FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Freelance Traveller
(15 Nov 2015 02:40 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
tmr0195@xxxxxx
(15 Nov 2015 15:33 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Tim
(15 Nov 2015 23:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
tmr0195@xxxxxx
(16 Nov 2015 02:38 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
tmr0195@xxxxxx
(16 Nov 2015 03:22 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Freelance Traveller
(21 Nov 2015 02:45 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
William Ewing
(16 Nov 2015 00:32 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Freelance Traveller
(21 Nov 2015 02:52 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
William Ewing
(21 Nov 2015 07:47 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Freelance Traveller
(21 Nov 2015 19:51 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
William Ewing
(21 Nov 2015 23:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Freelance Traveller
(21 Nov 2015 02:15 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Kurt Feltenberger
(16 Nov 2015 02:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Freelance Traveller
(21 Nov 2015 02:58 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Freelance Traveller
(21 Nov 2015 05:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
tmr0195@xxxxxx
(21 Nov 2015 13:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Jim Vassilakos
(21 Nov 2015 20:07 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers
Freelance Traveller
(21 Nov 2015 23:07 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] FOR PEER REVIEW: Dreamwalkers Freelance Traveller (21 Nov 2015 23:45 UTC)
|
Sorry about fat-fingering a premature send... On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:07:15 -0800, Jim Vassilakos <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote: >Now, what I'm seeing here is that the second paragraph doesn't really >conform to the first. If the dream extended beyond what the dreamer >perceives, then one would think that the shadowy figure would be >potentially identifiable by the Visitor. In other words, there would be an >actual follower who would have some sort of real existence outside the >perception of the dreamer. But this creates problems, because it gives >dreams a sort of independent reality, which I'm not really sure you want to >introduce. (Well, maybe you do, in which case you can ignore the rest of >this.) No, it's not an independent reality; it's sort of an implicit extension of what the dreamer (and Observer) would see - if the dreamer is standing in the middle of a room, and what s/he sees looks like the living room of his parents' house when s/he was a child, implicitly, the entire room is there, including the part of the room s/he can't see because it's behind him/her, and beyond that, the rest of the house (although that can be less certain; maybe by walking through the door that would normally lead to the hall, the dreamer will transition to someplace different - it's a dream; it doesn't follow 'normal' rules). If the dreamer feels s/he is being followed, but doesn't know by who, then the Visitor should be able to see that something/someone is following, but can't identify by who/what, just that there's something there ("a shadowy figure"). To the extent that the dreamer _does_ know who it _might_ be, the Visitor can and will also know that, but it doesn't necessarily make the figure more distinct. >Nonetheless, it does make sense that a Visitor should be able to get more >information than a mere Observer. Interestingly, your mention of there >being a list of individuals that might be available to a Visitor (but >presumably not the an Observer) seems to underscore this point. Exactly; the Visitor has access to more information connected to the dream than the Observer does - a good description of the Observer might be 'consomniar' (from [con, =with], and [somniare, =to dream]), or 'co-dreamer' - the Observer experiences the dream just as the dreamer does, no more, no less, no control. The Visitor is more than a mere consomniar; s/he has access to additional, 'supporting' material connected with the dream, and can thus perceive the entirety of the implicit environment of the dream. If you would prefer an analogy with the performing arts, the Observer sits in the audience with the dreamer watching the play; the Visitor can wander around the stage and back-stage as well. >Hence, what I would do if I were you is that I'd modify the first >paragraph. Instead of talking about the self-consistency of the dream >environment and the extension of that environment beyond the perceptions of >the dreamer, it might be a better idea to simply say that a Visitor is >privy to the significance and implications of the dream to the same extent >as the dreamer, whereas the Observer is not. Hence, if the dream involves a >shadowy figure, an observer would be left at a loss as to what exactly this >means, whereas a Visitor would understand the meaning of the dream >potentially up the same extent as the dreamer, perhaps even having a list >of people who the dreamer is afraid of. By the same token, if there is some >symbol in the dream that is meaningful to the dreamer, a visitor would at >least have a chance to recognize its significance. whereas an observer >would not. In this way, you can significantly put the powers of Visitors >well above those of Observers without having to extend the the dream-space >into some sort of alternate reality. The thing is, the dream environment _is_ an 'alternate reality' of sorts, one that is totally within the dreamer's mind while the dream is in progress (only!), and which can be changed by the dreamer during the dream (consciously, if the dreamer is a trained/experienced lucid dreamer, or unconsciously otherwise). But, even though the dreamer must necessarily have _all_ of the information to create the environment and dream, s/he isn't necessarily _aware_ of it, and the 'reality' is that generally, only enough of the 'world' to support the dream is created - if the dream takes place on a deserted island beach, the rest of the island may be there, and surrounded by ocean, but if there's no need for it, there won't be a 'world' beyond the horizon, and even other parts of the island may be 'undefined' (that is, they're there, but may not appear as anything in particular to the Visitor). As far as understanding meanings or implications... Even Observers can remember a dream that they've 'walked'; they're not generally subject to forgetting the dream the way that dreamers commonly do. At that point, they can take the time to go over it and (if they have the relevant skills) analyze it and extract meaning from it (and Tavrchedl' therapist dreamwalkers do just that). Again, Visitors can, by virtue of having the ability to see more of the environment, extract more information from the dream - but even then, it's not going to be information that the dreamer didn't _know_, although the dreamer may not _consciously_ know it, or know that s/he knows. -- Jeff Zeitlin, Editor Freelance Traveller The Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller® Fanzine and Resource xxxxxx@freelancetraveller.com http://www.freelancetraveller.com http://freelancetraveller.downport.com/ ®Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises, 1977-2014. Use of the trademark in this notice and in the referenced materials is not intended to infringe or devalue the trademark. Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following enterprises for hosting services: CyberNET Web Hosting (http://www.cyberwebhosting.net) The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com)