Must-Make films for socialists [Archive]

View Full Version : Must-Make films for socialists

rararoadrunner

1st February 2009, 09:29

Comrades:

Now that we have ample discussion on must-watch movies, let's boldly take the next step: what films should we produce?

Documentaries are always a good place to begin: here, we can beat the capitalists all to pieces, harnessing our decentralised resources and sound analytical instincts to maximum effect.

Fiction is another matter: we can tell whopping fantastic tales...or fictionalise history, "filling in the blanks" as it were, bringing history to life through our stories and characters (we can also tell convincing tales of alternative history, such as a Confederate or Nazi triumph, the Nazi rise to power thwarted, Soviet socialism spreading to China, Germany, and beyond after WWI, the Russian Revolution of 1905 being as successful as that of 1917, etc,)

Let me offer you one example: my project, "Operation Kama," set in a Soviet diesel-electric submarine (B-427, berthed beside the Queen Mary in Long Beach, doubling for B-59) that played a pivotal role in the Cuban Missile Crisis. (Watch the trailer in English, Russian, and Spanish, together with a few other goodies, simply by going to YouTube and typing in my username, "rararoadrunner").

While the overall motivation behind "Operation Kama" is how narrowly thermonuclear war was averted, there is another political subtext to this drama: the successful deterrence of US aggression against Cuba.

Some would say that the Soviets were defeated in the Cuban Missile Crisis: while it is true that their military objectives weren't met, it is also doubtless true that, if "Operation Anadyr," and its submarine element, "Operation Kama," weren't attempted, the US would have invaded Cuba and overthrew the Castro government: this is why Russians and Cubans have such differing assesments of these operations.

Hence, while the subtitle of "Operation Kama: Documentary Cine-Film Made Aboard Submarine B-59 During Heroic Protection of Socialist Cuba in 1962" may seem Borat-esque at first blush, it is only half ironic, as that objective was in fact realised.

So, not only does the film depict a failed propaganda movie about a failed military operation (using Blair-Witch-Project-like "mockumentary" techniques to both cut costs and enhance seeming authenticity): it also portrays the very real accomplishments of Operations Anadyr and Kama: deterrence of US military aggression that also successfully retreated from nuclear war. Quite an heroic feat when viewed in those terms!

"Operation Kama" draws upon two primary sources, as noted in the trailer: "October Fury," by Peter Huchtcausen, and "Cuban Samba of the Quartet of Foxtrots" by Alexander Mozgovoy (both written in 2002): the finding of a documentary film made aboard the B-59 in the FSB/KGB Museum in the former Lyubyanka Prison, Moscow, is, of course, the film's fictional conceit (again, my hat's off to "Blair Witch Project" for this concept); the two documentaries upon which the trailer draws then become "prequels," rather like "Curse of the Blair Witch:" unlike it, the History Channel and Discovery Channel documentaries refer to actual events...and "Operation Kama" is a fiction based upon those events.

So: what are "Must Make Movies" for us socialists? Maybe "Operation Kama" is one of those, maybe it ain't: if you think it is, I invite you aboard; regardless of that, let's see what we can come up with as challenges to the dominant, capitalist paradigm in the cinematic realm.

Dr Mindbender

1st February 2009, 14:18

Well due to the fact that no sphere of socialistic influence has the resources or cash of tinseltown, its unlikely many leftist films would get decent exposure or distribution.

That said, there are films that badly need made, particulary on the russian revolution (dont think anyones touched on that, certainly not from a leftist light). I do think the recent che films are a step in the right direction though.

Sarah Palin

1st February 2009, 15:45

This summer....
It came...
It conquered...
It is THE SPECTRE HAUNTING EUROPE!!!
Bruce Willis in The Communist Manifesto

Pogue

1st February 2009, 16:16

UndergroundConnexion

1st February 2009, 17:47

Have you nto heard of REDS? A brilliant film that is 4 hours long, made by leftists and entirely focused on the Russian Revolution. Very popular these days too.

Well "Reds" made by leftists... I'd suggest October by Eisenstein

Charles Xavier

1st February 2009, 18:22

There's numerous soviet and Cuban films too.

Davie zepeda

4th February 2009, 05:53

Salvador Allende , Jacob arbenz, A movie about Simon bolivar. A movie about Carlos fonseca. I think a really great movie would be joe a movie where a man name joe see the realities of the system he lives in 1928-30. Not to forget huey newton and the panthers not many people know that part of American history.

Angry Young Man

4th February 2009, 11:38

The UK cinema seems to be quite left-wing, odd considering that we're the most conservative country in Europe.

It's probably the legacy of Look Back in Anger and other Kitchen Sink plays and films, with influence from Ken Loach. I imagine that the UK has the most left-wing cinema in the capitalist world, though Germany is probably on par or above. But we make good left films :lol: wtf was the Edukators!

But I think alternate history is wank. How will it help the cause to show the world what would have happened if the USSR took most of Europe? A similar post in History.

Social Realism is good because it has merit both as propaganda and art.

rararoadrunner

5th February 2009, 08:19

Comrades:

I, too, saw "Reds," and while I was mightily impressed, I did also see quite a lot of the dogmas of Hollywood on display there, sooo...once again, my appreciacion, sincere as it is, will have to be dialectical.

I would also like to see actual (such as the 7th Battle of the Panjshir Valley, when Alexander Rutskoi and his Airborne faced off against Ahmed Shah Masoud's muhajadin, and actually pushed them clear to Pakistan), alternative (I mentioned a few historical junctures, see above) and fictionalised (such as an East German hacker who, upon the fall of the Wall, pieces together how the Nazis bored right into both the Stasi and the Gehlenite BND, right from Berlin) history, illuminated with a red, socialist light on the silver screen..."Reds" went a long way, maybe we can push the envelope even further (such as, f'rinstance, smashing through the Zionist lie machine to depict the actual history of Palestine, the actual role of the Zionists in the Shoah, etc...they have an iron grip on Hollywood that is, thenkfully, beginning to rust...) and undermine the orthodoxies one at a time, or as many as we can as soon as we can...back to you, comrades!

Killfacer

5th February 2009, 22:26

Walt Dinsey Presents
A New line Cinema Production
Starring James Macavoy as Makhno
And Sean Bean as P.Arshinov
MAKHNO - A UKRAINIAN STORY

Or

Walt Dinsey Presents
A 20th century picture
Starring Russel Crowe
And Reese Witherspoon
Kronstadt 2: Rise of the sailors.

SchrÃ¶dinger's Cat

13th February 2009, 19:57

There are millions of stories from past revolutions that could be used. I would be interested in a video that pertains to how normal Soviet workers reacted to the Russian Civil War, Revolution, and eventual downfall.

A documentary-styled movie on Eugene Debs, Rosa Luxemburg, or Emma Goldman.

One possible historical outlet would be the Japanese Communist Party - its stance against colonialism, WW2, and subsequent assault from right-wing nationalists.

Some revolutionaries definitely fit the "tragic hero" genre.

Psy

4th March 2009, 16:31

But I think alternate history is wank. How will it help the cause to show the world what would have happened if the USSR took most of Europe? A similar post in History.

Social Realism is good because it has merit both as propaganda and art.
You could have a story of a fictional communist society dealing with the remanence of capitalist society. It also might be neat to have a story of workers from a communist world crashing in wilderness and dealing with primitive societies that communists decided to just ignore as the primitive societies didn't want any relations with the communist world, thus you have communists dealing with being isolated from the communist world and dealing with primitivists that find industrialization evil.

Invincible Summer

4th March 2009, 23:19

What was the title of that movie about the Spanish Civil War? Regardless, I think they should re-do it so people can see there was a revolution that was more successful than the failed Communist countries

brigadista

4th March 2009, 23:54

Have you nto heard of REDS? A brilliant film that is 4 hours long, made by leftists and entirely focused on the Russian Revolution. Very popular these days too.

the love stuff was so boring in that film - the interviews with the people who knew john reed were interesting and i would have liked to see more of them..unfortunately i cant stand diane keaton so a lot of the film was a fast forward for me

x359594

5th March 2009, 00:25

Easily the most ambitious and the best left film of recent years is Peter Watlin's La Commune (Paris 1871). At 345 minutes the story of the Commune is played out as if it was taking place in the present with non-professional actors playing communards and their opponents.

Watkin's method of presentation suggests many possibilities for left filmmakers who wish to treat historical subjects in both a dramatic and analytical manner. Some possible subjects: the Peterloo Massacre, the Patterson Silk Strike, the Triangle Shirt Co. fire, the Los Angeles upraising of 1992, the Brixton upraising, the May-June rebellion in France

ckaihatsu

9th March 2009, 12:27

You could have a story of a fictional communist society dealing with the remanence of capitalist society. It also might be neat to have a story of workers from a communist world crashing in wilderness and dealing with primitive societies that communists decided to just ignore as the primitive societies didn't want any relations with the communist world, thus you have communists dealing with being isolated from the communist world and dealing with primitivists that find industrialization evil.

Psy,

I'm finding this approach to a fictional narrative to be quite attractive and compelling. Please tell me if you (and anyone else) would like to pursue this on some kind of basis. This kind of project has been a recurring thought for me for years now -- I think it's sorely needed.

We could flesh out more of the framework of the narrative, on a casual schedule, if you like. Thanks, take care.

Chris

--

--

--
___

RevLeft.com -- Home of the Revolutionary Left
www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=16162

Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/

3D Design Communications - Let Your Design Do Your Footwork
ckaihatsu.elance.com

MySpace:
myspace.com/ckaihatsu

CouchSurfing:
tinyurl.com/yoh74u

-- Of all the Marxists in a roomful of people, I'm the Wilde-ist. --

Psy

10th March 2009, 15:48

Psy,

I'm finding this approach to a fictional narrative to be quite attractive and compelling. Please tell me if you (and anyone else) would like to pursue this on some kind of basis. This kind of project has been a recurring thought for me for years now -- I think it's sorely needed.

We could flesh out more of the framework of the narrative, on a casual schedule, if you like. Thanks, take care.

Chris

Sure thing.

ckaihatsu

10th March 2009, 22:10

Sure thing.

Okay, cool, Psy, good to hear. I've broken down your idea into some constituent elements, below, and added other elements, with some options, to get things rolling.

If this seems okay for now then feel free to fill things in. I'll basically follow your lead and pitch in any thoughts that come to mind. Till later...!

TITLE / WORKING TITLE

THEME / PREMISE

You could have a story of a fictional communist society dealing with the [remnants] of capitalist society.

PLOT THREAD

It also might be neat to have a story of workers from a communist world crashing in wilderness and dealing with primitive societies that communists decided to just ignore as the primitive societies didn't want any relations with the communist world,

SETTING / SCENARIO

crashing in the wilderness

TYPE

drama, tragedy, comedy, action, romance, documentary, day-in-the-life

CONFIGURATION

protagonist, anti-hero, ensemble, plot threads

STORYLINE / PLOT / DRAMA

CONFLICT

CLIMAX

RESOLUTION

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT

thus you have communists dealing with being isolated from the communist world

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT

and dealing with primitivists that find industrialization evil.

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT

fictional communist society

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT

remnants of capitalist society

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT

workers (from a communist world) -- Worker #1 -- Worker #2 -- Worker #3 -- (etc.)

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT

Primitive / Primitivist #1 -- Primitive / Primitivist #2 -- Primitive / Primitivist #3 -- (etc.)

ISSUE

How did the primitivists escape capitalism?

Psy

11th March 2009, 05:46

Okay:

TYPE/CONFIGURATION: Mostly Adventure as the workers explore the wilderness looking for a way to get back home that causes conflict with locals.

STORYLINE: Years after a world revolution construction workers (it would give the workers very useful skills) flying over Africa (Africa does have lots of rural wilderness) crashes far off their plotted course causing them to be stranded. The workers set out to get back to civilization.

CONFLICT: The workers inadvertently destabilizes the primitive power structures in the region by building means of production, as the primitive societies only 'solved' the question of properly relation by rolling back the clock.

CLIMAX/RESOLUTION: The construction workers meets up with a ecological expedition (thus rescued). The primitive societies are no longer primitive.

ISSUE (How did the primitivists escape capitalism?):There are primitive societies that exist now.

ckaihatsu

11th March 2009, 08:06

- The conflict portion you've set forth reminds me of 'Gods Must Be Crazy' -- (the premise is that a Coke bottle dropped from a passing airplane falls into an indigenous society in the Kalahari and becomes the source of internal group strife because it's high-tech and everyone wants to keep the tool as their own, for their own use.)

- You may want to fill in more detail on this 'conflict' portion as a priority because that's where the drama (and crux) of the story comes from....

- I hear you on the 'issue' part -- without meaning to belabor the point, I might ask what the primitives or primitivists *think* about the capitalist and communist societies that they've heard about and avoided. In the case of primitivists it would be a *conscious*, knowledge-based decision, so that might be worth exploring as a topic.

- In terms of the narrative you (we) may want to consider *how* it will be told. Since it's a group of workers we could always go with an ensemble kind of approach, where there are a few plot threads from the workers' individual experiences that interweave closely together.

- I've put numbers in braces after each component, to indicate a level of completeness -- a zero means that the topic has been untouched, while a 10 would indicate that no more work needs to be done on it, and that it's ready to be incorporated and/or shipped off with the finished script. I put '6's for several of the items just as placeholders -- you can always change them, of course....

- At this point feel free to develop any of the items further, of course, and also please feel free to take on a co-management role and discuss with me what *you* think should be prioritized, in terms of development. Obviously we will have to flesh out some characters at some point, so that's one thing.... We could also think in terms of *scenes* within each of the three acts, as a framework....

---

TITLE / WORKING TITLE {0}

THEME / PREMISE {6}

a fictional communist society dealing with the [remnants] of capitalist society.

PLOT THREAD {6}

workers from a communist world crashing in wilderness and dealing with primitive societies that communists decided to just ignore as the primitive societies didn't want any relations with the communist world

SETTING / SCENARIO {6}

crashing in the wilderness

TYPE {6}

Mostly Adventure as the workers explore the wilderness looking for a way to get back home that causes conflict with locals.

CONFIGURATION {0}

protagonist, anti-hero, ensemble, plot threads

STORYLINE / PLOT / DRAMA -- ACT ONE {6}

Years after a world revolution construction workers (it would give the workers very useful skills) flying over Africa (Africa does have lots of rural wilderness) crashes far off their plotted course causing them to be stranded. The workers set out to get back to civilization.

CONFLICT -- ACT TWO {6}

The workers inadvertently destabilizes the primitive power structures in the region by building means of production, as the primitive societies only 'solved' the question of properly relation by rolling back the clock.

CLIMAX / RESOLUTION -- ACT THREE {6}

The construction workers meets up with a ecological expedition (thus rescued). The primitive societies are no longer primitive.

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {6}

communists dealing with being isolated from the communist world

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {6}

dealing with primitivists that find industrialization evil.

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {6}

fictional communist society

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {6}

remnants of capitalist society

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {0}

workers (from a communist world) -- Worker #1 -- Worker #2 -- Worker #3 -- (etc.)

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {0}

Primitive / Primitivist #1 -- Primitive / Primitivist #2 -- Primitive / Primitivist #3 -- (etc.)

ISSUE {6}

How did the primitivists escape capitalism? -- There are primitive societies that exist now.

RHIZOMES

11th March 2009, 09:05

Have you nto heard of REDS? A brilliant film that is 4 hours long, made by leftists and entirely focused on the Russian Revolution. Very popular these days too.

Warren Beatty is a communist???

Psy

11th March 2009, 17:19

ckaihatsu

11th March 2009, 17:46

Okay, updated the items with your latest post.

Yes, I'm also thinking situations like in the 1966 Kimba series were you have conservative forces that resist change all together.

Would you explain this, or provide links? I'm unfamiliar with it....

---

TITLE / WORKING TITLE {0}

THEME / PREMISE {6}

a fictional communist society dealing with the remnants of capitalist society.

Basically boils down to the primitivist view that that key problem is not one of class but of technology and seeing primitive property relations as the solution.

PLOT THREAD {6}

workers from a communist world crashing in wilderness and dealing with primitive societies that communists decided to just ignore as the primitive societies didn't want any relations with the communist world

PLOT THREAD {6}

As for catalyst I'm thinking workers decide that the most expedient solution to getting home is to build a raft to carry all of them down river, the size of the project (for being isolated) means they also build up the means of production not only to get the raft build but to help out these primitive societies.

PLOT THREAD {6}

This [causes] the primitive mode of productive to end and generates conflict over how these societies would evolve (or if they will as primitivist would simply resist the change and react by trying to destroy the new means of production) . Thinking about it might better as a single large primitive society, in that case it would a conflict over how the primitive society evolves.

SETTING / SCENARIO {6}

crashing in the wilderness

TYPE {6}

Mostly Adventure as the workers explore the wilderness looking for a way to get back home that causes conflict with locals.

CONFIGURATION {0}

ensemble / plot threads

STORYLINE / PLOT / DRAMA -- ACT ONE {6}

Years after a world revolution construction workers (it would give the workers very useful skills) flying over Africa (Africa does have lots of rural wilderness) crashes far off their plotted course causing them to be stranded. The workers set out to get back to civilization.

CONFLICT -- ACT TWO {6}

The workers inadvertently destabilizes the primitive power structures in the region by building means of production, as the primitive societies only 'solved' the question of properly relation by rolling back the clock.

CLIMAX / RESOLUTION -- ACT THREE {6}

The construction workers meets up with a ecological expedition (thus rescued). The primitive societies are no longer primitive.

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {6}

communists dealing with being isolated from the communist world

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {6}

dealing with primitivists that find industrialization evil.

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {6}

fictional communist society

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {6}

remnants of capitalist society

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {0}

workers (from a communist world) -- Worker #1 -- Worker #2 -- Worker #3 -- (etc.)

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT {0}

Primitive / Primitivist #1 -- Primitive / Primitivist #2 -- Primitive / Primitivist #3 -- (etc.)

ISSUE {6}

How did the primitivists escape capitalism? -- There are primitive societies that exist now.

Psy

11th March 2009, 19:55

Would you explain this, or provide links? I'm unfamiliar with it....

Kimba was a animated series from Japan that aired on NBC in 1966. Basically Kimba a little white lion went out to build a more altruistic jungle so he organized the animals to create a farm and strong animals took offense to Kimba changing the way of the Jungle (other stuff happens in the series but that is the only part I was thinking about in this case).

ckaihatsu

12th March 2009, 06:04

Psy, my own interest in this project mostly lies in the opportunity to describe a modern communist society and its economy. Without any discussion between the two of us as to what direction to take for the next steps of writing I'll most likely go in the direction of describing the communist world, through the eyes of the construction workers.

I've updated the items below.

---

TITLE / WORKING TITLE { 0 }

THEME / PREMISE { 8 }

- a fictional communist society dealing with the remnants of capitalist society.

- workers from a communist world crashing in wilderness and dealing with primitive societies that communists decided to just ignore as the primitive societies didn't want any relations with the communist world

- Basically boils down to the primitivist view that that key problem is not one of class but of technology and seeing primitive property relations as the solution.

SETTING / SCENARIO { 8 }

crashing in the wilderness

TYPE { 6 }

Mostly Adventure as the workers explore the wilderness looking for a way to get back home that causes conflict with locals.

Or would it mostly be a drama, because of the subject matter? Are we really planning to write in action sequences, like fight scenes?

CONFIGURATION { 8 }

ensemble / plot threads

STORYLINE / PLOT / DRAMA -- ACT ONE { 8 }

Years after a world revolution construction workers (it would give the workers very useful skills) flying over Africa (Africa does have lots of rural wilderness) crashes far off their plotted course causing them to be stranded. The workers set out to get back to civilization.

How are we introduced to the initial characters? What is the setting in which we find them, and what are they doing?

CONFLICT -- ACT TWO { 8 }

The workers inadvertently destabilizes the primitive power structures in the region by building means of production, as the primitive societies only 'solved' the question of [property] relation[s] by rolling back the clock.

CLIMAX / RESOLUTION -- ACT THREE { 8 }

The construction workers meets up with a ecological expedition (thus rescued). The primitive societies are no longer primitive.

PLOT THREAD { 8 }

This [causes] the primitive mode of productive to end and generates conflict over how these societies would evolve (or if they will as primitivist would simply resist the change and react by trying to destroy the new means of production) . Thinking about it might better as a single large primitive society, in that case it would a conflict over how the primitive society evolves.

PLOT THREAD { 8 }

One or more of the construction workers would have to relate the modern world's (fictional past) problem of running into a brick wall (over and over) because of the capitalist mode of production. They could point out similarities to the primitive society's own existential headaches because of a similar lack of development and growth. Particular attention could be paid to internal conflicts that sprout up like weeds in both societies due to lack of forward progress.

PLOT THREAD { 8 }

As for catalyst I'm thinking workers decide that the most expedient solution to getting home is to build a raft to carry all of them down river, the size of the project (for being isolated) means they also build up the means of production not only to get the raft build but to help out these primitive societies.

Describe the scene in which the construction workers begin to build a raft, and the primitives' / primitivists' reaction to that action. How does the construction workers' modern technique differ from the way the primitives / primitivists might do it?

DEFINITION / ISSUE { 8 }

communists dealing with being isolated from the communist world

DEFINITION / ISSUE { 8 }

dealing with primitivists that find industrialization evil.

What do the primitives / primitivists know about industrialization and why / how have they come to view it as evil?

DEFINITION / ISSUE { 8 }

fictional communist society

What device can we use to get a description of the modern communist society that the construction workers are coming from?

What is our conception of a modern communist society? What would be our description of it?

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT { 8 }

remnants of capitalist society

CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT { 6 }

[construction] workers (from a [modern] communist world) -- Worker #1 -- Worker #2 -- Worker #3 -- (etc.)

What do the construction workers think of the communist society setup and of the revolution that brought it into being?

How do the construction workers view their own place in the craft of construction / building, throughout the ages?

Do the construction workers *like* the communist economy, as construction workers? Do they think it's good for them and what they do?

CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT { 6 }

Primitive / Primitivist #1 -- Primitive / Primitivist #2 -- Primitive / Primitivist #3 -- (etc.)

What do the primitives / primitivists know about the capitalist world that preceded the current, modern communist one? What was their interaction with it, if any? How did they make the decision to stay put and not leave their habitat for the modern world?

At least one primitive / primitivist would have to be a devil's advocate who argues for a conventional, conservative way of life, in the favor of "stability".

Representatives of the primitive / primitivist society would have to relate their understanding of the modern, communist world as it exists, telling how they view it to be inappropriate for their way of life.

ckaihatsu

12th March 2009, 07:18

Something about the economic achievements of socialism in the Spanish Revolution would be nice, or anything highlighting the unique economics of socialism.

Hey, no one's stopping you...! Certainly no one *owns* this project -- (heh) -- and I'd be glad to incorporate contributions from you (or from any revolutionaries), as I've been doing....

Psy

12th March 2009, 17:11

Psy, my own interest in this project mostly lies in the opportunity to describe a modern communist society and its economy. Without any discussion between the two of us as to what direction to take for the next steps of writing I'll most likely go in the direction of describing the communist world, through the eyes of the construction workers.

Okay

Or would it mostly be a drama, because of the subject matter? Are we really planning to write in action sequences, like fight scenes?

You might have a point but then how you handle the conflict escalating into violence?

How are we introduced to the initial characters? What is the setting in which we find them, and what are they doing?

Probably on the airplane before the crash with casual conversations.

Describe the scene in which the construction workers begin to build a raft, and the primitives' / primitivists' reaction to that action. How does the construction workers' modern technique differ from the way the primitives / primitivists might do it?

Since they are construction workers traveling as a crew we say their hand tools were also on the plane, since they were in Africa to develop Africa they have experience building with little resources. They setup a logging camp where they plan to build the raft and the young primitivists are shocked a single worker is able to quickly cut down large trees with a single long blade chainsaw (using gas from the crashed propeller plane (so the plane ran on gas not jet fuel)) also the sight of workers in safety gear fascinates the young primitivists due the strength of advanced plastics for their light weight.

What do the primitives / primitivists know about industrialization and why / how have they come to view it as evil?

The younger primitivists would not know much about industrialization, the older would know from the old capitalist world. The view of industrialization being evil comes from industrialization turning artisans into proletariat (of course the construction workers wouldn't consider them selfs proletariat due to a lack of owning class).

What device can we use to get a description of the modern communist society that the construction workers are coming from?

From the workers talking to the locals.

What is our conception of a modern communist society? What would be our description of it?

We don't have to get into much detail just generalities since the workers wouldn't get into great detail. Let's face it if you were trying to explain the current society to an alien you wouldn't go into great detail but explain in abstracts.

What do the construction workers think of the communist society setup and of the revolution that brought it into being?

Younger workers wouldn't think much about (they wouldn't have much memory of the revolution let alone pre-revolutionary society). The older workers would be far more supportive of it (compared to capitalist society).

How do the construction workers view their own place in the craft of construction / building, throughout the ages?

I don't know if that is something they would be thinking about. We are talking about a construction crew in Africa to build stuff that is primarily functional for underdeveloped communities within the communist world so they wouldn't be underdeveloped.

Do the construction workers *like* the communist economy, as construction workers? Do they think it's good for them and what they do?

Pretty much, it is what allowed them to help underdeveloped communities

What do the primitives / primitivists know about the capitalist world that preceded the current, modern communist one? What was their interaction with it, if any?

That the capitalist world impoverished their tribes and exploited their land. Their interaction would be one that most tribes has with capitalism, that they were cheap labor for primitive accumulation of raw materials.

How did they make the decision to stay put and not leave their habitat for the modern world?

Because it is their home.

ckaihatsu

13th March 2009, 08:41

---

TITLE / WORKING TITLE { 0 }

THEME / PREMISE { 8 }

- a fictional communist society dealing with the remnants of capitalist society.

- workers from a communist world crashing in wilderness and dealing with primitive societies that communists decided to just ignore as the primitive societies didn't want any relations with the communist world

- Basically boils down to the primitivist view that that key problem is not one of class but of technology and seeing primitive property relations as the solution.

TYPE { 7 }

Mostly Adventure as the workers explore the wilderness looking for a way to get back home that causes conflict with locals.

Or would it mostly be a drama, because of the subject matter? Are we really planning to write in action sequences, like fight scenes?

You might have a point but then how you handle the conflict escalating into violence?

I think we could build up some real drama / conflict and audience interest by showing how factionalism results from the workers entering into the primitivists' society. The tribe would have the prior experience of being invaded by modern (capitalist) society and several of the members would see reflections of that in the arrival of the workers. This factionalism could even split *across* generational lines, showing that it's not simply a matter of age. This flashpoint (and violence / action scenes) could be used to springboard into some of the more political / philosophical issues that we're outlining.

CONFIGURATION { 10 }

ensemble / plot threads

= > ACT ONE -- (STORYLINE / PLOT / DRAMA) { 7 }

Years after a world revolution construction workers (it would give the workers very useful skills) flying over Africa (Africa does have lots of rural wilderness) crashes far off their plotted course causing them to be stranded. The workers set out to get back to civilization.

How are we introduced to the initial characters? What is the setting in which we find them, and what are they doing?

Probably on the airplane before the crash with casual conversations.

DEFINITION / ISSUE -- COMMUNIST WORKERS ISOLATED FROM THE MODERN WORLD { 6 }

There could be some valuable material here, in terms of character development. The workers, having crash-landed, would suddenly have an uncertain future, and that means that we should explore -- at least somewhat -- their reactions to their new situation. What "stuff" are they made of, coming from a modern, post-class communist civilization, and how does it feel to them to suddenly be dropped, involuntarily, into the wilderness?

DEFINITION / ISSUE -- PRIMITIVISTS' TAKE ON INDUSTRIALIZATION AS EVIL { 7 }

What do the primitives / primitivists know about industrialization and why / how have they come to view it as evil?

The younger primitivists would not know much about industrialization, the older would know from the old capitalist world. The view of industrialization being evil comes from industrialization turning artisans into proletariat (of course the construction workers wouldn't consider them selfs proletariat due to a lack of owning class).

Okay, I added younger and older primitivists to the list of characters. I think we could include a story thread / back-story about some individuals from the tribe who became proletarianized, as told by the older primitivists. (This would mean that not *all* people from the tribe turned into primitivists as a result of the tribe's being invaded by the capitalist / industrialized world.)

We should also have a response from the older construction workers, from their own perspective / experience of it from the modern world. This response could kick off a possible discussion between the two groups about evil / morality and the pros and cons of industrialization.

DEFINITION / ISSUE -- DESCRIBING THE FICTIONAL, MODERN COMMUNIST SOCIETY { 7 }

What device can we use to get a description of the modern communist society that the construction workers are coming from?

From the workers talking to the locals.

I guess I'm thinking of how we want this to come out of the situation -- can we situate the conversation into the larger flow of events? What precipitates this conversation? (It could always take place during introductions, but that seems rather pedestrian. We could put it off till later, when one of the workers uses a certain technical word, or maybe when the workers begin to use their modern tools to start building the raft.)

What is our conception of a modern communist society? What would be our description of it?

We don't have to get into much detail just generalities since the workers wouldn't get into great detail. Let's face it if you were trying to explain the current society to an alien you wouldn't go into great detail but explain in abstracts.

This is up to us and our storytelling skills and inclination, of course. As I mentioned I'd be most interested in this part myself. One of the characters could be a communist administrator, or possibly a political fighter from the time of the revolution, who would have more of a passion to explain the relatively new, historic society in detail. (I'll think about this some more -- I've already written up a fair amount of description, which I'll be posting, that I'd like to incorporate.)

= > ACT TWO -- (CONFLICT) { 7 }

The workers inadvertently destabilizes the primitive power structures in the region by building means of production, as the primitive societies only 'solved' the question of [property] relation[s] by rolling back the clock.

PLOT THREAD -- BUILDING THE RAFT { 6 }

[The communist construction workers' building of a raft causes] the primitive mode of productive to end and generates conflict over how these societies would evolve (or if they will as primitivist would simply resist the change and react by trying to destroy the new means of production) . Thinking about it might better as a single large primitive society, in that case it would a conflict over how the primitive society evolves.

As for catalyst I'm thinking workers decide that the most expedient solution to getting home is to build a raft to carry all of them down river, the size of the project (for being isolated) means they also build up the means of production not only to get the raft build but to help out these primitive societies.

Describe the scene in which the construction workers begin to build a raft, and the primitives' / primitivists' reaction to that action. How does the construction workers' modern technique differ from the way the primitives / primitivists might do it?

Since they are construction workers traveling as a crew we say their hand tools were also on the plane, since they were in Africa to develop Africa they have experience building with little resources. They setup a logging camp where they plan to build the raft and the young primitivists are shocked a single worker is able to quickly cut down large trees with a single long blade chainsaw (using gas from the crashed propeller plane (so the plane ran on gas not jet fuel)) also the sight of workers in safety gear fascinates the young primitivists due the strength of advanced plastics for their light weight.

I like this general approach, but if you don't mind my nit-picking here I think we should have the workers using *futuristic* tools since they are coming from an advanced, post-class society of the future that would have developed technology that surpasses our own. It might get a little Star Trek here, but I have some ideas that wouldn't overshadow or distract....

We should also keep in mind that the initial arrival of the workers is *not* a welcome event for the primitivists, and that the workers' trepidation (?) and use of advanced tools initially causes an uproar and divisiveness in the tribe -- it's only *later* that we find resolution and the tools are used to the tribe's benefit.

= > ACT THREE -- (CLIMAX / RESOLUTION) { 7 }

The construction workers meets up with a ecological expedition (thus rescued). The primitive societies are no longer primitive.

PLOT THREAD -- POLITICAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN WORKERS AND PRIMITIVISTS { 6 }

One or more of the construction workers would have to relate the modern world's (fictional past) problem of running into a brick wall (over and over) because of the capitalist mode of production. They could point out similarities to the primitive society's own existential headaches because of a similar lack of development and growth. Particular attention could be paid to internal conflicts that sprout up like weeds in both societies due to lack of forward progress.

DEFINITION / CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT { 5 }

remnants of capitalist society

CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT -- COMMUNIST CONSTRUCTION WORKERS { 7 }

[construction] workers (from a [modern] communist world) -- Older workers -- Younger workers -- Worker #1 -- Worker #2 -- Worker #3 -- (etc.)

What do the construction workers think of the communist society setup and of the revolution that brought it into being?

Younger workers wouldn't think much about (they wouldn't have much memory of the revolution let alone pre-revolutionary society). The older workers would be far more supportive of it (compared to capitalist society).

I think we should work in some viewpoints on the communist society setup, from the perspective of the younger workers who know nothing else, and from the older workers who know the difference, having lived through the transition / revolution. It's like today -- younger generations have grown up with the conveniences of the Internet / information revolution, whereas everyone else knows of the flavor of society before and without this tool available. (Added older and younger workers to the character list.) XXXXXXXX

How do the construction workers view their own place in the craft of construction / building, throughout the ages?

I don't know if that is something they would be thinking about. We are talking about a construction crew in Africa to build stuff that is primarily functional for underdeveloped communities within the communist world so they wouldn't be underdeveloped.

This is a little problematic. Were the construction workers *on a mission / project* to serve underdeveloped communities in Africa when their plane crashed, or were they traveling for some other purpose, and then *accidentally* crashed somewhere in Africa? From what I'm seeing so far thw workers seem motivated to *leave* the place where they crashed, and that's why they set about building a raft.

Do the construction workers *like* the communist economy, as construction workers? Do they think it's good for them and what they do?

Pretty much, it is what allowed them to help underdeveloped communities

Again, I think we should resolve this question -- what is the initial motivation of the workers? I suppose we'll get a sense of what the workers think of the communist society during the time that they're describing it to the primitivists.

CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT -- PRIMITIVISTS { 7 }

Older primitivists -- Younger primitivsts -- Primitivist #1 -- Primitivist #2 -- Primitivist #3 -- (etc.)

What do the primitives / primitivists know about the capitalist world that preceded the current, modern communist one? What was their interaction with it, if any?

That the capitalist world impoverished their tribes and exploited their land. Their interaction would be one that most tribes has with capitalism, that they were cheap labor for primitive accumulation of raw materials.

Okay, this will be a key point in the story.

How did they make the decision to stay put and not leave their habitat for the modern world?

Because it is their home.

I think we could go into a fair amount of detail / back-story here -- this would relate to the time when the capitalist world impoverished their tribes and exploited their land. It would be good to relate how the (then-)primitives experienced this, and how they became *primitivists* as a result. Also, did *everyone* stay put, or did *some* decide to join the capitalist world?

At least one primitive / primitivist would have to be a devil's advocate who argues for a conventional, conservative way of life, in the favor of "stability".

Representatives of the primitive / primitivist society would have to relate their understanding of the modern, communist world as it exists, telling how they view it to be inappropriate for their way of life.

ckaihatsu

13th March 2009, 09:33

problems for [construction] workers under capitalism:

- seasonal work

- boom / bust cycles

- travelling to sites

- start / stop, depending on financing and owner whims

- political patronage circles, corruption -- favored firms

- lack of planning / decision-making (over nature of projects, construction materials, etc.)

- difficulties in union organizing, incorporating foreign / migrant workers

improvements, post-revolution:

- felt like a whole new world

- like inheriting a ready-made planet

- roles became clear-cut and information about work projects and co-workers became transparent and constructive

- communities around work sites opened up and assisted workers on-the-job

revolution, through [construction] workers' eyes

- commerce networks finally broke down altogether -- workers began using their own systems of credit and accountability instead of going through banks and capitalists

- workers' networks started for the most critical goods and services, on month-to-month transactions

- networks became more widely known, then publicized, and more labor and moneyless bulk barter transactions became more commonplace and routine

- capitalists' finance-based networks broke down due to the Great Crash and disintegrated -- many workers seized the assets at their workplaces before they could be sold off for scrap by fleeing owners

- new, exotic types of energy sourcing became possible as workers collectives looked for free sources of energy to power the industrial processes they now controlled

- community input over preferred / desired goods and services took on a popular (mass) voice, after public discussions and debates

- popular, mass movements began to dominate politics at all levels with politicians increasingly forced to respond to the issues and pace set by demonstrations and marches -- capitalists could no longer speak with a unified voice or provide a solid way forward and they fell to the wayside

- bank and government buildings became de facto meeting places for higher-level meetings about the largest, most widespread labor projects -- representatives from many regional-level revolutionary labor councils travelled to take part, with the proceedings broadcast over the mass media and on the Internet

- residential housing blossomed in all kinds of former office buildings, transforming their look both inside and outside -- more decorations and creativity became visible everywhere

- until the Great Crash people didn't commonly think that they could be organized on a class basis -- it always seemed like a crackpot idea -- suddenly it seemed like there was no other way in reality

- many bad attitudes and petty concerns among co-workers disappeared very quickly as a myriad of labor possibilities suddenly opened up, with capital and profit out of the way

- newspapers started to report on and reflect the wide-ranging discussions taking place on the net and in local workplaces, by trade -- workers found out what communities really wanted produced -- dozens of newspapers and magazines became worker-oriented, by trade and region

- many more goods became available for free in stores everywhere as workers no longer had to squeeze a profit out of funding for production

- people felt liberated and inspired to be more self-sufficient and to do regular productive activities, like energy sourcing and food production, for themselves and their localities -- vertical farming became commonplace and alternative, organic energy sources became employed for household-based production

- industrial processes became much simpler as newer, exotic forms of energy became accessible -- home-based kits began to become available that allowed consumers to do for themselves what they used to rely on factories to do

- mass transit flourished as masses of people came together in search of large-scale projects to cooperate on -- urban planning became open-source projects with public conferences and local organizing groups -- older cities became rejuvenated while rural populations came together and made their towns more robust

- artistic projects became fully supported as ways to individualize local towns and cities to give them a unique identity -- creative projects burgeoned with competitions for local municipal showcasing -- many people who hadn't considered themselves artists or artistic began to explore their creative sides and found many more media and resources opened and available to them where they hadn't been before

- science exploration, etc.

Psy

13th March 2009, 16:32

I think we could build up some real drama / conflict and audience interest by showing how factionalism results from the workers entering into the primitivists' society. The tribe would have the prior experience of being invaded by modern (capitalist) society and several of the members would see reflections of that in the arrival of the workers. This factionalism could even split *across* generational lines, showing that it's not simply a matter of age. This flashpoint (and violence / action scenes) could be used to springboard into some of the more political / philosophical issues that we're outlining.

Okay

There could be some valuable material here, in terms of character development. The workers, having crash-landed, would suddenly have an uncertain future, and that means that we should explore -- at least somewhat -- their reactions to their new situation. What "stuff" are they made of, coming from a modern, post-class communist civilization, and how does it feel to them to suddenly be dropped, involuntarily, into the wilderness?

Well since they work in rural environments they would not be totally out of their element but they probably be concerned that are stranded in the wilderness.

Okay, I added younger and older primitivists to the list of characters. I think we could include a story thread / back-story about some individuals from the tribe who became proletarianized, as told by the older primitivists. (This would mean that not *all* people from the tribe turned into primitivists as a result of the tribe's being invaded by the capitalist / industrialized world.)

We should also have a response from the older construction workers, from their own perspective / experience of it from the modern world. This response could kick off a possible discussion between the two groups about evil / morality and the pros and cons of industrialization.

Sure

I guess I'm thinking of how we want this to come out of the situation -- can we situate the conversation into the larger flow of events? What precipitates this conversation? (It could always take place during introductions, but that seems rather pedestrian. We could put it off till later, when one of the workers uses a certain technical word, or maybe when the workers begin to use their modern tools to start building the raft.)

Well since the local have a plane wreck from the communist world in their back yard it would probably be a conversation piece and some of younger locals probably try to explore the wreckage giving opportunity for conversation between the workers and younger locals.

This is up to us and our storytelling skills and inclination, of course. As I mentioned I'd be most interested in this part myself. One of the characters could be a communist administrator, or possibly a political fighter from the time of the revolution, who would have more of a passion to explain the relatively new, historic society in detail. (I'll think about this some more -- I've already written up a fair amount of description, which I'll be posting, that I'd like to incorporate.)

I think ex-solider in the the revolutionary army (by then disbanded) probably be more plausible (we are talking about workers that volunteered to work in rural communities). The ex-solider could be from a rural community (one that become part of the communist world) in another part of Africa, the some exploitation that made the locals primitivists made the ex-guerrilla fighter a communist thus why the ex-solider is helping out the rural communities in Africa by being part of the construction crew (that builds hospitals, schools, wells, homes, power generators,ect).

I like this general approach, but if you don't mind my nit-picking here I think we should have the workers using *futuristic* tools since they are coming from an advanced, post-class society of the future that would have developed technology that surpasses our own. It might get a little Star Trek here, but I have some ideas that wouldn't overshadow or distract....

Not that farther in the future, we have construction crews still dragging Africa out of poverty. Basically the communist world is still solving the problems left behind by capitalism is making progress.

We should also keep in mind that the initial arrival of the workers is *not* a welcome event for the primitivists, and that the workers' trepidation (?) and use of advanced tools initially causes an uproar and divisiveness in the tribe -- it's only *later* that we find resolution and the tools are used to the tribe's benefit.

Yes but odds are the local would be split from the start.

One or more of the construction workers would have to relate the modern world's (fictional past) problem of running into a brick wall (over and over) because of the capitalist mode of production. They could point out similarities to the primitive society's own existential headaches because of a similar lack of development and growth. Particular attention could be paid to internal conflicts that sprout up like weeds in both societies due to lack of forward progress.

Right

I think we should work in some viewpoints on the communist society setup, from the perspective of the younger workers who know nothing else, and from the older workers who know the difference, having lived through the transition / revolution. It's like today -- younger generations have grown up with the conveniences of the Internet / information revolution, whereas everyone else knows of the flavor of society before and without this tool available. (Added older and younger workers to the character list.) XXXXXXXX

That is what I was thinking of.

This is a little problematic. Were the construction workers *on a mission / project* to serve underdeveloped communities in Africa when their plane crashed, or were they traveling for some other purpose, and then *accidentally* crashed somewhere in Africa? From what I'm seeing so far thw workers seem motivated to *leave* the place where they crashed, and that's why they set about building a raft.

They are volunteers to serve underdeveloped communities in Africa when their plane crashed. They are motivated to leave the place were they crashed since their loved ones would worried about them thus want to get back into contact with the communist world.

Again, I think we should resolve this question -- what is the initial motivation of the workers? I suppose we'll get a sense of what the workers think of the communist society during the time that they're describing it to the primitivists.

To help the rural communities that actually are part of the communist world.

think we could go into a fair amount of detail / back-story here -- this would relate to the time when the capitalist world impoverished their tribes and exploited their land. It would be good to relate how the (then-)primitives experienced this, and how they became *primitivists* as a result. Also, did *everyone* stay put, or did *some* decide to join the capitalist world?

Yes we could. Join the capitalist world? Don't you mean join the communist world since the capitalist world wouldn't exist anymore.

rararoadrunner

14th March 2009, 06:23

Hmmm...your discussion reminds me of...Rick Berman's thinking behind "Star Trek: the Next Generation."

Why do I say this?

Well, he did have Captain Picard make the claim that the economic problems endemic to our centuries were fundamentally solved by the "United Federation of Planets:" if that involves a negation of the capitalist assumption of "scarcity," it of necessity implies complete communism (although I don't know if Berman would agree to this!)

We must also be mindful of Star Trek's Prime Directive of non-interferance in less developed societies...even though the writers themselves frequently wrote episodes which called this assumption into question!

So: there's some grist for our mill, comrades! Back to you!

Hasta pronto, y a la victoria, siempre, MKO.

ckaihatsu

14th March 2009, 08:05

ckaihatsu

14th March 2009, 08:08

Psy

14th March 2009, 16:29

= > ACT ONE -- OVERVIEW, VERSION 1 { 5 }

_______________________LEVEL OF____________________________COMMUNIST
_____________________CONSCIOUSNESS______PRIMITIVIS TS______WORKERS
_
( enlightened / older )______conscious of_____________class__________revolutionary
______________________being conscious_________conscious__________soldier

That would be former revolutionary soldier since the revolution would have been won.

_
______________________unconscious of____________tech-____________worker
______________________being conscious__________oriented____________________
_

_______________________conscious of_____________non-____________student
______________________being unconscious_______traditional__________________
_
( younger )______________unconscious of__________traditional /________immature
______________________being unconscious_______conservative________________

How would you have someone on the crew younger then a student?

Okay, Psy, all, I used the framework above as a guide for pinning down the main characters involved. Here's the rundown for Act One:

- Day-in-the-life for 1 + 2 of the communist workers (revolutionary soldier + student, & immature)

- Day-in-the-life for 1 + 2 of the primitivists (traditional + tech-oriented & class conscious)

Why not delay Day-in-the-life of the primitivists till after the crash?

- Telling conversations among those in each of the two groups, foreshadowing coming tensions and conflicts within each of the two groups

- Flow of narrative / events shows how those in each of the two groups gravitate towards the eventual crash site when plane crashes

- Plane crashes at dusk -- hit by lightning -- electrical equipment is shorted out and fails to function -- crew loses control of airplane

Planes don't usually crash when hit by lightning and it won't explain how the plane gone off course (thus out of the search area). It would be more probable that a large electrical storm forms, reducing visibility and causing electrical interface that messed up their navigation interments causing the pilot to get disoriented and unaware the storm pushing the plane off course. After a mountain appears in the pilots limited field of vision causing the plane to run trees on the mountain jamming the ailerons causing the plane to crash.

- Trauma / aftermath / emergency actions in wilderness

- Satellite phone is damaged -- workers are cut off from communications with outside world

- Workers stay in shell of plane overnight then start moving downslope at daybreak

- The primitivists saw the blaze from the crash on the mountain slope from several miles away and started moving towards it during the night

- The workers use a matter disintegrator -- looks like a long horizontal shoulder-mounted pole -- to carve a wide circular tunnel through the thick jungle-like forest and underbrush

A bit too high tech, we are talking about a communist society that is still dealing with the left overs of capitalism.

- They use their maps to orient themselves towards a river that is not too far away

Since the ex-revolutionary solider that fought in Africa he'd probably be the one figuring out where they are based on the land marks (the biggest being the mountain) and yes a map yet since it is a modern setting odds are the map would be on a field laptop (rather then paper maps) specially design to survive in the field thus has a rigged armored case with a flash drive instead of a hard drive (these exist now for armies).

- The primitivists reach the crash site and can't help but notice the cleanly carved tunnel through the forest, which they follow

- The workers are just beginning to gather materials to build a raft when they are approached by the primitivists

END OF ACT ONE
Sounds good.

ckaihatsu

14th March 2009, 19:58

That would be former revolutionary soldier since the revolution would have been won.

We would certainly explain the guy's (woman's -- ?) past, but for the sake of reference I think we can still refer to him / her as a revolutionary soldier -- it's the kind of title that's a mark of distinction so it kind of sticks with a person for the rest of their life.

How would you have someone on the crew younger then a student?

I would rather emphasize the * un-enlightened * aspect of this type of person -- it doesn't *necessarily* correlate directly to age, though I think a greater expanse of (self-examined) life experience would certainly help. So, for future reference, please think * immature * (politically) rather than "young [in age]".

Why not delay Day-in-the-life of the primitivists till after the crash?

I'm open to this -- I'll keep it in mind, though I'm not that drawn to this variation you're suggesting.

Concerning my version, I think focusing on the characters from the very first minute is a gamble of sorts -- they *have* to be interesting enough, as they're written, to draw interest right away. The other thing is that a total of *six* might be kind of unwieldy, but, like I mentioned, it would be more like 1 + 2, and 1 + 2, so it could be manageable. I'd rather introduce them all upfront and gradually reveal their trajectories to be converging as the main storyline kicks in and leads to the crash.

Planes don't usually crash when hit by lightning and it won't explain how the plane gone off course (thus out of the search area). It would be more probable that a large electrical storm forms, reducing visibility and causing electrical interface that messed up their navigation interments causing the pilot to get disoriented and unaware the storm pushing the plane off course. After a mountain appears in the pilots limited field of vision causing the plane to run trees on the mountain jamming the ailerons causing the plane to crash.

Very cool -- I like this much better -- it's definitely more plausible and realistic-feeling.

- The workers use a matter disintegrator -- looks like a long horizontal shoulder-mounted pole -- to carve a wide circular tunnel through the thick jungle-like forest and underbrush

A bit too high tech, we are talking about a communist society that is still dealing with the left overs of capitalism.

I'm going to have to stick to my guns on this one, and to similar tech-related points that may come up -- if an explanation is needed we can always note that many technologies were logjammed by capitalism, and, now freed, they've become commonplace in a short span of time, post-revolution. I *do* want a hint of the futuristic here, because it can be a catalyst to raising political arguments for communism -- greater efficiencies, greater control over nature, etc.

Also please note that the "damage" done to the jungle -- instead of using a machete -- is a set-up (narratively speaking) for the primitivists to get pissed off about. This, and the possible use of other advanced technologies, will present opportunities for the rise of clashes in the beginning of Act Two.

- They use their maps to orient themselves towards a river that is not too far away

Since the ex-revolutionary solider that fought in Africa he'd probably be the one figuring out where they are based on the land marks (the biggest being the mountain) and yes a map yet since it is a modern setting odds are the map would be on a field laptop (rather then paper maps) specially design to survive in the field thus has a rigged armored case with a flash drive instead of a hard drive (these exist now for armies).

Sorry, again I'm going to have to insist on the high-tech route -- let's just say that they retrieve handheld electronic map devices from the plane that contain full pre-programmed map databases for every inch of the earth's surface.

Sounds good.

Thanks -- feel free to chip in -- you don't have to wait for me...!

Psy

15th March 2009, 02:38

We would certainly explain the guy's (woman's -- ?) past, but for the sake of reference I think we can still refer to him / her as a revolutionary soldier -- it's the kind of title that's a mark of distinction so it kind of sticks with a person for the rest of their life.

I'm think the ex-soldier is a women (to contract the fragile image of females). Being a combat engineer during the revolutionary war in the African theater, in the work crew she does many of the same tasks she did in the war (demolition, dealing with mines and unexploded munitions, plan the recovery of vehicles and engineering make shift roads and bridges).

Next up we have a construction worker (before the war) that became a factory worker during the war due to lack of construction work during the war and the need for factory workers, in the crew he is a structural engineer.

Then we have the agricultural engineer that is environmentalist that was a student activist during the revolutionary war, last the young worker that was just a kid during the revolutionary war and has a unrealistic romantic view of the war and joined for adventure.

Then we have the pilot and co-pilot that are not part of the work crew and minor characters.

I'm open to this -- I'll keep it in mind, though I'm not that drawn to this variation you're suggesting.

Concerning my version, I think focusing on the characters from the very first minute is a gamble of sorts -- they *have* to be interesting enough, as they're written, to draw interest right away. The other thing is that a total of *six* might be kind of unwieldy, but, like I mentioned, it would be more like 1 + 2, and 1 + 2, so it could be manageable. I'd rather introduce them all upfront and gradually reveal their trajectories to be converging as the main storyline kicks in and leads to the crash.

I'm thinking it better to describe how the locals lived based on their reaction to the crash.

I'm going to have to stick to my guns on this one, and to similar tech-related points that may come up -- if an explanation is needed we can always note that many technologies were logjammed by capitalism, and, now freed, they've become commonplace in a short span of time, post-revolution. I *do* want a hint of the futuristic here, because it can be a catalyst to raising political arguments for communism -- greater efficiencies, greater control over nature, etc.

Even in Gundam (that had futuristic technology) didn't have such futuristic device, beams in Gundam that could disintegrate were huge weapons attached to reactors. I doubt we'd see that much of jump in technology in such a short period of time, also the highly futuristic technology makes it seem it is the technology that is solving the problems and not workers.

Also please note that the "damage" done to the jungle -- instead of using a machete -- is a set-up (narratively speaking) for the primitivists to get pissed off about. This, and the possible use of other advanced technologies, will present opportunities for the rise of clashes in the beginning of Act Two.

Modern equipment could do damage to the jungle. I also with the scars from the revolutionary war the older primitivist would have another reason to get pissed, blaming booth the communists and capitalists for turning Africa into a bloody battlefield during the revolutionary war as the CIA puppets fought to the very last man in fear of retribution for their brutal oppression.

Sorry, again I'm going to have to insist on the high-tech route -- let's just say that they retrieve handheld electronic map devices from the plane that contain full pre-programmed map databases for every inch of the earth's surface.

Ever try to do serious work on a PDA or other such small screen device? We are talking about a crew that would need to draw up plans meaning they would need something to do computer aided designs and that would still probably be done on a laptop.

ckaihatsu

15th March 2009, 05:26

I'm think the ex-soldier is a women (to contract the fragile image of females). Being a combat engineer during the revolutionary war in the African theater, in the work crew she does many of the same tasks she did in the war (demolition, dealing with mines and unexploded munitions, plan the recovery of vehicles and engineering make shift roads and bridges).

Cool...!

Next up we have a construction worker (before the war) that became a factory worker during the war due to lack of construction work during the war and the need for factory workers, in the crew he is a structural engineer.

Okay, this sounds good, too -- if we include this character that would push the total on the modern side to 4 (instead of 3) -- I guess it's doable....

Then we have the agricultural engineer that is environmentalist that was a student activist during the revolutionary war, last the young worker that was just a kid during the revolutionary war and has a unrealistic romantic view of the war and joined for adventure.

*Very* cool -- niiiiiicceee...!

Then we have the pilot and co-pilot that are not part of the work crew and minor characters.

Yeah.

I'm thinking it better to describe how the locals lived based on their reaction to the crash.

Okay, I'd like to hear more about this, then, if you don't mind -- You're saying that we start with a day-in-the-life for each (or paired) of the modern communist workers, then show how their fates become tied together as the storyline kicks in and they become a team going on a plane to assist people in a rural part of Africa -- ? The plane crashes, and just as it does we switch over to see the primitivist camp not too far away, and their reaction to the crash.... -- ? In the process of seeing their individual, somewhat differing, reactions, we're getting to see who they are.... -- ? At some point we switch back to the workers' crash site and see what steps they're taking to extricate themselves from the accident.... ( --? )

Even in Gundam (that had futuristic technology) didn't have such futuristic device, beams in Gundam that could disintegrate were huge weapons attached to reactors. I doubt we'd see that much of jump in technology in such a short period of time, also the highly futuristic technology makes it seem it is the technology that is solving the problems and not workers.

This is a good point -- there is the danger of the tech stuff overshadowing the more political, post-class feature of the workers' group. At the same time, the *existence* of such sophisticated technology indicates a society that has its shit together well enough to *produce* such advanced technology -- perhaps we can work both aspects in somehow -- I'll be thinking about this some more....

Modern equipment could do damage to the jungle. I also with the scars from the revolutionary war the older primitivist would have another reason to get pissed, blaming booth the communists and capitalists for turning Africa into a bloody battlefield during the revolutionary war as the CIA puppets fought to the very last man in fear of retribution for their brutal oppression.

Yes.

Ever try to do serious work on a PDA or other such small screen device? We are talking about a crew that would need to draw up plans meaning they would need something to do computer aided designs and that would still probably be done on a laptop.

Okay, that's fine. I don't want to quibble here.

Psy

15th March 2009, 06:42

ckaihatsu

15th March 2009, 07:18

Okay, I'd like to hear more about this, then, if you don't mind -- You're saying that we start with a day-in-the-life for each (or paired) of the modern communist workers, then show how their fates become tied together as the storyline kicks in and they become a team going on a plane to assist people in a rural part of Africa -- ?

I was thinking of telling their back stories through conversation and flashback.

Feh. I find the flashback and back-story device to be over-used and cliched. Are you sure we can't just start off with a day-in-the-life approach for the 1 + 1 + 2 -- ?

Also, I think the conversations should happen later, maybe once they're on the plane, or just before, as their life-paths start becoming inter-connected. The point of a day-in-the-life approach is that we get to *see* the stuff we're trying to put across, about a communist world, about a greater state of society, and so on, through the characters' lives and environments. I *don't* want to see this thing get too talky....

'The plane crashes, and just as it does we switch over to see the primitivist camp not too far away, and their reaction to the crash.... -- ? In the process of seeing their individual, somewhat differing, reactions, we're getting to see who they are.... -- ? At some point we switch back to the workers' crash site and see what steps they're taking to extricate themselves from the accident.... ( --? )

You switch to just before the plane crashes so you can go into what they were doing then you have their reaction to the crash.

Okay, that's fine.

This is a good point -- there is the danger of the tech stuff overshadowing the more political, post-class feature of the workers' group. At the same time, the *existence* of such sophisticated technology indicates a society that has its shit together well enough to *produce* such advanced technology -- perhaps we can work both aspects in somehow -- I'll be thinking about this some more....

The fact close to all of the crew are engineers shows the society can produce engineers and deploy them to underdeveloped regions. The fact the communist society is sending engineers, equipment and materials to undeveloped communities suggests the society is altruistic.

Okay, I appreciate this, especially in the context of the post-revolution backdrop that we'll be showing....

At the same time I have to wonder if that's *enough* -- after all, there's a fair amount of this kind of thing going on * in the present *, and this is *despite* the hyper-individualism that's fostered by capitalism.

So on both the tech point and the societal point I'm wondering if we're really going to be able to illustrate *advancement* or if it's just going to look like something present-day....

---

Also -- forgot to mention this earlier, but I want to specify the way the conflict could play out at the beginning of Act Two -- on the modern side we have the 1 + 1 + 2, in the order of politically advanced to more immature. Among the primitivists we have 1 + 2, in the order of more traditional to more class-conscious.

What I'm thinking is that when the two groups encounter each other, at the river, we'll see factionalism develop quickly, * across the groups * -- this means a re-mix-and-match, where the more politically advanced people cluster, and then the less politically advanced people cluster (the pair from the modern side plus the traditional type from the primitivist side).

Copacetic?

JimmyJazz

15th March 2009, 07:31

rararoadrunner

15th March 2009, 09:35

The Haitian Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Revolution).

It was basically the Russian Revolution for slaves. The first and only successful revolution of slaves to take over a whole country and abolish the mode of production that was oppressing them.

Yes, absolutely, Toussaint L'Ouverture, the "Black Napoleon," did indeed succeed where Spartacus failed, leading the slaves to overthrow their masters...

Among other things, the Haitians can, I think, be credited for the first political use of the colours black and red in the service of revolution (previous to this, black and red were used by pirates and other warships: red was a signal of attack which booked no quarter; black offered the enemy the option of immediately strking the colours and replying with the white flag of surrender: if this wasn't done immediately, the black flag would be lowered...withdrawing the offer of mercy...and the red flag raised).

After the Haitians' combination of these colours in their revolutionary flag, of course, the European anarchists and socialists took the black flag and red flag their seperate ways...yet, in Southern European countries of a Romance heritage, and in Latin America, they continue to fly red and black together: hence the EZLN flag of black emblazoned with a red star.

Haiti figures large in the career of Simon Bolivar: like the Ethiopians sheltering Muhammad, the Haitians saw in Bolivar a kindred spirit, hence helping him return from one of the reverses of his career, so that he could carry on his liberation struggle.

Since then, of course, Haiti has been threatened by tyrants from across the seas, as well as by its brooding neighbour, the Dominican Republic, with which it cohabits the island of Hispaniola...and freqently to which it loses people, captured near the border in modern slave raids.

Now, of course, the Haitian people have friends among the Bolivarian socialists and others...and, unlike before, these friends are in a position to lend more than mere moral support.

We who long to see justice come to Haiti cannot bring it to them...they, of course, must produce it themselves, as must we all...but we can act to cut the tenticles of injustice which eminate from our quarters...and, once justice is achieved in Haiti, justice will soon come to the Dominican Republic as well.

So: you want to do a "looking back" from a future communist society to a still-struggling capitalist entity? Why not set this drama in the Haiti of the future...and, from there, cast a jaundiced eye at the future "Mad Max" wasteland of what will be left of the USA?

Hope this helps: hasta pronto, y a la victoria, siempre, MKO.

ckaihatsu

17th March 2009, 14:43

Feh. I find the flashback and back-story device to be over-used and cliched. Are you sure we can't just start off with a day-in-the-life approach for the 1 + 1 + 2 -- ?

Also, I think the conversations should happen later, maybe once they're on the plane, or just before, as their life-paths start becoming inter-connected. The point of a day-in-the-life approach is that we get to *see* the stuff we're trying to put across, about a communist world, about a greater state of society, and so on, through the characters' lives and environments. I *don't* want to see this thing get too talky....

So as the volunteers are being selected and contacted?

How about we see the characters in the midst of their regular lives, just *before* they begin to take on their given roles in the story...? I don't care too much *how* they come to be included -- please feel free to work on that aspect, if you like....

Okay, I appreciate this, especially in the context of the post-revolution backdrop that we'll be showing....

At the same time I have to wonder if that's *enough* -- after all, there's a fair amount of this kind of thing going on * in the present *, and this is *despite* the hyper-individualism that's fostered by capitalism.

Not really now we have students drowning in debt and under developed nations given token aid that doesn't make up for their exploitation.

Okay, okay, okay -- you're correct, of course -- I think the thing that would clarify this project is to show how it originates -- that it's just one work group out of thousands (millions?) being deployed by the socialist transitional government as part of the ongoing offensive against capitalism and its forced scarcity against underdeveloped regions like rural Africa.... (Is this okay? Could we change the timeframe to actual-revolution instead of post-revolution?)

I could use the material I posted previously to fill in the backdrop of the revolution-in-progress....

So on both the tech point and the societal point I'm wondering if we're really going to be able to illustrate *advancement* or if it's just going to look like something present-day....

As long as the existence of the technology doesn't call into question why Africa still underdeveloped with such technology available. For example a hover truck as part of the crews equipment wouldn't call that into question, even if we assume all the crews in Africa has one it wouldn't really diminish the difficultly of developing Africa and that it would be a time consuming endeavor.

Okay, well, then let's figure out *exactly* what technology we'll be introducing so that we can make sure it *isn't* overshadowing or too elitist.... I'd be content to limit it to the plane itself (nothing fancy there), to the broken / unusable satellite phone, to the laptop for maps, and to the material disintegrator thingee I mentioned. How about the material disintegrator doubles as the tool that they decide to use to make their raft? The idea is that the tool can put out a *strong* beam for vaporizing vegetation, or a *weaker* beam for softening the wood of the logs, in order to fuse the logs together into a raft.... ( -- ? )

--

--
___

>>> Revolutionary policy *solution* -- must read -- overthrow capitalism now! <<<
http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1386014&postcount=30

Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/

3D Design Communications - Let Your Design Do Your Footwork
ckaihatsu.elance.com

MySpace:
myspace.com/ckaihatsu

CouchSurfing:
tinyurl.com/yoh74u

-- Of all the Marxists in a roomful of people, I'm the Wilde-ist. --

ckaihatsu

17th March 2009, 14:46

How about we see the characters in the midst of their regular lives, just *before* they begin to take on their given roles in the story...? I don't care too much *how* they come to be included -- please feel free to work on that aspect, if you like....

Okay, well going that way we could simply assume they are rotating into Africa to relieve a work crew in Africa thus start at the last day before they report in.

Cool -- sounds good -- the last day before they're *called*, okay...? Maybe it's a standing thing that people are on-call for revolutionary duty, and are otherwise going about their *personal* lives (free from want) in the interim.... We can just skip ahead in time to the point when they then report in -- no biggie from a narrative point of view....

Okay, okay, okay -- you're correct, of course -- I think the thing that would clarify this project is to show how it originates -- that it's just one work group out of thousands (millions?) being deployed by the socialist transitional government as part of the ongoing offensive against capitalism and its forced scarcity against underdeveloped regions like rural Africa.... (Is this okay? Could we change the timeframe to actual-revolution instead of post-revolution?)

I could use the material I posted previously to fill in the backdrop of the revolution-in-progress....

More like a ongoing effort to modernize Africa. The industrial centers of the communist world has rebuilt and now has the capacity to help the underdeveloped regions just like how Lenin and Trotsky hoped a communist Germany would help Russia modernize. Of course since we have a underdeveloped Africa that means opportunists probably exist so other then the primitivists we could have war lords using the weapons littering Africa (still being collected by the communist world).

Sounds *excellent* -- this situation will give us opportunities to connect with the revolutionary soldier character, and provide a background revolutionary environment storyline that we can play off of...!

Okay, well, then let's figure out *exactly* what technology we'll be introducing so that we can make sure it *isn't* overshadowing or too elitist.... I'd be content to limit it to the plane itself (nothing fancy there), to the broken / unusable satellite phone, to the laptop for maps, and to the material disintegrator thingee I mentioned. How about the material disintegrator doubles as the tool that they decide to use to make their raft? The idea is that the tool can put out a *strong* beam for vaporizing vegetation, or a *weaker* beam for softening the wood of the logs, in order to fuse the logs together into a raft.... ( -- ? )

How about a hover truck instead of the material disintergrator thingee? Or how something like the heat hawk from Gundam a blade that also uses thermal energy to help it cut (meant for mobile suits as it is powered by the mobile suit's fusion reactor but how about a scaled down weaker version?). Disintergrator runs into the problem of you can't destroy matter thus impossible under current understanding of physics.

I'd like to stick with it, if at all possible -- we can just explain that it uses fusion reactor energy to snap all of the atomic bonds of any matter in the beam's path -- in this way it doesn't *destroy* any matter -- rather, it breaks it down into its constituent atoms, effectively vaporizing it.... (At lower power levels it would do an incomplete job, thereby allowing many of the molecules to re-attach, giving a melting effect....)

ckaihatsu

17th March 2009, 14:49

Okay, Psy, (all,) it looks like we have a skeleton storyline for Act One. Here goes:

The story opens with a look into an average day in the life of a thirty- or forty-something African woman originally from a village in rural Africa. In her youth she saw and experienced exploitation from ________ from the Western, capitalist world. This social environment turned some of her peers into primitivists but turned her into a committed communist, and later a revolutionary soldier actively fighting the armed forces of capital in the African theater. As a combat engineer she dealt with mines, unexploded munitions, recovered vehicles, and built makeshift roads and bridges.

We see her going about a typical day in her personal life, possibly interacting with significant other(s), family, friends, past co-workers or associates, etc. She, like everyone else, is on-call for revolutionary duty as the revolutionary world struggle against capitalism is ongoing and, while looking good, is definitely not over.

(From a previous post on this thread we have some points of an outline of the fictional revolution that we can use in aid of the revolution backdrop story.)

After seeing some of her life-in-progress we switch to an unrelated person's life, a thirty-something ___(ethnicity?)___ construction worker by trade who switched to doing factory work in order to pay the bills. He's going about his life, too, doing his thing and interacting with the people in his life. (When, in the next step, he's called to duty he will be working with the group as a structural engineer.)

Next we see an unrelated pair whose lives are connected to each other. One is an agricultural engineer who's politically an environmentalist. He (she?) was a student activist in college, demonstrating and taking part in direct-action movements against ______. His / her buddy is a fresh-out-of-school worker who is high-spirited and dewey-eyed. He / she consciously *chose* to join the revolution when it began a few years ago, out of a romantic notion of revolution and an expectation of adventure. The pair met because of ________ and have been inseparable since. We see their shared lives-in-progress, and the people they typically encounter in their everyday lives.

In this opening segment we'll see the character's opinions of the revolution through their conversations and interactions against the backdrop of the world in mass revolutionary struggle. We also get a clear sense of what motivates them in their lives, and in the ongoing revolutionary struggle.

After the introductory, day-in-the-lives segments we'll see a quick succession of scenes that show how each of the four characters receive their call to active revolutionary duty. (It may not have to be as literal as a phone call for everyone.) We see them re-arrange their lives to re-orient to the news and to prepare for active duty. Each of them will have to leave their personal lives and report in to an airbase where the plane awaits that will bring their life-paths together and transport them to a rural, underdeveloped area in Africa. They'll be relieving a work crew that's been there for several months already.

We see the formal orientation they're given in preparation for the project, one that is taking place in the thousands as part of a revolutionary offensive against the forced scarcity programs of the capitalists. They, as a construction crew, will be flying and landing to set up camps in the most remote regions in order to build hospitals, schools, wells, homes, power generators, and so on.

We then see them preparing equipment for the flight, making introductions in the process, and having light-to-medium conversations about themselves, their backgrounds, and their politics.

We learn from the formal orientation and from their conversations that opportunist warlords are still active in rural Africa -- they build their bases of power using weapons that are scattered around and are all-too-readily available. Communist fighting forces have been attempting to collect weapons, mostly through political agitation and non-violent means, but it's been slow-going and new weapons seem to sprout up once the communists leave. There have been some violent incidents with the warlords, though mostly incidental.

After a few / several days of preparation the crews are ready for boarding and flight and so we see the characters making their last-minute touches and expressing their feelings about the project just as it's about to begin. They board and the plane takes off, high into the air, and reaches cruising speed and altitude. Some more conversations ensue, this time heavier, with the characters now revealing more of their inner selves, especially on political matters.

Just as the discussions get heavy, though, there's an alert sound coming from the cockpit. The pilots announce that the electrical storm they're in has severely reduced visibility while its interference has messed up their navigation instruments. The pilots are doing their best to compensate, but everyone needs to stay calm and not get too distracted by the bad conditions. The situation worsens, though, and within minutes the pilots announce that they're essentially helpless, without any means to orient the plane's location or direction in the air. A few moments later we hear a rumbling scraping on the underside and find out that the plane is now running against the tops of trees in the forest. The treetops are jamming the ailerons, throwing the plane entirely out of control and headed downward. We see the frightened surprise on the faces of the characters, along with their reactions and short expressions of fear and concern for the next few minutes of their lives.

The story now switches over to a group of rural, almost indigenous, Africans in their natural environment. By sight / description we are quickly introduced to them as they go about their typical daily routine in their domestic environs. (They may be preparing a meal, having a casual conversation, whatever....)

A briefly screeching, then ground-shaking, explosive concussion of sound shocks them out of their reverie and they look over to where the explosion just happened. There's the tips of a large fire just visible above the treetops several miles away. The Africans climb to higher ground to get a better view. After some exchanges they decide that three will head over to the spot right away, assembling some light provisions for the journey. It is now dusk.

The plane crashes into the ground, coming to an abrupt stop. Everyone on board is shocked and disoriented, still buckled into their seats. The pilots have been instantly killed and the nose of the plane is shattered and not even visible. The fuselage is badly damaged, with much of it missing, but all the passengers are okay, with relatively minor injuries and scrapes.

Slowly everyone comes to their senses and they remove themselves from their seats and begin to assemble first aid kits to tend to their injuries. They look around for equipment they can use but find that their satellite phone is damaged beyond repair. They quickly realize that they are indeed isolated in the jungle, and with few provisions for survival -- maybe a week's worth, at most. They retrieve a laptop that's loaded with maps and are relieved to find that it *does* work. They situate themselves on the map and see that a fairly large river is not too far away. Come morning they will head in that direction in the hopes of finding an escape from where they are, and to re-contact civilization and their loved ones. They settle down to some much-needed rest and recuperation.

As dawn breaks the group wakes and begins to head away from the crash wreckage, towards the river. One piece of equipment turns out to be handy in their predicament -- it's a newly developed shoulder-mounted material disintegrator. Looking like a long broomstick with a handle, it is nuclear fusion-powered, light, and makes short work of cutting a clean circular tunnel out of the thick jungle forest and underbrush. The construction worker / structural engineer explains how it's a recent addition to applied technology, a combined source of energy and destruction known about for years but which was never finalized into a tool, not even for the military, due to a lack of interest and risk-taking on the part of the capital-intensive research and development industries.

He explains that the tool consumes a lot of energy but that it doesn't heat up. The nuclear fusion is a cold process that releases neutrons. The material disintegrator accelerates those neutrons and scatters them in a radial shape at high, directed velocities, thereby shattering the atomic bonds of all matter within a certain radius, effectively vaporizing the matter.

The group is able to cut through the dense jungle at a slow walking speed, cutting days off of their journey to the river, over using conventional means like a machete. As they walk we see a softer, more vulnerable side of the characters since the crash. The uncertainty introduced into their lives has had a disruptive effect already and, despite their progress, they're not entirely confident about making it out of the remote location and back to their normal lives. New, emotional bondings are taking place in the aftermath as the characters come to terms with what it means to be alive without the comforts of civilization. Their conversations also turn to matters of civilization, including how things come to be made and what can be considered to be "progress".

The three Africans have been navigating their way through the jungle and have reached the crash site by high noon. They are shocked by what they see -- none of them have ever seen an airplane before, and certainly not in that kind of shape. They notice the clean-cut tunnel off to the side, and begin to follow it.

By nightfall the group has cut their way through to the river bank and are relieved. They begin to feel a little more hope at escaping their isolation and settle down to a meal, heated by rigging up their metal plates and bowls over the material disintegrator, now turned vertically and set at a very low power level to produce heat from atomic friction.

Just as they're partway done the three Africans emerge from the tunnel and greet them. Surprised, the group returns the greeting and the African woman expresses a particularly warm greeting of kinship to her brother(s) and sister(s).

The seven sit down to a shared meal and begin to talk about themselves, their backgrounds, how they came to be in Africa, the state of the world, the war, the tunnel, their current projects, and their personal lives and aspirations. They speak one at a time with the rest of the combined group listening, and everything goes fine for awhile until the topic of the tunnel comes up. One of the Africans, a traditionalist, speaks forcefully about the damage the communist workers' material disintegrator tool has done to the forest. (Include dialogue here.) He / she bemoans the individual, numerous plants killed by the tool, the insects, and possibly larger animals as well. The revolutionary soldier and structural engineer assure him /her that the forest will recover, and that the tool goes slowly enough for them to scare away any larger animals that might get caught by the tool's destructive beam.

This explanation doesn't calm the African down, though, and, in fact, the agricultural engineer and student activist begin to side with him / her, noting that the tool is only one of many in the former capitalist and current revolutionary societies that cause damage to the environment.

One of the other Africans counters by explaining that the capitalist mode of production was *much* more harmful than the way the world is today. This African has heard some news about the revolution and urges the other Africans to support the communist workers in front of them and to not get so hung up on the destructive tendencies in the world.

The traditionalist comes back and bemoans the development of technology *at all*, saying that humanity would be much better off if it had never left the natural environment that this group of Africans currently lives in, and just came from. The third African at first tries to mediate the argument, noting that their traditional society does use tools, like clay pots, for carrying water, and that they make their own huts and clothing. But he / she also expresses a disdain for anything that's that much more complicated than that, saying that the use of tools *masks* over human relationships and leads to people having relationships and obsessions with their tools instead of each other.

The revolutionary soldier and construction worker come back, arguing that the use of modern tools has enriched millions and billions of people's lives and led to a greater level of civilization than has ever existed before in human history. They admit that not everyone in the modern world participates in the highest forms of civilization through use of modern tools and conveniences, but they note that at least vast numbers of people now have access to more knowledge and self-empowerment than ever before.

Instead of allaying the traditionalist's anxiety, though, the argument only heightens his / her ire, and he / she argues back even more forcefully, demanding to know what could possibly justify the horrors of the modern wars of the 20th century. The middle African jumps into this line of argument saying that if the weapons of war didn't exist there would be no wars. The agricultural engineer and young worker slowly nod their heads in agreement, drawn toward this line of reasoning.

Ridiculous, is the response from the revolutionary soldier. Wars happen because of a lack of progress in *any* civilization -- it's *not* because of the tools or technology of war itself. The class conscious African adds to this, noting that there have been plenty of conflicts in traditional African societies, usually out of long periods of boredom when clashes between tribes just seem to happen out of nowhere, and for no good reason. (Fact-checking needed here.) Other times there are conflicts with a ruling clan when natural conditions get bad and the clan refuses to give up power. (Fact-checking needed here.)

The traditionalist is insulted and feels betrayed by these words coming from a tribe-mate who he / she thought he / she knew so well. He / she turns and begins to issue strong and harsh words against the other, becoming very angry and upset.

The agricultural engineer and young worker feel very embarassed for the traditionalist and begin to get angry as well, denouncing the two communist workers and the African for defending the destructiveness of modern warfare and attacking traditional African culture.

Within moments, and with the suddenness of the plane crash the seven are now standing up and facing off in two groups against each other. With voices raised and the sternest of faces light pushing from the fingertips ensues, with the four traditional-minded people demanding a retraction of the defense of warfare, while the three class conscious people return the pushes, though somewhat more forceful, and call the four crazy and tell them to come to their senses.

Each group backs off a step, but with voices shouting now in exchanges, a faux-debate that neither side is contemplating losing. The dual tirade continues for several minutes longer, with additional bouts of pushing and screaming, then ebbing back to the shouting alone.

Several minutes later nothing has changed but both sides are growing exhausted and weary of the impasse. The exchanges begin to die down now that both sides have used all of the arguments they could possibly conceive of at least twenty times over. Some begin to turn away to reach for water, or just an uninterrupted breath, while letting their factional friends shoulder the campaign, only to rejoin the verbal fray a moment later. Some switching off like this happens for awhile longer, and then it becomes clear that the impasse will not be letting up anytime soon.

The revolutionary soldier raises her hands and calls for a cessation of the arguing because the workers still have the task of getting home in front of them. Grudgingly the other six step away from the verbal fight, and one of the Africans asks what the plans are for getting home.

"Well, you know the land better than we do. What do you suggest?" asks one.

The question leads to the response of building a raft for navigating the river downstream to a known camp made up of an ecological expedition that has been there on a semi-permanent basis. The middle African suggests delaying the trip right away, though, in favor of returning with the Africans to their home to see how it is possible to live decent lives without the use of any modern technology. The workers agree and the group of seven begin the trek back to the Africans' environs.

(The rest of the story can deal with a tour of the Africans' home and environs that includes an ongoing, calmer discussion around the topics of exploitation, industrialization, proletarianization, primitivization, evil / morality, primitive accumulation, primitive property relations, and progress. The environs can be used in the facilitation and illustration of these conversations.)

(Ultimately the workers will make it to the river, build the raft, and go downstream meet up with the ecological expedition's camp, and then back home.)

Psy

17th March 2009, 18:17

Okay, Psy, (all,) it looks like we have a skeleton storyline for Act One. Here goes:

The story opens with a look into an average day in the life of a thirty- or forty-something African woman originally from a village in rural Africa. In her youth she saw and experienced exploitation from ________ from the Western, capitalist world. This social environment turned some of her peers into primitivists but turned her into a committed communist, and later a revolutionary soldier actively fighting the armed forces of capital in the African theater. As a combat engineer she dealt with mines, unexploded munitions, recovered vehicles, and built makeshift roads and bridges.

Sound good, though she'd probably be early in her thirties.

We see her going about a typical day in her personal life, possibly interacting with significant other(s), family, friends, past co-workers or associates, etc. She, like everyone else, is on-call for revolutionary duty as the revolutionary world struggle against capitalism is ongoing and, while looking good, is definitely not over.

I was thinking more that the crew are volunteers and their work considered humanitarian work and through worker rotation they are replacing a work crew already in Africa so we go through their daily lives before the volunteers are rotated into Africa.

After seeing some of her life-in-progress we switch to an unrelated person's life, a thirty-something ___(ethnicity?)___ construction worker by trade who switched to doing factory work in order to pay the bills. He's going about his life, too, doing his thing and interacting with the people in his life. (When, in the next step, he's called to duty he will be working with the group as a structural engineer.)

Pretty much.

Next we see an unrelated pair whose lives are connected to each other. One is an agricultural engineer who's politically an environmentalist. He (she?) was a student activist in college, demonstrating and taking part in direct-action movements against ______. His / her buddy is a fresh-out-of-school worker who is high-spirited and dewey-eyed. He / she consciously *chose* to join the revolution when it began a few years ago, out of a romantic notion of revolution and an expectation of adventure. The pair met because of ________ and have been inseparable since. We see their shared lives-in-progress, and the people they typically encounter in their everyday lives.

I actually was thinking the youngest being just a kid during the revolution and volunteering to going to Africa for adventure.

In this opening segment we'll see the character's opinions of the revolution through their conversations and interactions against the backdrop of the world in mass revolutionary struggle. We also get a clear sense of what motivates them in their lives, and in the ongoing revolutionary struggle.

After the introductory, day-in-the-lives segments we'll see a quick succession of scenes that show how each of the four characters receive their call to active revolutionary duty. (It may not have to be as literal as a phone call for everyone.) We see them re-arrange their lives to re-orient to the news and to prepare for active duty. Each of them will have to leave their personal lives and report in to an airbase where the plane awaits that will bring their life-paths together and transport them to a rural, underdeveloped area in Africa. They'll be relieving a work crew that's been there for several months already.

Or we play it as they are volunteers, if you want you could have them called to announce relieve workers are needed sooner then previously thought and their scheduled departure being bumped up.

We see the formal orientation they're given in preparation for the project, one that is taking place in the thousands as part of a revolutionary offensive against the forced scarcity programs of the capitalists. They, as a construction crew, will be flying and landing to set up camps in the most remote regions in order to build hospitals, schools, wells, homes, power generators, and so on.

Pretty much but they would be doing that in existing rural villages to develop Africa.

We then see them preparing equipment for the flight, making introductions in the process, and having light-to-medium conversations about themselves, their backgrounds, and their politics.

We learn from the formal orientation and from their conversations that opportunist warlords are still active in rural Africa -- they build their bases of power using weapons that are scattered around and are all-too-readily available.

Right, that because the proletariat was a tiny minority in Africa, after the revolutionary army smashed the bourgeoisie some opportunist took power in rural part of Africa, the warlords are new oppressors that simply filled in the power vacuum when the workers failed to.

Communist fighting forces have been attempting to collect weapons, mostly through political agitation and non-violent means, but it's been slow-going and new weapons seem to sprout up once the communists leave. There have been some violent incidents with the warlords, though mostly incidental.

More like Africa is so littered with weapons (even now) that it is a huge task.

After a few / several days of preparation the crews are ready for boarding and flight and so we see the characters making their last-minute touches and expressing their feelings about the project just as it's about to begin. They board and the plane takes off, high into the air, and reaches cruising speed and altitude. Some more conversations ensue, this time heavier, with the characters now revealing more of their inner selves, especially on political matters.

Okay

Just as the discussions get heavy, though, there's an alert sound coming from the cockpit. The pilots announce that the electrical storm they're in has severely reduced visibility while its interference has messed up their navigation instruments. The pilots are doing their best to compensate, but everyone needs to stay calm and not get too distracted by the bad conditions. The situation worsens, though, and within minutes the pilots announce that they're essentially helpless, without any means to orient the plane's location or direction in the air. A few moments later we hear a rumbling scraping on the underside and find out that the plane is now running against the tops of trees in the forest. The treetops are jamming the ailerons, throwing the plane entirely out of control and headed downward. We see the frightened surprise on the faces of the characters, along with their reactions and short expressions of fear and concern for the next few minutes of their lives.

Okay

The story now switches over to a group of rural, almost indigenous, Africans in their natural environment. By sight / description we are quickly introduced to them as they go about their typical daily routine in their domestic environs. (They may be preparing a meal, having a casual conversation, whatever....)

A briefly screeching, then ground-shaking, explosive concussion of sound shocks them out of their reverie and they look over to where the explosion just happened. There's the tips of a large fire just visible above the treetops several miles away. The Africans climb to higher ground to get a better view. After some exchanges they decide that three will head over to the spot right away, assembling some light provisions for the journey. It is now dusk.

Okay but it would probably be black smoke and maybe a luminary white flare sent up by the pilot after crashing to see where they are in the dark stormy night (the mountains separating the plane from the village also separates the village from the storm), if we got that way it would be their nightly routine and the flare would be the first tech the tribe sees, a light not from the moon at night slowly fight down to Earth.

The plane crashes into the ground, coming to an abrupt stop. Everyone on board is shocked and disoriented, still buckled into their seats. The pilots have been instantly killed and the nose of the plane is shattered and not even visible. The fuselage is badly damaged, with much of it missing, but all the passengers are okay, with relatively minor injuries and scrapes.

Okay if we kill the pilots then we have someone fire the flare. Also you don't have to kill them to write them out of the story, they could be unconscious or too badly wounded to speak or get up.

Slowly everyone comes to their senses and they remove themselves from their seats and begin to assemble first aid kits to tend to their injuries. They look around for equipment they can use but find that their satellite phone is damaged beyond repair. They quickly realize that they are indeed isolated in the jungle, and with few provisions for survival -- maybe a week's worth, at most.

Or for motivation to find help you could have them only able to stabilize the pilots yet lacking proper medical skill, supplies and equipment to properly treat them.

They retrieve a laptop that's loaded with maps and are relieved to find that it *does* work.

Could be laptops but either way.

They situate themselves on the map and see that a fairly large river is not too far away.

Other side of the mountain, that would have drinking water something not they don't have much of since most villages (by this time) do having a decent water supply.

Come morning they will head in that direction in the hopes of finding an escape from where they are, and to re-contact civilization and their loved ones. They settle down to some much-needed rest and recuperation.

As dawn breaks the group wakes and begins to head away from the crash wreckage, towards the river. One piece of equipment turns out to be handy in their predicament -- it's a newly developed shoulder-mounted material disintegrator. Looking like a long broomstick with a handle, it is nuclear fusion-powered, light, and makes short work of cutting a clean circular tunnel out of the thick jungle forest and underbrush. The construction worker / structural engineer explains how it's a recent addition to applied technology, a combined source of energy and destruction known about for years but which was never finalized into a tool, not even for the military, due to a lack of interest and risk-taking on the part of the capital-intensive research and development industries.

Yhea the technology issue, I still don't know about this, I'd actually rather have small mechs then something as far off as a disintegrator, I mean Patlabor pulled off mechs being used for construction in the near years of 1998-2002 (written in 1988-1993) pretty well.

He explains that the tool consumes a lot of energy but that it doesn't heat up. The nuclear fusion is a cold process that releases neutrons. The material disintegrator accelerates those neutrons and scatters them in a radial shape at high, directed velocities, thereby shattering the atomic bonds of all matter within a certain radius, effectively vaporizing the matter.

We have not only the discovery of fusion but the ability to put it in a hand tool? At least with mechs you mostly just have the advancement of robotics for those small enough that you wouldn't need a powerful power source to power them. You could have them being developed by the communist world thorough brute R&D (throwing far more engineers and resources at its development then capitalists were ever willing to) and the crew getting one very first mass produced mechs (thus since construction mechs are brand new its presence hasn't yet effected Africa yet).

The group is able to cut through the dense jungle at a slow walking speed, cutting days off of their journey to the river, over using conventional means like a machete. As they walk we see a softer, more vulnerable side of the characters since the crash. The uncertainty introduced into their lives has had a disruptive effect already and, despite their progress, they're not entirely confident about making it out of the remote location and back to their normal lives. New, emotional bondings are taking place in the aftermath as the characters come to terms with what it means to be alive without the comforts of civilization. Their conversations also turn to matters of civilization, including how things come to be made and what can be considered to be "progress".

Or you have have them scale a mountain, using the mech to quickly climb the mountain.

The three Africans have been navigating their way through the jungle and have reached the crash site by high noon. They are shocked by what they see -- none of them have ever seen an airplane before, and certainly not in that kind of shape. They notice the clean-cut tunnel off to the side, and begin to follow it.

Or they see the mech climbing the mountain.

By nightfall the group has cut their way through to the river bank and are relieved. They begin to feel a little more hope at escaping their isolation and settle down to a meal, heated by rigging up their metal plates and bowls over the material disintegrator, now turned vertically and set at a very low power level to produce heat from atomic friction.

Or other means to heat.

Just as they're partway done the three Africans emerge from the tunnel and greet them. Surprised, the group returns the greeting and the African woman expresses a particularly warm greeting of kinship to her brother(s) and sister(s).

And feel totally stupid for climbing over the mountain when they could have walked through the tunnel since they would have to leave the mech anyway as it is too big to float down the river and not enough power to walk to a civilization.

The seven sit down to a shared meal and begin to talk about themselves, their backgrounds, how they came to be in Africa, the state of the world, the war, the tunnel, their current projects, and their personal lives and aspirations. They speak one at a time with the rest of the combined group listening, and everything goes fine for awhile until the topic of the tunnel comes up. One of the Africans, a traditionalist, speaks forcefully about the damage the communist workers' material disintegrator tool has done to the forest.

Or we have it a natural tunnel and the traditionalist upset that the mech left a path of destruction (to the wilderness) due to its size and weight.

(Include dialogue here.) He / she bemoans the individual, numerous plants killed by the tool, the insects, and possibly larger animals as well. The revolutionary soldier and structural engineer assure him /her that the forest will recover, and that the tool goes slowly enough for them to scare away any larger animals that might get caught by the tool's destructive beam.

Or the mech lumbers slow enough they assumes animals ran away from the thing long before it got close to them and that the forest/jungle would recover as the path of destruction is not that wide.

This explanation doesn't calm the African down, though, and, in fact, the agricultural engineer and student activist begin to side with him / her, noting that the tool is only one of many in the former capitalist and current revolutionary societies that cause damage to the environment.

One of the other Africans counters by explaining that the capitalist mode of production was *much* more harmful than the way the world is today. This African has heard some news about the revolution and urges the other Africans to support the communist workers in front of them and to not get so hung up on the destructive tendencies in the world.

The traditionalist comes back and bemoans the development of technology *at all*, saying that humanity would be much better off if it had never left the natural environment that this group of Africans currently lives in, and just came from. The third African at first tries to mediate the argument, noting that their traditional society does use tools, like clay pots, for carrying water, and that they make their own huts and clothing. But he / she also expresses a disdain for anything that's that much more complicated than that, saying that the use of tools *masks* over human relationships and leads to people having relationships and obsessions with their tools instead of each other.

Okay

The revolutionary soldier and construction worker come back, arguing that the use of modern tools has enriched millions and billions of people's lives and led to a greater level of civilization than has ever existed before in human history. They admit that not everyone in the modern world participates in the highest forms of civilization through use of modern tools and conveniences, but they note that at least vast numbers of people now have access to more knowledge and self-empowerment than ever before.

Or the argument that it was the lack of industrialization that caused a failure of the workers to take power in Africa, that industrialization brings class consciousness.

Instead of allaying the traditionalist's anxiety, though, the argument only heightens his / her ire, and he / she argues back even more forcefully, demanding to know what could possibly justify the horrors of the modern wars of the 20th century. The middle African jumps into this line of argument saying that if the weapons of war didn't exist there would be no wars. The agricultural engineer and young worker slowly nod their heads in agreement, drawn toward this line of reasoning.

The young worker is a romantic about the revolutionary war not a pacifist. Basically the young worker doesn't view the revolution in any critical light.

Ridiculous, is the response from the revolutionary soldier. Wars happen because of a lack of progress in *any* civilization -- it's *not* because of the tools or technology of war itself. The class conscious African adds to this, noting that there have been plenty of conflicts in traditional African societies, usually out of long periods of boredom when clashes between tribes just seem to happen out of nowhere, and for no good reason. (Fact-checking needed here.) Other times there are conflicts with a ruling clan when natural conditions get bad and the clan refuses to give up power. (Fact-checking needed here.)

I'm thinking the solider states she is not proud of the means that were taken but at the same find they were necessary that peace without justice is just a one sided peace. That every attempt to reform capitalism failed.

The traditionalist is insulted and feels betrayed by these words coming from a tribe-mate who he / she thought he / she knew so well. He / she turns and begins to issue strong and harsh words against the other, becoming very angry and upset.

The agricultural engineer and young worker feel very embarassed for the traditionalist and begin to get angry as well, denouncing the two communist workers and the African for defending the destructiveness of modern warfare and attacking traditional African culture.

Within moments, and with the suddenness of the plane crash the seven are now standing up and facing off in two groups against each other. With voices raised and the sternest of faces light pushing from the fingertips ensues, with the four traditional-minded people demanding a retraction of the defense of warfare, while the three class conscious people return the pushes, though somewhat more forceful, and call the four crazy and tell them to come to their senses.

Each group backs off a step, but with voices shouting now in exchanges, a faux-debate that neither side is contemplating losing. The dual tirade continues for several minutes longer, with additional bouts of pushing and screaming, then ebbing back to the shouting alone.

Several minutes later nothing has changed but both sides are growing exhausted and weary of the impasse. The exchanges begin to die down now that both sides have used all of the arguments they could possibly conceive of at least twenty times over. Some begin to turn away to reach for water, or just an uninterrupted breath, while letting their factional friends shoulder the campaign, only to rejoin the verbal fray a moment later. Some switching off like this happens for awhile longer, and then it becomes clear that the impasse will not be letting up anytime soon.

The revolutionary soldier raises her hands and calls for a cessation of the arguing because the workers still have the task of getting home in front of them. Grudgingly the other six step away from the verbal fight, and one of the Africans asks what the plans are for getting home.

"Well, you know the land better than we do. What do you suggest?" asks one.

The question leads to the response of building a raft for navigating the river downstream to a known camp made up of an ecological expedition that has been there on a semi-permanent basis.

Or the logic that there are many along villages on the river as it is source for drinking water.

The middle African suggests delaying the trip right away, though, in favor of returning with the Africans to their home to see how it is possible to live decent lives without the use of any modern technology. The workers agree and the group of seven begin the trek back to the Africans' environs.

Or they decide so start building a raft the next day.

(The rest of the story can deal with a tour of the Africans' home and environs that includes an ongoing, calmer discussion around the topics of exploitation, industrialization, proletarianization, primitivization, evil / morality, primitive accumulation, primitive property relations, and progress. The environs can be used in the facilitation and illustration of these conversations.)

(Ultimately the workers will make it to the river, build the raft, and go downstream meet up with the ecological expedition's camp, and then back home.)
Okay.

ckaihatsu

17th March 2009, 20:08

Psy,

For future reference, *please* read the entire thing before you start commenting on it. Your comments are too atomistic and you're not proposing *alternative scenarios*, for the most part. I do not care about the "mech" thing, whatever that is. Most of your comments are coming off as nit-picky.

I'm open to alternatives, both large and small, but please make sure that they're substantive enough, from a narrative perspective.

Sound good, though she'd probably be early in her thirties.

I was thinking more that the crew are volunteers and their work considered humanitarian work and through worker rotation they are replacing a work crew already in Africa so we go through their daily lives before the volunteers are rotated into Africa.

I thought you agreed to setting this during *revolutionary* times, *not* *post-*revolutionary times.

I also don't know what to think of this *volunteer* stuff -- it's problematic, especially during a *revolutionary* period when the whole point will be a coordinated policy, including offensives against the capitalist state.

I actually was thinking the youngest being just a kid during the revolution and volunteering to going to Africa for adventure.

Again, this is problematic.

Or we play it as they are volunteers, if you want you could have them called to announce relieve workers are needed sooner then previously thought and their scheduled departure being bumped up.

Look, *all of them* are volunteers in the sense that they're anti-capitalists of one stripe or another, and they're down with the revolution. What we're showing in this thing is that not all of them are as *politically conscious*, or understanding, of *why* they're down with the revolution.

I'll incorporate this scheduling thing, though it's a rather immaterial point.

Pretty much but they would be doing that in existing rural villages to develop Africa.

So noted.

Right, that because the proletariat was a tiny minority in Africa, after the revolutionary army smashed the bourgeoisie some opportunist took power in rural part of Africa, the warlords are new oppressors that simply filled in the power vacuum when the workers failed to.

Okay.

More like Africa is so littered with weapons (even now) that it is a huge task.

Right.

Okay but it would probably be black smoke and maybe a luminary white flare sent up by the pilot after crashing to see where they are in the dark stormy night (the mountains separating the plane from the village also separates the village from the storm), if we got that way it would be their nightly routine and the flare would be the first tech the tribe sees, a light not from the moon at night slowly fight down to Earth.

Okay if we kill the pilots then we have someone fire the flare. Also you don't have to kill them to write them out of the story, they could be unconscious or too badly wounded to speak or get up.

I'll give you the black smoke, but I think it'd be much better that the pilots die in the crash -- and we *don't* need &%$# flares -- that way we don't have to have them as characters. The tribe sees the black smoke trail and the fire above the treetops -- isn't that enough? Map-wise we can just say that everyone kinda knew the route the plane was taking beforehand and they figured out where they crashed -- a major mountain is in the area....

Other side of the mountain, that would have drinking water something not they don't have much of since most villages (by this time) do having a decent water supply.

No, we don't need to complicate things with getting past a mountain -- they have *limited provisions* and that causes them *anxiety*.

We have not only the discovery of fusion but the ability to put it in a hand tool? At least with mechs you mostly just have the advancement of robotics for those small enough that you wouldn't need a powerful power source to power them. You could have them being developed by the communist world thorough brute R&D (throwing far more engineers and resources at its development then capitalists were ever willing to) and the crew getting one very first mass produced mechs (thus since construction mechs are brand new its presence hasn't yet effected Africa yet).

Dude, you're getting bogged down in technical details -- for the purpose of storytelling we just need something that's halfway *plausible*, to suspend the audience's disbelief and keep the story going.

Or the argument that it was the lack of industrialization that caused a failure of the workers to take power in Africa, that industrialization brings class consciousness.

Okay, we can work this in....

The young worker is a romantic about the revolutionary war not a pacifist. Basically the young worker doesn't view the revolution in any critical light.

Okay, noted.

I'm thinking the solider states she is not proud of the means that were taken but at the same find they were necessary that peace without justice is just a one sided peace. That every attempt to reform capitalism failed.

Okay.

Or the logic that there are many along villages on the river as it is source for drinking water.

But the point is that the workers want to get back to the *modern* world, and many villages are still underdeveloped and *not* hooked into the tech grid. Can we leave this part as it is?

---

I've decided to push back the building of the raft because this story is coming up *way* short -- I'd like it to last about twice as long as the material we have so far, so there's more basic writing to do. I'm thinking that there would be a second round of plot, taking place among the villagers as a whole, that deals with the political issues I (we) listed. On the other hand it could get very talky at that point, so I (we) need to *develop* a second round in the middle part, before then resolving it and letting the workers build the raft and head home....

Psy

17th March 2009, 23:07

Psy,

For future reference, *please* read the entire thing before you start commenting on it. Your comments are too atomistic and you're not proposing *alternative scenarios*, for the most part. I do not care about the "mech" thing, whatever that is. Most of your comments are coming off as nit-picky.

I'm open to alternatives, both large and small, but please make sure that they're substantive enough, from a narrative perspective.

Okay

I thought you agreed to setting this during *revolutionary* times, *not* *post-*revolutionary times.

I also don't know what to think of this *volunteer* stuff -- it's problematic, especially during a *revolutionary* period when the whole point will be a coordinated policy, including offensives against the capitalist state.

It is post revolutionary times for most of the world, what you have is a region so underdeveloped when world revolution come it didn't fully take hold there and the communist world approaching the situation by developing the region and the manpower for this being made up of volunteers.

Again, this is problematic.

The other way the youngest becomes a slight variation of the student activist character. Being a naive youth that was a kid during the revolution you can have a character that starts with naive view of what it means to be class conscious while in the activists you have someone class conscious but focusing on the means, the solider focusing on the ends and the average worker just trying to help people and unaware he is class conscious.

Look, *all of them* are volunteers in the sense that they're anti-capitalists of one stripe or another, and they're down with the revolution. What we're showing in this thing is that not all of them are as *politically conscious*, or understanding, of *why* they're down with the revolution.

Sure.

I'll give you the black smoke, but I think it'd be much better that the pilots die in the crash -- and we *don't* need &%$# flares -- that way we don't have to have them as characters. The tribe sees the black smoke trail and the fire above the treetops -- isn't that enough? Map-wise we can just say that everyone kinda knew the route the plane was taking beforehand and they figured out where they crashed -- a major mountain is in the area....

Okay

No, we don't need to complicate things with getting past a mountain -- they have *limited provisions* and that causes them *anxiety*.

Okay

Dude, you're getting bogged down in technical details -- for the purpose of storytelling we just need something that's halfway *plausible*, to suspend the audience's disbelief and keep the story going.

True but with a construction mech you have a general purpose construction machine, you have what you wanted a sign of technology advancement of communist society that you really don't have to describe as mechs are common in science fiction. You also have a convenient way to have the work crew quickly build stuff and have a better symbolization of mechanization of human power since it is basically a large metal man operated by humans, rather then explaining how disintegration technology is beneficial you have a large metal man that's labor like human labor can be applied in many different ways simply on a larger scale. You could even write in a part were the mech is used to save someone thus causing support for the machine and the workers.

But the point is that the workers want to get back to the *modern* world, and many villages are still underdeveloped and *not* hooked into the tech grid. Can we leave this part as it is?

But Africa is being developed they are just stranded in part not currently being developed, they assume they eventually run into someone that could help them and eventually run into a ecological expedition's ship moving up river.

I've decided to push back the building of the raft because this story is coming up *way* short -- I'd like it to last about twice as long as the material we have so far, so there's more basic writing to do. I'm thinking that there would be a second round of plot, taking place among the villagers as a whole, that deals with the political issues I (we) listed. On the other hand it could get very talky at that point, so I (we) need to *develop* a second round in the middle part, before then resolving it and letting the workers build the raft and head home....
We could have the building of the raft delayed as the crew decides to use the building supplies, tools and equipment that is intact from the aircraft to develop the village, thus we have conflict in the village as get new means of production.

Pogue

17th March 2009, 23:09

A film about my birth.

Pogue

17th March 2009, 23:11

ckaihatsu

18th March 2009, 04:34

It is post revolutionary times for most of the world, what you have is a region so underdeveloped when world revolution come it didn't fully take hold there and the communist world approaching the situation by developing the region and the manpower for this being made up of volunteers.

Okay, very nice. I guess my only concern is that we emphasize the global *communist revolution* as the driving force of all of this -- if we focus too much on the *volunteer* aspect of it it sounds too much like volunteerism.

The other way the youngest becomes a slight variation of the student activist character. Being a naive youth that was a kid during the revolution you can have a character that starts with naive view of what it means to be class conscious while in the activists you have someone class conscious but focusing on the means, the solider focusing on the ends and the average worker just trying to help people and unaware he is class conscious.

Terrific -- yup, that's it...!

True but with a construction mech you have a general purpose construction machine, you have what you wanted a sign of technology advancement of communist society that you really don't have to describe as mechs are common in science fiction. You also have a convenient way to have the work crew quickly build stuff and have a better symbolization of mechanization of human power since it is basically a large metal man operated by humans, rather then explaining how disintegration technology is beneficial you have a large metal man that's labor like human labor can be applied in many different ways simply on a larger scale. You could even write in a part were the mech is used to save someone thus causing support for the machine and the workers.

Okay, I'll stay open to this, but *you* have to write it and work it into the main storyline...!

But Africa is being developed they are just stranded in part not currently being developed, they assume they eventually run into someone that could help them and eventually run into a ecological expedition's ship moving up river.

In the interests of extending this thing out further I'd be more than happy to have the workers linger in the rural region for whatever reason....

I was thinking we might just splice in some scenes from the greater revolution (recently past), or from the revolution-in-progress-pushing-to-completion.... This could happen when the workers move around a few villages and hear some news from the outside world by talking to some villagers....

This would open a narrative portal to just about anything, so we could juice up the story with something more lively and action-oriented....

We could have the building of the raft delayed as the crew decides to use the building supplies, tools and equipment that is intact from the aircraft to develop the village, thus we have conflict in the village as get new means of production.

Yeah, _good_ -- nicely done. This will set off a second, higher round of tensions and discussions about means of production and politics, and the villagers will have some tidbits -- done as flashbacks or alter-stories -- of news from the greater world communist revolution....

Psy

18th March 2009, 20:01

Okay, very nice. I guess my only concern is that we emphasize the global *communist revolution* as the driving force of all of this -- if we focus too much on the *volunteer* aspect of it it sounds too much like volunteerism.

Okay

Okay, I'll stay open to this, but *you* have to write it and work it into the main storyline...!

Okay, so far:

It was developed by the communist engineers after the revolutionary war to help with redevelopment, it basically is a 4 meter tall general purpose construction machine in a humanoid shape designed to perform a wide variety of tasks to speed up construction without the need of a wider array construction equipment specialized for only a few tasks. The work crew of the story is getting a modified version that can work off a power grid thanks to a high efficiency hydrogen cell power pack it carries on its back.

After the crash it is used the clear a path (operated by one the crew) through the jungle simply by walking through the jungle, it clear a path for the wide track transport the rest of the crew is in.

The storm having moved up river causes the river to flood causing kids of the village to be swept down river by currents, the mech saves the kids by cutting down a tree (more environmental destruction) near the bank with its welding laser that the kids gab hold of and the mech drags them back to shore.

In the interests of extending this thing out further I'd be more than happy to have the workers linger in the rural region for whatever reason....

I was thinking we might just splice in some scenes from the greater revolution (recently past), or from the revolution-in-progress-pushing-to-completion.... This could happen when the workers move around a few villages and hear some news from the outside world by talking to some villagers....

This would open a narrative portal to just about anything, so we could juice up the story with something more lively and action-oriented...

Sound to be a plan

Yeah, _good_ -- nicely done. This will set off a second, higher round of tensions and discussions about means of production and politics, and the villagers will have some tidbits -- done as flashbacks or alter-stories -- of news from the greater world communist revolution....
Right

ckaihatsu

18th March 2009, 21:17

It was developed by the communist engineers after the revolutionary war to help with redevelopment, it basically is a 4 meter tall general purpose construction machine in a humanoid shape designed to perform a wide variety of tasks to speed up construction without the need of a wider array construction equipment specialized for only a few tasks. The work crew of the story is getting a modified version that can work off a power grid thanks to a high efficiency hydrogen cell power pack it carries on its back.

After the crash it is used the clear a path (operated by one the crew) through the jungle simply by walking through the jungle, it clear a path for the wide track transport the rest of the crew is in.

The storm having moved up river causes the river to flood causing kids of the village to be swept down river by currents, the mech saves the kids by cutting down a tree (more environmental destruction) near the bank with its welding laser that the kids gab hold of and the mech drags them back to shore.

Maybe say that it looks like a Transformer-type robot thing -- help the reader visualize what the thing is, beyond a technical description, if at all possible.... You also need to describe the sequence of action -- *exactly* what happens to advance the course of action? (Who gets in the robot, etc....)

Now my concern is that we have kids in the storyline -- do they just scamper off, without having any further effect on the story? Remember that the African villagers are about to show up, when the workers are at the river....

Also, I'd like to keep my fusion-powered matter disintegrator in there, in some way -- maybe just a small, handheld one that they use for heating up their meal at the river bank.... It would (continue to) serve as an example of advanced technology that the capitalist system was *able* to develop, but didn't because of its clamped-down, risk-averse nature....

---

Okay, I've done some thinking about the revolution backdrop / back-story, and here's one overall approach:

We could compare and contrast storytelling over the village fire, from the Africans' myth-based cosmology to the modern, communist one. This would allow us to both get a little cultural on the traditional side as well as note that the modern types have to *create* and *make judgments* about the worldview and cosmology that they decide to adopt for their lives on planet earth.

This would be the narrative vehicle for doing one or more flashbacks to the traditional world of myth, and to the recent / ongoing communist creation of a new, post-capitalist, more-humane world.... I'll have more on this later....

Psy

18th March 2009, 22:32

Maybe say that it looks like a Transformer-type robot thing -- help the reader visualize what the thing is, beyond a technical description, if at all possible....

Tranformers are intelligent machines so they are technically not mechs and the variety of mech designs in sci-fi is varied so it could be anything from looking like a Zaku (http://mahq.net/mecha/gundam/msgundam/ms-05b.htm) from Gundam to something like the the construction mechs from Patlabor (I.E the ASV-99 Boxer) (http://mahq.net/mecha/patlabor/patlabortv/asv-99.htm) probably the latter.

You also need to describe the sequence of action -- *exactly* what happens to advance the course of action? (Who gets in the robot, etc....)

That the crew figures the mech can easily clear a path for the transport, how about the structural engineer having construction experience.

Now my concern is that we have kids in the storyline -- do they just scamper off, without having any further effect on the story? Remember that the African villagers are about to show up, when the workers are at the river....

Probably just scamper off.

Also, I'd like to keep my fusion-powered matter disintegrator in there, in some way -- maybe just a small, handheld one that they use for heating up their meal at the river bank....

That would be a heat laser not a disintergrator.

It would (continue to) serve as an example of advanced technology that the capitalist system was *able* to develop, but didn't because of its clamped-down, risk-averse nature....

But you'd have to go into why, with the construction mech you could go into R&D costs as well as capitalists not being that interested in replacing their existing fixed capital tied up in existing construction equipment.

Okay, I've done some thinking about the revolution backdrop / back-story, and here's one overall approach:

We could compare and contrast storytelling over the village fire, from the Africans' myth-based cosmology to the modern, communist one. This would allow us to both get a little cultural on the traditional side as well as note that the modern types have to *create* and *make judgments* about the worldview and cosmology that they decide to adopt for their lives on planet earth.

This would be the narrative vehicle for doing one or more flashbacks to the traditional world of myth, and to the recent / ongoing communist creation of a new, post-capitalist, more-humane world.... I'll have more on this later....
okay

ckaihatsu

19th March 2009, 01:52

Regarding the mech thing, I won't quibble -- just so you can write it into the script so that it fits and reads well....

Probably just scamper off.

Okay, fine -- to me it seems like a loose end, but I guess it's not a big deal....

That would be a heat laser not a disintergrator.

But you'd have to go into why, with the construction mech you could go into R&D costs as well as capitalists not being that interested in replacing their existing fixed capital tied up in existing construction equipment.

You write your tech thing in, and I'll write mine.

Buster Flynn

19th March 2009, 02:00

but might I recommend Philip K. Dick, Samuel Delany, and Octavia Butler as starting points for post-capitalist story lines?

OK, okay, Dick's been fairly pillaged (if only as the originator of the near-future police-state dystopia). But the others havent... and they're entirely relevant... one of them's even still alive... and who knows? might be prevailed upon to collaborate...

Hey, you'll be busy making a film. Do you really need to be bothered to write it too? Or are you some kind of craft-purist ;-)

Angry Young Man

19th March 2009, 03:32

I have 3 plays on the go atm (bad commitment issues lol).

The most complete one is a Senecan tragedy where a peasant leads a rebellion and takes the lord's lands into collective control. The duke comes back, etc., etc.

The second is based entirely in a living room in Yorkshire when a civil war is ending.

The third is about the Karen Matthews kidnap case and only started it last night. Plus research is proving difficult. Fecking BBC.

Buster Flynn

19th March 2009, 06:20

Period pieces! Yes! :thumbup:

Angry Young Man

19th March 2009, 09:08

It's not a conventional period piece. The inspiration came from the lack of peasants in Shakespeare, and comparing the intensity of character in Hamlet to the average living aristocrat, with his hunting, his daily telegraph, his shotgun and his humorous values

Psy

23rd March 2009, 01:19

Regarding the mech thing, I won't quibble -- just so you can write it into the script so that it fits and reads well....

It is common in sci-fi so shouldn't be an issue

Anyway I've been thinking of the outline the communist world and why the primitivists are hostile towards the communist world.

We have a post-revolutionary communist world that is rebuilt yet strongly industrialist, the communist society is geared towards further mechanization and automation of labor to minimize the socially necessary labor time in order to bring a leisure society thus why communist engineers threw so much effort in developing the construction mechs (that was not very sought after by capitalists due to the inability to exploit machines in the long run). The primitivists being anti-industrialists are against the communist's goal of mechanizing labor to give workers both free time and abundance.

ckaihatsu

23rd March 2009, 01:36

Anyway I've been thinking of the outline the communist world and why the primitivists are hostile towards the communist world.

We have a post-revolutionary communist world that is rebuilt yet strongly industrialist, the communist society is geared towards further mechanization and automation of labor to minimize the socially necessary labor time in order to bring a leisure society thus why communist engineers threw so much effort in developing the construction mechs (that was not very sought after by capitalists due to the inability to exploit machines in the long run). The primitivists being anti-industrialists are against the communist's goal of mechanizing labor to give workers both free time and abundance.

Okay, this *is* the crux of the drama / conflict in the story, so it's definitely worth exploring and deepening....

Can we build up (heh) some primitivist arguments for *why* they're anti-industrial? I know the general primitivist line, but the more we can detail for dialogue for the arguments in the storyline, the better....

Also, is there anything the communist workers can say to make the primitivists *differentiate* between the capitalist society of invaders and the groups of communist workers who are coming in on thousands of politically motivated projects to upgrade the underdeveloped regions of Africa? (I would consider this stage to be *revolutionary*, btw, *not* post-revolutionary.) The primitivists would probably just blur *all* modern societies together and say fuck-em-all....

Blackscare

23rd March 2009, 02:02

Apparently there is a Ukrainian mini-series about Makhno, but It's not subbed yet and it's not the highest quality work in the world.

I'd love to see a good documentary or even che style movie about him :D

Psy

23rd March 2009, 04:55

Okay, this *is* the crux of the drama / conflict in the story, so it's definitely worth exploring and deepening....

Can we build up (heh) some primitivist arguments for *why* they're anti-industrial? I know the general primitivist line, but the more we can detail for dialogue for the arguments in the storyline, the better....

For that we have to look at the communist manifesto specifically this:

"Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property
of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that
preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the
development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and
is still destroying it daily."

Primitivists hold up the artisan and peasant as the classes that should run production, they are not against private property they are against the fact industrialization destroyed the property rights of the peasants and artisans and communists are unsympathetic as our goal is a classless society without private ownership of the means of production.

You also have the environmental primitivist argument that mechanization of labor increases humans influence over the environment as it multiplies the labor power of humans thus increases the overall productive force thus gives humanity more power to change the environment. They tend to ignore that this amplification of human labor power can be used to help the enviornment in some cases..

Also, is there anything the communist workers can say to make the primitivists *differentiate* between the capitalist society of invaders and the groups of communist workers who are coming in on thousands of politically motivated projects to upgrade the underdeveloped regions of Africa? (I would consider this stage to be *revolutionary*, btw, *not* post-revolutionary.) The primitivists would probably just blur *all* modern societies together and say fuck-em-all....
Probably that the communists are using industrialization for altruistic goals rather then to exploit the labor of others.

ckaihatsu

23rd March 2009, 09:17

For that we have to look at the communist manifesto specifically this:

"Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property
of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that
preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the
development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and
is still destroying it daily."

Primitivists hold up the artisan and peasant as the classes that should run production, they are not against private property they are against the fact industrialization destroyed the property rights of the peasants and artisans and communists are unsympathetic as our goal is a classless society without private ownership of the means of production.

You also have the environmental primitivist argument that mechanization of labor increases humans influence over the environment as it multiplies the labor power of humans thus increases the overall productive force thus gives humanity more power to change the environment. They tend to ignore that this amplification of human labor power can be used to help the enviornment in some cases..

Got it -- yup -- thanks.

Probably that the communists are using industrialization for altruistic goals rather then to exploit the labor of others.

Yeah. (On a technical, or side note, here, I have a little bit of an issue with the use of the term 'altruistic'. As communists we're not *strictly*, *principally* 'altruistic' -- altruistic is going over to someone and asking, "Hey, wanna upgrade? It's *free*!" If they say "no" the altruistic person would have to leave because to impose upgrades would not be considered altruism anymore. Communists, on the other hand, would continue along to industrialize around the general area, regardless, just as the capitalists would -- the difference is that the communists would do it in a classless (heh) way, so that the proceeds would be distributed in common. I guess *I* wouldn't exactly call that 'altruism' but it's not worth bickering about, either -- it's certainly more *altruistic* than capitalism could ever be...!)

Do you want to provide some direction here, Psy? I'm juggling a few other things at the moment so I think our writing project is kind of at a lull -- is there anything we should be focusing on, in particular, to get things moving again?

ckaihatsu

23rd March 2009, 13:49

I'd like to add a couple things here, for the sake of clarification:

Primitivists hold up the artisan and peasant as the classes that should run production, they are not against private property they are against the fact industrialization destroyed the property rights of the peasants and artisans and communists are unsympathetic as our goal is a classless society without private ownership of the means of production.

From what I've read on primitivism, the point is to "return to nature", or a feral state of being. I think we're allowing too much civilization in in speaking of *production* and *primitivism* in the same sentence.

Probably that the communists are using industrialization for altruistic goals rather then to exploit the labor of others.

Again, as a side note, it benefits the communist revolution to "get to" underdeveloped parts of the world in order to industrialize them on a collectivist basis rather than allow capitalism and opportunism to rule over them, as is happening now.

Psy

23rd March 2009, 15:47

Yeah. (On a technical, or side note, here, I have a little bit of an issue with the use of the term 'altruistic'. As communists we're not *strictly*, *principally* 'altruistic' -- altruistic is going over to someone and asking, "Hey, wanna upgrade? It's *free*!" If they say "no" the altruistic person would have to leave because to impose upgrades would not be considered altruism anymore. Communists, on the other hand, would continue along to industrialize around the general area, regardless, just as the capitalists would -- the difference is that the communists would do it in a classless (heh) way, so that the proceeds would be distributed in common. I guess *I* wouldn't exactly call that 'altruism' but it's not worth bickering about, either -- it's certainly more *altruistic* than capitalism could ever be...!)

You have a point but at the reasons for the communists to force industrialization is that it is for their own good like a parent forcing their kid to do something that was beneficial to the kid.

Do you want to provide some direction here, Psy? I'm juggling a few other things at the moment so I think our writing project is kind of at a lull -- is there anything we should be focusing on, in particular, to get things moving again?
Right now we are just in a outline phase, so having outlines for later into story would be helpful.

From what I've read on primitivism, the point is to "return to nature", or a feral state of being. I think we're allowing too much civilization in in speaking of *production* and *primitivism* in the same sentence.

Not really, primitivists hold up the Luddite rebellion (when artisans setup out to destroy capitalist machinery in order to stop the proletarianization of labor during the dawn of capitalism) as their model, some primitivists have setup up farming communes to make small scales examples of their the society they want.

Again, as a side note, it benefits the communist revolution to "get to" underdeveloped parts of the world in order to industrialize them on a collectivist basis rather than allow capitalism and opportunism to rule over them, as is happening now.

True but only in the long run in the idea capitalism might develop from such conditions and it is still also for the locals own good.

ckaihatsu

23rd March 2009, 16:32

You have a point but at the reasons for the communists to force industrialization is that it is for their own good like a parent forcing their kid to do something that was beneficial to the kid.

[...]

Right now we are just in a outline phase, so having outlines for later into story would be helpful.

[...]

Not really, primitivists hold up the Luddite rebellion (when artisans setup out to destroy capitalist machinery in order to stop the proletarianization of labor during the dawn of capitalism) as their model, some primitivists have setup up farming communes to make small scales examples of their the society they want.

[...]

True but only in the long run in the idea capitalism might develop from such conditions and it is still also for the locals own good.

Okay on everything -- on a finer point, still, we *could* use the parental thing as an analogy, but *I* personally wouldn't, because of the patronization (power relation) implied. Also the capitalist-based nuclear family is *extremely* problematic itself -- indeed it's one of the first institutions that would be ushered out with the advent of a communist revolution.

Forced collectivist industrialization would be better compared to a building's utility guy coming in to install new smoke detectors or something like that.... No one can really say no, but why would anyone want to, anyway? (There are no *good* arguments against good upgrades.)

Psy

23rd March 2009, 18:10

Okay on everything -- on a finer point, still, we *could* use the parental thing as an analogy, but *I* personally wouldn't, because of the patronization (power relation) implied. Also the capitalist-based nuclear family is *extremely* problematic itself -- indeed it's one of the first institutions that would be ushered out with the advent of a communist revolution.

Forced collectivist industrialization would be better compared to a building's utility guy coming in to install new smoke detectors or something like that.... No one can really say no, but why would anyone want to, anyway? (There are no *good* arguments against good upgrades.)
Okay.

rararoadrunner

20th May 2009, 19:10

Comrades:

Here's something that came my way courtesy portside.com that you may find of interest:

Science Fiction From Below
Alex Rivera, director of the new film Sleep Dealer,
imagines the future of the Global South.

by Mark Engler

Foreign Policy In Focus - May 13, 2009

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/6116

Tapping into a long tradition of politicized science
fiction, the young, New-York-based filmmaker Alex
Rivera has brought to theaters a movie that reflects in
news ways on the disquieting realities of the global
economy. Sleep Dealer, his first feature film, has
opened in New York and Los Angeles, and will show in 25
cities throughout the country this spring.

Set largely on the U.S.-Mexico border, Sleep Dealer
depicts a world in which borders are closed but high-
tech factories allow migrant workers to plug their
bodies into the network to provide virtual labor to the
North. The drama that unfolds in this dystopian setting
delves deeps into issues of immigration, labor, water
rights, and the nature of sustainable development.

Rivera's film drew attention by winning two awards at
Sundance--the Waldo Salt Screenwriting Award and the
Alfred P. Sloan Prize for the best film focusing on
science and technology. Los Angeles Times film critic
Kenneth Turan wrote of the movie, "Adventurous,
ambitious and ingeniously futuristic, Sleep Dealer.
combines visually arresting science fiction done on a
budget with a strong sense of social commentary in a
way that few films attempt, let alone achieve."

Rivera spoke with Foreign Policy In Focus senior
analyst Mark Engler by phone from Los Angeles, where
the director was attending the local premier of his
movie.

M.E.: How do you describe your film?

A.R.: Sleep Dealer is a science fiction thriller that
takes a look at the future from a perspective that
we've never seen before in science fiction. We've seen
the future of Los Angeles, in Blade Runner. We've seen
the future of Washington, D.C., in Steven Spielberg's
Minority Report. We've seen London and Chicago. But
we've never seen the places where the great majority of
humanity actually lives. Those are in the global South.
We've never seen Mexico; we've never seen Brazil; we've
never seen India. We've never seen that future on film
before.

M.E.: Your main character, Memo Cruz, is from rural
Mexico, from Oaxaca. In many ways, the village that we
see on film is very similar to many poor, remote
communities today. It doesn't necessarily look like how
we think about the future at all. What was your
conception of how economic globalization would affect
communities like these?

A.R.: One of the things that fascinates me about the
genre is that, explicitly or not, science fiction is
always partly about development theory. So when
Spielberg shows us Washington, DC with 15-lane traffic
flowing all around the city, he's putting forward a
certain vision of development.

Sleep Dealer starts in Oaxaca, and to think about the
future of Oaxaca, you have to think about how so-called
"development" has been happening there and where might
it go. And it's not superhighways and skyscrapers. That
would be ridiculous. So, in the vision I put forward,
most of the landscape remains the same. The buildings
look older. Most of the streets still aren't paved. And
yet there are these tendrils of technology that have
infiltrated the environment. So instead of an old-
fashioned TV, there is a high-definition TV. Instead of
a calling booth like they have today in Mexican
villages, where people call their relatives who are far
away, in this future there is a video-calling booth.
There's the presence of a North American corporation
that has privatized the water and that uses technology
to control the water supply. There are remote cameras
with guns mounted on them and drones that do
surveillance over the area.

The vision of Oaxaca in the future and of the South in
the future is a kind of collage, where there are still
elements that look ancient, there is still
infrastructure that looks older even than it does
today, and yet there are little capillaries of high
technology that pulse through the environment.

ME: How far into the future did you set the film?

A.R.: I started working on the ideas in Sleep Dealer
ten years ago, and at that point I thought I was
writing about a future that was forty or fifty years
away, or maybe a future that might not ever happen.
Over this past decade, though, the world has rapidly
caught up with a lot of the fantasy nightmares in the
film. That's been an interesting process.

But, you know, a lot of times we use the word
"futuristic" to describe things that are kind of
explosions of capital, like skyscrapers or futuristic
cities. We do not think of a cornfield as futuristic,
even though that has as much to do with the future as
does the shimmering skyscraper.

M.E.: In what sense?

A.R.: In the sense that we all need to eat. In the
sense that the ancient cornfields in Oaxaca are the
places that replenish the genetic supply of corn that
feeds the world. Those fields are the future of the
food supply.

For every futuristic skyscraper, there's a mine
someplace where the ore used to build that structure
was taken out of the ground. That mine is just as
futuristic as the skyscraper. So, I think Sleep Dealer
puts forward this vision of the future that connects
the dots, a vision that says that the wealth of the
North comes from somewhere. It tries to look at
development and futurism from this split point of
view - to look at the fact that these fantasies of what
the future will be in the North must always be creating
a second, nightmare reality somewhere in the South.
That these things are tied together.

M.E.: It's interesting that at the recent Summit of the
Americas, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez gave
President Obama a copy of Eduardo Galeano's Open Veins
of Latin America. This is a book that was written over
30 years ago, but that really emphasizes the same point
that you are making now, that underdevelopment is not
an earlier stage of development, but rather is the
product of development. That development and
underdevelopment go hand in hand.

A.R.: Exactly. And I think that you can also add
immigration into that mix. Because the history that
Open Veins lays out is a lot about resource
exploitation and transfer from South to North. And
today, of course, one of the main entities that places
like Mexico export is workers.

M.E.: There's a quote from the film that says a lot.
Memo's boss, who runs this sort of high-tech Mexican
sweatshop, says, "We give the United States what it's
always wanted. All the work without the workers." Can
you describe this concept of the "cybracero" that you
have been developing?

A.R.: The central idea for this film occurred to me
about ten years ago when I was reading an article in
Wired magazine about telecommuting. The article was
making all of these fantastic predictions that, in the
future, there won't be any traffic jams anymore, and no
one will have to ride the subway, because everyone will
work from home. Well, I come from a family that's
mostly immigrant, a family in which my cousins are
still arriving and working in landscaping and
construction. I tried to put them into this fantasy of
working from home - when their home is Peru, 3000 miles
away, and their work is construction.

And so I came up with this idea of the telecommuting
immigrant, where in the future the borders are sealed,
workers stay in the South, and they connect themselves
to a network through which they control machines that
perform their labor in the North.

The end result is an American economy that receives the
labor of these workers but doesn't ever have to care
for them, and doesn't have to fear that their children
will be born here, and doesn't ever have to let them
vote.

When I started this project, the idea of a remote
worker was political satire. About eight years ago, it
became a reality in the call centers of India and in
the idea of off-shoring information-processing jobs
that could be done in real time by people on the other
side of the planet.

My movie goes further by putting forward a vision of
remote manual laborers. What if somebody in India could
drive a taxi in New York or bus dishes in a restaurant
in Los Angeles? I wonder, do we live in a world where
it would be acceptable to have someone in Jakarta
laying the bricks for a building that's being built
next door to us?

I think under the rules of the economy that we live
with, if that were technically possible, it would be
considered morally acceptable. It's just another stage
of globalization. Yet it seems so surreal, and it makes
me wonder: What kind of social order would that
produce? What kind of communities would that produce?

M.E.: At the same time, I think in the film you suggest
that this new technology also has the possibility to
connect people across great distances. I wonder how you
weigh the alienating effects of technology with some of
its redemptive potential?

A.R.: To me, Sleep Dealer is a parable, a myth. There
are three characters: One is a remote worker. The
second is a remote soldier - a person who is in the
United States but flies a drone that patrols the South.
And the third character is a kind of writer, a blogger,
who connects her body to the network and uploads, not
words that she is typing, but rather her memories. And
by sharing her memories she is able to let people see
these far-away realities that maybe they're not
supposed to. She's able to use technology to erase
borders for a moment.

And to me, that is the tension of the moment we're
living in. We live in a moment when the military is
using technology to wage remote war. Corporations are
using technology to move extraordinarily quickly around
the globe to take advantage of weak environmental
standards and weak labor standards.

And yet, we're living in the moment of the social
forums, which are organized over the network. We're
living in the age of the Zapatistas, who in 1994 sent
messages by horseback, messages written on paper, to
Internet cafes where they could be sent out as press
releases and could be used to build a global network of
solidarity. We're living in a time when I'm starting to
hear tremors from the labor movement about creating
cross-border unions, which will also be built over the
network.

So I think we're in this moment when we don't know who
will be more empowered by this connectivity and by new
technology. And that's the battle in Sleep Dealer. It's
over the future of this connected planet and what kind
of globalization we'll be living in.

M.E.: Beyond immigration politics, the commodification
and privatization of water is a major theme in the
film. How did you choose water as an issue you would
focus on?

A.R.: When I look at dramas of immigration, one of the
things that I find unsatisfying is that they always
focus on an internal dream, a dream that someone has of
going to America and making his or her life better.
And, instead, what I wanted Sleep Dealer to start with
was this idea that immigrants from Latin America, in
the places where they're born, are usually living
somehow in the shadow of U.S. intervention, that
immigrants come here because we - the United States - are
already there.

In my film I wanted to have a presence of U.S. power in
my character's village. And so I put in a dam. The dam
controls the local water supply, and it makes
traditional subsistence life much more difficult. In
reality, in Latin America, it's been banana plantations
controlled by paramilitaries. It's been gold mines and
copper mines and silver mines. It's been oil fields.
It's any number of situations that have made it hard
for the people there to survive.

I chose water because it also has a symbolic and
spiritual dimension to it. When my characters have
their first kiss, they are by a little river. When they
make love, they go down by the ocean. It would have
been a lot harder to do that with petroleum.

M.E.: But, of course, struggles over the control of
water are not purely metaphorical.

A.R.: When you talk to people about this, the idea that
an evil corporation would go in and take the water from
the people sounds so bombastic, so bizarre, that it
feels like science fiction. And yet it's absolutely
happening today.

A lot of people are familiar with the story of
Cochabamba, Bolivia, where an American company,
Bechtel, privatized the water, and there literally was
a water war. All of this stuff can sound like a bad
Kevin Costner movie - the idea of a water war - and yet
it's one of those realities that, if you were to graph
it, is only going to trend upwards in terms of its
intensity in the future.

M.E.: The characters in the film are moved to take
action about water privatization. Yet this takes the
form of a highly individualized type of action - they
don't join a social movement. I wondered about the
absence of more collective resistance in the movie.

A.R.: Well, I think you've hit on the Achilles' heel of
political narrative film. Narrative film is driven by
psychology and by identifying with a character. And I
think that's why there are so few truly transcendent
political films. In narrative cinema we're used to
identifying with one person, and so even if the story
is anti-imperial or anti-racist or anti-misogynist,
it's usually one character's journey in overcoming
those things.

In Sleep Dealer there are three characters that
represent three vast segments of our society. Those
characters are in conflict at first, and then they come
together. And their story is meant to have larger
resonance than just the three individuals.

But I think that devising a narrative where political
hope and political power doesn't belong to one actor,
but is somehow made collective, that is very, very
challenging. I look at The Battle of Algiers as an
incredible model, where there is a single character --
Ali la Pointe -- who we meet, but then his subjectivity
sort of bleeds away from him and is given to a social
movement by the end of the film.

That film is a masterpiece; I am but a learner. When we
were writing Sleep Dealer we were trying to think about
what the future of what a radically networked social
movement would look like, but we couldn't get there.
Instead, I think the contribution of Sleep Dealer is in
being a parable, a myth, that thinks through some of
the impulses of globalization.

M.E.: How did you first come to this type of work?

A.R.: I grew up in upstate New York, and when I was 15
years old I met Pete Seeger. Without knowing who he
was, I ended up doing volunteer work for one of his
organizations. After meeting him I learned about his
life using music and song as a part of social
movements. When I went to college, that's what I went
to study--music and social movements.

M.E.: So you had taken up the claw-hammer banjo?

A.R.: I did learn how to play the five-string banjo,
actually! I can still do it. But at a certain moment I
decided that the banjo wasn't the future of social
movements. And I decided that through film and video
you could express much more complicated and subtle
arguments about the world than you can through song.

M.E.: I think you're pissing off all of the political
songwriters out there.

A.R.: With song I think you have an access to the
spirit, access to the heart. But with film we have two
hours with people trapped in a dark room. You can refer
back to something that happened 60 minutes earlier in
the film, and you can play with what your viewers
remember, and you can build really intimate
relationships with characters. You can lay out both an
emotional journey and an intellectual argument. I don't
think there's anybody who will say that you can do all
of that in a song.

M.E.: Are you concerned with being pigeonholed as a
political filmmaker or having the movie labeled as a
"political" film?

A.R.: I'd be happy to be pigeonholed as a political
filmmaker. For me, making a film is so difficult and so
challenging that I only want to make films that are
relevant to the world we live in.

M.E.: Do you see a trend toward politics, or maybe away
from politics, in science fiction filmmaking today?

A.R.: Science fiction has always had a radical history,
all the way from Fritz Lang's Metropolis to Terry
Gilliam's Brazil, which is a comedic portrait of
fascism, up to Gattaca, which looks at the way that DNA
profiling could be used by the government, to Children
of Men, to Michael Winterbottom's Code 46.

Science fiction has always been a space for radical
critique on one hand, and, on the other, for selling
Happy Meals. I do think that science fiction today is
at risk of being completely co-opted by superhero
movies, big franchises, and xenophobic fantasies about
space aliens. It has that face as well. But I think the
long history, going back almost a hundred years, is of
science fiction as a place for forward-thinking,
radical thought.

M.E.: Perhaps unique among these movies you've
mentioned, Sleep Dealer is a bi-lingual film, with the
vast majority of the dialogue in Spanish. How did you
think about language in the film?

A.R.: We need to know in our guts that we are going
into a future that will be multi-cultural. I think we
are seeing in the news right now that America might not
be the only world power in the future, that English
might not be the international language of choice. So,
for me, doing a science fiction set in the South and
doing it in a language that was not English was
fundamental. I'd love to do a science fiction in
Nahuatl, or in Tagalog, or in Pashto. The language is
just part of a gesture that says, the future belongs to
all of us.

I think the situation we're in is very striking. It is
as if you met somebody and you asked them, "What do you
want to have in your future?" And they said, "I don't
know. I've never thought about it." In the cinema,
that's what we have for the entire global South. We
don't have any cinema that reflects on the future of
the so-called Third World. There's zero.

Why is it that we've seen comedies from the South,
we've seen romances from the South, we've seen action
movies from the South? We've seen everything but
reflections on the future. To me, the first step to
getting to the future that you want to live in is to
imagine it.

[Mark Engler, a writer based in New York City, is a
senior analyst with Foreign Policy In Focus and the
author of How to Rule the World: The Coming Battle Over
the Global Economy (Nation Books, 2008). He can be
reached via the Web site
http://www.DemocracyUprising.com (http://www.democracyuprising.com/) ]

Hope this helps.

Hasta pronto, y a la victoria, siempre, MKO.

Psy

11th July 2009, 05:46

I've have a little outline for the story idea.

We start in a Egyptian airbase were we are introduced to the characters and explained that is has been 10 years since capitalism has been violently overthrown on Earth by a world war including the bulk of working class. There are just starting to be enough global cooperation from the regions for global production plans mostly due to the industrial world being mostly rebuilt, facing huge surpluses of productive capacity and rising global awareness of workers. Also explained they would be issued a modified construction mech in hopes to rapidly modernize Africa and being one of the first report problems they have operating in Africa (this would get past it failing later without it looking like they are poorly engineered, they are simply not engineered for operation in Africa and simply modified to work there).

Later their in storm their planes goes off course, the plane crash lands in a jungle losing its communication antennas. The survivors decide there is no point in staying the crashed plane and uses the construction mech to clear a path through the jungle so the rest could drive towards a river on their maps of the area (being logical since it is clean drinking water, be a place to fish and they could raft down it). In the village villagers watch burning of plane crash and sends out a party to investigate.

The surviors and villages meets, the villages are unhappy about the path the suviors created, the surviours point out the path of destruction isn't that bad and the jungle will repair the damages in a year or so. Villagers still unhappy, the war vets points out the villagers agression would be futile, they (the surviours) don't want to fight them and the villagers won't acomplish anything picking a fight with them. The argument is stoped when the mech pilot states he is reading a huge increase of seismic activity and that is comming from up the river and moving fast down, they all rush back to the village with the villagers agreeing to get a ride on the truck.

At the village it has become obvious the strom has caused flooding up river and the river is now flash flooding. The construction mech loses no time saving villagers cought in the flood while the rest provides aid to the villagers. The flood waters starts overwhelm the construction mech, yet the pilot ingores all alarms continues to builds makeshift leevels to limmit the damage of the flood to the village. The mech breaks down in the river causing the pilot to be stranded till the flood dies down.

The flood creates a slit in the village over modernized technology and that is as far as I got in this outline.

ckaihatsu

11th July 2009, 11:02

I've have a little outline for the story idea.

We start in a Egyptian airbase were we are introduced to the characters and explained that is has been 10 years since capitalism has been violently overthrown on Earth by a world war including the bulk of working class.

Point of detail here -- I think we should be clear in stating that it was a world *class* war (*not* similar to the two world wars of the 20th century).

There are just starting to be enough global cooperation from the regions for global production plans mostly due to the industrial world being mostly rebuilt, facing huge surpluses of productive capacity and rising global awareness of workers. Also explained they would be issued a modified construction mech in hopes to rapidly modernize Africa and being one of the first report problems they have operating in Africa (this would get past it failing later without it looking like they are poorly engineered, they are simply not engineered for operation in Africa and simply modified to work there).

Oh, okay, so it would be like a test run, or a pilot project, done on a limited scale just to see how it *might* be able to work.... Good idea!

One other point of detail -- I think it will be *very* important to describe the "mech" in detail, as an introduction to what it is, for non-technically-inclined readers.

Later their in storm their planes goes off course, the plane crash lands in a jungle losing its communication antennas. The survivors decide there is no point in staying the crashed plane and uses the construction mech to clear a path through the jungle so the rest could drive towards a river on their maps of the area (being logical since it is clean drinking water, be a place to fish and they could raft down it). In the village villagers watch burning of plane crash and sends out a party to investigate.

The surviors and villages meets, the villages are unhappy about the path the suviors created, the surviours point out the path of destruction isn't that bad and the jungle will repair the damages in a year or so. Villagers still unhappy, the war vets points out the villagers agression would be futile, they (the surviours) don't want to fight them and the villagers won't acomplish anything picking a fight with them. The argument is stoped when the mech pilot states he is reading a huge increase of seismic activity and that is comming from up the river and moving fast down, they all rush back to the village with the villagers agreeing to get a ride on the truck.

At the village it has become obvious the strom has caused flooding up river and the river is now flash flooding. The construction mech loses no time saving villagers cought in the flood while the rest provides aid to the villagers. The flood waters starts overwhelm the construction mech, yet the pilot ingores all alarms continues to builds makeshift leevels to limmit the damage of the flood to the village. The mech breaks down in the river causing the pilot to be stranded till the flood dies down.

The flood creates a slit in the village over modernized technology and that is as far as I got in this outline.

Yeah! This is a substantive improvement over what we've had (lying stagnant) so far.... I'd say that, as long as we can *mesh* these developments into our pre-existing storyline, I'd have no objections to it....

Pirate turtle the 11th

11th July 2009, 14:34

Jimmy sells a paper.

Jimmy sells a paper but ends up having it stuck up his arse.

The end.

Psy

11th July 2009, 16:31

Point of detail here -- I think we should be clear in stating that it was a world *class* war (*not* similar to the two world wars of the 20th century).

True

Oh, okay, so it would be like a test run, or a pilot project, done on a limited scale just to see how it *might* be able to work.... Good idea!

Yhea, pretty much engineers made modifications that on paper would make them more suitable (in theory) for working in Africa.

One other point of detail -- I think it will be *very* important to describe the "mech" in detail, as an introduction to what it is, for non-technically-inclined readers.

Well the closest thing we have so far is Tmsuk T-52 Rescue Robot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD1OOvLBojo) that is far from what sci-fi depicted 20 years ago what we'd have by now. Anyway mechs are simply large scale robots operated by humans. I currently have no idea what the one in the story would be like.

Yeah! This is a substantive improvement over what we've had (lying stagnant) so far.... I'd say that, as long as we can *mesh* these developments into our pre-existing storyline, I'd have no objections to it....
okay.

Trystan

11th July 2009, 17:28

To develop on the paper story:

Jimmy joins a Marxist Party (we'll call it the Workers for Socialism Party) that forms a coalition with other Marxist parties and, er . . . an Islamic Party.

Jimmy is told to sell papers filled with crap written by his Party bosses.

Jimmy sells papers for a few years, sings the Internationale at conference and occasionally gets a word in (but usually the Party bosses have all the stage-time).

One day, the organisation that sells the paper splits . . . or something like that (by this time most people have lost interest and have left the coalition completely disillusioned).

Then there develops a sectarian war of words. Many people argue and develop horrible headaches - including Jimmy, whose head explodes for lack of thought during a musical segment.

We finish the film with a shot of some businessmen laughing over cigars and glasses of French brandy. They then drive off in large Rolls Royces powered by Iraqi oil.

The end.

berlitz23

12th July 2009, 01:52

A structure storyline is expendable altogether, I say we should emphasize more audience participation instead of meticulously calculated manipulation orchestrated by our good friends in Hollywood! Indie Cinema! Europe!

Jimmie Higgins

12th July 2009, 02:03

How is it that I only now noticed this thread!?

God, there are so many interesting history films that could be made - "Class Struggle" films should be the "Westerns" of today.

"Matewan" is probably one of the best historical fiction films made in the US in the last few decades. The brilliant thing about it is that it's basically a Western in form: instead of a town overrun and controlled by desperadoes in black hats, it's a company town and the thugs that run it are the company! The lone stranger who comes into town to battle the baddies is not some former sherrif or gunslinger or civil war vet, he's a vet of the class struggle: a former IWW organizer and socialist!

I would love to see a trillogy of historical fiction about the big 3 general strikes in the US during the depression.

Other than US history - a great movie about the Russian Revolution is desparatelty needed! It's a crime against history in general that such world-shaking events are ignored. Also no big films about the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising? There was a TV movie, but shit with 300 movies a year being produced about WWII, you'd think that this would get more attention.

Edit: Also, back to US history - a Debs film (trillogy) would be great. Film 1: The rail road unions to Debs radicalization. Film 2: The Socialist Party and the IWW. Film 3: Debs for President, WWI, The Russian Revolution. Anyone have 100 million dollars I can borrow to make these?

Psy

12th July 2009, 03:48

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

12th July 2009, 04:20

I'm really liking a lot of the ideas in this thread.

About the mech: It really should have tracks instead of legs - tracks are more stable, spread the weight better, and just plain make sense from an engineering standpoint. It'll also tie into the concept of the mech being a test platform - it would be relatively easy to modify a tank or a mechanical digger to have a torso and arms to do work.

It's a small thing really, especially in relation to everything else, but attention to the small details can count for a lot. It'll also serve to make the premise somewhat more unique than just another Gundam/BattleTech clone.

Jimmie Higgins

12th July 2009, 04:37

Don't forget Paris May 1968, you could make it big budget film with fight scenes recreating the police's failed attempt to breach the barricades erected by workers and the workers eventually pushing the police back across the barricades.

Hell, why not a whole franchise about worker uprisings in Paris: the commune, the protests and general strike against fascism in the 1920s, 1968!

I'm an internationalist and I know every region has it's own great history, but god damn sometimes I love the French!

Revy

12th July 2009, 04:38

I was about to say a film about the 1999 WTO protests in Seattle, but that's already been done:

YmQzw-O8eRY

Psy

12th July 2009, 05:21

I'm really liking a lot of the ideas in this thread.

About the mech: It really should have tracks instead of legs - tracks are more stable, spread the weight better, and just plain make sense from an engineering standpoint.

There is some practical heavy walking machines Timberjack Walking Machine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2V8GFqk_Y) but yhea they don't offer much advantages over wide tracks for the extra cost and increased maintained.

It'll also tie into the concept of the mech being a test platform - it would be relatively easy to modify a tank or a mechanical digger to have a torso and arms to do work.

I was thinking more of a test platform for operations outside conventional construction sites. You know operations with less support equipment, longer operating times before required maintenance and most importantly dealing with extreme climates (like hot humid jungles) on unfriendly terrain (like soft mucky ground).

Odds are the first mass produced construction mech would pretty much simply be engineered to just deal with already prepared construction sites and have poor off-road capabilities. I mean can you see something like a Tmsuk T-52 Rescue Robot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD1OOvLBojo) being able to operate on rough terrain. For example centre of gravity plays a much bigger role on uneven ground then it does on level ground and the spreading of weight players a much bigger role on soft terrain. .

It's a small thing really, especially in relation to everything else, but attention to the small details can count for a lot. It'll also serve to make the premise somewhat more unique than just another Gundam/BattleTech clone.
That is something more easily done in visual mediums.

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

12th July 2009, 05:48

I was thinking more of a test platform for operations outside conventional construction sites. You know operations with less support equipment, longer operating times before required maintenance and most importantly dealing with extreme climates (like hot humid jungles) on unfriendly terrain (like soft mucky ground).

Well, tracks would be ideal for dealing with soft mucky ground. I imagine most climatic adaptations would be "under the hood" so to speak and thus would not be readily apparent on the design.

Odds are the first mass produced construction mech would pretty much simply be engineered to just deal with already prepared construction sites and have poor off-road capabilities.If the construction sites I've seen are anything to go by, they do count as "off-road", at least somewhat.

I mean can you see something like a Tmsuk T-52 Rescue Robot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD1OOvLBojo) being able to operate on rough terrain.Give it bigger/wider tracks and a more powerful engine, then yes. Although I must say I imagined your construction mech to be bigger, something similar in size to this:

http://www.sourcemetic.com/uploadFile/200832152281193.jpg

Or maybe this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Armored_bulldozer_DSC00856.jpg/800px-Armored_bulldozer_DSC00856.jpg

For example centre of gravity plays a much bigger role on uneven ground then it does on level ground and the spreading of weight players a much bigger role on soft terrain.Which is why tracks make more sense - legs increase the height of the centre of gravity (unless they're really stubby and there's plenty of them, but that would make the machine more complicated than it needs to be), and concentrate the weight of the machine into a small area, as opposed to the relatively low profile and large contact patch of tracks.

That is something more easily done in visual mediums.I'm not sure what you mean, could you elaborate?

berlitz23

12th July 2009, 07:04

I demand Dicaprio and Megan Fox in these films! Goddammit I want the money for the message, so I want this film to be a pastiche of unrequited love, Man Vs. Nature, Explosive and unbelievale action scenes DIGITALLY remastered all with a revolutionary spice, and at the helm of this project I propose Oliver Stone! Indeed this will generate the greens! This Movie Will Provide the revolution!

Psy

12th July 2009, 19:25

Well, tracks would be ideal for dealing with soft mucky ground. I imagine most climatic adaptations would be "under the hood" so to speak and thus would not be readily apparent on the design.

Well wider tracks would be a obvious modification.

If the construction sites I've seen are anything to go by, they do count as "off-road", at least somewhat.

They are as off-road as a farmer's dirt road after bulldozers have cleared the site, the other construction vehicles don't need that much off-road capabilities since bulldozers usually clear the ground for them and compact the ground simply with their weight.

Give it bigger/wider tracks and a more powerful engine, then yes.

Right you'd have to modify it.

Although I must say I imagined your construction mech to be bigger, something similar in size to this:

http://www.sourcemetic.com/uploadFile/200832152281193.jpg

Or maybe this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Armored_bulldozer_DSC00856.jpg/800px-Armored_bulldozer_DSC00856.jpg

I simply mentioned the Tmsuk T-52 since it is what exists now. I was thinking of a much larger construction mech.

Which is why tracks make more sense - legs increase the height of the centre of gravity (unless they're really stubby and there's plenty of them, but that would make the machine more complicated than it needs to be), and concentrate the weight of the machine into a small area, as opposed to the relatively low profile and large contact patch of tracks.

True

I'm not sure what you mean, could you elaborate?
In visual mediums you can more easily add detail, it is possible to show the mech and even show the insidies simply by showing them while they are being worked on. You could even have images flashing back to its being built at the assembly line while the characters talk about it in the present (common technic in sci-fi anime)

Ã‘Ã³ẊÃ®Ã¶ŉ

13th July 2009, 21:25

I simply mentioned the Tmsuk T-52 since it is what exists now. I was thinking of a much larger construction mech.

You don't want it to be too large to carry on a smallish cargo plane or something like a C-130 Hercules (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-130_Hercules), since if you're going to be using this mech in developing areas transport facilities will be rudimentary - you'll have considerably more options if you can transport the mech on a plane that can land on a rougher airstrip than usual.

Manifesto

21st July 2009, 18:19

This summer....
It came...
It conquered...
It is THE SPECTRE HAUNTING EUROPE!!!
Bruce Willis in The Communist Manifesto
If only we could get him for that *sigh*.

Lacrimi de Chiciură

27th July 2009, 00:08

I think leftist film-makers need to make more movies that deal with present struggles of people in a capitalist world. This type of film would require less money for the budget than going back and doing historical stuff or trying to create some futuristic world. Also this type of film could be shot anywhere in the world, and the less Hollywood actors the better. Documentaries can be good, but what I think is even more interesting is fiction. I'd like to see modern movies in a French new wave, ethnofiction style. Maybe an example of this type of film I'm trying to describe would be Ciudade de Deus.

Psy

2nd August 2009, 03:37

You don't want it to be too large to carry on a smallish cargo plane or something like a C-130 Hercules (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-130_Hercules), since if you're going to be using this mech in developing areas transport facilities will be rudimentary - you'll have considerably more options if you can transport the mech on a plane that can land on a rougher airstrip than usual.
But heavy cargo planes like An-22 can lift 80,000 kg compared to the dinky 20,000 kg of the C-130, remember we are talking about air lift supplies along with equipment else we have a formation of cargo planes all getting blown off course. Come to think about it that would be possible if the they were all following the lead plane, but then you have multiple planes all blown off course, all losing communications and all not being seen by satellites and search planes, at least with one cargo plane (even if big) it is kinda plausible.

Speaking of that I though after we have the whole flood in the story switching to search effort trying to locate the downed cargo plane to show that the socialist world is actually looking for them and is competent just Africa still too rural and hard to search over with finite resources (point out the entire socialist world can't drop everything and search for one cargo plane, there still being forest fires, earthquakes,ect around the world that also demand the resources of rescue services).

RedCommieBear

2nd August 2009, 05:45

I've thought that it would be cool to re-make Citizen Smith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Smith) with a Flight of the Conchords (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_of_the_Conchords_(TV_series)) style vibe. I think it could be very funny (the struggles of being a far-leftie in a capitalist society) and kind of inspiring, but that might be just me.