So I’m working on a certain very finite group of revisions to volume I. But of course the revisions provoke logic cascades – in one revision, I whimsically decided to refer to the abstract concept of most powerful entity as “the over-power.” Well, it turned out I had referred later to this concept as “the Power.” I referred to it a lot. And now I have to go through and make sure that every instance of “the Power” becomes “the over-power.”
This is a mere vocabulary shift. There’s an actual philosophical cascade as well, turning on whether the king of Florence is a subject of the law. In the earlier drafts he was explicitly discussed as being above the law. In a subplot introduced into the final draft, it is essential that the law should, at least partially, apply to him. I am mulling over what to do about this – on the one hand, his legal transcendence is important to the overall arc of the book, and on the other hand, the subplot, which is fairly major and important, makes no sense at all without it being possible to sue the king.
I’ll tell you what I’m thinking. I’m thinking that a distinction will have to be drawn, between the Crown, which transcends the law, and the king, who does not. The Crown is considered to hang above the head of the king, and to represent that end toward which any particular king aims; but in the king’s dimension as a man, he remains sueable. That is, the king has a dual nature, king-as-Crown and king-as-man. The entire succession of Florence, even as I had it before the subplot, makes no sense without this distinction.
And finally, there’s this one character, he was a midget before. I think I referred to his being short almost every time he appeared, and he’s a pretty major character. Now I kind of need him to not be a midget anymore.
Does this change in height change his personality? Didn’t being a midget influence his outlook, and doesn’t not being a midget also influence his outlook? Sure. I’m fixing that. That’s the joy of editing.