(Cont. 2/2)
But then, in the episode 8, we have Kinger describing Scratch (the first abstraction) as:
"I wasn't quite on Scratch's level of thinking outside the box. [...] His ideas were often so bizarre and ABSTRACT that the rest of the team had no idea how to work in his language. Either due to pure brilliance, or the tumor in his head."
That word choice is 100% intentional. The only question is what do the writers want us to take away from that?
I'm still not entirely convinced the technical definition is relevant here (though Kinger, Scratch, and the rest of the initial team are definitely the right people to know it--its not off the table either), but clearly it was important to latch on to that term in general
I think those monsters are called "abstractions" BECAUSE of Scratch. From a man known for his (creative) "abstractions", what is devolving into an abstract monster if not the ultimate abstraction? Especially, from a man with a brain tumor. And a man who (allegedly) had his brain tampered with by an AI that fundamentally doesn't understand humans.
In a way, to abstract is to become Scratch, to follow in his footsteps.
What do you all think of this? Is there a better connection to "abstraction" in the OOP sense? I really feel like there should be, but I already waited a few days before posting this and it just hasn't come to me.
I think Scratch and the origin/nature of abstraction are going to be important details in a post-Caine Circus, so maybe I'm being proven wrong as we speak!
🧵 2/2
#TheAmazingDigitalCircus #TADC #GlitchProductions #GlitchProd #GLITCH