much of a difference between the protagonist in a story creation process and the protagonist in a victory creation process or myth making process. The process might be specific to each CA, but the role of Character in all three is essentially the same - to be the driving force in the expression of each CA.
Does this way lead to madness or is there usefulness to this reconsideration of the jargon term “deprotagonize?” My vote, obviously, is yes. The reason being is that the term is useful and doing so helps to further unify the model into a whole.
Thanks.
On 1/8/2005 at 4:03am, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Did I hang myself?
Hi Jay,
The authority for this issue must necessarily be Paul Czege, who has a strong personal and intellectual stake in developing terms which help Narrativist play.
I confess that after writing the Glossary, I found myself far less emotionally invested in hammering out the details afterward. Granted, I should probably write the revision as I promised, but after that, I can nearly guarantee you that terms-wrassling will be about as far down on my list as it can get and still be on it.
So, go for it - I suggest maybe an exchange of communication with Paul first, and see what he says, then go from there.
Best,
Ron
On 1/8/2005 at 7:15am, Silmenume wrote:
RE: Did I hang myself?
Thank you!
Will do.
Out!
On 1/14/2005 at 6:58pm, Paul Czege wrote:
RE: Did I hang myself?
Hey Jay,
My question is...is there is some compelling reason why the phrase "deprotagonize" should not be applied to these two CA’s as well?
The reason, I think, is that deprotagonism is specific to the nullification of what is described by the second definition of protagonism. That second definition suggests "...a necessary unnamed equivalent [to protagonism] in Gamist play and possibly another in Simulationist play." So what you need is to name the dynamic of audience attendance to Gamist play, and the dynamic of audience attendance to Simulationist play, and then prefix them with "de-" to get the Gamist and Simulationist equivalents of deprotagonize.
Paul