Warp wrote:
> Captain Jack <Cap### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
>> In acting classes that I have attended as well as taught, we talk about "two 
>> dimensional characters", "cardboard cutouts", and "characters with no 
>> depth", all referring to the same thing.
> 
>   Btw, was the original expression "two-dimensional character" (meaning a
> character with no depth), after which some people started using an
> exaggerated version of the expression, "one-dimensional character" in
> their desire to say "a really, really flat character", and after years
> of using that, it has basically replaced the original expression and thus
> everybody nowadays says "one-dimensional character" when they really mean
> what "two-dimensional character" meant originally?
> 
That is probably it, yeah.  Though extending the metaphor in that way 
does yield some useful ideas.

That the character lacks all dimensionality except as a single thrust, 
or file.  Hints at the
possibility of a no-dimensional character, a single point, useful as a 
reference, a position, and that is all.

Post a reply to this message