Talk:Geomachy

From Plastic Tub

(Difference between revisions)

Current revision

Well, Dave, I was wondering if the expansive nature of this entry couldn't be spread out a bit? For instance, I note there is no Freemasonry link -- with which this article in large part explains. The danger, imo, of including freemasonry is the possibility of it's rapidly eclipsing our "native" groups, The Gloved, The Gnomes, etc. Seems like it would worthwhile to flesh it all out tho, get this entry forking out . . .?

Steven here. The Freemasonry thing is quite cool, but I don't think we should go too far with it for the very reason you mention: There's so much to delve into it could easily eclipse our own stuff. We've already talked about triskelions in Iagoville, etc. A Freemasonry entry, imo, should be short and sweet. It's come up in relation to a few characters, so merits an entry, but nothing too much. We've come at Masonry the back way. I don't want people thinking the tub ideas were inspired by freemasonry. It's as if with all our meanderings, it has inevitably crept in, as it should, but I for one would like it to stay minimal.

Also, yeah. Who We Are. I've still got my initial list and notes. Don't know why that petered out. I think a "ship by" date is a perfect way to consolidate many loose ends. Kind of like the 500 pages attempt was made to reinvigorate the activity, a ship by date would do the same thing with an end towards tightening up much which is loose. I see (among others) three major areas we could focus on: 1. Who We Are as a way of getting all the major players tidied up and properly situated. 2. The Mormo/Molech Axis. 3. The founding fathers thing, including the old world connections. A lot to chew on but if we concentrate on these three themes (for the moment) I think this could be a valuable way to increase overall coherency. Not suggesting a new page moratorium, some of these will prove necessary, more like limiting the new theme or story additions and keeping it connected to one or more major ideas we want to flesh out. Thoughts? Just some wispy ideas at 8 am....

--Payne 09:03, 2 May 2005 (EDT): Agreed on the Freemason thing: it deserves an entry that's short & sweet - and flippant, too. I'll give it a stab in a second here.

Also, regarding Who We Are -- I'd love to see something like this. It'll definitely force a tight focus, esp. on cleaning up & filling out the major players.

Finally, I have a Modest Proposal for a minor bit of publicity via a silly side project I'm working on. We'll want to work out the details through email. I'll initiate contact in a couple days: watch for a forthcoming post on the Tub asking you to check your email.

[edit]

general

dave you are kicking it so hard i feel like i need to come down like a hammer! you add to this brew sir, but i feel addisson's ghost is much too absent

a deed to you sir, and by his son

(d) it's not always the easiest spirit to channel, t, but

-- if yr refering to this article specifically, i think it's still in a draft state. there's some more to be worked out (see new comments below), & then i think it needs to be shortened a good deal (i've always had a weakness for writing too lengthy)

-- if yr speaking more generally, well, yeah, there's a core focus to the tub, and we've been spinning off on a more historical/symbological vibe - perhaps more so since i've joined? it's a work in progress & there's a lot of avenues to explore -- but i don't want to pull things too far from that core...

am i catching yr drift here, t? no? yes? maybe? i don't know?

Ah Dave, I was merely speaking as an overjoyed bureaucrat. The thing is with the Tub is that I really need to get into the guts bit more --- I see so many opportunities to move the text in directions I've been malingering over . . . I guess I need to drop some other projects for awhile and become more actively involved in developing the mythos.

On this subject, and this is as good a place as any to mention it --- I've been mulling over the introduction of the "ship it" mentality to the Tub, which is to say, set a a date to completion, for a portion of the Tub, such as the personages or one of the story "arcs" (ie choco cult/mormo et al) The reason for this could ostensibly be for the purpose of collecting the text in book form --- some kind of finalization. Of course, as far as the electronic tub goes, nothing will ever be final, daresay, but in the psychological realm having an end to the process of creation can do wonders for loose ends and lackadaise protean associations.

We tried this briefly when the creation of the pamphlet Who We Are came into being -- perhaps this idea can be resurrected. Who We Are is simply a who's who of the initial AA membership, it was to be published as a small booklet. Since you have brought such a tremendous amount of derring-do the the Tub, it seems reasonable to revisit the concept.

Whatcha think of that? __

I think yr diagram is pretty good, dave, and the text much clearer. However, I subtracted one fact regarding L'Enfant. There's no evidence he was a Freemason! However, doesn't mean he wasn't a Gnome, or....

(d) I'm diggin' the idea - but I think L'Enfante's design preceded the Gnomes? (Didn't the Gnomes make their appearance around the time Reticent 27 showed up? Maybe I'm thinking of something else?) Perhaps we could introduce some precursery Gnomic (mushroom) activity via some of the earlier shipping connections that pre-dated AA & other factions? Some of that history's a bit fuzzy for me - if you just want to jump in and write, I can follow yr lead. I was fairly shit-faced when I wrote most of that new stuff, so, as always please don't hesitate to rework it...

S: I don't think the article is too lengthy at all, so don't worry 'bout that....certainly, there's some aa tying-in to do, but then again, maybe not. insinuation and inference go a long way. plus, there's no need to "finish" right away. some of the best things gestate for a while. the owl, article, for example, has been on the tub for ages but not until recently has it taken on something approaching its final form. as for l'enfante and the gnome thing, yes, yer right. gnomes proper date from the early 1940's. just flinging ideas about....what needs some doing, and i've been threatening to get on it for a while, is to tie into the 1700's history, of which there is plenty to do. it appears that there is some proto-gnome grouping, a mormo cult of some sort. it's fuzzy for all of us...research is key, heh heh.

The aa story may in fact be very ancient, but i think we need to elaborate on these two groups: La Ligue d'Agenda de la Pinque and La Ligue du Masque Cancéreux. I think Pietri Biberoni and Paolo Grignotti, as well as Copernicus Trowbridge were suspected members of the latter. If true, the two itlaians form a link between the old world and the new. Trowbridge, ancestor of Cappy, was also in the Albert Kook gang.

Anyway, the history will yield more, but this here is a place to start. Links right into the L'Enfante era. Guvernor Morris is an important cat, is implicated in activities with all of the preceding. Finally, d, I notive you've erased some of the old comments...not to niggle, but I think we should keep all the comments. Perhaps we can do something like someone (tim?) suggested, get a message board to keep things tidy, or try to manage thiese pages better, but keep the comments because that way we guard the history of our activity. steven out.

that ain't niggley, s - seems a reasonable request between a couple of historians ;) -- i've revived the comments i erased on Talk:O'Donnely Zodiac Placemats. that's all i recall erasing.

(d) That owl observation is an ingenious Tub-ian spin on the "standard" read! I've tried to introduce some more spin in the intro. I think it's time to mangle the tale with some AA Truth...

ok - i'm completely ignorant of this whole thing, and i must say that it's very intriguing. at the same time, it's also easy to get lost (in tracing the pentagram).

so i did about 5 seconds of research.

and if i could suggest a structure for the article, why not start by presenting the 5 points of the pentagram by starting from the NE and moving clockwise, which, i believe, would read:

Dupont Circle
Logan Circle
Mr. Vernon
The White House
Washington Circle

then move to a description of the lines (which can be now be described as running, for example, from pt Dupont to pt Logan) along w/ their breaks.

then discuss the masonic connections and disconnections (and the implications) of the various points and breaks.

so anyways, that's a bunch of work for someone less ignorant than i. but it could be worth it.

at least for me, the ignorant sod who'll get to read the final product.

ps - hope i'm not coming across as critical. that t'weren't my drunken intention at all. ya just gust jot my curious juices a-flowin', and now i wanna learn more...

Hey man, that's what it's all about. Making it readable is never out of line. I might just tackle it when I get the urge...but not just yet. If you want to take a stab at it, why not? Anyone else for that matter. The next certainly needs shapin' up in some way or another...

Retrieved from "http://plastictub.vaporslave.com/index.php?title=Talk:Geomachy"

+Well, Dave, I was wondering if the expansive nature of this entry couldn't be spread out a bit? For instance, I note there is no [[Freemasonry]] link -- with which this article in large part explains. The danger, imo, of including freemasonry is the possibility of it's rapidly eclipsing our "native" groups, The Gloved, The Gnomes, etc. Seems like it would worthwhile to flesh it all out tho, get this entry forking out . . .?
+:Steven here.  The Freemasonry thing is quite cool, but I don't think we should go too far with it for the very reason you mention: There's so much to delve into it could easily eclipse our own stuff.  We've already talked about triskelions in Iagoville, etc.  A Freemasonry entry, imo, should be short and sweet.  It's come up in relation to a few characters, so merits an entry, but nothing too much.  We've come at Masonry the back way.  I don't want people thinking the tub ideas were inspired by freemasonry.  It's as if with all our meanderings, it has inevitably crept in, as it should, but I for one would like it to stay minimal.
+:Also, yeah.  [[Who We Are]].  I've still got my initial list and notes.  Don't know why that petered out.  I think a "ship by" date is a perfect way to consolidate many loose ends.  Kind of like the 500 pages attempt was made to reinvigorate the activity, a ship by date would do the same thing with an end towards tightening up much which is loose.  I see (among others) three major areas we could focus on: 1. Who We Are as a way of getting all the major players tidied up and properly situated.  2. The Mormo/Molech Axis.  3. The founding fathers thing, including the old world connections.  A lot to chew on but if we concentrate on these three themes (for the moment) I think this could be a valuable way to increase overall coherency.  Not suggesting a new page moratorium, some of these will prove necessary, more like limiting the new theme or story additions and keeping it connected to one or more major ideas we want to flesh out.  Thoughts?  Just some wispy ideas at 8 am....
+:: --[[User:Payne|Payne]] 09:03, 2 May 2005 (EDT): Agreed on the Freemason thing: it deserves an entry that's short & sweet - and flippant, too. I'll give it a stab in a second here.
+:: Also, regarding [[Who We Are]] -- I'd love to see something like this. It'll definitely force a tight focus, esp. on cleaning up & filling out the major players.
+:: Finally, I have a Modest Proposal for a minor bit of publicity via a silly side project I'm working on. We'll want to work out the details through email. I'll initiate contact in a couple days: watch for a forthcoming post on the Tub asking you to check your email.
 == general ==
 dave you are kicking it so hard i feel like i need to come down like a hammer!
 ::''-- if yr speaking more generally, well, yeah, there's a core focus to the tub, and we've been spinning off on a more historical/symbological vibe - perhaps more so since i've joined? it's a work in progress & there's a lot of avenues to explore -- but i don't want to pull things too far from that core...''
 :'' am i catching yr drift here, t? no? yes? maybe? i don't know?''
+Ah Dave, I was merely speaking as an overjoyed bureaucrat. The thing is with the Tub is that I really need to get into the guts bit more --- I see so many opportunities to move the text in directions I've been malingering over . . . I guess I need to drop some other projects for awhile and become more actively involved in developing the mythos.
+On this subject, and this is as good a place as any to mention it --- I've been mulling over the introduction of the "ship it" mentality to the Tub, which is to say, set a a date to completion, for ''a portion'' of the Tub, such as the personages or one of the story "arcs" (ie choco cult/mormo et al) The reason for this could ostensibly be for the purpose of collecting the text in book form --- some kind of finalization. Of course, as far as the electronic tub goes, nothing will ever be final, daresay, but in the psychological realm having an end to the process of creation can do wonders for loose ends and lackadaise protean associations.
+We tried this briefly when the creation of the pamphlet Who We Are came into being -- perhaps this idea can be resurrected. Who We Are is simply a who's who of the initial AA membership, it was to be published as a small booklet. Since you have brought such a tremendous amount of derring-do the the Tub, it seems reasonable to revisit the concept.
+Whatcha think of that?
 __
 ::Anyway, the history will yield more, but this here is a place to start.  Links right into the L'Enfante era.  [[Guvernor Morris]] is an important cat, is implicated in activities with all of the preceding.  Finally, d, I notive you've erased some of the old comments...not to niggle, but I think we should keep all the comments.  Perhaps we can do something like someone (tim?) suggested, get a message board to keep things tidy, or try to manage thiese pages better, but keep the comments because that way we guard the history of our activity.  steven out.
-::: that ain't niggley, s - seems a reasonable request between a couple of historians ;) -- i've revived the comments i erased on [[Talk:O'Donney Zodiac Placemats]]. that's all i recall erasing.
+::: that ain't niggley, s - seems a reasonable request between a couple of historians ;) -- i've revived the comments i erased on [[Talk:O'Donnely Zodiac Placemats]]. that's all i recall erasing.
 (d) That [[owl]] observation is an ingenious Tub-ian spin on the "standard" read! I've tried to introduce some more spin in the intro. I think it's time to mangle the tale with some [[AA]] Truth...

Talk:Geomachy

From Plastic Tub

Current revision

general

Views

Personal tools

Navigation

Search

Toolbox