Results 121 to 150 of 367
Thread: Tactical Question - Haley
-
2013-11-18, 08:20 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
On an entirely serious note which I'm sure the Giant will dismiss, but I'm submitting anyway in a Death-of-the-author sort of way, I'd like to submit the pet theory that Haley's insults towards women always being gendered is because of Haley's Latent Bisexuality. She was raised to keep everything hidden...
-
2013-11-18, 08:33 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
Maybe one way to salvage the stuff Haley has said in the past is to give her a learning experience. Maybe it's too late in the Tarquin saga, but something which drives home "Tarquin is a real jerk for the things he's been saying, maybe I should try and not go down that path either" or perhaps something where she actually does sexually insult Laurin and it doesn't go over well at all? Or maybe have that lesson pop up in a future book? There's something to be said for trying to instill a "here's how you should act" lesson as part of a character's growth, when that's feasible within the existing framework of the story.
Think you know what's going to happen next on OOTS? Put your "money" where your mouth is on the Demon Roach Betting Thread!
-
2013-11-18, 08:38 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Location
- Sweden
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
Well, if you were writing an allegory, you could justify realistic dialogue even in a world with magic and dragons. That being said, that's not really what you're doing, so your point still stands.
I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing if the protagonists have flaws, but if you want to avoid confusing the audience, you might want to make it clear that these character traits are flaws, or else you risk helping people associate the flaw with something good. An obvious example would be if the hero were also racist, and the narrative never pointed out that racism is bad. I think your story has done a great job so far regarding this issue, although it sometimes takes a while for you to point out that the flaws were, in fact, flaws, such as with Redcloak and hobgoblin racism (and human xenophobia/racism, though that seems to be played off more as a joke. It's still a little problematic, because Redcloak was meant to be sympathetic, and yet he hates humans for shallow reasons), and V's initial disdain for the value of black dragon lives.
Come to think of it, it is slightly problematic, actually. Perhaps I'm threading on thin ice here, but hear me out: The black dragon thing, which has been discussed over and over again on this forum. Now that we've given a proper perspective of it all, or at least I assume so, we can clearly see that V's lack of concern toward black dragon lives is problematic. Before V pointed this out, however, many people on these boards thought that what V did wasn't problematic at all.
Why is it problematic that some people thought that? Well, the main reason is time, I believe. It took a long time before we got an official answer to the question, and during that time, many people kept believing that it was right to kill the black dragons without concern, even if they thought that it might have been problematic to kill the half-dragons, or the humans with dragon blood. This kind of reasoning could, potentially, influence the way they think about real life issues.
Do I think that this comic has turned anyone racist? No, probably not. Has it made people more racist overall? I doubt it. In many ways, the comic probably helps to spread tolerance for different people, which is admirable, especially considering that it is a webcomic with stick figures. That being said, given enough media exposure, I think that issues like this could influence how some people think.
So, my point is, well: Keep in mind what signals you're sending out. You could, for instance, have a character act really sexist and all, like Roy did towards Miko, but if that had kept on for three years instead of just a few months, then I think it could potentially have some (very slight, but it might add up) effects on some of the readers.
-
2013-11-18, 08:46 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
1. The reasoning didn't exist because of the comic, though. It existed because of the existing lore on black dragons being what it is.
2. Before V brought the problems up, V's mass murder wasn't even really a thought about topic. It wasn't discussed further than in passing in the comic. So I wouldn't say that the comic really portrayed it as being okay.
3. As for Redcloak--he's sympathetic, but he's still evil. What he's doing is still obviously considered wrong.Last edited by AgentofHellfire; 2013-11-18 at 08:47 PM.
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds;
-
2013-11-18, 08:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Gender
-
2013-11-18, 08:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
"They" is attached to the rest of the audience/Haley.
But anyhow, why would you say it isn't a lampshade? The OP was using those attitudes as the start of a joke. He was laughing at those attitudes. That kind of has to be lampshading.
(Unless you think he was calling Laurin a tramp, which I find even more unlikely, but...)“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds;
-
2013-11-18, 09:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2012
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
I think part of the difficulty is that Haley's slut-shaming is not so much a personal flaw as it is indicative of a problematic linguistic trend; I never thought Haley's comments reflected an actual opinion about female promiscuity, but rather a cultural trend of gendered insults against women being primarily based in slut-shaming. In other words, as no more literal (and no less problematic) than gendered insults against men either questioning their sexuality or impugning their masculinity. I don't mean to say that this excuses such behavior, but it makes it a lot more difficult to portray. It's easier to show Roy's behavior towards Miko is problematic because the problem is in his attitudes, even if those attitudes are socially enforced; Haley's use of potentially problematic language is different in that it doesn't reflect an actual belief on her part.
I don't mean this to say it's not worth taking a hard look at what you've written in the past, but as something to consider when taking that look. I don't think Haley having avoided that language all along would necessarily present a critical engagement with its use — I don't think Haley avoiding gendered insults would have the same impact as the comic making no mention of Roy's race. It would make her behavior less problematic, certainly, but I think an opportunity for engagement with her problematic language, however accidental, is more productive than for it to have never happened in the first place. I think the potential to both learn and teach is greater, here, than it would be has Haley simply always used non-gendered insults. I think it's important to show that it's very easy to be perpetuate the insidious forms of discrimination and oppression that are woven into the fabric of our discourse, even for those with the most progressive attitudes or the best intentions.
Sometimes, we plan flaws in our characters and sometimes we find them; I think what is more important is what the author makes of those flaws than if they were originally intended. All of us, characters and authors alike, can make mistakes without even realizing it; what defines us is how we react when we do realize it.
-
2013-11-18, 09:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
I actually like this idea. And who knows, maybe a Watsonian-Freudian justification for the slut-shaming dialogue disappearing could be that, now that she's openly involved with Elan and not massively geographically separated from him, her sexuality in general is fairly well-satisfied, so there's less fuel for the Latent Bisexual fire.
Of course, as I write it, this theory is skewing awfully close to the "All you need is a good man..." line of reasoning, which I find utterly repugnant, so I think I'm just going to dunk my head in bleach and try to forget about it.
(That said, part of me would like it if Haley's Latent Bisexuality became Haley's Bisexuality. Openly gay characters are pretty rare, openly bi characters even moreso.)
-
2013-11-18, 09:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
See, I don't think OP was lampshading "those attitudes" so much as wallowing in them. As a joke about people who think of Laurin that way, it doesn't even make sense; it's merely a joke that relies on thinking of Laurin that way.
If I could contrive of a way to do it without unfortunate implications vis-a-vis her relationship with Elan, I'd be all for it.
-
2013-11-18, 09:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
Last edited by AgentofHellfire; 2013-11-18 at 09:51 PM.
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds;
-
2013-11-18, 09:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
Here's the thing: The reason it took "so long" for anyone on-panel to acknowledge that yes, killing a bazillion black dragons is wrong is largely because I thought it was self-evident from the narrative. From the dwindling size of the panels in that strip that blurred together into an unnumbered massacre to the following strip where the literal incarnations of Evil are stunned by the scale of it, I was under the impression that I had made a clear statement about whether it was a good idea or a bad idea. Maybe Vaarsuvius him/herself was unclear, but I didn't consider it even slightly ambiguous on the part of the narrative. Indeed, the very point of the scene was that it was an unjustifiable atrocity. That so many people continued to argue that it wasn't was completely unforeseen on my part, and perhaps fueled largely by feelings from their gaming experiences—not by what I had drawn.
But my point is, the intent was always there to present that as utterly wrong, it just apparently failed to penetrate for some readers. But honestly, like I said upthread, I shouldn't have to have someone speak dialogue saying, "THIS IS BAD!" in order to get the point across that I'm not supporting that thing.Rich Burlew
Now Available: 2023 OOTS Holiday Ornament plus a big pile of new t-shirt designs (that you can also get on mugs and stuff)!
~~You can also support The Order of the Stick and the GITP forum at Patreon.~~
-
2013-11-18, 09:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds;
-
2013-11-18, 09:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
I think you're applying the principle of charity a little too liberally here. I buy that Wombat simply didn't think it through, but I don't buy that there's a secret troll going on here. There's no indication that this is a joke about those people; the words of the post indicate that it is a joke about Laurin.
This, however, is brilliant.Last edited by Math_Mage; 2013-11-18 at 09:58 PM.
-
2013-11-18, 10:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Location
- Here.
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
I am: Neutral Good: -2 chaos, -21 evil and 15 balance!
Can't find the strip you're looking for? Head on over to OOTS Strip Summaries!
-
2013-11-18, 10:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
At first, that's what the simpler solution would be, but at the same time Laurin isn't really like that at all. It wouldn't make sense for someone to apply that term to her seriously.
(Well, unless it was Belkar. Belkar might actually be attracted to that.)
And this level of trolling isn't something like the long-winded posts on why Tarquin is good--it's not even really sarcasm--it's just...making a wry comment about the attitude.
This, however, is brilliant.Last edited by AgentofHellfire; 2013-11-18 at 10:24 PM.
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds;
-
2013-11-18, 10:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2012
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
I think a good comparison to this is the plenitude of readers who found Humbert Humbert sympathetic; the character is so able to rationalize his behavior that we, as readers, can often be taken in by the same lies the characters tell themselves to justify their actions. The strength of this is that it can remind us of our own weaknesses when we catch ourselves agreeing with a character's attempt to justify what we know to be unjustifiable, the difficulty is to make sure that the readers catch themselves without making the justification patently ridiculous.
-
2013-11-18, 10:24 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2012
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
Sadly Tsukiko is dead.
Nothing wrong with polyamory though.
Durkon has it
Obviously saying things certain that are offensive wouldn't be permitted on these boards since it's all encompassing and bans discussions on politics, religion, or other real life issues that are the subject of offensive humor. However, people going to places where such humor is tolerated or encouraged and telling people to stop them is annoying and unnecessary.
I don't think that's what he was getting at, but I felt the need to say what I did, since I used the oversensitive line but wasn't referring to comments on the forum.Last edited by Zmeoaice; 2013-11-18 at 10:53 PM.
-
2013-11-18, 10:24 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
I look at it more from the perspective of "Elan is a good person and Haley is happy with monogamy, but is still a little flustered by Tsukiko's short skirts and fishnet." And in all seriousness she has every right to feel uncomfortable about being attracted to the enemy - it could be a hazard in combat. But if Elan happened to be Elaine, she might also be perfectly OK with that.
I dunno what happened to the belt of gender change, but remember that those things are technically cursed items - you can't just take them off at will - so they might've gotten rid of it as it might've become a liability later. In fact, I would guess Roy ditched it at the next available opportunity simply because Belkar was in the party.Last edited by The Oni; 2013-11-18 at 10:30 PM.
-
2013-11-18, 10:29 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2013
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
It would also play into the Opposites theme with Nale- Nale and Sabine have experimented with gender-swapping play, with Sabine changing genders, and Nale is somewhat ashamed of it.
Elan and Haley experiment with gender-swapping play, with Elan changing genders, and they're both cool about it and don't think it's a big deal (or anyone else's business, which is why it won't be mentioned on panel until Elan makes an off-handed remark while talking about something else).
-
2013-11-18, 10:38 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Gender
-
2013-11-18, 10:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
You did, indirectly, have a character say 'this is bad': Qarr said he thought the familicide was affecting V's alignment.
Either way, I'm pretty sure that even if Nero or Lee said "Wow, that is the most Evil thing I have ever seen a mortal do!", there still would be forumites saying it was somehow good.
The same group of forumites who promoted the theory about Belkar somehow being CN during NCFPB. It's just the nature of the forums. I think most readers understood that what V did was horrible, if not immediately upon his/her/its casting, then certainly in the next strip when the effects were explained, and when even the fiends were surprised at the level of V's evil.
In other words, I think the familicide thing worked as it is for all but the segment of readers who will come to silly conclusions no matter what.
-
2013-11-18, 10:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
- Location
- The Chi
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
There is a point where that would start taking self-censorship to the extreme. Sexism is such a big thing it is hardly where I would say it crosses that line but there are other parts of the comic where we find these things. The Empress of Blood is clearly a "fat=stupid=lazy=acceptable to laugh at" characterization, something I am very much aware of given that I used to be obese and have a number of friends of various weight levels who are actively promoting a positive image of fat, or who have a negative perception of their own bodies, or are struggling on the fence. I'm not sure what I think about the acceptability fat jokes, but I decided to take away a link that included an my earlier attempt using the Empress that has in fact bothered me. This would certainly seem to cross the line if you are actively attempting to avoid all forms of discrimination.
More mildly Kilkil is clearly a stereotype of a boring, efficient, bureaucratic, accountant subordinate. This stereotype perpetuation is nothing on the scale of the fat-comedy mini-industry, and I'm sure most accountants would laugh at it, but it is a way to differentiate people by a single trait and put them into boxes.
-
2013-11-18, 11:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
No, it is not, clearly or otherwise. The Empress of Blood is a "mark" or "patsy" - i.e. the person being conned, as is appropriate for a puppet for a shadow government. These roles require characters that are stupid.
Now, since this character also happens to be a dragon, it opened up the joke opportunity of a stupid individual misunderstanding the meaning of "size" in the context of dragon rules, interpreting as weight when it is meant to be interpreted as age. Which lead to a dragon stuffing itself in an attempt to gain power. Laziness does not enter the picture at all - indeed, she still flies herself, does she not? We do not laugh at her for being fat, we laugh at her for failing to understand simple words. See also "Gate? What gate?".
So your equation should read "stupid dragon->fat-> jokes about how inconsequential weight is to the rules or anything else"
Grey WolfInterested in MitD? Join us in MitD's thread.There is a world of imagination
Deep in the corners of your mind
Where reality is an intruder
And myth and legend thrive
Ceterum autem censeo Hilgya malefica est
-
2013-11-18, 11:35 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
- Location
- Sweden
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
I suspect what threw some people off was the half-dragons killed in the strip.
But my point is, the intent was always there to present that as utterly wrong, it just apparently failed to penetrate for some readers. But honestly, like I said upthread, I shouldn't have to have someone speak dialogue saying, "THIS IS BAD!" in order to get the point across that I'm not supporting that thing.
That being said, your comic is read by a large audience, and, assuming you buy into the theory that media can affect us (which I find fairly obvious, but some disagree), then it might be something worth keeping in mind.
It's rather general advice that I'm mainly putting here because I find the subject interesting to discuss, not because I believe that you need it. You've probably thought about this already, but I had fun developing my thoughts on the matter, so yeah, at least something was gained, even if the advice wasn't needed.
1. Quite likely, though it isn't impossible that the comic, in some ways, helped reinforce that belief. In the end, I'm inclined to believe that it did more good than harm, since we ended up in a situation where V discussed the implication of genocide of "Always Evil"-creatures that aren't really "Always" Evil.
2. I seem to recall it being quite a popular topic, about whether Familicide was evil or not. In either case, I'm primarily using it as an example to help illustrate my point better, I'm not trying to pin any blame on the Giant for it.
3. To some extent, I'm inclined to agree. Redcloak is a lot more nuanced than Xykon, though, and not everything he does or believes in is necessarily bad. Are people supposed to think that because Redcloak believes that everyone should get a fair chance (if we assume he's not hypocritic, which he might very well be), giving people a fair chance is a bad thing? Probably not. If someone is racist in real life, I suppose they might agree with some of Redcloak's thoughts... but given how he's written, I'm not too worried. Redcloak's racism could, potentially, be problematic, though I don't think it is at the moment, and I don't think it's going to be. What's interesting is that if would step over the line with his racism, then it's likely that he will do so in a manner that's obviously evil and obviously bigoted, thus falling under the "Antagonist doing obviously bad things"-clause.
-
2013-11-18, 11:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
The Empress is fat because she is dumb, not dumb because she is fat. Her fatness is the direct result of being fooled by Tarquin. You'll note that in the flashback panel where Tarquin is fighting Nale (just two years ago), she's still skinny. Her defining characteristic is thus her stupidity, not her weight, and in no way does her weight actually impede her functioning. And she's not lazy at all—she's actively pursuing a regimen of self-improvement, day in and day out. She's just totally wrong on how that works.
So while I get what you're saying, I feel like the fact that her size is willfully self-inflicted muddies the water.
I have no idea how displaying an accountant that is good with numbers is in any way supposed to be a problem, but I would point out that this accountant is still secretly conspiring in an evil world domination scheme, and is in fact a flying kobold, so I feel pretty safe that I managed to step outside the box on that one.
I think the race issue—that an unusual race doesn't have to be a monster or a bandit, but can have a normal everyday job and be good at it—is a far more important point than whether or not I am stereotyping accountants as being efficient. If I make him some sort of weird non-typical accountant, the audience assumption would be, "Oh, that's because he's a kobold. Kobolds shouldn't be accountants, then." Heck, the fact that it didn't even register in your mind that it was unusual to put a kobold as an accountant means I achieved exactly what I wanted to!Rich Burlew
Now Available: 2023 OOTS Holiday Ornament plus a big pile of new t-shirt designs (that you can also get on mugs and stuff)!
~~You can also support The Order of the Stick and the GITP forum at Patreon.~~
-
2013-11-19, 12:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- California
- Gender
-
2013-11-19, 01:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
Just a brief drive-by comment here to note that the Giant's parameters for a character flaw in this thread is a stunning one (in a good way). I have been wracking my brain trying to think of counterexamples in what I consider good stories and nothing has come to mind. I'd never heard that take on characterization before. Well done, and insightful.
-
2013-11-19, 01:26 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
- Location
- The Chi
- Gender
The laws of physics are not crying in a corner, they are bawling in the forums.
Thanks to half-halfling for the avatar
-
2013-11-19, 01:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- Location
- Kiev, Ukraine
- Gender
Re: Tactical Question - Haley
Ooh, Giant, since you're here anyway, I'd been wanting to ask: you have seem to become more direct in taking a stance on morality and making other points in-comic - to be honest, it sometimes feels like you're talking through the characters directly to the audience and not primarily to the other characters. Is this an intentional change in writing, or am I just reading too much into it?
There are thousands of good reasons magic doesn't rule the world. They're called mages. - Slightly misquoted Pratchett
-
2013-11-19, 01:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- Newcastle, UK
- Gender
To the guy responsible for Belkar, Haley and Vaarsuvius. Thank you for providing over 800 comedy gems.
My Favourite Giant Posts
Well, It Took 10 Years, But His Tolerance For Rules-Based Criticism Finally Snapped Like A Dry Breadstick
Race Should Not Dictate Alignment
"What's the point in defending the defensible? Where's the challenge in that?" - Nick Naylor, Thank You for Smoking
Spot the Toxic Comic Fans! Gotta Catch 'Em All!