|
Boneless Jogger posted:I've missed the echeladder jokes. The next level on the ladder is kind of ominous, though. It could just mean she has no genetic parent thanks to weird ectobiology poo poo, but it could also mean Not Good Things for Dad. Dad doesn't die, he just moves on to another universe.
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 10:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
Welp, I guess that's Maid confirmed. I'm a bit disappointed, I was really hoping to have the complete set of titles and elements. On the plus side, post-scratch Gent of Piss confirmed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 10:37
|
|
|
And now we have another Sburb-related mechanisim showing up in real life. Just what the hell happened on her 13th birthday?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 10:37
|
|
|
Boneless Jogger posted:I've missed the echeladder jokes. The next level on the ladder is kind of ominous, though. It could just mean she has no genetic parent thanks to weird ectobiology poo poo, but it could also mean Not Good Things for Dad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 10:40
|
|
|
Maybe the echeladder is just a Thing that you get along with a name when you turn 13.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 10:42
|
|
|
The original Nanna did mention scaling her Echeladder. Oh, how I missed jokes about objects leveling up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 10:46
|
|
|
Roger Explosion posted:And now we have another Sburb-related mechanisim showing up in real life. Just what the hell happened on her 13th birthday? Given that SBURB creates the universes that play it, this isn't too surprising. It's all essentially part of the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 11:29
|
|
|
So who the hell made SBURB?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 11:43
|
|
|
SHAOLIN FUCKFIEND posted:So who the hell made SBURB? SBURB made SBURB duh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 11:56
|
|
|
Duttie made SBURB, because he is Lord English.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 14:07
|
|
L
|
SHAOLIN FUCKFIEND posted:So who the hell made SBURB? I'm guessing Lord English.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 14:07
|
|
|
SHAOLIN FUCKFIEND posted:So who the hell made SBURB?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 14:51
|
|
|
SHAOLIN FUCKFIEND posted:So who the hell made SBURB? Much like evolution, it kind of made itself. The first universe that managed to figure out a way to duplicate itself did so, and the resulting universes continued to do so. The ones that were most capable of duplicating themselves improved on the system involved, and the ones that couldn't, didn't. It happens because it has to happen. It's deterministic perfection!
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 14:54
|
|
|
Lord of Laughton posted:Feferi was awesome. The saddest update was when she died I'm pretty sure I'm the only person who was disappointed when Tavros was killed. He finally grows a pair and all he has to show for it is a lance in the gut.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 15:11
|
|
|
Kit Walker posted:Social justice is pretty important, but people clearly do take it waaaay too far sometimes if the Homestuck fandom has showed me anything. It's one thing to be offended by something racist or bigoted in some other form, it's another thing to contrive an elaborate situation to explain why something maybe, can be, sorta, somehow, possibly be seen as offensive. I could write for hours on this, but this isn't the place so I'll boil it down to this: the majority opinion on what minorities and the marginalized should and shouldn't find bigoted or racist or offensive is not simply useless, it's the entire loving problem. Echeladder! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 15:25
|
|
|
sitchelin posted:I'm pretty sure I'm the only person who was disappointed when Tavros was killed. He finally grows a pair and all he has to show for it is a lance in the gut. You're far from the only one. I'm inclined to view his arc as ending in personal failure, though. Tavros was a pretty cool little dude at heart and strong in his own way but when he gained his robo-confidence he really lost his way, and then he embarked on a quixotic crusade that was largely meaningless, vindictive, and honestly kind of petty. If he had made the same logical jump that Terezi did then his final suicidal charge might have been more impressive, but there's no suggestion that he has any motivation except revenge. If you read closely you may notice that Homestuck has some things to say about revenge. They are not good things. It's likely that this is meant to tie back to his personal hero myth arc. Tavros is the Page: a good buddy, an assistant, a sidekick, a partner. He was never really the sort of person to go out and do things for himself. None of that means that he's weak or that there's anything wrong with him! But he was unable to reconcile himself to that role and it killed him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 15:34
|
|
|
I rather like Tavros too, mainly because he was one of the pre-Hivebent trolls before we had any notion of some trolls being more or less narratively important than others. For a large stretch of Hivebent I was waiting for and assuming he'd eventually use Vriska to develop himself, wasn't really expecting the reverse. Still, even if his original arc did end with impalement and failure, there's still room in the story for anything Hussie might want to do with the dream bubble characters. Making it the retirement home he sends dead characters so his fans don't feel bad for them seems a little too soft, there's got to be a greater purpose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 16:09
|
|
|
MARTYR'S PISSCRADLE. We'll never forget you, Fedorafreak 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 16:10
|
|
|
Heiress Sans Parent Heir Transparent god drat it
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 16:29
|
|
|
I don't think it was JUST revenge or a reaction to being unimportant. I think Tavros realized as much as everyone else did that Standing Up To Vriska was an important part of his development arc, but the problem (as in so many other things) was that his confidence was in actuality fakey fake confidence. That led to thinking the correct way of standing up to Vriska was to just sort of run in her direction while holding a perfectly deadly weapon, because (a) that would totally work, and (b) standing up to someone means killing them in single combat, right? Can't think of any OTHER possible definitions for it, no sir! In other words, yeah, Tavros's death was his arc ending in personal failure, but it wasn't about revenge or resigning himself to a secondary role (which would have been sort of depressing if he'd actually done it), it was about him totally failing to grasp the basic concept of what confidence is. e: Alternately, Tavros defaulted to "welp better kill her" because (a) she seemed to want to fight and he didn't realize that by giving her what she wanted he was once again failing to stand up to her, and (b) just plain getting her out of the picture would be much easier than standing up to her nonviolently over long periods of time would have been, and he was a coward. So many personal failures! loquacius fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Dec 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 16:30
|
|
|
quote:Heiress Sans Parent Oh no, Dad. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 17:27
|
|
|
Dead Dream Dave and Tavros might have some plot relevance later, as a Knight and his Page, but I could also still see them laying down the sick beats until the end of foreseeable time or whatever the lifespan of a dream bubble is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 17:27
|
|
|
loquacius posted:In other words, yeah, Tavros's death was his arc ending in personal failure, but it wasn't about revenge or resigning himself to a secondary role (which would have been sort of depressing if he'd actually done it), it was about him totally failing to grasp the basic concept of what confidence is. That too, but being confident does not come only from being a big drat hero or a leader! We like to lionize our leaders and ascribe their successes wholly to them. We celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. Day instead of Civil Rights Movement Day, for example. Does that mean the millions of civil rights activists who were not Dr. King merely "resigned" themselves to being passive participants in the movement? Was it "depressing" for the organizers who merely arranged logistics behind the scenes? Were the marchers there because they lacked confidence to be up on the stage in the limelight? There is no shame in service, nor any glory in leadership. Homestuck portrays strong, powerful leaders as tyrants and ultimately failures: the Condesce lost her empire, the Derse royalty exists as obstacles to be overcome. Characters who want to be a big deal always end in tragedy: Vriska, Eridan, Tavros in his final hours. Karkat too, seeing everything he worked for go up in flames, right up until the point where he abandoned his shattered self-important concept of leadership and embraced John's model of being a friend and moirail first and foremost. The model Homestuck presents for good leaders is self-sacrificing and deferential, like John, or the Prospit royalty. They are good leaders specifically because they do not seek out power or glory for themselves. So when Rose staunchly insists that John is her leader, is this also depressing? Should she have shown more "confidence" by embracing a primary role and insisting she was her own leader instead? If Tavros had truly embraced his heroic title, he could have been Sancho Panza to his crazier friends' Don Quixote. Being a loyal friend-subordinate would not have made him any weaker, less useful, or less important than anyone else, but he tried to follow in Vriska's self-destructive footsteps instead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 17:43
|
|
|
Cavatica posted:Oh no, Dad. Don't act like this isn't a foreseeable and likely consequence considering what has already happened and what Kanaya and Jade believe about the game. DaveBro and RoseMom probably might bite the dust before all is said and done, too. I'm talking about the deaths of characters who haven't even been introduced yet! Wow. Hussie sure knows how to imprint expectations on us. But he also knows how to subvert those expectations at the point where they would start screwing with thematic points, in ways that should be similarly predictable, so you have to be on your toes about what to expect. MrBims fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Dec 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 17:53
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:civil rights movement analogy??? Doing your part in a larger movement by maximizing the impact of your personal skills is one thing; realizing that you were "never really the sort of person to go out and do things for (your)self" is another entirely. No, you don't have to hog the limelight all the time, but choosing to define yourself relative to other, "stronger" people is not the only, or best, alternative. I guess we can agree that Tavros was trying to do the former, but that doesn't mean he should have done the latter because his title seemed to be passive-aggressively suggesting he should.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 18:02
|
|
|
loquacius posted:No, you don't have to hog the limelight all the time, but choosing to define yourself relative to other, "stronger" people is not the only, or best, alternative. Being strong doesn't have anything to do with it and you're the only one insisting that such a distinction exists! It is entirely possible to be acting in a supporting role and still be strong. Aradia also has a servant's title and it's a role she's always willingly accepted, and she was running more of the fuckin' show than any of the other trolls. And her lack of personal agency was kind of depressing at first, admittedly, but now she's alive and awesome and yet she still enthusiastically plays a servile role--and is certainly no weaker for it!
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 18:19
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:Being strong doesn't have anything to do with it and you're the only one insisting that such a distinction exists! It is entirely possible to be acting in a supporting role and still be strong. Aradia also has a servant's title and it's a role she's always willingly accepted, and she was running more of the fuckin' show than any of the other trolls. And her lack of personal agency was kind of depressing at first, admittedly, but now she's alive and awesome and yet she still enthusiastically plays a servile role--and is certainly no weaker for it! I guess if that's what you meant it kind of makes sense, but it wasn't what was implied in the original post. I don't think this Aradia example applies to it either exactly -- she kicks plenty of rear end on her own merits, both before she came back to life and after it. She's actually become more independent, and is a much better character for it. Tavros did basically nothing for himself (doing nothing was his entire character); I guess my takeaway from the original post was that you thought he should accept that and continue to let everyone else do all the stuff for him. Which WOULD have been depressing. But if you meant he should have ended up similar to Aradia I guess there's nothing wrong with that!
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 18:31
|
|
|
loquacius posted:I guess if that's what you meant it kind of makes sense, but it wasn't what was implied in the original post. I don't think this Aradia example applies to it either exactly -- she kicks plenty of rear end on her own merits, both before she came back to life and after it. She's actually become more independent, and is a much better character for it. Tavros did basically nothing for himself (doing nothing was his entire character); I guess my takeaway from the original post was that you thought he should accept that and continue to let everyone else do all the stuff for him. Which WOULD have been depressing. But if you meant he should have ended up similar to Aradia I guess there's nothing wrong with that! Okay, yeah, I can see how the line about "not going out and doing things for himself" probably could have been worded better--I definitely didn't mean that he should embrace codependence and never do anything on his own! But there's nothing wrong with being more of a helper than a doer. Again, strength has nothing to do with it: Aradia was one of the most powerful characters running around for a while, but instead of going out and wrecking poo poo she consigned herself to the Furthest Ring in order to pitch in and help the dead dreambubble people cope with their poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 18:55
|
|
|
Oh the things that you find on Google image search while searching your name... K4RK4T 1S TH1S YOU?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 19:59
|
|
|
Kit Walker posted:Much like evolution, it kind of made itself. The first universe that managed to figure out a way to duplicate itself did so, and the resulting universes continued to do so. The ones that were most capable of duplicating themselves improved on the system involved, and the ones that couldn't, didn't. It happens because it has to happen. It's deterministic perfection! The problem with this theory is that SBURB has a point, and that point is to be devoured by Lord English. As I understand it the point of the game isn't to enable an endless recycling of universes but rather to provide oppurtunity for those to exist that are fit to feed the Time Travelling Demon. So logically LE created SBURB. It's actually quite weird this hasn't been brought up more in the comic because it was literally the main thing I was thinking about for about 500 strips - when are we going to find out who made this thing? sitchelin posted:I'm pretty sure I'm the only person who was disappointed when Tavros was killed. He finally grows a pair and all he has to show for it is a lance in the gut. I'm probably going to catch hell for saying not only was I disappointed when Tavros was killed, but I viewed everything about it as a failure on Hussie's part. It's tragic in a pointless way, because Tavros never had a point in his own story where he evolved or really grew in anyway and his story ended predictably when he confronted Vriska. It's not really funny either; Vriska taunting Tav with his legs, Terezi conducting that weird investigation on his body, none of these were funny. I mean if you're saying they are funny then you are buying into the giant blinking neon sign hung over the joke saying "You Should Feel Guilty About Finding This Funny." They were clumsy and awkward and incredibly unsatisfying.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 20:46
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:Vriska taunting Tav with his legs, Terezi conducting that weird investigation on his body, none of these were funny. Bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 20:48
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:They were clumsy and awkward and incredibly unsatisfying. So just like Tavros then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 20:49
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:Bullshit. Well, whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:It's not really funny either; Vriska taunting Tav with his legs, Terezi conducting that weird investigation on his body, none of these were funny. Nilbop posted:I mean if you're saying they are funny then you are buying into the giant blinking neon sign hung over the joke saying "You Should Feel Guilty About Finding This Funny." They were clumsy and awkward and incredibly unsatisfying. Nope. I don't feel guilty about finding it funny at all. I recognize that it's tragic, sure, but it was still presented in a joking, humorous way. It's the same way that Equius's death was funny. Sure, it's tragic. It's still hilarious, and intentionally so.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
I cried when Tavros died. I wept tears of crimson red (that's my fantroll's blood color). Curse you monsters for finding his death funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 21:01
|
|
|
Tavros is absolutely my least favorite troll. I even think Equius was interesting because of his issues with authority, feeling like he should step up to his bloodtype but not wanting to and all that. Even Eridan is amazing in a completely terrible way (And at least he stepped up and tried to fight for something). Tavros was just boring and pathetic and in the end just did what Vriska had planned  .
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
King of Solomon posted:This is wrong. They were both actually hilarious. Well I mean what do you want me to say to this. quote:Nope. I don't feel guilty about finding it funny at all. I recognize that it's tragic, sure, but it was still presented in a joking, humorous way. It's the same way that Equius's death was funny. Sure, it's tragic. It's still hilarious, and intentionally so. Well that's fine if you don't feel guilty about it but you're kind of missing the wood for the trees. Look at when Terezi's doffing Tav's doofy face with (I can't remember the name of the puppet)'s bottom for her mock-investigation. He's giving you the opportunity to laugh at it while constantly reminding you that you probably shouldn't. If you think Equius death was hilarious that's actually kind of weird to me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 21:11
|
|
|
Yeah uh even speaking as a dude with Equius's death scene as an avatar I would not describe that scene as "hilarious." It was hosed-up. There has been exactly one death in this comic that was hilarious, and that was fedorafreak's. Even Eridan's was more "satisfying" than "funny." e: ok i guess a bunch of the felt had funny deaths too but they're not really characters e2: vvvvvvvvvv How is getting off to your own death funny and not hosed up? I mean, it worked for the character, it was striking and disturbing, it was hosed up in a good storytelling way, but it was still hosed up. loquacius fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Dec 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 21:16
|
|
|
He really isn't. The entire point to that is it's absurd. Tavros's expression is ridiculous and Terezi is "investigating" his death by smacking him with a scalemate plush. Equius died with that ridiculous smile because while he still died, he was getting off to it. They're jokes. Equius was a joke character and he died in a jokey way. Sure you could put up an argument about how tragic it is that he died because he ultimately couldn't get past his rigid adherence to the blood caste. That's a thing that's still true. That doesn't make it any less of a joke on Hussie's part. Homestuck is a comedy first and foremost. EDIT: Okay, I probably shouldn't be using the word "hilarious" here, because they weren't actually that funny, but the point is those scenes are funny. They're tragic events presented in an absurd way for comedic reasons. King of Solomon fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Dec 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
Cavatica posted:Oh no, Dad. All the Guardians died real early in the last Scratched session we saw. I'm guessing that's gonna come up! Re: Tavros, I don't think his standing up to Vriska was petty or selfish at all - foolish, sure, but one of his recurring themes is that he's associated with characters like Peter Pan and Don Quixote, who are striving perhaps foolishly against an unbeatable object. Their attempts are still noble though! Logically Tavros knows Vriska is going to kick his rear end, but she's revealed herself to have seriously hurt not just him but all his friends, so he wants to at least try to stop her. He's spent his whole life being scared of a terrifying, oppressive murderer, but now that he knows it's not just his life she's ruined, he decides he has to stand up to her. That's noble! He dies, but of course he's going to die. He's not much but a dreamer in actuality, while Vriska is a literal god, but Dream the Impossible Dream and all that. Don Quixote doesn't get much poo poo done either, but he's commonly accepted (and I personally like him) as a heroic figure, and that's entirely because his ideals and motives are pure and heroic - good must always strive against evil, even if it has no chance of victory. Prospitian ideals, if you like! Vriska is sympathetic but by many definitions (including the cosmic definition, as evinced by her death) she's to be recorded as a figure of great evil who deserved to die. Saying Tavros was cruel or vengeful in trying to kill her seems off when the cosmic workings of justice themselves wanted her dead for more or less the exact same reasons. He had the right heart, but not the required puissance. For what it's worth, Don Quixote is also a satirical figure, lampooning the childishness of the idea of a knightly hero who can save everyone. So you can comfortably read it both ways, you know? Maybe even both at once. Android Blues fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Dec 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 21:27
|
|
