Re:

["Jason Joel Thompson" <jason@wildghost.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Crawford <chriscrawford@wave.net>

> > The paradigm
> > shift is to move from defining story as a description of past events, to
a
> > description of -current- events
>
> I must confess, your point is lost on me. To me, the operant term is
> "description", and whether the description is of past events or current
> events seems irrelevant to me.

Very relevant:

Past events: non-interactive
Current events: interactive

 In the example you offer, the actors are
> indeed interacting with one other, but the audience enjoys no
interactivity
> whatever, whether they are witnessing it as it happens or after the fact.


The actors *are* the audience Chris.

Even individuals who weren't a part of the core 20 were still actively
present in the environment and fully capable of altering the flow of events
around them.

Sure, I suppose someone could just sit on a chair and watch the events
unfold-- this is merely an example of someone making a choice to not
interact.

But its not like people would ignore you if you were sitting there-- like it
or not your presence would have an impact.