quote:Originally posted by Nick:
is she right?
It seems like it could be valuable to leave this an open question. Let's just say in the process of the narrative, there are those who cannot deny her belief system as much as they might try.
quote:
why is this happening to her, specifically?
She did an interdisciplinary dissertation with her fiance, a behavioral psychologist, analyzing large-scale patterns of human behavior in response to various stimulus. Why people panic during plagues, and how it's possible to predict outcomes of that panic. The WAY they panic, that is.
In the course of the project, the fiance dies in an accident, shortly after they realize the predictive model which worked for all of human history stopped working shortly after the widespread use of television (or whatever Unhealthy Modern Convenience or Widespread Diabolical Device you'd like to pin this on).
Television (or UMC/WDD) caused the social pattern to crumble into fractal chaos around the edges. The Mass' normal reactions became muted, more prone to paranoia.
quote:
what is the external force, if it exists?
A specific, wildly popular cable channel.
The television broadcast is a carrier signal for the real visual/electronic input.
The waitress, a few years after the death & dropping out of school, has noticed the interference in the predictive model stopped being chaotic and started being directed.
(She tries to forget the model, but it comes to mind every time she watches the news, and some of the diner regulars like to have CNN on during the lunch breaks, or The Weather Channel before they go fishing/hunting/whatever).
There is, of course, an Executive Programming Board who have a vested interest in eliminating those who are immune to their signal.
quote:
what actions do people under control perform that they would not otherwise?
speak words that aren't theirs, instead quote wholesale bits of "input" from the source programming. Act out certain scenes from top-rated sitcoms.
That's a symptom, at least.
Direct paranoia and aggression against certain "flags" -- like black trenchcoats, or long-haired males, or things even more subtle. Use of the words "workers' rights," say, could trigger a specific response.
And the responses are becoming more primally motivated -- people choosing atypical sex partners, for instance, or becoming complicit in hate crimes.
(at it's most extreme, this could lend itself to bi/lesbian love slaves and homicidal bodyguards for the Executive Board members.)
Interestingly, the plot could also bring up the fact that the board members themselves would not be immune to the signal. It could be that they themselves get INTO the brainwashing, but in a drug-trip sort of way. Maybe they have some way to jam the signal or insulate themselves while watching the top shows.
(I'd like to note that I wrote this before reading the other responses, and it's WEIRD how well all the different versions and revisions coincide.)
[ 25-06-2001: Message edited by: grant ] |