Onwards

Each day I have a harder and harder time summarizing what happened:

I returned the DVX to Naje and he said to me, "I can't wait to see it." Eek!

Travis and I spent a long time discussing something but I'm not sure what exactly. We up-ended the couch and sat on cushions on the floor, definitely an improvement.

Aurora arrived and we began the making-of documentary in earnest, which actually helped us think about how we act when we're not acting and therefore how to act ourselves, as well as illuminating Symbiopsycotaxiplasm.

Joe arrived and wanted to know what he missed last night so we tried the erasure text reading exercise with him. Joe, Travis and I read the nonsense lines as characters who were trying to convince Joe to jump (me) or not jump (Trav) off a bridge. Second, we tried improvising "sensical" lines for the same scene. Third, we made up a scene with same dynamic within our fictional apartment, trying to convince Joe to break or not break down the door into the locked room. Fourth, we reduced distractions, added props, lighting, a little wardrobe and tried the same scene again. It worked pretty well, the scene was definitely the realest we've come to so far, but when I was reviewing the footage the problem with the scene seemed to be that we were so seriously and realistically discussing such a crappy premise instead of just some mundane thing from real life, like "Joe, you should call that girl!" I'm going to post the video to youtube tonight, I'll put it up here ASAP. Sound off about what you think.

Travis left, Aurora, Joe and I ate dinner (as threatened, I made turnips, brussels sprouts and seitan over couscous). Joe and I talked long and hard about thinking about the science fiction element as more surreal -- not worrying about "is there still electricity" but thinking of the weirdness as dream-like experiences. Joe somehow came to a new concept of the guru storyline in which we've come to the apartment not to be transformed but to have experiences (like the drug experiences that Travis discussed) and that the existence/influence of the owner behind the locked door could still be an element but we wouldn't have to feel burdened to show the character arcs, just mundane living together scenes and creative trip/dream/experience scenes. Also, we had the idea that we could focus on conceiving the mundane scenes and make the "dream" scenes by re-staging the scenes in successive versions changing one element at a time. Scenes 1, 2, 3 are normal. Then we make scenes 1a, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3a, 3b, etc. But the relationships between iterations becomes less explicit and maybe disintegrates completely.

Talking to Evan about it later on gchat, he pointed out that the difference between "Joe, you should call that girl!" and "Joe, break down the door into the mystical room!" which seemed bad to us was the same as what would result from the process we thought of to get away from it, that having electricity could be the element we remove in successive versions. At that point my head exploded. Comment, think, call me tomorrow.