Sunday, September 2, 2012

Four Scientist

a group of four scientist begin to get ill and two of them die.
it seems to be radiation type illness.
what binds them together is that they were all called to isolate and identify an isotope that was found and secured.
the remaining two realize that there must have been some exposure (or at least that's what they think) becuase the two deaths are similar to other deaths from those that were exposed.
the problem is, they can't understand what must have happened.

they realize they need to get together and retrace what happened if they are to have any chance of understanding what happened.
as they retrace and recalculate the numbers they begin to have nightmares of the incident and memories of random incidents from that time, but there are too many gaps in their memories and what one says the other doesn't remember. there are heated arguments with others, affairs, charges of crimes, violence against one another as if they were on a mission to mars, all alone, isolated, cut off.

despite thinking that they were initially involved in the project for a few days, they soon realize it must have been weeks, and finally they find it was 8 months. they feel they were experimented on. they can't agree the city they were in. affairs they had, disagreements or what they even did.

they do remember who oversaw the project. some dr. they never get to meet him, but they are able to trace snippets of information about the project which seem to be vital and on isues they can agree on, that are very significant.

the story is very andrei tarkovsky-esque.
they realize there was much more to the incident than an isotope, it was a full incident and there were many others involved in the investigation.
they reach out to these other groups. and are able to put only a few pieces together. some have died, some don't remember, or say they were not involved in the project. they are able to get information through other governments freedom of information act on debriefings from the incident

told in a tarkovsky-esque manner
long dialogues, no special effects
talking on the phone with others. very low tech, despite the expense and hi-tech aspect of their work and the incident. typewritten reports, phone calls, transcripts, photos, handwritten notes, word of mouth, rumors, stories verbal communication, dreams, deduction....

as it deepens, they begin to talk about how they begin to make sense of it.
narrowing down parts of the report, deciding to ignore certain information as dead ends.
realizing that they maybe don't care about what "exactly" happened. but wanting to know the "truth" about human memory and the meaning of life, and a short existence and work, duty, family, self-integrity... to certain touchstones and key elements that make us who we are.

as they do this, the information gets more and more strange, and yet it makes more and more sense to them.

told through the low tech means above. flashbacks, interviews, discussions. they meet every few months or weeks or days and keep one another filled in on their report. sometimes they are very united, sometimes they are working out different leads and seemingly on their own.

told over weeks, months, and seemingly years. sometimes forgetting that they are investigating.
wondering to themselves how long this is going on.
are they scientist? what do they do for income? how do they eat, get paid? where do they live?

they are seemingly caught in the very strange and real dream of reality.
this is reality.
this is our dilemma as humans
to figure out who we are, where we come from, what our purpose is, who put us here, who these people are, what our connection is...making sense of it all.
coming to peace with it, and our mortality and the falliability of man, and memory, and intention.
that's what it's about.

inspiration.
i had a dream some scientist were dying and they needed to figure out why and retrace their acions and look at their calculatios and process to figure out why/what happened. it was a disturbing dream.
They want to recalculate their numbers and run some more models because their previous conclusion was that it was safe.

One person tells them they were wrong. That they found it to be unsafe, but they bowed to political pressure, power and financial/academic accolades. They find protestors and differing opinions of the time. The evidence is their income, wealth, etc.
Sent by thewoozy.com® cellular dispatch

No comments: