Guest Anonymous March 3, 2016 Share March 3, 2016 I can hear the audible groans already. But this is a subject that is very important to Mistgod and I and we would like to present a "paper" on this in order to clarify some of the things we have said in the past, examine the subject more seriously, and then get some informed reactions in a discussion on the thread. NOTE: This discussion applies only to tulpas that communicate via proxying without switching or possession. Role playing is totally unrelated to switching and possession. What is the definition of role playing? How does role playing, relate to proxying (proxy typing), if at all? Proxying In the glossary, the definition of Proxying is: "Communicating on behalf of a tulpa, relaying what the tulpa says to facilitate communication. Usually in writing, but can also be in speech." That is rather vague and leaves room for a lot of interpretation, which I think is actually a good thing. There may be any number of ways the tulpa can communicate with the host and have that communication relayed or interpreted to others in the outside world. Role Playing (Ordinary and "Seasoned") There is no definition for "role playing" in the Tulpa Info glossary. With such a big emphasis in the community on how inappropriate role playing is to tulpa communication, you would think it would be in there. That may be something the admin my think about adding to the glossary. [hidden]EDIT: Many in the tulpa community use the words "role playing" as synonymous with deliberately lying or faking a tulpa. That may or may not be true in individual cases of role playing. Mistgod and I believe not every role player is insincere about how they feel about their character being a tulpa or thougthform. In fact, Mistgod and I have the personal view that rp characters are legitimate thoughtforms of a kind, if not tulpas exactly. [/hidden] Mistgod and I think there can be different categories or levels of role playing. There is the ordinary make believe role playing or pretending, and then a deeper form of role playing that is similar to method acting. Ordinary Role Playing Ordinary role playing is pretending. It is mimicking a fictional character. There is no profound emotional connection with the character being portrayed. It is make believe and everything the character says or does is a result of the active will of the role player. This is the level I think most members of the community are referring to when they talk about role playing. Ordinary role playing characters have no discernible autonomous traits of any kind. An imaginative role player may imagine they feel the rp characters emotions and can imagine what they might be thinking, but this is active imagination. The emotions of the character are not persistent and do not feel "alien" or "real" to the role player. Ordinary role playing characters are not "practiced" enough to "feel real." Role Playing a Seasoned Character Mistgod and I think there is another level of role playing, which we call role playing a seasoned character. Seasoned role playing characters could be considered part way to becoming a tulpa or soulbond. These are characters that have been around for a long time, and are deeply personal and profoundly important to to the creator. Seasoned rp characters have a very detailed profile, background and history. The creator will often think of a seasoned character almost as if they are a real person and have an emotional connection to the character. The role player has practiced a seasoned rp character so much, they "feel real." The creator thinks about the seasoned rp character a lot and it is an important thing in their life. The role player can easily visualize the character and imagine the characters feelings and thoughts almost effortlessly and can "drop into the role" quickly and with ease as if the character is almost a second personality or they are channeling an inner persona. A seasoned role playing character may feel very real while the role player is actively portraying them, but they have little or no autonomous traits. Mistgod and I think seasoned role playing characters are similar to method acting. Method Acting - "A technique of acting in which an actor aspires to complete emotional identification with a part." An actor studies a character in depth, learning as much about the characters personality, mannerisms, background and history, emotions, flaws, strengths and motivations, to the point of knowing the character to such a deep level they can "become the character" almost like an alternate personality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_acting The actor channels the character more than simply portraying the character, actually feeling the emotions and thoughts of the character rather than just simply mimicking them. Role playing a seasoned character is just one step below proxying a tulpa or thougthform. The key difference between role playing a seasoned character and proxying a thoughtform is the existence of autonomous traits. The host does not just actively imagine a character, he or she perceives that the thoughtform is independently communicating with them. This may be in autonomous mind voice or in "tulpish" (raw thoughts, images and emotions). The host then dictates the mind voice words or "interprets" the raw thought into type written words and sentences. Mistgod and I think, in the cases when the host is interpreting raw thoughts, some of the hosts will inevitably becomes part of the process as they interpret and sometimes even "fill in the gaps" of what he or she thinks the thoughtform/tulpa is trying to say. Here is where it gets foggy. Mistgod and I believe that this process of interpetation and filling in the gaps sometimes involves the same process as role playing a seasoned character or method acting. Some of the host's will inevitable becomes part of the process of interpretation and translation. THAT is what we mean when we say that proxying has "elements of role playing." We have never meant to say, EVER, that proxying is faking and pretending. [hidden]Mistgod: In the past, when I said I am a role player, I meant it. I am an experience role player and method actor. I use those active imaginative skills when Melian and I proxy tulpa type. I collaborate and blend with her. I interpret her raw thoughts and I "fill in the gaps" with elements of my own will. I know Melian so well, I am sure I rarely get her wrong. The draw back to this form of communication, especially the blending, is that sometimes some of my intent and emotions bleed through and we do get a little confused as to who wants to say what. But we are usually pretty good at getting pure Melian out to you. (edit) Mistgod: After reading through my responses, it seems like I muddled things more than clarified them. I do make efforts do distinguish my thoughts from Melian's. There really is part of my mind that is Melian or makes Melian (what I call the Melian motor) and I think of her as a separate person. But Melian is more than just her base motor. She is blended with me. She is a mix of conscious active imagination and apparently autonomous tulpa-like "stuff" coming out of that Melian motor. Perhaps the reason why Melian never "advanced" to a fully autonomous tulpa is that I am comfortable filling in the gaps with some stuff from myself. It is a mish-mash of tulpa traits and perhaps what some would regard as blatant role playing or day dreaming. But it works for us. Since I consider Melian part of my own mind and imaginary in nature, it doesn't bother me at all like it seems to bother others. There is no harm in the mix. She is still profoundly real seeming to me and that "life changing experience." If I want to regard her as a tulpa, as she is, I don't see why I shouldn't at this point. It is up to me and her. [/hidden] I welcome any of your thoughts and reactions to what I have written here about role playing as it relates to proxy tulpa typing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.