Nate's "Allegory of the Oasis" Graphic

Oh wow this is great I am reading now!

Just a few comments ---

2 - "When your anticipations do not complement reality..." Possibly "comport with reality" or "agree with reality" or "conform to reality" ??

That's an excellent next step Nate! I am going to think on it tonight to see if I have anything else. Were you going to use a particular animal to dramatize the movement along the path?

Nate I see the title "Allegory of the Oasis" is still there.... which is fine....I wonder if some other general label or box might still serve to tie the whole thing together and explain the scenario --- for example box 1 starts with "We" -- who is "we" and how might it be conveyed to the viewer what role the viewer should assume in reading through the progression?

I think what you're going back and forth on is part of the issue. Somebody looking at panel one at first glance might think the entire theme is "Stormy Dialectic" due to the placement of that term in the center.

Maybe we're so close to the details that we need some fresh eyes to ask some fresh questions like "What is this all about?" or whatever. Maybe it might be a good idea to start a new post at FB with some kind of general question like "Give me your general thoughts on seeing this for the first time?" (not good phrasing) or something that would help us get an idea of what a new person would ask in order to get oriented.

And maybe that plays into the issue of how to fit the two panels together. One above the other with some kind of huge arrows pointing out the pathway? Or side by side?

I think somehow we're missing an in-your-face method of telling people what this is.

You know, the second panel has the Epicureans lined up facing toward the oasis with Epicurus at the end, and that works well I think. The first panel, however-- I'm not sure that it has the same kind of "theme" that pulls it together in the same way or shows that it is a progression (still thinking)

Nate I'm still wondering if things would be more clear if there was a character in the picture representing the "We" who is referenced in first bubble of panel one. On panel two, you have animals moving toward the oasis, but not one thing representing the "we." Would it be more clear if the "we" were represented by a uniform someone/something moving through the diagram and encountering those people? To some extent that's the way the cave analogy worked, with the main character moving from place to place in the landscape.

I think this is coming along VERY well! Let me check your other posts.

I hope others will comment! One minor thought going through my mind is that our stoic friends might quibble with the wording of the mountain of virtue description - they probably see their mountain not as much of a "dismissal of anguish" or a "sanctuary from the storm" as much as glorious height to be scaled or a "better" or "more worthy" way....