I have been talking to Anton about this second talk. I think I’m going to have to present it all from memory to preserve the spontaneity of the drawings, which means a different kind of writing. I think the thing to do is write all the sections out long-hand then practise them so that I can present them using the right words but with only a couple of notes to prompt me.

I’ve realized it doesn’t work to try and prefect one talk at a time from start to finish: they need to evolve contiguously so that the structural and textual correspondences are there. Today I’m going to work on the Latin dome and the Propagator talks together. I’ve been working towards a kind of narrative structure for the Latin dome, in which a mystery is presented then eventually solved, because that’s how the story was first described to me in a very brilliant lecture. But if I’m going to present the audience with a series of samples – “this is a thing that can happen; this is a thing that can happen; this is a thing that can happen…” – then all I need to do is present linear facts. And it’s important that there’s some parity in the way all the talks are structured, and the mystery/solution format doesn’t work for the others.

Reading about propagators in this Pip Book I’ve realised one of my small trees needs urgent repotting because its leaves get yellow and limp even if I try to water it the right amount.