#pathologic meta

[transdaniil]

something i haven't seen mentioned yet abt 3 is that at multiple different moments daniil has the option to make a point of why he is fighting death.

(Apparently I don't have the screenshot of him saying something similar to Grief at Lara's funeral, but he does.)

this kills any reading where it was ever a vanity project for him. where he was doing it because he's just that self important.

he's doing it out of raw compassion. he wants grief and suffering to end. he wants loss to end.

[margueritestjusts]

Pathologic: The Marble Nest is so Nietzschean it makes me sick. I believe Dankovsky’s time loop perfectly encapsulates what Nietzsche was referring to whenever he discussed the eternal return. How so, you might ask? Let me explain.

Concepts similar to the eternal return predate Nietzsche, most notably with the concept of samsara (the cycle of death and rebirth, influenced by the karmic cycle) in Hinduism and Buddhism, but the eternal return holds significant weight in Nietzsche's philosophy given that not only is he oft called a nihilist (although that label is not apt), but also given that Nietzsche was a staunch determinist. The first time Nietzsche mentions the eternal return is in The Gay Science, where he presents it to the reader as a thought experiment:

“What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more' … Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.' If this thought gained possession of you, it would change you as you are or perhaps crush you. The question in each and every thing, 'Do you desire this once more and innumerable times more?' would lie upon your actions as the greatest weight. Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal?” (Nietzsche, The Gay Science, p. 273-274, tr. Walter Kaufmann).

Essentially, the eternal return is the belief that time itself is an infinite loop. Everything will repeat, and every event will play out in the same way for all of eternity. While Pathologic as a whole does tend to take more from absurdism and the Theatre of the Absurd (for time loops specifically? See: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead), I think the eternal return holds special weight for Dankovsky in The Marble Nest; he willingly chooses (depending on which ending you chose) to repeat the same day over and over again, not only because he is stubborn and refuses to die, but because he wants to still find a way to keep everyone safe and keep the plague out of the Stone Yard. Despite this, however, the events of the DLC are set to repeat in the exact same way, no matter how many times you try, in vain, to change the outcome. The plague will still come, and you will still choose whether or not you will finally die or not.

And I find it fascinating that the Executor sees Dankovsky's death as being, essentially, mercy. It is implied that when we are playing the DLC, this is not the first time Dankovsky has continued to repeat the time loop. How long has he been doing it for? That, we don't know, but the Executor believes that not only is Dankovsky agitating for continuing to deny death, but that it is also causing him suffering. By choosing to go with the Executor, Dankovsky will finally escape the samsara of his deathbed-induced, delirious time loop. By the end of the DLC, he has come to grapple with death and really, what the hell he's doing. By choosing to go with the Executor now, I believe Dankovsky is, well... not necessarily more at peace with death, but has ultimately come to accept his own mortality in the wake of the plague spreading to the Stone Yard. What would the point of his death be if he just didn't learn anything? That is why the game chastizes you when you choose to die during the first conversation, after all.

On the other hand, there's the choice to repeat the day once again. Would Daniil Dankovsky, bachelor of medicine and famed thanaticist, truly choose to just accept his death? No. Dankovsky would not. Not the man who claimed he would destroy Death itself. That's why he came to this town in the first place, was it not? He will choose to repeat the day, to try in vain to save this town no matter what, and no matter how many times he must relive this day once again.

[jude-harley]

i'm gonna do something i shouldn't and vaguepost about pathologic discourse i saw on my dash, specifically about daniil dankovsky and his position in relation to labor unions/organizing

i want to start by highlighting the idea that

a.) labor unions are a good thing

and that

b.) a good character would support that good thing

so people who think a character is "good" feel that character should/would support that good thing

this is the part of the post where i would get into more nuanced discourse except because i've only played the first game (and only the bachelor and haruspex routes) and don't feel prepared to cite certain passages from memory i feel unprepared to actually address some of the arguments made

so i'll just say this

i completely and totally understand the impulse to apply the simple a-b logic highlighted in the first part of the post to a character you like, and am not immune from doing so myself. but:

danil dankovsky is not a good person.

and he waltzes into town wearing the single most expensive piece of clothing in the game on his back.

[amphorographia]

Wouldn't it be cool if the Polyhedron looked different for each of the protagonists? We get so many differing descriptions of what it looks like to different people, imagine if that extended to the three characters. If Daniil saw a structure made of paper, the self-made miracle symbolic of his own attempts to make death a tangible enemy he can defeat. If Artemy saw a tower made of glass, a glittering monument so glaringly out of place that it's presence is an offront to the Town's predominantly indigenous and/or working-class population and it's destruction feels like a victory. And if Clara's Polyhedron was made of mirrors, an echo of her own duality, mystical powers, and youth, as she can see "through the looking glass" to the facets where the children play.

Wouldn't that be neat?

[bachelor-dankovsky]

i know very little of the specific indigenous tribes the kin is based on, but i know theyre not a cult. (in pathologic 1 where algaya refers to them as a cult) and it is in fact weird and racist to call them that, but very little do we talk about algayas racism ,even though it's like a huge part of her manipulating artemy is convincing him of the racist belief that his community does not want to and cannot progress societally. even though aspity is actively screaming at him that the kin do in fact need to and want to progress and that artemy needs to kill algaya lilitch to do so, because if not she gets the credit for the panacea and he does not in fact progress his own understanding of steppe medicine as valuable (instead of what he believes it to be: some bullshit) therefore not becoming the leader the kin needs him to be: someone who sees his own culture and people as valuable.

[willowmellow]

One of the things that JUST CLICKED in my brain is that what I thought was random weird programming mix-up behaviour in the early days is, in fact not random or weird at all?

I had sometimes witnessed how female NPCs (both seamstress and young woman) had been attacked not just by Muggers but also Factory Workers and even the fancy dressed Young Men. In late game-play, I understood it as the situation in the town becoming more drastic, however, this time I triggered a dialogue when speaking to one of the men as the Bachelor.

Turns out this is part of the shabnak-adyr hunt that has resulted in the herb bride being burned at the Bone Stake Lot. The women are specifically attacked, given that the burning revealed the girl had been innocent.

Is it heartbreaking? Absolutely. Do I love it? Sadly, yes.

[astroenchanter]

Thinking about Clara's redesign in 2 and how it more clearly illustrates that she's the "in-between" of the Haruspex and the Batchelor. With Artemy’s primary color being green (at least in 2) and Daniil's being red, Clara's green jacket, and red scarf and hat mixing the two together and also having her own colors, tan and pale blue. It's just interesting, methinks.

[erriga]

Pathologic and Edward Gordon Craig

In this episode, one very tired theatrology student will try to explain how Craig's ideas about actors and theatre in general might have factored into the way theatre is used in pathologic, especially when it comes to minor changes made between patho classic and 2. We'll talk about puppets vs actors, the role of directors and how it all relates to death. Yay!

SPOILERS FOR BOTH GAMES AHEAD

THEATRE IN PATHOLOGIC

So, anyone who's seen Codex Entry's video essays might be aware that Pathologic very visibly uses and plays with various theatrical ideas and concepts, especially when it comes to XXth century avantgarde movements. So far, Ruby has discussed the influences of Artaud (my boi), Brecht and Beckett, but today we're going to take a little step back and focus on one thinker who might have just been on of the most important theatre theorists ever and whose ideas definitely influenced all those that came after him. We're talking about our favorite theatre malcontent- Edward Gordon Craig

Soo, Craig was a theatre theoretician, actor, director, and founder of the magazine "The mask" back in the 1910s. In it, Craig would talk about his thoughts on theatre, which were largely counter-cultural, at least in comparison to the standard established back in the mid XIXth century. His works are often cited as fundamental to the Great Reform movement, which included among others, Stanislavsky, Reinhardt, and Appia. Their works paved the way towards avant garde theatre and a completely new understanding to it.

Now, why is Craig so important? Basically, he complained a lot and had very cool, albeit sometimes impossible ideas which were later inspired other in creative ways. His main ideas were:

Theatre is not a synthesis of other arts but rather something autonomical, unlike SOME OTHER PEOPLE THOUGHT (im loking at you wagner)

The director>>>>>>>> some dumb smelly actors

The actor shall one day be replaced by the Uber marrionette (tm)

Today we'll focus on those last two, since they are interconnected and most relevant in Pathologic.

The second point is pretty self-explanatory. Craig proposed that the director and their vision is the most important part of any given theatre show. The director should have a holistic vision, knowledge about all the arts participating in theatre and abilities to make their ideas reality. Before that, directors were more like the caretakers of shows, while the main focus was on the star actors. And this way of thinking leads us directly toooo:

THE UBER MARRIONETTE

(project by Oscar Schlemmer)

So, what is the uber marrionette? Basically it's a slightly esoteric idea that somewhere between puppets and living actors exists a form which would be perfectly responsive to the director's artistic vision. Human actors were ego-driven, restricted by their bodies and minds which generally not malleable enough to be a good material, even going so far as to suggest that acting is not an artform at all, since it is driven by chance and not specific intentions.

In contrast to that, Craig explained the nature of puppets- perfectly controlled, humble, objects of worship. And also symbols of death. Which he thought of as perfection. So, in some way, a perfect actor is a ...dead actor. Or, not literally dead, but posseing the perfect stasis of death, one usually assosciated with inanimate objects.

OK, WTF?

As I mentioned those ideas are very cool theories but are rather hard to actualize in the real world, especially since Craig was sometimes vague about what he ACTUALLY wanted to see. He would complain about people misinterpreting his works and declaring that he wants to replace actors with literal machines, while also never specifying what he actually meant. So different artists tried to bring his ideas to life, mostly by "mechanising" living actors, or using some blend of life and artificiality. In practice it was mostly shit like putting actors in giant metal pots and making them communicate in mono syllables to restrict their natural expressions od self as much as possible

OK, BUT HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO PATHOLOGIC?

So my theory is, that by portraying the player character(s) as puppets in classic, and as actors and tying all of this to the idea of death, the makers of PAthologic are playing (pun intended) with the concept of the uber marionnette and maybe even proposing a solution to this impossible problem.

Let's start with classic, because it's pretty straight forward. The characters are dolls/puppets (I'll be using those words interchangibly because fundamentally they serve the same purpose). The theatre itself is specifically said to host puppet shows (which is in itself a nod to the long standing tradition of folk puppetry in Russia and other eastern european countries)

Which in hindsight, are a direct reference to the fact that the very story you are playing is nothing more than a game/puppet performance hosted by in-world The Powers That Be and at the very top by the makers of Pathologic. In that way it is a very straight forward (but ultimately incorrect) use of the uber marionette- the player character is a humble vessel through which an idea is manifested. It's a puppet made out of polygons and lines of code instead of wood or felt. Your role as a player in this performance is two fold- you are both the puppeteer (the one who moves the dolls) and the spectator (because you are being told the story, not the other way around). What you are not is the Director- that role, personified by Mark Immortel and later by the Executor and Tragedian is out of reach for you. So, as you can see it's definitely using puppets, but not necessarily uber marrionetes.

AND THEN WE HAVE PATHO 2

So, the theatre inspirations in Patho 2 are a lot less...subtle than in classic, one of them being literally namedropping my boi Artaud's concept of the Theatre of Cruelty.

But what I want to focus on in this case is the seeming dissapearence of the puppet metaphor from the first game. You are no longer compared to a puppeteer moving a vessel, but to an actor inhabiting a role. A role which is in a way highly restrictive, since there are only four endings, and only two choices that actually impact what happens in the end (what you do with the documents, and whether you take the fellow travellers deal or not) You are faced with the idea that you are replacable, so your personal ego is not valuable to the director in universe and the game creators out of the universe. And finally, to make it even more interesting, you are in-universe faces with the neverending cycle of life and death, through the system of deaths having consequences/being part of the game's continuous timeline instead of just out of universe reloading. I think you might already see where i am going with this.

I THINK THAT THOSE TRAITS MAKE ARTEMY'S PORTRAYAL SIMILAR TO THE CONCEPT OF THE UBER MARRIONETTE

So not the concept itself, but something that heavily resembles the ideal version of what it could have been. Now, does it theory make perfect sense? No, but I thought it was a cool though experiment to do nontheless. The idea of an uber marionnette is onfusing theatrologists to this day, and many people have claimed to having founf a way to realize it, but since Craig himself was unclear about it, we will never know how relevan those tries were. But I still think that the topic of video games and theatre concepts is a fascinating one (that will probably be the topic of my bachelor's thesis lol), and pathologic is a perfect examples of those two ideas working together. If you have any other ideas about it, please let me know, and if you're interested i can make more posts about the theatrological angle of patho!!