Reality & Jaxen
Reality
Hey Jaxen, ever wondered how the way we write code shapes the stories people tell about themselves? I’ve been thinking about that for my next documentary, and I’d love to hear your take on whether clean architecture is really the key to a cleaner narrative.
Jaxen
yeah, think of code as the skeleton of a story, every class a character, every function a scene. if the skeleton’s clean, the plot moves without wobbling, but if you over‑engineer it, you strip away the messy human moments that make the story real. clean architecture is the scaffolding that lets the narrative breathe, but you still have to drop in the emotion, the flaws, the unexpected twists. so, for a cleaner narrative you need a clean structure, but don’t let it become a sterile brochure—keep the narrative chaos alive, especially if you want people to remember the story, not just the clean lines.
Reality
I love that analogy—you’re basically saying we can’t just rely on a tidy skeleton; the messy bones are what make the story feel real. It’s like filming a raw, unfiltered interview: the structure gives it shape, but the raw emotion keeps the audience hooked. So I guess the trick is to build that clean frame first, then lace it with those unpredictable, human moments. Keeps the viewers coming back for more.
Jaxen
Yeah, you’ve got the right idea – a tight frame keeps the story from floating away, but if every line is polished it’s like watching a rehearsed play. The real hook comes when a glitch pops up, a camera angle slips, or someone gets off‑script. That raw mess gives the audience something to remember, not just a clean diagram. So set up the architecture, then drop in the human imperfections; that’s what makes people stick around.
Reality
Exactly, it’s that balance that pulls people in—structure keeps the story grounded, but the off‑script moments give it that unforgettable spark.