[projectaon] Re: Editor's Companion Submission
- From: Simon Osborne <outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:49:10 +0000
On 02/12/2009 17:22, Sam Seaver wrote:
It sounds reasonable to me, remember, the text asks if you've been to
the Battle of Cetza, and requires you to remember that anyway. All
we're trying to establish here is whether or not there really is a
sense of continuity upon meeting Prarg.
For a fan to remember having visited somewhere is one thing; to expect them to remember whether they
met an obscure character who appears in all of two numbered sections...five books previously...seems
unreasonable. The only way to fix this would be to introduce Prarg as a character who is always
encountered at Cetza; but that's way beyond our remit.
I argue that LW, if not the reader (its role-playing after all), would
remember people he meets, even if its only in passing (and thus not
explicit in the text). Jan and I are proposing solutions that help
reconcile what seems to be an illusory gap in the continuity.
But it demands that people remember things that they have no reason to have to remember. That's what
I'm arguing. ;-)
Not everyone is as conversant with the books as we are--we are all clearly fans of the series, after
all. So if John Smith finds the books on our website, his first ever exposure to the Lone Wolf
series, and maybe reads one per week at weekends because of his busy work schedule, why should he
remember some obscure name that he may or may not have encountered a month previous? It seems
extremely unreasonable to me.
That's why IMHO the best way to resolve this is to have a footnote saying that you might not
actually have met Captain Prarg at Cetza--so if you can't place the name, don't worry too much about
it. I'm interested in hearing other potential solutions, I'm just not convinced by any that have
been put forward so far. They all require too much of the reader.
Look at it this way: Joe clearly felt the same way, which is why he always writes these sorts of
questions in terms of places rather than people or actions. So, in Book 4, he asks "Have you ever
visited Gorn Cove?" rather than "Have you ever been poisoned by Gnadurn Sap?" As a reader, you're
quite likely to remember the former, but not necessarily the latter.
Jonathan Blake wrote:
2009/12/1 McSwain LeRoy <simonaamanarfan@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> couldn't we amend to?:
>
> 'If you took part in the Battle of Cetza and met Captain Prarg there,'
That's not as crazy as it first looks. ;)
Perhaps in a footnote, we could say "Only turn to XXX if you have met
Captain Prarg at the Battle of Cetza." Is it really giving so much
away to mention his name? The pattern in the books is to keep the
identity of the person secret for a little bit longer, but is there
really a gameplay reason to do that here? Will the reader be put off
to get this tidbit of information here?
I don't see that people will remember such an obscure meeting. Perhaps--and still only *perhaps*--if
it was in the previous book; but five books previously? Why should anyone remember that?
Still, in the interests of democracy, I'll go along with the majority. What's
it to be?
--
Simon Osborne
Project Aon
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts:
