intfiction.org

(Probably already mentioned here, but not recently...)

Jason Scott has been posting his interview film rolls from the Get Lamp archive:

http://archive.org/search.php?query=col ... publicdate

There is *a whole lot* of this stuff. I mention it because (of course) I just saw my own name show up -- but I'm in the movie for about two minutes, and now there's like 40 minutes of me that you can download if you want. And equivalent amounts of all the other Get Lamp interviewees. Plus more people who didn't appear in the film.

Good call. The Adam Thornton interview was quite fun and it was interesting seeing his perspective on the underlying differences between the TADS and Inform design models. Just waiting for Howard Sherman to buffer now...

Excellent news; thank you! I purchased Get Lamp almost entirely out of interest in seeing Demian Katz interviewed, and in the end product, he was either barely in it or not in it at all (I may have blinked and missed it ...)

I dig Get Lamp either way, but still

_________________
Games, Fonts, and Font-Toys For Gamers - http://www.cumberlandgames.com

Jason Scott is a true hero. You just have to love that guy.

Excellent! Downloading some of it now, always good to have more pleasure to look forward to

This:

http://archive.org/details/getlamp-rpinsky

Is awesome! Thank you for pointing this out.

Yeah, so far I've looked at -

Peter Nepstad: I've been playing/reviewing Lovecraft games he curated. His section is almost entirely on 1893: A World's Fair Mystery, so it's the best extra footage I've seen so far in terms of one person talking about just one game at length.

Dave Cornelson: 'Cos I wanted to see and hear the author of Cattus Atrox. Good wide-ranging interview. No insights on Cattus Atrox, though.

Andrew Plotkin: I downloaded his due to peer pressure. I don't want to be punched! More seriously, Andrew is always asking difficult questions. Since he's the one being questioned in this interview, I don't know who he expected would answer them

Paul O'Brian: Another good wide-ranging talk.

Dan Shiovitz: I wanted to see and hear this inky chap. Some different perspectives here.

John Romero: I love to hear the Apple II stories, and Romero has them. In fact he'll be speaking at the Apple II Kansasfest in a week or two.

I'm not sure if these qualify as interviews. For one thing, the interviewer is absent, both literally and figuratively. His question are often cut out, so that it takes some time to figure out what the interviewee is responding to. I'm not sure if this is an aesthetic choice or if the interviewer is simply embarrassed by his stutter. And then there's the issue of the interviewer being rather passive (perhaps "comatose" is a better way of describing his technique?). When one of the nuttier subjects pontificates that he invented emotion in IF and hence all IF since 1996 that deals with emotion is derivative of his work, the interviewer just lets it slip. Many comic opportunities are lost because the interviewer is mentally not present. As far as I can see, it's a guy pointing a camera at his subject and letting him/her indulge in self-exegesis. "When did I break my IF cherry?" seems to the favourite question people ask themselves. Does anyone care? People like Stephen Grenade and Adam Thornton are mentally solid enough to handle the absence of an interwiewer and talk interestingly, but the rest is just mush.

_________________
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.

Not an Errol Morris fan, eh Jacek?

Oh J-J, I've missed your sneer, your unexamined sense of superiority. I must admit that while you're out sniffing Edmund Wilson's panties, I'm in your house, sniffing yours. You are SO right! Of course! How stupid of me to enjoy that interview without thinking of it your way. How very intolerably thick of me to go about trying to enjoy things in my own, simple-minded manner.

Though you know, a part of me does wonder, and please forgive me for this lingering whiff of apostasy, that if the footage contains such obvious defects, is so raw (here's the inevitable reference to the condition of your "manhood" during one of your marathon rants at the latest antics of those insufferable harlots of Jersey Shore, as with the other hand you're throwing popcorn at your face, guffawing, shifting in the discomfort of your still-sealed pyloric valve), that maybe, just maybe, they were cuts intended for the director's own use, and, please forgive my faithlessness, that they were released out, and please hold your outrage, out of the kindness of his heart (oh, I know all too well that men of your caliber don't have a use for such vestigial organs) for the community's perusal!

Ah, but that's right, I guess it does defy the imagination to think that an interview could be anything but a grilling session, a chance to waterboard the interviewee for their flimsy, downright un-Pudloian thoughts and opinions. Can you imagine (such audacity) that these interviews may have been a sampling, a survey of the opinions, thoughts and personalities of IF developers and contributors, past and present. It's almost as if these are rough-cuts from a work of history, not a segment of 60 minutes! The horror!

Well, that was a scary venture outside the accepted tenets of your church. I see why the elders forbid careless use of non-approved media and ideas. Absolutely dangerous, that stuff. I guess I will retreat back to under your bed so that I can watch you sleep. You're so cute when you sleep. Sometimes, I take a rag out, wipe the drool from your chin, and I keep that rag. I do. I suck on it when I'm anxious.