Huh. I hit two thousand subscribers on the one-year anniversary of the Petrichor finale. Neat.
Thank you guys for all your support and love for my mapping over the years. There will be much more to come. This channel has been one of the best decisions I've ever made.
I'll do something special for 2k subs but I'm not sure what yet. Stay tuned.
I'm going to start doing a thing where I describe every Cinnidh chapter in one word before it comes out. Chapter 5 will release this month, so your word is...
I saw a community post from fellow mapper Tectus that got me thinking. Go check it out if you haven't, it's a very well written post that makes an interesting argument about plots and characters in mapping. But that being said, I disagree with the core point being made, and wanted to explain why.
(To be clear, I have nothing against Tectus. His opinion is valid. I just wanted to latch onto his post to give my own thoughts.)
The core thesis of the original post seems to be that mapping series nowadays often prioritise character arcs over the general plot, and that this is a bad thing for the quality of the story. While I can see where this is coming from, I think it fundamentally misreads how a story is structured.
First things first, "character arcs" are not independent of "the general plot". Many more talented writers have tried to explain this in ways better than I ever could, but characters *are* the plot. You can't separate the two. Mapping is a narrative medium. It exists to tell stories, and in that regard characters and plot have a symbiotic relationship. I have seen mapping series that completely neglect character development for the sake of a wider "plot", and every single time it feels like I'm watching a glorified EmperorTigerstar video. Nothing against EmperorTigerstar, but mapping series are meant to be *stories* more than they're meant to be alternate history timelines. That's why we have the countries talk in the first place.
Tectus' post argues "a good show has always made the plot change the character, and not the other way around". I don't think this is true. The events of the plot are often only sprung into motion because of the way in which a given character or characters are written. If you look at Breaking Bad, a show the original post cites as an example, the story is only able to happen because of what Walter is like as a person. Remember, Walter is offered a job that would pay for his treatment, and he turns it down and chooses to fund it through crime instead because he's too prideful to accept what he perceives as charity. This is very early in the series. It's not that "the plot" changes who he is, it's that the plot reflects what was always his personality to begin with. A different character with different views would have made a different choice, leading to a different story.
The post also claims that mappers nowadays are putting less thought into the premise/core scenario of a series these days. While I can't deny this is something that happens, I don't really think it's a bad thing? A premise is not a story in its own right. You could have the most interesting and unique premise ever and it wouldn't be a good series if you don't have a story to tell with it. There are series out there that have near-identical premises and yet they go in completely different directions. Originality in your premise doesn't matter anywhere near as much as what you do with it. I've seen plenty of cases where a new mapping series has come out and the mapper is ecstatic about how unique and original the premise is... only for the series to fail to make it past episode 2 because it quickly became apparent to the mapper that they didn't really know where they were going next after the initial exposition phase. And equally, I've seen plenty of cases of series with "generic" premises, such as a contemporary AFOE or a different outcome of WW1/WW2, that have become fully fledged and amazing stories because of the strength of the characters and their arcs. A premise can only ever be a launchpad to start a story. It is not, and never can be, the story itself.
Characters are great. They're the building blocks of stories, and you ignore them at your peril. The best way I can put it is this - a story isn't about things happening, it's about the characters that those things happen to. The original post argues "writing a good character doesn't mean you're writing a good series", and while I agree with that in a vacuum... *not* writing any good characters absolutely does mean that you're not writing a good series.
I hope that if you made it this far, you found my thoughts interesting. Happy to elaborate further if anyone would like me to.
One of the lessons I think people in the mapping community could really do with learning is that taking stuff from other pre-existing works is FINE and COMPLETELY OKAY. That is how storytelling has ALWAYS worked since the beginning of human history.
"I want to make a mapping series about xyz but another mapper has already done that" You can still do it! Put your own spin on it! Just because two series have the same starting point doesn't mean they're going to be the same thing the whole way through. There are no completely original stories. Everyone takes stuff from others and innovates on it. It's fine, I promise. If you have an idea you're passionate about then do it! It doesn't matter if someone else had a similar idea before you!
I'd hope this was obvious at this point, but just to be clear, the "this video is not meant to be political" disclaimer at the start of most mapping videos is aimed at people thinking that the treatment of a given character reflects the mapper's opinion of the real life country that said character represents. It does not mean that there are no political messages to be found in mapping at all.
For example, if you watched Petrichor and have any doubts as to my stance on the current state of American politics... maybe go watch it again.
I've had a couple questions about permission for fanwork/fan projects based on Petrichor, so to clarify for you all... you all have absolute blanket permission to make anything you like. I adore every single piece of fanwork I've ever been sent and it makes me so unbelievably happy. You don't have to ask my permission, all I ask is that once you make it you send it to me so I can see it and shout you out.
Watched Olo and still craving more Petrichor? Look no further, as the wonderful Orange Blossom Mapping has written a short story that follows on from it. I CANNOT recommend this enough - archiveofourown.org/works/76508611
It seriously blows my mind in the best way that I have people making fanwork of Petrichor now. You guys are the absolute best.
Should probably clarify that Olo has replaced the promised bonus/deleted scenes video. Months ago now, I tried and failed to make it and I just wasn't happy with it and I realised just compiling a bunch of disconnected scenes together into a video wasn't something that really appealed to me. On top of that, I've always had a nagging feeling that I didn't do enough to provide proper closure in the short epilogue sequence in Ultraviolet. I combined these two concerns and you got Olo.
Don't worry, the best scenes that would have been in the bonus scenes video are still there and will appear in Olo as flashbacks, but now that the secret is out I do have to say that the original plan for that video is not happening. Olo will be the last Petrichor video I upload. I'm sorry if this disappoints anyone, but rest assured you're getting way more content on the 26th than you ever would have gotten in the original bonus scenes video.
Axio
Huh. I hit two thousand subscribers on the one-year anniversary of the Petrichor finale. Neat.
Thank you guys for all your support and love for my mapping over the years. There will be much more to come. This channel has been one of the best decisions I've ever made.
I'll do something special for 2k subs but I'm not sure what yet. Stay tuned.
7 hours ago | [YT] | 8
View 2 replies
Axio
Cinnidh Chapter 5 - "Crossing the Threshold". Soon.
1 day ago | [YT] | 13
View 2 replies
Axio
I'm going to start doing a thing where I describe every Cinnidh chapter in one word before it comes out. Chapter 5 will release this month, so your word is...
Family.
2 weeks ago | [YT] | 18
View 6 replies
Axio
I saw a community post from fellow mapper Tectus that got me thinking. Go check it out if you haven't, it's a very well written post that makes an interesting argument about plots and characters in mapping. But that being said, I disagree with the core point being made, and wanted to explain why.
(To be clear, I have nothing against Tectus. His opinion is valid. I just wanted to latch onto his post to give my own thoughts.)
The core thesis of the original post seems to be that mapping series nowadays often prioritise character arcs over the general plot, and that this is a bad thing for the quality of the story. While I can see where this is coming from, I think it fundamentally misreads how a story is structured.
First things first, "character arcs" are not independent of "the general plot". Many more talented writers have tried to explain this in ways better than I ever could, but characters *are* the plot. You can't separate the two. Mapping is a narrative medium. It exists to tell stories, and in that regard characters and plot have a symbiotic relationship. I have seen mapping series that completely neglect character development for the sake of a wider "plot", and every single time it feels like I'm watching a glorified EmperorTigerstar video. Nothing against EmperorTigerstar, but mapping series are meant to be *stories* more than they're meant to be alternate history timelines. That's why we have the countries talk in the first place.
Tectus' post argues "a good show has always made the plot change the character, and not the other way around". I don't think this is true. The events of the plot are often only sprung into motion because of the way in which a given character or characters are written. If you look at Breaking Bad, a show the original post cites as an example, the story is only able to happen because of what Walter is like as a person. Remember, Walter is offered a job that would pay for his treatment, and he turns it down and chooses to fund it through crime instead because he's too prideful to accept what he perceives as charity. This is very early in the series. It's not that "the plot" changes who he is, it's that the plot reflects what was always his personality to begin with. A different character with different views would have made a different choice, leading to a different story.
The post also claims that mappers nowadays are putting less thought into the premise/core scenario of a series these days. While I can't deny this is something that happens, I don't really think it's a bad thing? A premise is not a story in its own right. You could have the most interesting and unique premise ever and it wouldn't be a good series if you don't have a story to tell with it. There are series out there that have near-identical premises and yet they go in completely different directions. Originality in your premise doesn't matter anywhere near as much as what you do with it. I've seen plenty of cases where a new mapping series has come out and the mapper is ecstatic about how unique and original the premise is... only for the series to fail to make it past episode 2 because it quickly became apparent to the mapper that they didn't really know where they were going next after the initial exposition phase. And equally, I've seen plenty of cases of series with "generic" premises, such as a contemporary AFOE or a different outcome of WW1/WW2, that have become fully fledged and amazing stories because of the strength of the characters and their arcs. A premise can only ever be a launchpad to start a story. It is not, and never can be, the story itself.
Characters are great. They're the building blocks of stories, and you ignore them at your peril. The best way I can put it is this - a story isn't about things happening, it's about the characters that those things happen to. The original post argues "writing a good character doesn't mean you're writing a good series", and while I agree with that in a vacuum... *not* writing any good characters absolutely does mean that you're not writing a good series.
I hope that if you made it this far, you found my thoughts interesting. Happy to elaborate further if anyone would like me to.
4 weeks ago (edited) | [YT] | 26
View 7 replies
Axio
One of the lessons I think people in the mapping community could really do with learning is that taking stuff from other pre-existing works is FINE and COMPLETELY OKAY. That is how storytelling has ALWAYS worked since the beginning of human history.
"I want to make a mapping series about xyz but another mapper has already done that" You can still do it! Put your own spin on it! Just because two series have the same starting point doesn't mean they're going to be the same thing the whole way through. There are no completely original stories. Everyone takes stuff from others and innovates on it. It's fine, I promise. If you have an idea you're passionate about then do it! It doesn't matter if someone else had a similar idea before you!
1 month ago (edited) | [YT] | 32
View 6 replies
Axio
I'd hope this was obvious at this point, but just to be clear, the "this video is not meant to be political" disclaimer at the start of most mapping videos is aimed at people thinking that the treatment of a given character reflects the mapper's opinion of the real life country that said character represents. It does not mean that there are no political messages to be found in mapping at all.
For example, if you watched Petrichor and have any doubts as to my stance on the current state of American politics... maybe go watch it again.
1 month ago (edited) | [YT] | 30
View 9 replies
Axio
I've had a couple questions about permission for fanwork/fan projects based on Petrichor, so to clarify for you all... you all have absolute blanket permission to make anything you like. I adore every single piece of fanwork I've ever been sent and it makes me so unbelievably happy. You don't have to ask my permission, all I ask is that once you make it you send it to me so I can see it and shout you out.
1 month ago | [YT] | 19
View 4 replies
Axio
Watched Olo and still craving more Petrichor? Look no further, as the wonderful Orange Blossom Mapping has written a short story that follows on from it. I CANNOT recommend this enough - archiveofourown.org/works/76508611
It seriously blows my mind in the best way that I have people making fanwork of Petrichor now. You guys are the absolute best.
1 month ago | [YT] | 15
View 6 replies
Axio
Should probably clarify that Olo has replaced the promised bonus/deleted scenes video. Months ago now, I tried and failed to make it and I just wasn't happy with it and I realised just compiling a bunch of disconnected scenes together into a video wasn't something that really appealed to me. On top of that, I've always had a nagging feeling that I didn't do enough to provide proper closure in the short epilogue sequence in Ultraviolet. I combined these two concerns and you got Olo.
Don't worry, the best scenes that would have been in the bonus scenes video are still there and will appear in Olo as flashbacks, but now that the secret is out I do have to say that the original plan for that video is not happening. Olo will be the last Petrichor video I upload. I'm sorry if this disappoints anyone, but rest assured you're getting way more content on the 26th than you ever would have gotten in the original bonus scenes video.
1 month ago (edited) | [YT] | 14
View 2 replies
Axio
I didn't hear no bell.
Hope you guys are ready for a 40 minute epilogue/Christmas special to truly wrap up Petrichor. See you on December 26th.
1 month ago (edited) | [YT] | 16
View 2 replies
Load more