Ee-eerie Firefly reference.

[Alfryd]

From Objects in Space.

EARLY
(turns to Simon)
"You know, with the exception of one deadly and unpredictable midget this girl is the smallest cargo I have ever had to transport and yet by far the most troublesome. Does that seem right to you?"

Early turns back to the screens.

SIMON
"What'd he do?"

EARLY
"Who?"

SIMON
"The midget."

EARLY
"Arson."
(beat)
"Little man loooved fire."

:confused:

[krossbow]

somehow, I don't think early was contracted to capture belkar :p





completely unrelated IMO.
________
CHRYSLER SEBRING (SEDAN) SPECIFICATIONS (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Chrysler_Sebring_(sedan))

[Alfryd]

Yeah. But it was amusing to come across. :)

[Illiander]

I've had a situation similar with a character from a book and a real-life person, then when I checked the dates, the book was published long before the person became well known

and from a friend who's studying english literature (or something similar enough for me to get confused) you can reference something without meaning to, and the authors intentions for a character are compleatly irrelevent once you let someone else read it.
don't ask me to explain that, I'm just quoting her...

[Bozidar]

From Objects in Space.

EARLY
by far the best NPC of that show. .

[jkdjr25]

That line gives me so many ideas for character concepts its not even funny :)

[lared]

I've had a situation similar with a character from a book and a real-life person, then when I checked the dates, the book was published long before the person became well known

and from a friend who's studying english literature (or something similar enough for me to get confused) you can reference something without meaning to, and the authors intentions for a character are compleatly irrelevent once you let someone else read it.
don't ask me to explain that, I'm just quoting her...

Sounds like post-structuralism and deconstruction, particularly Barthes' "The Death of the Author."



To give a text an Author is to impose a limit on that text, to furnish it with a final signified, to close the writing.

Mostly nonsense, but useful to have read for appearing erudite and impressing the opposite sex. Also, lends itself well to academic nihilism, which is always useful for procrastination. ("It is a literary travesty that in my essay I am asked to constrain the full ideological, cultural, historical, and psychological multiplicities of this text into a single monolithic constructed 'meaning' that must also feature well-structured introductory and body paragraphs! etc. etc. etc.")

[Glyde]

Am I a lion? I don't think of myself as a lion...

You might as well though, I have a mighty roar.

[krossbow]

by far the best NPC of that show. .


"you ever been raped?"

[Josh Inno]

"Little man LOVED fire." Ooohhh. :P Now I am so tempted to play a pyrokeneticist!!!!

[Alfryd]

Mostly nonsense...
http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo

They actually used this technique to submit an essay to a prestigious literary journal. They even published it.

[Adygias]

Mostly nonsense, but useful to have read for appearing erudite and impressing the opposite sex. Also, lends itself well to academic nihilism, which is always useful for procrastination.

If deconstructionism turns out to be true and all literature is just raw materials for the art of literary criticism, can someone let me know? That would save me about 6 hours worth of writing time a day. I could really use that time to work my volleyball technique. That'd be nice. I'd improve my serves in no time. Just drop me a PM, okay?

[Twilight Jack]

I've had a situation similar with a character from a book and a real-life person, then when I checked the dates, the book was published long before the person became well known

and from a friend who's studying english literature (or something similar enough for me to get confused) you can reference something without meaning to, and the authors intentions for a character are compleatly irrelevent once you let someone else read it.
don't ask me to explain that, I'm just quoting her...

Deconstructionism, post-structuralism, and Lacan's Triangle of Perspective (author, character, reader).

[Alysar]

Belkar is psychotic, but not really much of a pyromaniac. I only recall him setting one fire (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0270.html) and that only because it was a convenient weapon. Yeah, he has that line at the end of the comic, but it seems more as a standard fall-back strategy than an obsession.

[Andiamo]

If I may direct you to this strip:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0157.html

[Dolash]

If deconstructionism turns out to be true and all literature is just raw materials for the art of literary criticism, can someone let me know? That would save me about 6 hours worth of writing time a day. I could really use that time to work my volleyball technique. That'd be nice. I'd improve my serves in no time. Just drop me a PM, okay?

I think deconstructionism's real - I'm a shameless deconstructionist, although generally I try and avoid using the word much and just tell people how I view things, because otherwise it sounds too fancy-pantsy.

Basically, I'm the sort of guy who doesn't like Thog because he kills people. Sure he's funny, but that just makes him psychotic to boot.

[Adygias]

Basically, I'm the sort of guy who doesn't like Thog because he kills people. Sure he's funny, but that just makes him psychotic to boot.

Dolash's post is an expression of a anger with God for creating a universe wherein evil happens. The phrase "I'm the sort of guy" sets up a speaker who is holding himself in opposition to the violence set up in the set of the statement, as a peaceful man is opposed to a violent and irrational world. The phonetic similarity between "God" and "Thog" should be noted. There is a deep undercurrent of frustration in the second sentence. "Sure he's funny" is a weak concession to conscience, which objects initially to any acusations against God with religious fear, but it is overcome with renewed force and harshness. Note the ferocity of sound and connotation in the word "psychotic" and the directness of the simple declarative sentence structure. The phrase "to boot" indicates casualness, finalizing the rejection of the religious superego elements. :smallwink: :smallbiggrin:

To tell the truth, I do see some merit in non-author-centered criticism. I had a professor back in college who talked about the Frost poem "Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening." Apparently Frost got irritated by people suggesting that he meant the poem to be a meditation on death, and eventually just said right out, "Look, the poem's about stopping in the woods on a snowy evening. That's it. It's just not about death, everyone." My professor said that something to the effect of, "I really respect Robert Frost, but I have to say, he's just wrong. The poem is about death, no matter what he thinks. He could have never made the connection even for a second while he was writing it, but it's still there." I agree there, but I think jumping to the conclusion that meaning is conferred subjectively by the reader (or the society or the literary community) is totally unwarranted. I'd just say that means that the writer's daemon can sometimes be in touch with universal meaning that the writer is.

[Pvednes]

I really, really, really dislike that sort of vile rubbish. It reminds me of back in high-school when they spent a whole six weeks on a single sentence, which was clearly written and intended to be taken at face value. It is so infuriating.

[Pvednes]

I ended up reading the whole book many times over while they were crapping on about that sentence. Probably why I did well in it.

[Adygias]

Sure, you figured out he book, but I just know that the deeper implications of that sentence still haunt you at night. There's no telling where you'd be today if you had just dug deeper. You could be in big-name literary journals. You could be in an Oxford English fellowship.

Though you could also be in heroin rehab.

I'm not really sure which one's worse in the long run.

[Pvednes]

Shouldn't look in that deep. It looks back.

[Alfryd]

My professor said that something to the effect of, "I really respect Robert Frost, but I have to say, he's just wrong. The poem is about death, no matter what he thinks. He could have never made the connection even for a second while he was writing it, but it's still there."
There is some merit to this position, if we assume that textual meaning is in some sense objective.

Shouldn't look in that deep. It looks back.
Well, they say the philosopher's duty is not just to look into the abyss, but stare it down.

If I may direct you to this strip:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0157.html
Also-
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0270.html

[TinSoldier]

Am I a lion? I don't think of myself as a lion...

You might as well though, I have a mighty roar.


Does that seem right to you?

For the record, Jubal Early was probably my favorite villain. Even more than the Operative, possibly. I just would have liked to have seen him in more episodes.

Does that seem right to you?

[Jannex]

For the record, Jubal Early was probably my favorite villain. Even more than the Operative, possibly. I just would have liked to have seen him in more episodes.

Does that seem right to you?

I find it to be entirely in keeping with what I know of you. :smallwink:

[Rason]

Verna is the best villian ever. the whole show 'she' was plotting the destruction of Serenity. And just so everyone knows, Wash didn't die!

[Dalenthas]

All Firefly villains were awesome. Though, I have to say, for all their build up, the Hands-of-Blue dudes kinda bit (and yes, I did read the comic).

EDIT: Wait, do you mean Vera, Jayne's gun? What the hell?

[Greebo]

Verna is the best villian ever. the whole show 'she' was plotting the destruction of Serenity. And just so everyone knows, Wash didn't die!
1) Who the heck is Verna.
2) Yes, Walsh died. He had a grave and everything. (The big spike through his chest was also a clue.)
3) Should this be in Media Discussions?

[Alfryd]

Should this be in Media Discussions?
Not if you make suddden, random, disconnected comparisons between Jayne and Bitterleaf, Book and Thundershield, Haley and Inara, and Miko and River!

Wooo-ooo-oo!

[ElfLad]

Roy is like Mal, but less jolly.

[Vonriel]

And fewer jokes about killing people. Though, I think Roy would be likely to imitate Mal in the episode where he gave his 'I'll let you live IF...' speech, kicked the guy into the engine when he said no, then brought up the next guy and started in on the same speech (Man I wish I could remember that episode's name.. Wasn't it at the end of The Train Job?)
:biggrin:

Edit: Wow, I fail at homonyms. Homynyms.. homanyms.. whatever.

Double edit: Remembered the episode's proper name.. I think..

[atteSmythe]

"Train Job," yep.

Yes, I'm right with you! Best thing for everyone!

[Greebo]

Ok, but who's Verna! ;)

[Vonriel]

Probably a typo on Vera, quite possibly the best cameo ever. Hehehe.. trading a gun for a chick.. hehehe..

[Alfryd]

Roy is like Mal, but less jolly.
Also, Mal Reynolds is NG. A *lot* more scheming and ruthless when the situation calls for it, and more resentful of authority. (He also has better charisma.)

Though, I think Roy would be likely to imitate Mal in the episode where he gave his 'I'll let you live IF...' speech, kicked the guy into the engine when he said no...
Actually, leaving generally Evil people who have every motive to track you down and kill you on some future occasion alive to do so is something Roy has done more than a few times.
Saffron was the main exception for Mal, because she didn't specifically seem likely to bear a grudge, and didn't kill them personally, so I suppose that was one of his Lawful moments.
Speaking of which.

Ok, but who's Verna! ;)
JAYNE
"Six men came to kill me one time, and the best of them carried this. It's a Callahan fullbore autolock, customized trigger and double cartridge thorough-gauge."

He holds it out to Mal.

JAYNE (cont'd)
"It's my very favorite gun."

MAL
"The explosive diarrhea of an elephant, are you offering me a trade?"

JAYNE
"A trade? Hell, it's theft! This is the best gun made by man, and its got extreme sentimental value! It's miles more worthy'n what you got."

MAL
"'What I got' - she has a name."

JAYNE
"So does this! I call it... Vera."

MAL
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle."

JAYNE
"Dammit, Mal, I'd treat her okay..."

MAL
"She's not to be bought. Nor bartered, nor borrowed or lent. She's a human woman, doesn't know a damn thing about the world and needs our protection."

JAYNE
"I'll protect her!"

MAL
"Jayne! Go play with your rainstick."


.

[Greebo]

Yeah I know who *Vera* is -- but that doesn't fit with:

Verna is the best villian ever. the whole show 'she' was plotting the destruction of Serenity.
A gun never plotted the destruction of Serenity. Maybe the poster meant Bridget or whatever her name really was...

[Solaris]

I think deconstructionism's real - I'm a shameless deconstructionist, although generally I try and avoid using the word much and just tell people how I view things, because otherwise it sounds too fancy-pantsy.

Basically, I'm the sort of guy who doesn't like Thog because he kills people. Sure he's funny, but that just makes him psychotic to boot.

I got a riddle for you.

That kind of thing . . . It's burning the bridge for firewood. I'm the sort of guy who shamelessly thinks art is there to make something, not to be picked apart for subtleties that aren't there. Then again, it could just be me chuckling at having gotten an A on a half-baked art class assignment because I knew someone who was really good at BSing. I kid you not when I say I threw random shapes together and this girl came up with a great-sounding analysis that was, of course, complete rubbish.

[Vonriel]

I was referring more to the part where he was letting the bad guy go to deliver a message to his boss to never bother them again, but c'est la vive. Oh crap, I spoke french! Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo! *Bzzzzzzapp*

[Jannex]

I was referring more to the part where he was letting the bad guy go to deliver a message to his boss to never bother them again, but c'est la vive. Oh crap, I spoke french! Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo! *Bzzzzzzapp*

"Now, this is all the money Niska gave us..."

Great scene. And yeah, I can envision Roy doing something like that.

[Dratsabre Tsabala]

Y'know... actually, I don't see it. Not so much, no.

Granted, my memory's not what it used to be, but I really don't remember any single occaision where Roy has ever caused, allowed, or seriously considered/advocated the death of anyone outside of combat. I can see Roy pulling SOME kind of catch-and-release, send-'em-running-home-scared tactic on the bad guys, but that turbine stunt? Actually FOLLOWING THROUGH on it? It's just waaay out of his depth. Closest he ever came was dangling The Oracle out the window.

[Sketti]

Oh god... I come here to get AWAY from Literary Theory >_<

It corrupts everything it touches X-D

Death to Derrida!

On Firefly...

I love the rainstick! And Jayne :)

Best stuff: "He stole from the rich and he gave to the poor
Stood up to the man and gave him what-for
Our love for him now ain't hard to explain
The hero of Canton
The man they call Jayne!"

[Alfryd]

"He stole from the rich and he gave to the poor
Stood up to the man and gave him what-for
Our love for him now ain't hard to explain
The hero of Canton
The man they call Jayne!"
The others stare up at the statue.
"I think they've really captured him, though, you know? Captured his essence."
"He looks sort of angry, don't he?"

[Jannex]

The others stare up at the statue.
"I think they've really captured him, though, you know? Captured his essence."
"He looks sort of angry, don't he?"

"...This must be what going mad feels like."


Y'know... actually, I don't see it. Not so much, no.

Granted, my memory's not what it used to be, but I really don't remember any single occaision where Roy has ever caused, allowed, or seriously considered/advocated the death of anyone outside of combat. I can see Roy pulling SOME kind of catch-and-release, send-'em-running-home-scared tactic on the bad guys, but that turbine stunt? Actually FOLLOWING THROUGH on it? It's just waaay out of his depth. Closest he ever came was dangling The Oracle out the window.

Yeah, you're probably right; Roy isn't nearly as awesome as Mal.

[Alfryd]

Roy isn't nearly as awesome as Mal.
And that's *after* his spirit was utterly crushed! Ah, give Greenhilt time.

But on to other random comparisons! Who does this remind you of?

"If wishes were horses, we'd all be eating steak."

"Y'know, they go just fine if you lead 'em."
"I like smackin' em!"

"You held a riot for me? ...How could I stay away!"

"You just need to scare him."
"Pain is scary..."

[Vonriel]

Wow, until you mentioned the riot line, I never really put much stock into a Belkar->Jayne comparison. But y'know..

[Goofy]

Wait, are we going for a full-blown comparison?
Roy: Mal
Elan: Wash
Haley: Zoey
V: Simon
Belkar: Jayne
Durkon: Book

What do we do with Inara, River and Kaylee then? Are they Haley's sub-personalities?

[monsterinshadow]

Also, Mal Reynolds is NG. A *lot* more scheming and ruthless when the situation calls for it, and more resentful of authority. (He also has better charisma.)

Actually, leaving generally Evil people who have every motive to track you down and kill you on some future occasion alive to do so is something Roy has done more than a few times.
Saffron was the main exception for Mal, because she didn't specifically seem likely to bear a grudge, and didn't kill them personally, so I suppose that was one of his Lawful moments.
Speaking of which.

JAYNE
"Six men came to kill me one time, and the best of them carried this. It's a Callahan fullbore autolock, customized trigger and double cartridge thorough-gauge."

He holds it out to Mal.

JAYNE (cont'd)
"It's my very favorite gun."

MAL
"The explosive diarrhea of an elephant, are you offering me a trade?"

JAYNE
"A trade? Hell, it's theft! This is the best gun made by man, and its got extreme sentimental value! It's miles more worthy'n what you got."

MAL
"'What I got' - she has a name."

JAYNE
"So does this! I call it... Vera."

MAL
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle."

JAYNE
"Dammit, Mal, I'd treat her okay..."

MAL
"She's not to be bought. Nor bartered, nor borrowed or lent. She's a human woman, doesn't know a damn thing about the world and needs our protection."

JAYNE
"I'll protect her!"

MAL
"Jayne! Go play with your rainstick."


.

i must disagree. i would peg Mal as more a of a true neutral. He obviously has no discipline except with his crew and he oscillates between good and evil quite easily.

[Silverlocke980]

Funny as all get-out, if- as others have stated- unrelated.

Little people like fire because it goes up the target, eliminating the need to aim for the head!

[Spiky]

Wait, are we going for a full-blown comparison?
Roy: Mal
Elan: Wash
Haley: Zoey
V: Simon
Belkar: Jayne
Durkon: Book

What do we do with Inara, River and Kaylee then? Are they Haley's sub-personalities?
Uh, I don't see V anywhere on that show, although Book would be closest. And Zoey does not compare to Haley except for the outfit. The only real comparison is Roy-Mal. Belkar-Jayne isn't bad, I guess. The others aren't even close. Sometimes things just don't match.

Damn, I miss that show. I gotta get my discs back.

[Jannex]

i must disagree. i would peg Mal as more a of a true neutral. He obviously has no discipline except with his crew and he oscillates between good and evil quite easily.

According to official D&D sources--or, at least the guys who wrote Complete Scoundrel--Mal Reynolds is Chaotic Good. He's certainly an outlaw, but he has guiding principles that he follows concerning what's "right." He's never really done anything evil per se--even shoving Niska's henchman into the turbine was at worst a neutral act, in light of the fact that Mal gave him every opportunity to go peacefully on his way, but instead the guy vowed to hunt Mal down and kill him. Oh yeah, and after the guy put his knife through Mal's shoulder. Self-defense, any way you slice it. Mal's done some decidedly neutral things in his day, but nothing really evil.

[Vonriel]

Heh, decidedly neutral.. Does anyone else find that somewhat ironic?

[TheOtherMC]

:roy: "Doesnt Thor's laws frown upon killing priest?"

:durkon: "Aye lad, but its a bitty fuzzy about kneecapping..."

:smallbiggrin:

[Alfryd]

Mal Reynolds is...

"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

Mal arranged to return the medicine he stole from the villagers despite the probability that Niska would exact revenge for failing to deliver, and knowing full-well what form that punishment would take.
He protects Simon and River despite the fact they put himself and his crew at considerable risk as time progresses, and ultimately... ...well, I won't spoil Serenity for you.
Many of his jobs have involved helping others out while endangering himself. He's usually paid for his efforts, but other sources of employment would probably involve less trouble and more reward.

Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.

Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.

Mal does lie when neccesary or useful, but he's also frank and open. He certainly keeps his word and judges those who fall short of their duties. He has no fondness for the Alliance as an authority and attaches great importance to his personal freedoms, but we've seen nothing to indicate he didn't treat army superiors with deference. He has the typical 'gentlemen's attitude' toward defending womens' (Inara's) honour, which you might call adherence to tradition. His underlying motives are generally consistent and he does formulate detailed plans.
He also displays a certain honour code in varying situations- he doesn't kill Saffron, despite every reason and provocation to do so, and opts to maroon the survivor of the Reaver-ransacked vessel rather than killing him outright.
"You don't know me, son. So let me explain this to you once: If I ever kill you, you'll be awake, you'll be facing me, and you'll be armed."
Definitely a Lawful attitude.
So, I peg'm as NG.


Belkar-Jayne isn't bad, I guess. The others aren't even close. Sometimes things just don't match.
They don't especially in this case. But clearly you have yet to master the fine art of pithy rationalisation: Observe!
Durkon resembles Book in that both are sexually withdrawn, religiously devout missionary pilgrims cut off from and torn by a past life with reasonable combat proficiency. (Book's past, however, was apparently rather dark, whereas Durkon's was contentedly bland. One seeks to return, the other to escape.)
You could consider Miko a sort of wierd composite of traits from Simon and River- reality disconnect, lethal force, conscientious anal-retentive stiffness, pathos, isolation, stern training and psychological duress, plus sheer gorramn hotness.

"She can be a mite... unpredictable. Mood swings... of a sort."
"He looks better in red."
"No power in the 'verse can stop me."

[ElfLad]

I kinda saw Miko as the Operative, but the more you look at the analogy, the more it horribly breaks down.

[Vonriel]

Yeah, the operative never really got angry. Miko? Not so much. I'd go as far as saying that in High School, she would've been voted "Most Likely To Kill Someone Over Spilt Milk"

[Tilian]

And the Operative freely admitted that he was the scum of the earth. He just claimed to have justification from on high to be as such.

Miko is righteous 24/7. She just needs time to figure out what the gods want her to do!

[Greebo]

And the Operative freely admitted that he was the scum of the earth. He just claimed to have justification from on high to be as such.

Miko is righteous 24/7. She just needs time to figure out what the gods want her to do!
True - the operative never thought he would live in that better world...

Then again, NOBODY lived in that better world...

[Jannex]

"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

Mal arranged to return the medicine he stole from the villagers despite the probability that Niska would exact revenge for failing to deliver, and knowing full-well what form that punishment would take.
He protects Simon and River despite the fact they put himself and his crew at considerable risk as time progresses, and ultimately... ...well, I won't spoil Serenity for you.
Many of his jobs have involved helping others out while endangering himself. He's usually paid for his efforts, but other sources of employment would probably involve less trouble and more reward.

Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.

Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.

Mal does lie when neccesary or useful, but he's also frank and open. He certainly keeps his word and judges those who fall short of their duties. He has no fondness for the Alliance as an authority and attaches great importance to his personal freedoms, but we've seen nothing to indicate he didn't treat army superiors with deference. He has the typical 'gentlemen's attitude' toward defending womens' (Inara's) honour, which you might call adherence to tradition. His underlying motives are generally consistent and he does formulate detailed plans.
He also displays a certain honour code in varying situations- he doesn't kill Saffron, despite every reason and provocation to do so, and opts to maroon the survivor of the Reaver-ransacked vessel rather than killing him outright.
"You don't know me, son. So let me explain this to you once: If I ever kill you, you'll be awake, you'll be facing me, and you'll be armed."
Definitely a Lawful attitude.
So, I peg'm as NG.

I don't disagree on any particular point... but,

"His underlying motives are generally consistent and he does formulate detailed plans."

Perhaps you're not rememberin' some of his previous plans? :smallwink:

[Terraxos]

I kinda saw Miko as the Operative, but the more you look at the analogy, the more it horribly breaks down.
There is a definite similarity, but they differ slightly in how they justify their actions, and drastically in their personalities.

At first glance, the plot of 'No Cure for the Paladin Blues' does resemble the basic setup of Serenity: a powerful, self-righteous warrior, acting on behalf of a vast empire, hunts down a rag-tag band of unlikely heroes for the alleged danger posed by one of their number, and fights several battles with them, but ultimately loses faith in the rightness of the society s/he's supposed to be fighting for.

Then again, that description could fit many stories, I'm sure. Besides, in some ways, Miko's actually more similar to Mal!

"I want to resolve this like civilized men. I'm not threatening you. I'm unarmed..."

"Good!" (attacks)

Is it just me, or do those lines fit perfectly with the moment when Miko stabbed Hinjo?

[Terraxos]

Perhaps you're not rememberin' some of his previous plans? :smallwink:
"What you plan and what takes place ain't ever been exactly similar..."

By the way, I love the idea of this thread. I think there ought to be some sort of symbolic prize for whoever can come up with the most ingenious/persuasive link between OOTS and Firefly.

[Ishmael]

Damn Deconstructionists. What are we going to get next from literary theory? Linguistic principles/semantical philosophy does very little beyond muddling the issue of ontology. In their system, all essentially falls down to a contest of power, who can project the greater meaning onto society? Postmodernists...and their vaguely existential reality. Grr....

On a more related note, I would pay much to fine a definitive connection between the glory that is Firefly and OoTS.

[roadkiller]

I see good and bad to all the comparisons made:

Roy:Mal :: Lawful good; Will attempt to help people. Doesn't kill when he doesn't have to (tying up enemies etc) : True neutral-Chaotic good; Will help decent people who are in trouble, don't deserve it and thinks he has a chance of success (protecting the brothel) but won't go out of his way for anyone else. Extremely loyal to his crew. Will kill people who deserve it or who would end up with worse (the man caught by Reavers) without hesitation.
I'd put the match at about 6/10. They act similarly in some ways, but their motives, means and ultimately personality differ extremely.

Belkar:Jayne :: Chaotic Evil (Yes! He IS Chaotic Evil!); Loves inflicting suffering and death. Will get involved in any fight he can. Always attempts to kill enemies. Completely unreliable as a party member. : Neutral Evil(?); Finds fighting and weaponry entertaining. Will sit out of a fight if it happens to be more entertaining to watch (Mal's barfight, at least for the start). Will knock out enemies if that's what Mal wants. Reliable as long as you can pay him the most.
I'd put this at 9.5/10. I'd much rather have Jayne with me than Belkar.

Elan:Wash: Chaotic Good; Usually ineffective, but can become effective when there is real pressure put on him. Otherwise, entirely clueless. Hooked up with Haley : Neutral Good (?); Skilled piolet and technician and extraordinary with extreme pressure. Somewhat silly about playing with toys and such ("We will rule over all this land and we will call it... This Land.") but understands and reacts according to more complex circumstances. Hooked up with Zoey.
I'd say a 4/10 match there. They both might be goofy, but they are in different ways.

Haley:Zoey :: Neutral Good (? I don't have origins and don't ever remember seeing her alignment); Stealthy distance fighter. Often self doubting, even to an unreasonable level. More greedy than physically possible. Hooked up with Elan : Lawful Neutral (?); Prefers stealth while fighting (organ smuggling episode). Very confident in herself. Extremely loyal to Mal. Hooked up with Wash.
3/10 Aside from being with another person and being relatively stealthy,
they really don't have that much in common.

V:Simon :: I'll fill this stuff in later.
1/10 aside from both being quite intellegent, they're pretty much completely different.

Durkon:Book :: I'll fill this in later
1/10 aside from being religous, they are very different. Even the mechanics of religion differ between them.

[Skydiving_Ninja]

I see good and bad to all the comparisons made:
Belkar:Jayne :: Chaotic Evil (Yes! He IS Chaotic Evil!); Loves inflicting suffering and . Will get involved in any fight he can. Always attempts to kill enemies. Completely unreliable as a party member. : Neutral Evil(?); Finds fighting and weaponry entertaining. Will sit out of a fight if it happens to be more entertaining to watch (Mal's barfight, at least for the start). Will knock out enemies if that's what Mal wants. Reliable as long as you can pay him the most.
I'd put this at 9.5/10. I'd much rather have Jayne with me than Belkar.


I wouldn't call Jayne completely evil. I'd call him chaotic neutral. After all, look at him in "Jaynestown."

Also, kudos to whoever spotted the unintentional similarity. You and the person who discovered "Dark Side of the Rainbow" should have a shrine of some sort.

[TinSoldier]

I love this thread! Two of my favorite things--Firefly and OotS.

Oh, and to throw in some Goblins: Kore is so the Operative.

[Spiky]

The basic problem with comparing the 2 is that Firefly doesn't have any restrictive rules about Good/Neutral/Evil. So any comparison starts breaking down as soon as you get deep into the characters.

I'm trying to figure out this Wash/Elan comparison. Wash is not dumb like Elan, and he is completely effective at what he does. He just isn't a mercenary, so maybe he seems a bit out of it compared to Mal/Zoie/Jayne. Whereas Elan actually is a mercenary, just not a real tough one, and ineffective til recently. (although he did give Durkon that last little bit once so he didn't have to waste another round on a low-level goblin) Take out the blond hair and I fail to see many comparitve traits. General niceness, I guess. I'd give it 1/10 at best for the hair.

Alfryd,
I actually hate pithy rationalization. Or any other type. That's the issue. Reality is ever so much more fun. (Hook derivation) Like picking apart rationalizations.

[Vonriel]

I think we need to get The Giant to come here and tell us how huge a fan he is of the Firefly series. Anyone else agree?

[Alfryd]

I kinda saw Miko as the Operative, but the more you look at the analogy, the more it horribly breaks down.
Yeah... As mentioned despite similar narrative roles, the operative is a pleasant, urbane, understanding and self-attuned individual with a keen knowledge of human frailty, who simply believes that a sufficiently worthy end justifies the means- any means. Miko has not, thus far, stooped so low as to butcher inconvenient child witnesses.

"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.

Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.

Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.

His exact alignment is actually tricky to peg down given the known data.
The Operative surely displays 'concern for the dignity of sentient beings'. As Whedon puts it- "he tries to make everyone around him feel as good about themselves as possible- even when he's killing them." He certainly makes personal sacrifices for a higher cause, but it's difficult to see who benefits apart from faceless Alliance superiors. That said, once he realises the magnitude of their atrocities, he performs an abrupt U-turn with his loyalties and places himself in significant danger by going out of his way to patch up Serenity and it's crew.
He does oodles of killing, but not without compassion, not out of convenience, and hardly for sport. The question comes down to whether he genuinely believes his masters' interests are benign and whether this belief was justified to begin with. Whedon says: "The Alliance is, by and large, a benevolent force in the lives of it's citizens, but it's out of it's depth in these outflung, backwater worlds which it can't really control, and has no business trying," so really, it's a toss-up.
The Operative has never lied or failed to keep his word, to our knowledge, even if he omits pertinent information from discussion. He definitely respects what he considers legitimate authority. The only real argument you can make for chaotic alignment is his 'end-justifies-means' to-the-exclusion-of-all-else attitude, which is admittedly so pervasive it blankets most of his other virtues. His behaviour is highly consistent and his plans are coherent and well-executed. Whedon also mentions that his use of a sword is a lawful attribute, preferring to kill up close and personal- note that he stuns Mal with a blaster, rather than killing him- and "is in his own way a very honourable character."
EDIT: Actually, he does lie about payment to Mr. Universe. Make that TN, then.
(Whedon quotes from movie/documentary commentary not word-for-word accurate, but sense is intact... I think.)


Perhaps you're not rememberin' some of his previous plans?
Now, now. If Nale and Roy can be Lawful... He does have a knack for changing plans on the spur of the moment, though.
Eh, point taken.

"I am of course wearing full-body armour- I am not a moron!"
Mal should have taken a headshot- 2 to the chest, 1 to the head- standard procedure.

Is it just me, or do those lines fit perfectly with the moment when Miko stabbed Hinjo?
IIRC, Hinjo was fully armed at the time and actively challenging Miko, albeit sufficiently lower level that subdual damage would have been easy. Going after Belkar was irrational enough under the circumstances, but Miko's attitude to Hinjo *really* freaked me out.


Belkar:Jayne :: Chaotic Evil (Yes! He IS Chaotic Evil!); Loves inflicting suffering and death. Will get involved in any fight he can. Always attempts to kill enemies. Completely unreliable as a party member. : Neutral Evil(?); Finds fighting and weaponry entertaining. Will sit out of a fight if it happens to be more entertaining to watch (Mal's barfight, at least for the start). Will knock out enemies if that's what Mal wants. Reliable as long as you can pay him the most.
I'd put this at 9.5/10. I'd much rather have Jayne with me than Belkar.
Jayne is actually a lot more decent and restrained than Belkar has ever been. He *did* risk his hide to rescue the Captain from Niska's clutches, joined Mal for delivering the message, and there is some faint evidence of latent guilt over his betrayal of the Tams (doesn't want the others to know what he did on Ariel.) He's also forlornly in love with Kaylee (remember him crawling into the ventilation shaft to watch her operation at the start of the show?) He didn't really do anything notably heroic in Jaynestown- having slight qualms about his actions doesn't count for much- and like Belkar enjoys violence and has no desire to stick his neck out for others unnecessarily. Unlike Belkar, there's no evidence that he takes pleasure in other's pain per se.
I think the character *has* changed over the series- he comes across as somewhat smarter and more benign in Serenity- but both he and Belkar function as the group's Id.
In the final analysis, though, Jayne really speaks for himself:

"Shepherd Book used to say to me... if you can't do something smart, do something right."

"I think it's noble as a grape the way you look t'River, but she ain't my sister- ...and she ain't your crew, so where's it writ that we gotta lay down our lives f'r her, which is what you've steered us t'ward?"

"And I thought they was getting OFF. Didn't we have this intricate plan where they was gonna be not-here-anymore? In earnest, Mal, why'd ya bring 'em back on?"

"Hell, I'll kill a man in a fair fight. ...or if he bothers me. ...or if there's a woman- ...or if I'm gettin' paid- Mostly when I'm gettin' paid. But these Reavers- last 12 years- comin' out of the edge of space like the boogeyman out of stories- Rapin' and murderin'- eating people alive!? When does that get fun?"

"Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others."
"Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient."
He does respect Mal's authority, but that's just about his only Lawful feature, and it's tenuous at best. He doesn't especially 'follow his conscience', 'resent being told what to do', or 'favor new ideas over tradition', but he's not especially predictable, tends to act on impulse, and does lie when convenient. I'll go with CN.

[Mal:Roy] I'd put the match at about 6/10.
Durkon:Book :: I'll fill this in later
1/10 aside from being religous, they are very different. Even the mechanics of religion differ between them.
It's roughly as good a match as you'll find anywhere else, excepting Belkar/Jayne. I'd have given it a 30% match. For Mal:Roy, 25% or so. Belkar:Jayne, 60%. Miko:River 35%.

I'm trying to figure out this Wash/Elan comparison...
Alfryd,
I actually hate pithy rationalization. Or any other type. That's the issue. Reality is ever so much more fun. (Hook derivation) Like picking apart rationalizations.
Pfah, it's harmless provided you *know* it's rationalisation. And may be entertaining.
The Wash/Elan match isn't especially strong. Wash is TN, for starters.


Oh, and to throw in some Goblins: Kore is so the Operative.
Nah, the Operative's aware that he's a monster.
To throw in some Frank Miller, Marv in Sin City is vaguely similar to a hybrid of Belkar and Jayne.

.

[SmartAlec]

"You don't know me, son. So let me explain this to you once: If I ever kill you, you'll be awake, you'll be facing me, and you'll be armed."
Definitely a Lawful attitude.
So, I peg'm as NG.

Code of the Gun. Basically boils down to 'if you shoot an armed man, it isn't murder'. Very much a wild-western gunfighter's attitude. Giving Simon a gun isn't an attempt to make it fair - because there's no way in hell Simon is going to out-draw Mal, and Mal knows that full well. He'd be giving Simon a gun because shooting unarmed men is what cowards and murderers do, and Mal doesn't consider himself either of those.

And even then:

Operative: "I'm not threatening you, I'm unarmed -"
Mal: "Good." *BLAM*

So it's clear Mal considers the Code of the Gun as more of a guideline than an absolute rule. Not sure if that's what you could call Lawful.


(The Operative's) exact alignment is actually tricky to peg down given the known data.

Lawful Evil, surely.

The Operative: "What I do is evil."

[Giscard76]

Lawful Evil, surely.

The Operative: "What I do is evil."

Yes but is motives aren't evil at least not form his point-of-view. He takes no joy in killing, he even regrets that Mal won't "settle this as men not with fire." Still he feels no regret over what he has to do and when he's ultimately defeated he helps those he hurt in the course of trying to do his duty. Since the harm has been done... no one gains from killing River or Mal at that point.

I'd say more aggressively Lawful Neutral...

[Jannex]

The Wash/Elan match isn't especially strong. Wash is TN, for starters.


I'd say Wash is Good.

"Can I make a suggestion that doesn't involve killing--or is this the wrong crowd?"

[Tilian]

Yeah, Wash is definitely the most conscientious of the crew after Book.

Then again I guess arguments could be made for Simon and Kaylee.

It's funny, but the first time I came to think of Zoe as lawful and Mal as chaotic was during that flashback showing their different approaches towards wartime combat.

Zoe : Calm, cool, methodical...

Mal : Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!

[Alfryd]

"Can I make a suggestion that doesn't involve killing--or is this the wrong crowd?"
'Violence'. Having qualms on the subject and actually doing anything about it are different things.

Yeah, Wash is definitely the most conscientious of the crew after Book.
He often shows concern verbally, but I've rarely seen him go out of his way to actually help others he didn't have an immediate emotional investment in. He did help rescue Mal from Niska, I suppose, but under the circumstances he basically had to. On the other hand-
SIMON: "Did he say anything about a Miranda?..."
WASH: "Do we care? ...Are we caring about that?"


So it's clear Mal considers the Code of the Gun as more of a guideline than an absolute rule. Not sure if that's what you could call Lawful.
Given that the Operative was talking about sending a missile to his ship's exact location in 3 minutes, probably has legions of minions waiting on standby and considerable martial-arts expertise, he might be considerably automatically 'armed.'
I'm sure it's not what you'd call Lawful Stupid.

Lawful Evil, surely.
The Operative: "What I do is evil...
...but it must be done. I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin."

[TinSoldier]

While the Operative realizes that some of his actions are evil, and Kore may not, I peg them both as Lawful Neutral. Passionless in their pursuit of a "better world" whatever that may mean. For both of them it means the elimination of anything that can disturb their realization of a better world. They are not clones of one another, simply they are kindred spirits from two different worlds.

[Alfryd]

I think the comic's author stated that Kore was 'insane and evil' at some point, though this is second-hand info. The big difference I've seen with the Operative is that, once given direct contradictory evidence for belief in his masters' benevolence, he did the right thing, which clears up his motives a bit. Kore doesn't seem to be working for a larger organisation, and pending any similar development, I can't really give him the benefit of the doubt.


Kaylee's superficially similar to Haley in that both have a sweet disposition, but Kaylee has no real combat proficiency or festering neuroses to speak of. Haley doesn't really seem to have a plausible parallel within the group.

[SmartAlec]

...but it must be done. I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin."

Let's look at the sanctioned killing of the scientist at the beginning of 'Serenity'. He's clearly an amoral, detached man, and responsible for inflicting a great deal of pain upon people in the course of his work, but that's not why the Operative kills him.

No, the Operative's motives for killing that man are:

1) I've been told to.
2) Things got screwed up on his watch.
3) He's a prideful man.
4) He knows too much.

Bear in mind that as far as 2) goes, the Operative even admits that there was nothing that really could have been done. And the Operative doesn't even KNOW what secret River might have escaped with. But despite that, the Operative kills him without a twinge of conscience. He doesn't even show any regret that he has to kill him. He admires the man's work and he gives the scientist as 'good' a death as he can, but he never says anything along the lines of 'Shame you have to die'.

And it's very clear that as far as the Operative is concerned, this is business as usual.

To look at the complete quote above, he's basically saying "I do evil things and I don't care, because the ends justify the means." He had no qualms about killing the scientist, just as he had no qualms of ordering the deaths of everyone at Haven, Minehead, and everywhere else Serenity might have run to, some of whom could well have been true innocents.

He may have a code of conduct. He may be urbane, witty, intelligent and maybe even a little charming. He may believe that what he's doing is the right thing, and that his work and the work of others like him will eventually bring about a 'world without sin'. And he certainly knows that no-one will ever know what role he played in bringing about that world. But he's still the zealous doer of dirty work for a government without morals, and despite being in the unique position to see first-hand just HOW amoral that government is, it never seems to bother him. His conscience is overruled by his faith. Because of that, despite all of the good things about him, I still see him as Evil.

It's not until he's finally confronted with a means that he can't justify that he starts to rethink his point of view, but up till then there's no telling how many men, women and children he's knowingly killed and ordered killed in the pursuit of his duty and simply not given a damn.

Plus, he obviously has a few Assassin levels. :smallwink: And in DnD, being Evil is a requirement for the class. He even has the Death Attack paralysing move. :smallsmile:

[Ariko]

A side note, under the Rifts system, the Operative could almost fit the alignment of aberrent. Except that that aberrents aren't supposed to kill innocents. (harm yes, but kill)

[TinSoldier]

I think the comic's author stated that Kore was 'insane and evil' at some point, though this is second-hand info.Nope. Not that I recall. As much as Miko is on this forum, discussions of Kore's alignment and paladin-hood are fodder for much speculation on the Goblins forum. He believes himself to still be a paladin and many others in the world believe it too. We readers are still left in the dark as to the fact of it, though.


The big difference I've seen with the Operative is that, once given direct contradictory evidence for belief in his masters' benevolence, he did the right thing, which clears up his motives a bit. Kore doesn't seem to be working for a larger organisation, and pending any similar development, I can't really give him the benefit of the doubt.But their attitudes and methods are very similar, at least until the Operative sees that he was wrong. Kore may not have had that moment yet.

I see none of Kore's actions to date that the Operative would not also commit in his cause. And their attitudes are almost identical, even though Kore has not expressed that he believes himself to be evil or that he would have no place in the better world once his task is completed.

[Alfryd]

He's clearly an amoral, detached man, and responsible for inflicting a great deal of pain upon people in the course of his work...
"I haven't made you angry, have I?"
"There are a lot of innocent people in the air being killed right now."
"You have no idea how True that is."
I don't see the evidence that he's amoral, or detached, or that he inflicts great pain during his work. Kills people, sure, but not by especially prolongued or unsavoury methods. If he were so amoral, I don't see why he would bother to comfort his victims in the act of forced suicide. It's warped, and sick, and perverse, but hardly detached.

I should also point out that the crew of Serenity decided that the means of hurling a substantial Reaver fleet at an Alliance squadron manned by crewman schmucks just doing their job was justified by the end of dispensing their news broadcast. Thousands of not-especially-guilty people probably died as a result.

1) I've been told to.
2) Things got screwed up on his watch...
Bear in mind that as far as 2) goes, the Operative even admits that there was nothing that really could have been done.
Not quite. As the Operative points out, he isn't being blamed for allowing River and Simon to escape:
"Do you know what your sin is, Doctor?-
It's pride.
The minds behind every military, diplomatic, and covert operation in the galaxy, and you put them. In a room. With a psychic.
Would you be killed in your sleep like an ailing pet?"
The scientist's mistake was his stupidity in allowing River a chance to access classified information. Of course, stupidity by itself doesn't justify killing the man, and identifying his flaw is mainly a rationalisation the Operative applies to convince himself that, in a world without sin, these situations would not arise (and his services would not be required.) The main reason is No.1.

And the Operative doesn't even KNOW what secret River might have escaped with.
True.
"And judging by her deteriorating mental state I'd say we're all better off. ...secrets... are not my concern.
Keeping them. Is."

"Do you even know why they send you?"
"It's not my place to ask."

And it's very clear that as far as the Operative is concerned, this is business as usual.
Oh, entirely. But his logic runs as follows-
'The alliance is a force for the greater good in the lives of it's citizens. If it's government and leadership were to be weakened, the security and welfare of many worlds would suffer. If this government requires that I kill innocents in order to safeguard it's interests, I will do so, for even if many individuals die for the cause, their loss is not significant compared to the millions who look to the Alliance as a beacon of civilisation. Ultimately, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.'
Of course, at the time, he wasn't aware that the 'few' in question were upward of 30 million.

But he's still the zealous doer of dirty work for a government without morals, and despite being in the unique position to see first-hand just HOW amoral that government is, it never seems to bother him...
...he's basically saying "I do evil things and I don't care, because the ends justify the means."
I think, strictly speaking, the belief that the end can justifies the means is a Chaotic quality rather than a Good/Evil one. If you're convinced that this ain't the case, I won't argue the point. But take Shojo. He essentially had a bunch of Good(-ish) aligned adventurers forcibly captured and blackmailed into his service for what he believed was the common welfare. Now, Shojo actually *was* serving the greater good, and didn't go to anything near the same extremes as the Operative, but logically you can't consider him a Good character and declare at the same time that 'the ends can't justify the means.'

He may be urbane, witty... and maybe even a little charming.
My main purpose here was to point out all the ways in which he *doesn't* resemble Miko. In fact, he's almost her opposite.



As much as Miko is on this forum, discussions of Kore's alignment and paladin-hood are fodder for much speculation on the Goblins forum.
Well, we know pretty well for certain he ain't a Paladin, as you simply can't kill defenceless infants without Falling. I've never seen him go out of his way to help others, and his rationale for killing innocents is substantially less cogent than the Operative's. The latter kills children so that they can't testify to his misdeeds and thereby help topple the incumbent-and-on-balance-benevolent government- which is brutal, but logical- the former kills children because they might sympathise with the 'evil' demihumans who took it on themselves to save his life.

I see none of Kore's actions to date that the Operative would not also commit in his cause.
Perhaps, but the Operative has performed other actions which exhibit traits which there is no evidence Kore possesses. When I see Kore Remove Disease, rescue orphans, tickle a kitten or complement someone's hairdo, I'll reconsider the position.
.

[Fo Shizzle]

I think Wash/Elan fits.

They both have a very specific job with their parties, though both of them can be done with out. Mal has implied he can fly the ship without Wash there if he has to.

Both are (or were until recently) fairly useless in a fight.

And they both like to play and have fun. Wash playing with his Dinosaurs is probably one of the best parts of the whole series.

Wash: "Everything looks good from here... (beat...playing with plastic dinosaurs over his console) Yes. Yes, this is a fertile land, and we will thrive."

(as Stegosaurus) "We will rule over all this land, and we will call it... 'This Land'."

(as T-Rex) "I think we should call it...your grave!"

(Stegosaurus) "Ah, curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!"

(T-Rex) "Ha ha HA! Mine is an evil laugh...now die!"

Somehow it doesn’t seem like that big of stretch for me to see Elan doing something similar.

[SmartAlec]

I don't see the evidence that he's amoral, or detached, or that he inflicts great pain during his work.

Ah. That referred to the scientist, not the Operative.

The point I was trying to make is that the Operative doesn't kill the scientist for the bad things he's done - as you rightly pointed out, the reasons why the scientist is killed don't seem to merit his death.


I think, strictly speaking, the belief that the end can justifies the means is a Chaotic quality rather than a Good/Evil one. If you're convinced that this ain't the case, I won't argue the point. But take Shojo. He essentially had a bunch of Good(-ish) aligned adventurers forcibly captured and blackmailed into his service for what he believed was the common welfare. Now, Shojo actually *was* serving the greater good, and didn't go to anything near the same extremes as the Operative, but logically you can't consider him a Good character and declare at the same time that 'the ends can't justify the means.'

I'm not sure that comparison quite holds water. Shojo's means and end were, at least, known to him. They were his own ends. He took responsibility for them, and he had a conscience. Blind devotion and the willingness to be the means in someone else's end, doing really bad and brutal stuff and taking it on faith that you're justified, I see that as both lawful (willing to serve a greater power with distinction) and evil (prepared to do whatever it takes, no matter who gets hurt, and still able to sleep at night).

Certainly no Paladin, and not like Miko. I can't see Miko (as she was when she was a Paladin) going and executing a wizard of Azure City (best representative I can find for the scientist) purely on Shojo's say-so, no questions asked.

[Alfryd]

...I see that as both lawful (willing to serve a greater power with distinction) and evil (prepared to do whatever it takes, no matter who gets hurt, and still able to sleep at night).
I suppose there is some logic to that. I still tend to give him the benefit of the doubt following his behaviour at the end of the flick. I suppose you could imagine him having a last-minute alignment shift.
That's another thing that seperate him pretty clearly from Miko. Miko can be swayed by the evidence, but what she can't do, apparently, is perform a complete attitudinal U-turn on the basis of available facts. When faced with either rejecting overpowering emotional imperative, or throwing reason to the wind, she seems to default to the latter.
The Operative, on the other hand, once given the right slide-show, bends over backwards to make amends despite the revelations utterly obliterating every value he holds dear.
"Well, that don't bode especially well for you... givin' the order to let us go, patching up our hurt."
"I told them the Tams were no longer a threat- damage done. They might listen... but I think they know that I am no longer... their man."
"They take you down, don't expect to grieve overmuch. Like to kill you myself, I see you again."
"You won't. There is nothing left to see."
In his own strange way, he's almost a tragic figure.


Somehow it doesn’t seem like that big of stretch for me to see Elan doing something similar.
You make a fair point. I suppose if you can consider Jayne a smarter, more restrained, competent and decent version of Belkar, you could consider Wash a smarter, more restrained, competent and less decent version of Elan.
I wouldn't say he was useless in a fight, though- he showed up guns blazing to take down Niska- he just doesn't get much of a chance to show his stuff. He's not in the same league as Jayne, Zoe, Mal, or, heck, Book.

"I am a large, semi-muscular male! I can take it!"

[Andvare]

Wait, are we going for a full-blown comparison?
Roy: Mal
Elan: Wash
Haley: Zoey
V: Simon
Belkar: Jayne
Durkon: Book

What do we do with Inara, River and Kaylee then? Are they Haley's sub-personalities?


What we do with them? Well I know what I would like to do with them. But that is kinda mature. :smallbiggrin:
Josh Whedon tends to find women that kinda agrees with my taste.
Eye candy indeed.


Edit: And that the series stopped without telling the story of Book is just... Evil.
So I'd say that Whedon is evil, well, probably not, but the Fox network certainly is.

[SmartAlec]

The Operative, on the other hand, once given the right slide-show, bends over backwards to make amends despite the revelations utterly obliterating every value he holds dear.

Without knowing what becomes of him, it's hard to say. He might end up like Book, seeking repentance in religion; or he might end up like Jubal Early, keeping his ruthless tendencies but losing any moral centre he once had.

[Jannex]

Edit: And that the series stopped without telling the story of Book is just... Evil.
So I'd say that Whedon is evil, well, probably not, but the Fox network certainly is.

It was Fox. They shot the show in the gut at the outset, and let it bleed out slowly over the course of the half-season. Did you know they didn't even air the two-hour pilot episode until almost the end of the show's run?

But yeah; I can definitely see a case for the Elan/Wash comparison. Each brings a lighthearted, whimsical, not-killing-people element to his respective group, but do NOT mess with his girl, because then he'll suddenly become combat-effective, often in unexpected ways (thank you, Wash, for proving once again that Drive is a combat skill).