|
Post by sapientcoffee on Nov 14, 2012 8:07:40 GMT
|
|
Rymdljus
Full Member
Beautiful songbird
Posts: 207
|
Post by Rymdljus on Nov 14, 2012 8:08:05 GMT
No dreams, desires or feelings of any kind, eh?
Hm... I guess writing a totally emotionless character is extremely hard, since so much of the way we are as humans is based on emotions and desires. I mean, why do anything at all if you have no desire to do it? I'll go back to my first assumption: She is faking emotions to better fit into society.
|
|
|
Post by ctso74 on Nov 14, 2012 8:11:24 GMT
"Like some sort of golem?" Annie is so trolling.
|
|
quoodle
Full Member
Just a man on a planet
Posts: 168
|
Post by quoodle on Nov 14, 2012 8:15:12 GMT
I'm thinking - Jones probably has more stones in that drawer.
But more to the point - It's obviously not a perfect metaphor.
If she had absolutely *no* desires - she's not have broken that rock to make a point. She wouldn't have decided on the medium,
She is animate, not inanimate. And there is some sort of will which moves her. She is not "a stone" - but she may be "stone". A golem is programmed, she has an independent will.
|
|
|
Post by seaofalchemy on Nov 14, 2012 8:16:03 GMT
Pop. Not crunch, crack, smash, or KRK. But POP. Stones are like bubble wrap to Jones.
|
|
|
Post by ctso74 on Nov 14, 2012 8:18:17 GMT
I'm thinking - Jones probably has more stones in that drawer. Pop. Not crunch, crack, smash, or KRK. But POP. Stones are like bubble wrap to Jones. That's why she has a drawer of them. You can't pop just one.
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Nov 14, 2012 8:18:46 GMT
If Jones truly desired nothing could she be moving and talking?
[Another way the definition is imperfect, most likely.]
|
|
|
Post by Raph on Nov 14, 2012 8:35:05 GMT
She can have will without desire. Pop. Not crunch, crack, smash, or KRK. But POP. Stones are like bubble wrap to Jones. That's why she has a drawer of them. You can't pop just one. He he. So much heh.
|
|
|
Post by kelantar on Nov 14, 2012 8:38:46 GMT
"Jones: Does not break." is what I took away from this.
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Nov 14, 2012 8:40:32 GMT
Robot Etheric God Non-etheric God Earth Elemental Bison Boson Golem
Scratch one more.
I don't even have a smarmy remark at this point.
I think it's clear that Tom intends to set up another mystery rather than giving any answers. I don't know how I led myself to believe otherwise, that has been the unbroken pattern so far. See you all on Friday.
|
|
|
Post by Eversist on Nov 14, 2012 8:44:21 GMT
I love how Tom directly tells his readers that she is not a golem in the comic.
She. Is not. A golem, guys. Hear that? Not. A. Golem. No.
|
|
|
Post by Raph on Nov 14, 2012 8:44:57 GMT
Robot Etheric God Non-etheric God Earth Elemental Bison Boson Golem
Scratch one more. I don't even have a smarmy remark at this point. I think it's clear that Tom intends to set up another mystery rather than giving any answers. I don't know how I led myself to believe otherwise, that has been the unbroken pattern so far. See you all on Friday. To get answers you'd have to ask questions, and to get the right answers you'd have to ask the right questions. It is unfortunate that when Annie asked the simplest of all "what are you?", she did not get (nor give us) the answer she expected, but she did get an answer: Jones has clearly asked that question herself, and I think of it as even more important. [Given the fact she has introspective capabilities, we can also include and scratch Psycho out of that list.]
|
|
|
Post by Eversist on Nov 14, 2012 8:56:03 GMT
If Jones truly desired nothing could she be moving and talking? [Another way the definition is imperfect, most likely.] This is a good point. If she TRUELY had no desires, she would have stayed at the bottom of the ocean. Satiating curiosity is a form of desire. And why does she work to further the court's agenda?
|
|
elco
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by elco on Nov 14, 2012 9:03:24 GMT
If she had absolutely *no* desires - she's not have broken that rock to make a point. She wouldn't have decided on the medium, She is animate, not inanimate. And there is some sort of will which moves her. She is not "a stone" - but she may be "stone". A golem is programmed, she has an independent will. This. And even more accurately this: If Jones truly desired nothing could she be moving and talking? [Another way the definition is imperfect, most likely.] She shows intent in her actions; indistinguishable mimicry is equality, and thus far she has behaved exactly as someone driven by kindness and curiosity and perhaps playfulness (she may be faking feelings for Jimmy Jims out of the first). She may not get mushy or giddy but she does want to help and learn. And even if all these were faked, if she's self-aware and moves on her all then she has a will. (Funny how I'm willing to argue with such a character about her own inner nature. )
|
|
Rymdljus
Full Member
Beautiful songbird
Posts: 207
|
Post by Rymdljus on Nov 14, 2012 9:04:31 GMT
She can have will without desire. How? I think I need some definitions of "will" and "desire". I might be wrong here, but isn't a desire the basis of any action? If you don't want anything and don't need anything, why would you do anything?
|
|
Søren
Junior Member
Pursuing Authenticity
Posts: 78
|
Post by Søren on Nov 14, 2012 9:10:31 GMT
This comic is so awesome, I can hardly contain myself. Come at me, Friday!
|
|
|
Post by Raph on Nov 14, 2012 9:11:14 GMT
She can have will without desire. How? I think I need some definitions of "will" and "desire". I might be wrong here, but isn't a desire the basis of any action? If you don't want anything and don't need anything, why would you do anything? You can act against your desires, but not against your will, your will is your tool to act upon something, and it is prior to any desire, even if desires help themselves from will. You would also not act upon your desires if you lacked the will to do so. I am so very sorry, as of now, I have read about 900-1200 pages on ethics, politics and metaphysics over the last few months for an investigation I have to turn in tomorrow. I am analising everything.
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Nov 14, 2012 9:14:23 GMT
She can have will without desire. How? I think I need some definitions of "will" and "desire". I might be wrong here, but isn't a desire the basis of any action? If you don't want anything and don't need anything, why would you do anything? I have been arguing this to religious people for almost a decade now. Most people draw a line between motive and emotion, but the same line doesn't extend to will and desire, which are pretty much two forms of saying the same thing, neither of which necessitates emotion. This comic is so awesome, I can hardly contain myself. Come at me, Friday! Comin' atcha bro!
|
|
elco
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by elco on Nov 14, 2012 9:14:57 GMT
Robot Etheric God Non-etheric God Earth Elemental Bison Boson Golem
Scratch one more. I don't even have a smarmy remark at this point. I think it's clear that Tom intends to set up another mystery rather than giving any answers. I don't know how I led myself to believe otherwise, that has been the unbroken pattern so far. See you all on Friday. She doesn't have to be *an* anything. No need for a category for a singular being - she is herself, or "she is Jonesy" if you will. Her kind is not featured in any beastiary. Maybe the world will end and the last sound will be her laughter.
|
|
|
Post by Raph on Nov 14, 2012 9:18:10 GMT
More than herself, she is everything that she is not, as saying she is herself would require identification between her and herself, implying there are one and another of a single thing.
|
|
Rymdljus
Full Member
Beautiful songbird
Posts: 207
|
Post by Rymdljus on Nov 14, 2012 9:37:10 GMT
You can act against your desires, but not against your will, your will is your tool to act upon something, and it is prior to any desire, even if desires help themselves from will. You would also not act upon your desires if you lacked the will to do so. I am so very sorry, as of now, I have read about 900-1200 pages on ethics, politics and metaphysics over the last few months for an investigation I have to turn in tomorrow. I am analising everything. Ah. That clears it up a bit, thanks. I'm confused about her motivation, but then again, she has absolutely no reason not to to do what she's doing either.
|
|
|
Post by dailenna on Nov 14, 2012 10:07:56 GMT
I like the techniques Tom uses to represent humanity in art. Like in the colour and pain of that panel on the previous page, and in the second panel on this page, where the colour of the stone statue has leaked over to Jones. Or leaked from Jones. She is like stone. Also like that Jones' way of showing the imperfection of the metaphor is basically saying that she and stone are alike, except stones aren't tough enough. Jones is the toughest. >
|
|
|
Post by smjjames on Nov 14, 2012 10:41:45 GMT
Maybe she is zircon? Or some kind of super zircon-diamond mix with wolverines adamantium mixed in.
|
|
krael
Junior Member
Posts: 95
|
Post by krael on Nov 14, 2012 10:53:29 GMT
I'm glad Raph popped the first bubble about the pending definition battle, but I want to point out that yapping about definitions of words will not get you any possibility of drawing conclusions. The simplest reason (Though I believe there are more) is that Jones is 'only human' (though she is not of course) in the sense that she is simply using language to convey some of her beliefs to Annie. In the light of definitions of words this can go wrong at any number of points; she can belief something inaccurate, she can use inaccurate language, etc etc.
at any rate, that doesn't matter, or so I do believe. In using language, you're allowed to use a word without extrensively defining it prior, and as long as everybody in the room understands, no further stipulating of meaning is nesseccary.
And what Jones means is clear: on the mental spectrum, what sets her aside from humans is a a lack of the substance that makes humans 'make art', 'want a bigger estate' and 'go to war'. Indeed, on the previous page she says 'lack of emotion', and on this one 'lack of desire'. In other words:...
TLDR: tomatos tomatos
What I DO find interesting, is that after aeons of thinking, she concludes she's not alive only because she doesn't have *emotions*. It is not hard to see she looks like humans but isn't quite the thing, but why does that disqualify her as a living being in her own right? She seems greatly impressed by human art then (and war), and being as alive as a tree isn't good enough apparently. Of course it seems she is excactly the opposite of a tree: a tree is *living/changing* but non-*moving/sentient*, while Jones is non-*changing/living* but IS *moving/sentient*. (for the definition people out there, I use 'sentient' in the lofty, thinking sense, not the being-able-to-respond-to-your-surroundings sense)
|
|
krael
Junior Member
Posts: 95
|
Post by krael on Nov 14, 2012 10:57:44 GMT
Also like that Jones' way of showing the imperfection of the metaphor is basically saying that she and stone are alike, except stones aren't tough enough. Jones is the toughest. > Were she speaking to a stone, I imagine she'd say: "yes, I'm like a stone, but I'm not quite like you...." *Jones grabs a human from her drawer*"Therefore I define myself as a human, because I have a lot of qualities in common with them as well... " *Jones holds up the human*"of course the metaphor isn't perfect..." *Pop*
|
|
|
Post by smjjames on Nov 14, 2012 11:01:45 GMT
I'd like to see if she can pop a diamond....
|
|
|
Post by lavkian on Nov 14, 2012 12:10:02 GMT
She can have will without desire. How? I think I need some definitions of "will" and "desire". I might be wrong here, but isn't a desire the basis of any action? If you don't want anything and don't need anything, why would you do anything? Desire can be redefined within the parameters of something without emotion. Take a robot, for example (which Jones is not), if we give it instructions to perform a task, and it does, it is only doing so because we told it to, and we COULD say it was willed or desired to do that, if some other party didn't know any better. I think the only thing left for Jones is a will for truth. Perhaps truth about her inception, or the ether, or the court, or any matter of things. Why? We'll just have to wait for Tom to tell us.
|
|
|
Post by cu on Nov 14, 2012 12:10:06 GMT
|
|
krael
Junior Member
Posts: 95
|
Post by krael on Nov 14, 2012 12:17:03 GMT
I'd like to see if she can pop a diamond.... If I'm not mistaken, you can yourself do that with a hammer. I think a diamonds hardness refers to its resistance to scratching, right?
|
|
|
Post by lordofpotatoes on Nov 14, 2012 12:26:22 GMT
If Jones truly desired nothing could she be moving and talking? [Another way the definition is imperfect, most likely.] But why does a river flow if it has no desires?
|
|