WILDWOOD and the DONGS are chasing the ROBBERS down a long street/corridor (the two change from one to another which lead/change into a theater lobby). WILDWOOD loses the DONGS and wanders around until: ::ries from the ROBBERS of "Down in front!" force him to sit down and vatch the show. A foreign movie is on, sub-titled and very bad. A convicted murderer has escaped from prison just after receiving the death sentence. He has stolen his daughter from her foster-parents and they ~e driving down narrow streets in a cheesy little car chased by cheesy .little police-cars (so explained to WILDWOOD by SANDY who is sitting next to him). WILDWOOD finds himself sitting in the back of the police-car and 1e I s being called "Captaine". He receives instructions in some foreign .language to fire at the car without regard for the girl and he answers jack in baby-talk. His car rams into something and he has time to see lis body torn to shreds before he's back in the theater, screaming. :ANDY tries to calm him and the other ROBBERS yell "Shut up in front!" By now, the killer's car, to avoid running over an old lady, is :totaled by a fruit wagon (I said it was a cheesy car). The killer, witt injuries from the crash now complicating previous gun-shot wounds, .arries his unconscious daughter into an arty Catholic church for sanctuary. (We see now how much these two characters resemble NORMAN nd SALOME). He lays his daughter down on one of the benches and, now crawling, goes to a confession box. WILDWOOD finds himself in priestly vestments, occupying the box. While the killer is confessing, WILDWOOD finds the police radio from the car he was in in the previous scene. It is saying that if he will hand he prisoner over, the police will clean all of the stained-glass windows every Friday and Saturday for five weeks. Meanwhile, the killer has started spitting blood and is asking for last rites. Confused, WILDWOOD gets out of the confession box, talking baby-talk, and making crosses with his fingers allover the killer's body, which seems to satisfy the killer as he dies. WILDWOOD then looks p to see SALOME, who's now recovered and looks at him with grief and error and exhaustion. Seeing her with such an expression, in her white Sunday dress, now torn and blood-stained, WILDWOOD breaths a deep sigh E resignation and rapes her.
)TE: OLD CITY is said to be beneath NEW CITY, but the reader ~ogressively sees that OLD CITY is an indoor area with institutional )rridors that characters slip in and out of uncontrollably. )TE: The distinction between the story and the dream should become ~ogressively clearer and more intense as DIRT CHEAP progresses. This .timately makes the last phase of the story more triumphant and the 1st phase of the dream more nightmarish.
This is an idea for the last major incident which throws everyone ltO the nightmarish end. «This, if possible at all, must be carried 'f without any slipups or it looks awful, if not already.» During the .ctory party in RATLAND, a group of the characters wander off to olav on the rides and get lost. The others, worrying, send off a search party. Those remaining get bored and decide to open the safe (or a compartment in it). They find a collection of old notes, mostly incomprehensible, and a badly-drawn comic-strip with disturbing characteristics. Meanwhile, one of the other groups stumble into a row of doors (likE the interior of the bus) with plaques on eabhdoor reading: Bloodlust in Ratland, Dirt Cheap, The Negress Always Called Him Natty Bumppo When He Laughed, "Miscellaneous Super-Hero Stories", "Misc. Sword and Sorcery Stories", "Misc. Self-Indulgences", and many reading "Vacant". Behind each door is a storeroom holding sets and character mannequins (sp?) . The other group works down a narrow corridor which leads to a ladder. They climb through the ladder, poking their heads through man-hole at the end of a dirt road. Up the road, behind a fence, two very strange people ~e eating pizza and discussing a story which they're having trouble caring about. One of the search party starts to rise out of the manhole until a mean little dog barks insanely and chases them back down. One of the pair yell, "Mud, quit chasing kids!" Mud knows. better, but returns to the yard anyway.
NOTE: It is learned quickly, in Book 2, that this pair were merely pawns of Luther Hopjohn, calling from beyond The End.
NOTE: Each character's recollection of incidents before proper of the story should be somewhat different, not slightly and subtlety, yet distinctly.' the beginning blatantly, but NOTE: The beginning remains and probably will remain a somewhat sticky problem. However, the beginning--Nonsense would have followed.
POSSIBLE PLOT-LINE (thematic, not phenomenal) Three-part base remains: Characters and events begin fairly unclear, in strained and irrational flow forming into short but clear scenes struggling with forces. Scenes become longer and clearer until 'rational' 'story'is over-powering. 'Story' runs smoothly and strongly until I Cave-in' .
JANUARY 76 PACKAGING Whatever becomes of DIRT CHEAP, it will be a rather large work in every possible sense. One big 'fume' is to me inadequate. It would take years before anyone sees it, even after the planning stages are completed. Also, people are, I think, more likely to subscribe to a magazine then to buy a comic "monster" in one lump (over 10 bucks if we're going to be at all fair to ourselves). It looks rather pompous, anyway. A number of sections remains the most feasible, but how do we divide? Do we print by the chapter or by the volume, or do we establish a convenient page number? This final question is not ready to be answered.
FORM
We'll worry when we've got a bit more meat on the skeleton.
DONGS What happens to the dong at the beginning of the story? After this encounter with HASHFORD and FILLMORE he must have been wandering around the catacombs (Are there catacombs now?) between NEW and OLD CITIES where anything could have been happening to him. Maybe he found some manuscripts (by NORMAN? HOPJOHN? HAWLEY? any or all?) and read them. Maybe he had some adventures of his own which tie mysteriously (metaphorically?) to everyone else's story. Maybe he discovers the answers to everyone else's problems, but since he has no contact with any of the other main characters, the finding is of no significance to him or anyone else. Maybe he enters, via a side door, one of TORNADO GIRL's fantasies. Maybe he gets out eventually and keeps ending up in places where other main characters have already been or have yet to be. . Preferably, he gets involved with a combination of all of the above. Ultimately, however, he makes it back to the John he first entered, just as HASHFORD and another dong are in there. The dong, much scruffier and skinnier now bears a resemblance to guess who. Maybe he takes HASHFORD's place after HASHFORD is shot, thereby living in his place. Maybe he takes HASHFORD's place before, thereby dying in his place. Maybe we should capitalize upon the resemblance this segment might bear to the work of Mr. Dodgson. At this point we might pause to consider what a scholar-bachelor does for amusement besides read multi-level political satires to little girls? Incidentally, I'm quite pleased with this idea and am looking forward to how we get this into the story. Somehow I have the weird and terribly amusing notion that I should be apologizing for adding more laberynthene proportions to an already confused plot. This is Economy? ECONOMICS What must be said? What need only be suggested? Correction: How much must be said about each thing that must be said? However, the tern 'each thing' implies an elemental rather than holistic approach. The only way to avoid the elemental/holistic dispute would be to center the conern completely upon the characters. On the other hand, I feel, now, that the E/H dispute has some dramatic potential itself «(but no, no, no, I must disagree. It is the E/H dispute that has occupied too much of our attention and consequently frustrates the fruition of our budding characters.») DONGS: Part Two As this Dong makes his spiritual journey between NEW CITY and through other people's fantasies, what happens? learned about himself, the Dongs, the history of NEW and Earth, or the Universe in general? Maybe, the dongs sought their appearance, originally, as a matter of pride. Maybe, they sought it in order to gain security through sameness during a time of great social upheaval. Maybe they're the remnants of c religious cult (Have you noticed that the main complaint about closely-knit religious and psycho-mystical cults is that everyone has the same expression on his or her face?) which formed an alliance with other groups in a power play, but once in power, became policemen as a result of getting the bum end of the allotment of power. Maybe they're outcasts (unlikelv) or imitation game players.
CITY and OLD What can be OLD CITY, One question raised by this thinking is, quite naturally, what do female dongs look like? «Should Dongs look just a little like John Wayne?» «(How are the Dongs, who are the spitting image of Dick Tracy, supposed to look like John Wayne? The Power of Suggestion?») Another question, how do we establish possible connections between the various theories, is explored in the next section.
HISTORICAL REVISIONISM AND CONSPIRATORIALISM It would be interesting to establish an atmosphere of uncertainty about the history of the setting. To remain with the dongs for an example: were the dongs established by the government, CONRAD HAWLEY, or a Dong Messiah? «(Isn't that a book by Frank Herbert?») «How mysterious are the Dongs to the other characters?» «(They are commonplace to the other characters; they are mysterious only to themselves.») Various characters have various opinions. This conflict of viewpoints can be carried through the origin of the current government, the civilization, then the planet. Naturally, historical stances are tailored to conform to and directly support the various world-schemes held by different groups and individuals. This should and probably will be explored further later.
FOREIGN POLICY One very unclear point in 'DIRT CHEAP' has always been the state of the world as a whole as the story progresses. The 'Summer 1975' notes, with the 'DUN and ONKA' developments were of only the slightest help. There were, in that piece, apparently colonies formed by the great empire of the past which had since fallen into neglect. Now, with historical ambiguity at our service, we can toy with foreign countries. At present, «Which of these statements is true? Unlike previous times, the stage for DIRT CHEAP is finally set. Or: Current notes simply push the story deeper into the quicksand that it has always inhabited, but at least the quicksand is of much higher quality.» I imagine them to be nearly all poor and ill-governed; ranging in social climate from disorderly (Italian style) to disastrous, from apathetic to incinderary. (This whole section of foreign policy is redeemable only on the grounds of the paradoxical resolution: The finished product does not merit the effort of its construction.) Each country has a smart-looking old man, a high priest or a civil service clerk or a beggar or a shop owner, who contends, rather shamefacedly, that his country (rather paternal sense of 'my' country) is the cradle of civilization. Each has a government made up of young revolutionaries, all idealistic, ruthless, and self-righteous, except one, where the dictator is the country's smart-Iooking-old-man-in-residence. The question is raised, but not answered, if he is the sort of dictator that all of the young revolutionary dictators have just overthrown, or if he is the sort of dictator that all of the young dictators will eventually become. Who, then, is whose colony?
PACKAGING, Part 2 In respect to recent enlargements in the potential scope, it is advisable to return occasionally to alternatives in the packaging and general construction of DIRT CHEAP. Originally, there was DIRT CHEAP. As the story became progressively longer, Books 1,2,3, etc. became possible. Later, the use of certain plot-devices revitalized the prospects of a complete one-shot novel. However, recent trends have made this difficult again. Maybe, we could return to the succeeding volumes, but not extend the story in a linear way. «(We must stop thinking of dividing the future. Mechanical division and sub-divisions hinder the necessarily organic nature of the story's development.») That is each volume could cover the same period of time that the other's cover. There are two ways to do this. Each volume could cover ~ different story from the same sequence of events or present the same story with its sequence of events altered for each volume. However, I could use some real aesthetic justification to do this. «(So could I, but I like this idea anyway.») «(Packaging is just an attempt to give this story a formal structure. ««Who are we deferring to here?»» Well, let me tell you! This story is not, was not, and will not be structured! And it sure ain't formal! You want to know what this DC looks like!? Look at....»)
THE NATURE OF AMBIGUITY: PUT ALL DOUBTS TO WORK IN SERVICE OF THE STORY. «(Use all your ammo and keep'em dancin' to your lead.»)
HISTORICAL REVISIONISM, Part 2 One important point seems to be making itself to me. It would be wise, if we adopt the state of historical ambiguity as a plot device, tc include an at-least-implied response to the political views of George Orwell. Besides the aesthetic and theoretical appeal of such an idea, it would be wisest to refer to Newthink before we're accused of it. «(A perfect example of Newthink: DOngs look like Dick Tracy; have all our characters say they look like John Wayne.») SELF-ABUSE If we're going to include that complicated scene in RATLAND of the Shocking Discovery, it is neccessary that the Authors be conquered in some way.
HISTORICAL REVISIONISM, Part 3 In the Age of Catastrophe, Historical Ambiguity and a larger world-scene make a more versatile situation for RATLAND and THE GAME. Who is MR. HAWLEY? Is he a hero or a villain? Is his first name Conrad or Marlowe? Did he found the Present Government, The Dongs, or The Game (and was his hatred for them only a show)? Did any of the above parties Found, Discover, or Fabricate any of the other above parties? (Not to worry)
NEW HOPE FOR HEMORRHOIDS If one distinguishes between major and minor characters, shouldn't one distinguish between major and minor non-characters as well? «(Who indeed?») «(Authors are non-characters.») If one distinguishes between major and minor. non-characters, however, one certainly should distinguish between major and minor characters. A story is the story of fill in the blank. Who or what DIRT CHEAP the story of? «(Like Homer's Odyssey, it is the story of telling stories.») AT THE TOM MIX FILM FESTIVAL A particularly clear problem has been discovered. We've been too soft on our characters. «(I agree. They haven't been doing their part of the job.») In fact, much of out style of characterization has remained the same since this story's creation: incredibly simplistic. «(Simple like the genius of the innocent babe; this must be expected; our knowledge of human character extends hardly beyond the 3-yr-old level. ) ) ) The problem of including death and violence into the DIRT CHEAP world shows this problem quite well. First, you can integrate the deatt and violence into the story so that the ratio between what is said and unsaid is one which meets the particular demands of the story. A second way of dealing with it explicitly is to divide the characters into two groups: Main characters, who are ~n a sense real characters who must be dealt with properly «(How properly? Realistically yet not senselessly? Or fantastically and therefore quite boorishly mythic?») and secondary characters who are many and unrefined and can be butchered to any degree. A good example of this is in 60's spy movies. We were too sophisticated and too honest to use this method, but we still didn't want any harm done. The other way is simply to gauge what actions shall be revealed by degree of violence or censorship. This method can, however, be used on characters both human arid sub-human. Being armchair hippies, this notion offended us, but somehow, we've taken on an extreme form of this method. Originally there were scenes of violence, but we've rendered them futile or reduced them to slapstick (or at least tried to). «(It seems to me that by adapting the idea of historical ambiguity if we have made scenes of violence futile but placing them within a bizarre social framework, then no character should have any motivation for violence, and therefore when any act of violence does occur, it becomes quite special indeed.») Not only do we have a lot of criminals and very few crimes, but we've revealed a society where no acts of violence can plausibly take place within the bizarre social framework suggested by the interaction of the main characters. But, now that I think about it, I'm not very hopeful that we'll even quite develop our characters very well. I really can't adapt any of this to DIRT CHEAP. On the other hand, maybe we only need a good long summer to et these ideas into concrete form.