Author notes

Chapter 2 Page 3

Abt_Nihil

on May 7, 2008

There's been the question if and how these chapters tie together. I can assure you they do, and you will soon see how. The Sunhra story that I told in the first chapter was never meant to be "the" central storyline, but when I had completed the first chapter I intended to continue it at least through the second chapter. But, exactly as the spontaneous decision to run with Sunhra in the first chapter, I toppled this plan and spontaneously chose to tell this one inbetween. Mrs Wong is one of the first characters I created for signifikat, so if ever there was something I could call a central storyline, she was part of it. But as these stories evolved and intertwined, they became equals in one big story.

By the way, you might wanna check out Eat My Shorts! - I uploaded a whole bunch of stuff recently.

REPLIES:

Fitz: Well, I think there's a pretty good test in the real world: If you're biological, chances are you don't have implanted memories… at least until the suitable interfaces will be reasonably priced :-) But yeah, seriously, memory is at the core of everyone's personality, you might even say it is the very core of personal identity: You are who you are (and behave as you do) because you remember who you were in the past. Thus, I identify most of what (the rather obscure concepts) fate or destiny mean by what your memory - your autobiographical past as interpreted in the present - forces on you (of course there are external forces as well). Also, you might wanna compare this statement about implanted memory with the one on the previous page concerning external memory :-) Plus, since you spoke of "proof" that certain things happened, compare Bertrand Russell: "In the first place, everything constituting a memory-belief is happening now, not in that past time to which the belief is said to refer. It is not logically necessary to the existence of a memory-belief that the event remembered should have occurred, or even that the past should have existed at all. There is no logical impossibility in the hypothesis that the world sprang into being five minutes ago, exactly as it then was, with a population that "remembered" a wholly unreal past" (from "The Analysis of Mind", readable in its entirety here). Similarly, there is no logical impossibility that all the proofs you can give for what happened sprang into being five minutes ago (even those which can be carbon-dated back to a million years in the past, that's why the creationist argument is so persistent).

Nepath: Thanks!

JNP: One reason why I started adding grey tones to my comics some years back was to enhance overall storytelling clarity; the decision to keep this chapter in pure b/w went hand in hand with my effort to clarify my lineart. But seems like I failed here, because, well, there IS no cloth in the last panel :-) There are her two hands and her eye in the background; she's just putting rings on her right hand (holding one ring between her thumb and index finger). Still, your main point does apply: I do keep most things deliberately mysterious, I just hope it also creates suspense and a sense of wanting to found out what's happening, more than leaving readers completely in the dark, possibly putting them off.

DAJB: You know how it is… you end up cutting text from the comic and have to squeeze it all into the comments :-) Thanks!

Midge: Thanks! Well, what she's gonna do - you'll soon find out… the cinnamon city question is a very good one actually. I can't say much, but that robot comes from there… and I can only reveal that because it probably isn't any help in figuring out how this all ties together :-)

Jabali & cda: Thanks!

mlai: Yes I am actually - a Ph.D. student since last month; so you should expect a lenghty answer! :-) Our disagreement - if it is not based on a misunderstanding - seems to be a fundamental one: I do think that memory makes us who we are. Not exclusively, since what we do also makes us who we are, and what we do is not determined by memory alone. But I'd say memory influences our choices; intentional actions are almost exclusively based on previous experiences, and thus on memory. On the other hand, unintentional actions can be divided into instinct and habit, so the only thing not having to do with memory would be instinctive actions. That is why I smuggled an "almost" into the sentence before the previous one :-) Most things we do (intentional or not) because we've always done them that way, and because we know other people expect us to do them that way. Also, everything we know about ourself and others depends on memory - I oppose the notion that our "self" (in the philosophical sense) can be known immediately (by taking a metaphorical look "inside", or whatever notion may suit you best). To adapt your terminology: I don't see how a formed personality can remain itself when stripped of its memory.

mlai (again): Imagining experiences is a constructive process similar especially to episodic memory… so the finding that their neural implementations are similar shouldn't surprise. But I don't see how to construct an argument from that either :-) Anyway, I was speaking of memory in the broadest sense, and I think that it is in this broadest sense that our argument should be settled - given there is a substantial difference of views. My argument would apply on either memory level, declarative as well as procedural. Both levels are crucial for your being able to be who you are - to act in a way that is specific to your personality, as well as feeling and thinking in a way that is specific to yourself. You are familiar with yourself in the same way that you are familiar with the response of your car - you simply actualize past experiences using memory. To answer your question, I'd conjecture that someone who loses his memory would also lose his humor - there is a personal variable to humor, but it is no doubt shaped by experience and social acceptance (and both go into memory). So memory not only tells you what to find funny, but whether you should laugh out loudly, smirk, or not react at all.

JNP (again): All my comic were b/w until I started A.D 1997 ep. 1 (2006?), and the first comic I colored was Bombshell (2007). I feel my coloring skills are not up to par with my lineart skills… but as I said, doing b/w art without graytones is more of a challenge, because pure b/w always needs more contrast and better layouts, just to make things recognizable. And… It would be interesting to find out to what extent changing people's memories completely would change their personality. There's a great movie about that, Dark City… co-starring the divine Jennifer Connelly :-)