|
e X posted:Once you know Piccolo is supposed to be n alien it's hard to see anything else, but his design does actually work for a demon lord pretty well. Toriyama apparently thought so too, so he threw a beard on him, gave him a new hat and made him the Demon Lord and last boss of Dragon Quest V:  Almost looks like Piccolo and Roshi fused.
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:23 |
|
|
In this post I'll be continuing to talk about the art of Dragonball and continuing on the theme of visual storytelling. If you want to read what I've already said about the art of Dragonball, click the ? under my name or find them neatly organized on this blog I made for just that purpose. Today I want to talk about the actions Toriyama shows his characters taking and the acting we see in the art of Dragonball. Should a character be in a panel or not? As established in the previous entry, the decision to exclude something from a comic is just as important as the decision to include something. If it helps, think of this as similar to the sound engineer's choices while scoring the anime on whether or not a section should have music or silence. If we have an establishing shot where a character is in the foreground and other characters are in the background, what that means is that the character who is the focal point of that panel's composition is aware of the presence of the background characters. By that same coin, if we have a panel where "geographically speaking" a character should be in our line of sight but has been omitted, that means that this character isn't relevant to the foreground character's mental state. It's also worth noting that it's often understood that if we have an establishing shot where a character is in the foreground and other characters are in the background, the characters who are not the focal point of the composition are not aware of the presence of the characters who are the focus. Examples   Background characters relevant to focus character's mental state. Focus character irrelevant to background character's mental state.  Character who is logically in our line of sight omitted because they are irrelevant to focus character's mental state.  Foreground characters relevant to focus character's mental state. Focus character irrelevant to foreground character's mental state. Having established a basic foundation on when a character should be in a panel and when they should not, I also want to note that this choice can also depend on the artist's style, but this principle generally holds in both manga and western comics. Regardless, once the artist knows a character is going to be in a scene, they should also start thinking about that character's action. The artist also needs to think of the character as an actor on stage; the character will be delivering a performance through the artist's drawings. Essential Action If a character is in a scene, they should have one overarching "essential action" that describes what they do during the entire scene. A character can take many individual actions in a scnee, but they should have only one "essential action." This action, determined once the script is complete, informs the artist how to portray the characters. Let's go ahead and have a look at Dragonball Chapter 30 and try to reverse-engineer the thought process that went through some of the "acting" we see. I'll introduce the following guidelines for a "good" action for a character in a scene to have, adapted from A Practical Handbook for the Actor. * The action has to be something with both a fail state and a pass state. At any moment the character should be able to tell how close they are to achieving their goal, and only when that goal is met will they have completed the action. (The character may not get the opportunity to complete the action, but they should know what success looks like and be striving for it.) Ex. "to get a friend's forgiveness" you know when your partner has forgiven you by his behavior toward you. On the other hand, with an action like "maintain someone's interest" there's no way to achieve the goal - the character can only try forever or fail. * The action should be something the character does throughout the entire scene. An action like "deliver a bottle of milk" is not good as the basis of the character's acting because the character can't fail and the entire action takes place in just an instant; the character is clearly not doing only that the entire time. * The action should be specific and tailored for the character. Ie, "talk a friend into spilling the beans" or "extract a crucial answer" are both better than "get someone to give me information" * An action should be true to who the character is and what's actually happening around the character. "An action such as 'making someone cry' is manipulative. An action such as 'forcing a friend to face facts' might make someone cry, but the crying is more likely to be a response to your carrying out your action, rather than the result of your manipulation. A manipulative action can cause you to act in a predetermined way instead of dealing truthfully with what is happening in the other person." For any given script, there are multiple "correct answers" to what the action of a scene should be. That's why people keep going to see Shakespeare over and over. But whatever the artist/actor chooses should follow the above guidelines. Expressions in Dragonball Chapter 30 Let's start with Roshi in the first part of scene two. I'll copy the dialog out of my viz copy. Roshi: "At last you will begin your education in the Kame-Sen School Bujutsu...the arts of the Turtle Master. But first, let me just say a few words about martial arts..." Roshi: "One does not study martial arts in order to win a fight or have girls say 'ooo <3 you're so strong!' One masters those arts for health in mind and body, for the ability to live one's life as courageously, uniquely, and energetically as one wishes!" Roshi: "If there are any who seek to terrorize you or any other decent people with undeserved power, you must defeat such enemies with one mighty blast!!" Roshi: "Do you understand so far?" Goku: "Not a word." Roshi: "Just 'train hard and enjoy life,' can you get THAT?" Goku: "Oh yeah, that's easy!" Krillin: "You really are stupid, aren't you...?" Roshi: "Enough talk...Let's start training! First some light jogging. Stay with me!" Krillin: "Yes, sir!" Krillin: (Thinking) "Huh, I'd heard the invincible old master's training regiment was tough...but this doesn't seem bad at all." What Roshi is literally doing in this scene is lecturing the boys on the purpose of studying martial arts. What Goku and Krillin are both doing is listening. But if I ran to an artist and commissioned a drawing and told them to draw one guy "lecturing" to two kids who are "listening," we'd probably get something boring as gently caress, like that drawing of a bored guy who doesn't want to be here from upthread that someone's friend made. If we wanted an artist to draw us something any good, we'd have to pick out the "essential action" of the scene. There are tons of "right answers." We could say Roshi's action is "making my students feel as passionately about what I teach as I am" or it could be "cramming some basic facts into my ignorant deciples' brains" or "Getting these kids to respect my deep knowledge" or maybe even "Building the confidence of some beginners." Here are Roshi's expressions in this scene:    And now Krillin and Goku. If the essential action for both were just "listening," then they would be acting the same, but they're not. Krillin is utterly serious, while Goku is barely processing the words coming out of Roshi's mouth. A suitable essential action for Krillin might be "Earn my master's respect with my austere dedication," "Prevent a rival from getting a leg up on me," or maybe "Force my master to recognize me as his best pupil." For Goku, perhaps "convince my teacher I can behave long enough for him to show me something cool" or "Keep up with an unexpectedly complex lesson," "Try to parse something understandable from a string of advanced technical terms." Whatever the case, ideally the character knows how close they are to success and the artist can consider how they would feel if they had to perform the same action and depict the characters' expressions accordingly. Krillin's expressions:    Goku's expressions:     If you don't have a consistent action that you stick with for the entire scene, the character's "acting" won't be true to the moment - the reader will sense that this isn't how such a person would really react in that situation and be taken out of the story. Trust me, this matters. I have the rest of the chapter transcribed and written up this way, but I think I'll pause on the Dragonball for now, because like the concept of "flow," I believe this is another component of visual storytelling that you don't appreciate until it's not there. Let me show you some of the worst "acting" I have ever seen in a professional comic. (From Avengers Academy 9)  Oh ouch that hurts to look at. This is SO bad. But we're masochists, so let's take a closer look!  Calm, slightly annoyed expression. (Why is her hand under her boob?)  "Go away." Ugly but angry, acceptable. (Though I'm not sure how he got in front of her? Wasn't he just behind her?)  No dialog. In this panel she says nothing. Also the other character isn't saying anything particularly shocking. Her expression is....blowjob. What is the essential action for this character? What is one action that would tie together all of these expressions? There is none. What probably happened is that the artist was like "well first she's mad and then she's really mad and then she's kinda still mad but maybe sad a little too?" That is not an action with a pass or fail state. That is the result of a guy keeping porn in his reference material folder. Here's another example from Adventure Comics (2009) #3:    Look at the women the main characters are talking to. They're just kind of...there. Remember when I asked you to imagine commissioning a drawing with a guy lecturing and people listening and no additional context? This is what you would get. The artist was just thinking "I need to draw these two women listening to these guys." But listening doesn't have both a pass/fail state. You can't succeed at "listening," nor can you really fail at it. For that reason it's somewhat difficult to parse what happens in the third page - we have to go on dialog that the women decided they didn't like the guys and left, but we don't know what they didn't like about the guys or if it was a strong dislike, boredom, or a case of the runs. Bad bad acting on the part of the artist here. Bonus: girl getting smacked in the face vs. girl getting smacked in the face  OH MY GOD HE BROKE HER SPINE. No really you can't actually look at that much boob and butt at the same time on a woman who has a healthy spine. Also fer being smacked in the face she sure looks...like someone who hasn't been smacked in the face. (From Avengers Academy 9)  Smacked in the faaaaace. Next time: more on visual storytelling in Dragonball Chapter 30
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 06:09
|
|
|
Great stuff, keep it coming. God, bad western comics look so baaaaad.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
I feel like I've been brought up to appreciate comics in the wrong way. Probably focused more on the words and not enough on what goes on in the panel itself.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 07:52
|
|
|
There's a whole book series on comics that uses manga as a frequent reference material. Each book is in comic form, and they're basically rad as hell. They're by Scott McCloud: Understanding comics deals with understanding a lot of comic concepts and artistic techniques, Making comics deals with actually implementing a lot of that stuff, and Reinventing comics looks at how things like webcomics have changed the comic industry. All three of them are very good, I'd have to recommend Understanding Comics if you're only going to get one, and making comics is going to be most useful to people who are actually, well, making comics. Basically, each book does the same stuff Xibanya is doing, only it's in comic panels and drawing on the whole of western and eastern comics as reference material.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 09:11
|
|
|
I think Scott McCloud is a little off with regards to webcomics, he tends to argue they don't have any particular flow to them, which might be true for something like CAD, but most webcomics I've read tries a very stilted approach to panels and tries to focus on the newspaper comic strip approach to comics, where each panel is a set size with characters talking back and forth. It's also why these comics also tend to focus more on spoken narrative than actual activity in the frames.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
It's also why those comics are some of the worst. I have very little patience for comics that are essentially just two (possibly disembodied) heads just talking at each other. It's a visual medium, engage me with your visuals. EDIT: vvv I was referring both to syndicated strips proper and webcomics that seek to emulate them. Bad Seafood fucked around with this message at 10:23 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 10:06
|
|
|
I would imagine that most webcomic artists make webcomics because they're not good enough on any level to make actual syndicated comics. If they were good enough at writing, I imagine they'd get a writing gig and same for a drawing gig. Obviously, you get your anomalies where pro comic artists can't write or draw at all, but yeah.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 10:19
|
|
|
I mean some webcomics try to go the "traditional" route and be more like the type you'd find in the store. Like any media, some of them do it right and some of them do it wrong. In my completely subjective and uneducated opinion, I tend to find that webcomics that go that route suffer from the amateur status of the creator(s) in ways that are more noticeable than their newspaper style counterparts. While they may have better art behind them than the newspaper style ones, usually, the higher skill and experience level demands tend to be a bit much for a lot of webcomic creator(s) and their flaws end up even more highlighted. Though, it could also be that, since they want to appear like comics we'd find in a comic book shop and go for more "elaborate" plots and visuals, I just end up expecting more from them than I would a webcomic that goes the newspaper route and they have more chances to introduce flaws to the product. I also don't read a lot of webcomics.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 10:19
|
|
|
Aurain posted:I would imagine that most webcomic artists make webcomics because they're not good enough on any level to make actual syndicated comics. If they were good enough at writing, I imagine they'd get a writing gig and same for a drawing gig. Pictured, lovely webcomic artist who can't make it with the professionals. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 10:32
|
|
|
Aurain posted:I would imagine that most webcomic artists make webcomics because they're not good enough on any level to make actual syndicated comics. If they were good enough at writing, I imagine they'd get a writing gig and same for a drawing gig. Boy howdy you just said a really dumb thing lol the lackadaisy guy is making almost 75k a year Ruggington fucked around with this message at 10:42 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
One Punch Man is a webcomic.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
Ruggington posted:Boy howdy you just said a really dumb thing this is not a rare occurrence.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 11:42
|
|
|
Rodyle posted:Pictured, lovely webcomic artist who can't make it with the professionals. And for every one of him, there's a dozen Tim Buckley's. As much as we make fun of him, he's actually not even the worst comic maker out there. I used to read a lot of webcomics because I was young and "holy poo poo, free entertainment!" but now I've got like over 60 bookmarks I never check in with anymore. And that is before we even step into the sprite-based comics, like 8-bit Theater and Bob & George, which were the standouts of their medium. The level of utter poo poo is inconceivable.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
There are plenty of really good looking webcomics out there, some good examples off the top of my head include; Kill Six Billion Demons, Paranatural, Poppy O'Possum, Prince of Sartar, and Endtown, all of which are also pretty well written(I'd post links and example pages but I'm posting from phone right now)
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
Aurain posted:I would imagine that most webcomic artists make webcomics because they're not good enough on any level to make actual syndicated comics. If they were good enough at writing, I imagine they'd get a writing gig and same for a drawing gig.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 12:14
|
|
|
i wrote a webcomic would anyone like to take a glance, lmk where to improve, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 12:20
|
|
|
Ruggington posted:Boy howdy you just said a really dumb thing Lackadaisy girl  Mordaedil posted:And for every one of him, there's a dozen Tim Buckley's. Also a her. Also "the level of utter poo poo is inconceivable", how is this any different from comic books and manga at large? Surprise, almost all of it is garbage or acceptably mediocre, like bland porridge.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
This thread moves way too loving fast. Regarding Black, I remember him being slightly sympathetic after killing Red but losing that sympathy during his fight with Goku. He just became another one of those 'conquer the world types' right after and Goku killed him dead. No real loss. Regarding his black caricature, you have to remember this is the 80s and Japan. It sucks and is racist, but even American culture was kind backwards then. I can't speak for Japan, but knowing there is a enhanced sense of nationalism in Japan and there aren't that many black people, it wouldn't surprise me if racial stereotypes existed in 80s popular media. My point is it's kind of stupid to bemoan media from 30 years ago, even if it's seen as problematic now.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 13:28
|
|
|
I've actually read two out of the three McCloud books mentioned but they're more like the comics equivalent to intro to film studies than they are instructive; that appears to be their intent and what I'm doing is a bit different. They are lovely for getting a grip on how comics can immerse us and get us involved even though comics are just a quiet stack of still pictures. To be honest not much of what I've covered here is something I've seen in an actual "how to draw comics" book, including McCloud's "Making Comics," which I own. The books I've referenced the most heavily while organizing this series have been a book on composition for magazine advertisements published decades ago that I inherited from my grandfather, who made such ads for a living back in the day, a book about writing plays, and a book about acting. I think that a lot of books about comic books don't quite have the right idea because they still get bogged down in the details of technique. To be honest I think that when it comes down to style, your ditko bubbles or speed lines only matter in the sense that they add clarity to your story. I think you can have a comic that has frankly awful art in terms of anatomy/verisimilitude but if it's clear what is going on in your comic and not a chore to read, your comic has a theme or a direction it's going in, and your comic has characters that are true to themselves, you're going to have something fun that people will like. I think SMBC and Order of the Stick are better comics than plenty of professional offerings despite the simplicity and abstract, let's say, quality to their art. Since this kind of thing isn't taught I can only surmise that people we think of as masters (Toriyama, Ditko, etc) sense these things and just know when something "feels right." It does seem a little weird though that plenty of books about comic books will discuss cinema when talking about panels but then not take a cue from cinema when it comes to guiding the eye, cluing the audience into a character's mental state through framing, silhouettes, and so on when all of those things have been taught in film school for eons but seem virtually unknown in the comics world. Maybe it's because when people see those concepts they think they're so obvious they don't need to study them but then they don't internalize the concepts? Who knows, I'm not very knowledgeable about cinema myself; I am but a humble playwright. Going back to comics analysis, it's very satisfying to look at something that makes my brain instantly happy (like Dragonball) and be able to pick out and name many of the things it's doing better than other things that don't make my brain happy. I'm nearly done with my analysis and I thank everyone for coming along with me while I write lots of words about punchmans comics. E: I'll be talking about two heads talking back and forth to each other in my next art post; it ties in with my last entry that good comics will give characters an action that is more than just "listening." It won't surprise you to hear that I think Bill Watterson knocks it out of the park as far as newspaper strips are concerned. Xibanya fucked around with this message at 13:55 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Also a her. Also "the level of utter poo poo is inconceivable", how is this any different from comic books and manga at large? Surprise, almost all of it is garbage or acceptably mediocre, like bland porridge. What gender noun do you use when referring to someone of unspecified gender, because I was taught to use "him" whenever that applied. Whatever, unimportant. The difference is maybe a bit up for debate, but if you went out there, truly looking, you'd find stuff that "Sweet Bro and Hella Jeff" were parodying. That is distinctly different from any comic book or manga as far asI know, because at least they draw something. Maybe not always pretty, maybe not always sensible, but at least something. Surviving cousins can be seen in fan-comics where Sonic self-inserts today. Luckily, most of these terrible comics have been run off the face of the Earth. But maybe you think still that it can't be that different from comic books or mangas at large. Well, you are in luck. I present to you, one of the actually "good ones" from back in time: http://www.elfonlyinn.net/d/20020523.html Yes, this was actually better than most of the stuff I read.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
English was traditionally a masculine language, so using him was/is considered correct but nowadays it's generally more gender neutral or at least taught as such.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
Mordaedil posted:What gender noun do you use when referring to someone of unspecified gender, because I was taught to use "him" whenever that applied. They/them/their The post(s) about Black are interesting. I'm reading through the DB manga for the first time and love most of it, but get bummed whenever I come across the racist/misogynist/transphobic stuff ("freak of nature" re: bulma being a man) but remember that the mid-80's wasn't so hot for any of that stuff, let alone race in Japan.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:29
|
|
|
Mordaedil posted:What gender noun do you use when referring to someone of unspecified gender, because I was taught to use "him" whenever that applied. Whatever, unimportant. Early-oughts webcomics were in a dire state, yes. But today the medium's pretty much hit the 99/1 ratio of everything else - a giant sea of bland or awful cookie-cutter wrecks with some incredible works scattered throughout. The same goes for anime, there's like one show a year worth watching out of what, three or four dozen
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
Yeah, web-comics have gotten out of that worst period and either died into obscurity or blossomed into decent reads. But then again, I still read Order of the Stick, so my tastes are probably not on the high end. zelah posted:They/them/their Doesn't quite feel right to me when referring to a single individual and my teacher taught me the old way, so I guess it's going to be stuck with me, sadly. Also probably because we do the same in my native language, making it an even harder habit to break.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:39
|
|
|
Mordaedil posted:Doesn't quite feel right to me when referring to a single individual and my teacher taught me the old way, so I guess it's going to be stuck with me, sadly. Also probably because we do the same in my native language, making it an even harder habit to break. Don't use it then, it's not wrong to not do so, just considered dated. e: Exclusively when you don't know someone's or something's gender, that is. Josuke Higashikata fucked around with this message at 14:49 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
There are a ton of good artists out there. I'm just not sure a lot of them read comics or want to work with comics. There's not really much prestige in being a comic book artist. At least manga dudes like Toriyama get to make up the story as well and not just draw someone elses stuff
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
If someone corrects you on a gender pronoun, just accept it and move on. Dwelling on it just makes it worse. E: as a Spanish-speaker I understand your confusion; I don't want to seem like I'm busting anyone's balls on this. To be honest I myself am not super fond of singular "they," especially in academic writing. In such a context, "he or she" is emerging as preferred. This is less a grammar issue and more a culture issue. It's increasingly frowned upon to assume anyone who is competent at something must be a guy. (The classic "I can't operate on this boy, he's my son!" brain teaser won't trick anyone these days.) Xibanya fucked around with this message at 14:53 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:If someone corrects you on a gender pronoun, just accept it and move on. Dwelling on it just makes it worse. Sure thing, I was just legitimately confused and wanted clarification, which I got. Thanks all.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:If someone corrects you on a gender pronoun, just accept it and move on. Dwelling on it just makes it worse. "He or she" has its own set of problems when it comes to some transgender individuals who identify as some variety of gender neutral or androgynous. Honestly "they" and various forms thereof is the best way to handle it; it just feels weird at first because "they" used to be used exclusively as a plural.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Mordaedil posted:What gender noun do you use when referring to someone of unspecified gender, because I was taught to use "him" whenever that applied. Whatever, unimportant. If it makes you feel any better, I was taught this as the accepted standard as well. The 'they/their' thing is new, and honestly is counterintuitive to how English is actually spoken. So don't worry too much about it
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Chaucer used the singular they. It's not even remotely new to the language.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
who cares
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:There are a ton of good artists out there. I'm just not sure a lot of them read comics or want to work with comics. There's not really much prestige in being a comic book artist. At least manga dudes like Toriyama get to make up the story as well and not just draw someone elses stuff It's not worth the time to do comics unless you just reallllly love that medium, or create your own property that "makes it big." You just don't get enough money for the amount of work you do, when you can technically make more in other ways (if you have enough art/design talent to create a comic, you can branch that into more profitable areas).
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
tbp posted:who cares
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
So I finally watched Bio Broly. That poo poo is kind of dark when you think about it, like when the scientists are all trying to flee and they are stuck in the elevator. They open the elevator to try and climb out and all the purple "acid" just fills the elevator. It's a little odd that of all things, the main villain (Bio-Broly) doesn't actually kill NEARLY as many people as an inanimate liquid.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
I don't think I've ever seen Bio-Broly, thinking about it. I thought I had, but the only image I can call to mind is goop monster Broly. I think I'll keep it that way.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
jivjov posted:"He or she" has its own set of problems when it comes to some transgender individuals who identify as some variety of gender neutral or androgynous. Honestly "they" and various forms thereof is the best way to handle it; it just feels weird at first because "they" used to be used exclusively as a plural. Actually, "they" and cohorts have a long, complicated history of official scholarship switching between being able to be used as third-person plural exclusively, and gender-neutral singular alongside it. Like much of the rest of the bastard, nonsense language that is English, the issues with "they" are still sort of unresolved. Often modern official scholarship still uses it as exclusively third-person plural but there's a significant push to have it as gender-neutral singular, appearing on many legal documents written in English both modern and not. Hell, most of Shakespeare's old works make use of it as gender-neutral singular. Are you going to argue with Shakespeare? Dude invented like a quarter of modern English vocabulary. Like the name "Jessica." Or the word "worm-hole."
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Darko posted:It's not worth the time to do comics unless you just reallllly love that medium, or create your own property that "makes it big." You just don't get enough money for the amount of work you do, when you can technically make more in other ways (if you have enough art/design talent to create a comic, you can branch that into more profitable areas). I think it's a twofold problem 1. Lots of people don't like or read comics because of how DC and Marvel have loving poisoned the well, so lots of artists grow up without any interest in comics and thus don't really consider making them. "You were a reader before you were a writer." -- J. D. Salinger 2. Some talented artists consider it but they realize their target audience probably doesn't read comics because of item one so they put their energy into other pursuits. As for the "poisoning the well" I mentioned, I covered that in greater detail in my Supes vs Goku posting.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:23 |
|
|
Maybe someday in the future we will create some kind of new third-person singular gender-neutral noun that will describe living beings. I'm thinking... "et", from combining "s/he" and "it".
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:23
|
|
