Warp escreveu:
> John VanSickle <evi### [at] kosherhotmailcom> wrote:
>> Instead of adding a third dimension to the visual experience of _the 
>> Phantom Menace_, you instead should have done one or more of these instead:
> 
>> * Added a second dimension to the characters;
>> * Added a second dimension to the plot;
>> * Subtracted a Jar-Jar from the entire work.
> 
>   Why has "one-dimensional" become what was previously referred to as
> "two-dimensional" when talking about characterization and personality?
> In fact, the former has replaced the latter so much that the latter is
> not used *at all* anymore.
> 
>   The figure of speech (ie. "two-dimensional" vs. "three-dimensional"
> character) has to do with the figurative depth of a character's personality.
> A well-developed character has depth to it, while a very straightforward
> and superficial characters is "flat" (iow. "two-dimensional").
> 
>   Where did the "one-dimensional" come from? It does not describe a "flat"
> character.

possibly from the same source that calls everything cool "sick".  i.e. 
stupidity...

Post a reply to this message