Outlining the anomaly - ridiculously long post

[Calluna Vulgaris]

Here's my first stab at this.  I'm not trying to answer the question, since I don't think we have the wherewithal to do so at this point; I'm trying to see if it's possible to create a near-complete set of possible answers. 

What am I forgetting?  What am I not thinking clearly about?


- Option one: the anomaly is an entity which exists separate from the host and which desires and/or benefits from conversion.

   --- One A: The anomaly is sentient and has a will and agenda of its own
      ----- One A 1: The anomaly is one sentient thing, attempting to gain access to as many people as possible.
      ----- One A 2: Each anomaly is a sentient thing which only acquires operancy when it has a host.

   --- One B: The anomaly is a kind of opportunistic infection, in that it enters the host from the outside, but the manifestation of it in the host is not a revelation of the anomaly's will, of which it has none, but the symptoms the individual displays when having 'caught' the anomaly.
      ----- One B 1: The contagion is the same, but the symptoms vary by individual based on that individual's history, personality, and schema for making sense of the world.
      ----- One B 2: There are multiple different contagions; a gamma is formed when an individual is exposed to an anomaly/contagion to which they are predisposed to be vulnerable at a time when there is an event which radically increases vulnerability. 

- Option Two: The anomaly exists separate from the human host but the creation of a gamma represents the *undesired* fusion of the anomaly with a human host, in a way which is not of evolutionary or more theoretical benefit to either.

   --- Two A: The anomaly is one or several sentient entity/entities which are normally imperceptible and benign; 'conversion', which might in this model more accurately be called 'confluence', being contrary to the goals, desires, and intentions of both parties, and occurring when rare alignments of mutual susceptibility take place.

   --- Two B: The anomaly follows the infection mode, but has, as it were, a vulnerability to being 'caught' in a way which parallels the host's vulnerability to 'catching' the infection.  The anomaly normally exists as a separate and essentially benign organism, but has a destructive effect when circumstances combine to cause fusion/infection with a host. 

- Option Three: The anomaly is a form of cellular mutation, like cancer.

   --- Three A: Certain individuals have a predisposition to susceptibility.  The susceptibility is primarily
      ----- Three A 1: genetic
      ----- Three A 2: congenital (but not hereditary)
      ----- Three A 3: environmental
      ----- Three A 4: psychological (but not traceable to environment or heredity)
      ----- Three A 5: a combination of any of the above

   --- Three B: The factors determining who develops an anomaly, how, and when depend on some aspect of the anomaly, rather than the individual.

   --- Three C: The factors determining who develops an anomaly, how, and when are entirely circumstantial.

- Option Four: The anomaly is a supernatural/psychic/spiritual analogue to a cellular mutation which has no physical/physiological substance, with the same variables as those listed for Option Three.

- Option Five: The anomaly is not a separate entity or mutation but a strongly demarcated change in the physiology and psychology of an individual.  Prior to acquisition of the anomaly, a person is an alpha; the only thing that distinguishes gammas from alphas is that they have acquired anomalies which have become the overriding feature of their psychologies and physical abilities.

   --- Five A: There is a specific form of pschological trauma, not yet separately identified, which produces 'anomalies' rather than, say, people with PTSD.  Anyone who experienced said specific kind of trauma would become a gamma.

   --- Five B: Certain individuals have a predisposition to convert as a response to acute psychological trauma rather than developing a different traumatic response.
      ----- Five B 1: The predisposition is immediately and directly genetic.
      ----- Five B 2: The predisposition is not identifiably genetic but a product of life experiences and belief structures.
      ----- Five B 3: The predisposition cannot be traced to either genetics or psychological formation.
      ----- Five B 4: The predisposition is at least in part identifiably a combination of both genetics and psychological formation.

   --- Five C:  It is external circumstance, rather than a quality inherent in the individual or the nature of the trauma, which produces conversion rather than another traumatic response. 


- Option Six: As in Option Five, above, the anomaly is 'just' a strongly demarcated change in the physiology and psychology of an individual, but it is a response to psychological trauma which only certain individuals can possibly have.  The term 'alpha' should thus only be applied to individuals who do not possess the traits which can result in conversion; before becoming a gamma, the host was a potential gamma, not an alpha.

   --- Six A: The potential to become a gamma is part of the genetic code.
      ----- Six A 1: This is an inherent part of the genome which has escaped notice so far.
      ----- Six A 2: This is an inherent part of the genome which has been identified but not made public knowledge as the result of a conspiracy.
         --------- Six A 2a: The conspiracy is maintained by gammas, pre-gammas, betas, or family members of persons with anomalies.
         --------- Six A 2b: The conspiracy is maintained by the government, including whomever Lau reports to over/beyond Reyes.
         --------- Six A 2c: The conspiracy is Reyes.

   --- Six B: The potential to become a gamma is congenital (but not hereditary), environmental, psychological, or circumstantial, but is in any case inherent in a person prior to conversion.

[Elizabeth Bear]

That's really cool.

[Calluna Vulgaris]

Thank you.  I'd ask what I'm missing, or what I've mixed up, but somehow I think you're not the one to ask.

[Jezabella49]

I'm impressed by your thoroughness.

I don't see anything you missed, but I'm probably not the one to ask, either.

[Calluna Vulgaris]

Of course, none of this addresses the mechanism which makes it possible for gammas and betas to do the "impossible."  But I think that's equally mysterious for any of the options, and doesn't favor one over another.

Of course, another way of looking a this is like this:

It has been observed by various parties that in the 20th and 21st centuries, psychology came to take a role that morality had previously occupied.  Therapists are our newest priests, people seek out psychotherapy as a profession to assure themselves that they are in the right, and as a service to become better and happier people, in a way which heretofore was the province of the church and temple.

Most attributes which were previously moral flaws or spiritual failings have been redefined on a disease/disability model, with treatment and accommodation considered more applicable than penance or punishment.*

Taking this perspective into this fandom, it is possible to see that we spend a great deal of time describing in minute psychological terms a phenomenon which, only a few hundred years ago, would have been easily identifiable as demon possession.

Possibly we're using the wrong modality, after all? 



* As a mental health professional, I personally support this transition, but that doesn't mean I can't see it.

[jennygadget]

I have nothing to add at the moment except:  "ooooh....shiny."

[txanne]

Thank you.  I'd ask what I'm missing, or what I've mixed up, but somehow I think you're not the one to ask.

She's precisely the one to ask. She's just not the one who's going to answer.

[rekre8]

Anyone who likes the idea of OneA.1 (for a given value of "like"), go read Wen Spensor's Alien Taste (http://www.amazon.com/Alien-Taste-Ukiah-Oregon-Book/dp/0451458370)

[Calluna Vulgaris]

Thank you.  I'd ask what I'm missing, or what I've mixed up, but somehow I think you're not the one to ask.

She's precisely the one to ask. She's just not the one who's going to answer.

The One Who Knows is not necessarily the One To Ask.

[Alena]

Niiice.

I feel like there are a few more options, or maybe just further tangents, that could be created through examination of the beta/gamma dichotomy (i.e., the appearance of the dichotomy under a certain condition and implications thereof; if there isn't a difference; if the difference is in the anomaly, in the circumstances of the 'crack', in the genetics/life experience/ideology of the host; etc.).  Though maybe that would be getting a little too detailed...

[txanne]

Too detailed? In this fandom?

Gamma of the Week: Ed Geoffrey
Crack: the wiki went down
Gammability: edits reality to suit himself

[Jezabella49]

Too detailed? In this fandom?

What she said.

Gammability: edits reality to suit himself

Hey!  That sounds like my ex-husband.  His story, after he dumped the girl he left me for, painted me as the evil bad person.

[kayjayoh]

<wild applause>

That was a really neat thing to read. Thanks for putting it together.