|
Post by Ulysses on Nov 13, 2009 19:39:59 GMT
How is Kat not cold? She has those massive doors wide open, it's freezing outside, and yet she seems to be ok in dungarees and one of those tops that shows the shoulder, I forget what they are called. She must be really warm blooded.
|
|
|
Post by xanbcoo on Nov 13, 2009 20:11:29 GMT
I really love how Annie just seems genuinely upset and confused over the complications of love. She's like a 5 year-old who's suddenly learned about death.
Poor girl's lead a pretty sheltered life...
|
|
Pig_catapult
Full Member
Keeper of the Devilkitty
Posts: 171
|
Post by Pig_catapult on Nov 13, 2009 20:19:58 GMT
She's like a 5 year-old who's suddenly learned about death. Considering Annie's backstory, I wish to know if this line is intentionally or unintentionally hilarious.
|
|
|
Post by tyler on Nov 13, 2009 20:28:49 GMT
10 bucks on smitty/parley My first thought was that it could be Smitface and Parley, too, just because we haven't seen them for a bit and Annie could have been doing medium stuff, which would explain her absence. Huh.
|
|
|
Post by starburst98 on Nov 13, 2009 20:33:03 GMT
i was about to say that! did you make a new account just to steal my words??!?!?!?! Yes. Yes I did. rage!
|
|
|
Post by hepcisbad on Nov 13, 2009 21:06:41 GMT
rage! Now the question is, will Smitty go insane and try to strangle Parley, leading to her confessing her love to him to snap him out of it? Will they bring about the end of the world?
|
|
|
Post by King Mir on Nov 13, 2009 21:16:43 GMT
Question: "Acting like enemies now, hm... One day they will both jump each other." (yazzydream) reminds me of Janet and William. Anyone think George and Andrew are just being like them? Janet and William hide from others, but still make out in the occasional empty classroom. They are unwilling to tell others of their affection. George and Andrew are unwilling to tell each other. At least that's my take.
|
|
|
Post by Snes on Nov 13, 2009 21:36:44 GMT
Now the question is, will Smitty go insane and try to strangle Parley, leading to her confessing her love to him to snap him out of it? Will they bring about the end of the world? If Andrew is Shinji and Parley is Asuka, would that mean Annie is Rei and Jones is Gendo?
|
|
|
Post by basser on Nov 13, 2009 23:13:17 GMT
Now the question is, will Smitty go insane and try to strangle Parley, leading to her confessing her love to him to snap him out of it? Will they bring about the end of the world? If Andrew is Shinji and Parley is Asuka, would that mean Annie is Rei and Jones is Gendo? What is this I don't even
|
|
|
Post by the bandit on Nov 13, 2009 23:22:35 GMT
She's got massive machinery to keep her warm.
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Nov 13, 2009 23:26:18 GMT
I really love how Annie just seems genuinely upset and confused over the complications of love. She's like a 5 year-old who's suddenly learned about death. Poor girl's lead a pretty sheltered life... I just keep getting this odd feeling she's kinda... fond of Smitty. Dunno why.. it's just there.
|
|
thor
Junior Member
Your personal text will be displayed underneath your avatar.
Posts: 58
|
Post by thor on Nov 13, 2009 23:30:53 GMT
If Andrew is Shinji and Parley is Asuka, would that mean Annie is Rei and Jones is Gendo? What is this I don't even It's like some amine or some junk like that. Cheap imported cartoons.
|
|
|
Post by nonfactor on Nov 13, 2009 23:32:43 GMT
There's a white dot under Annie's left eye in every panel. I wonder if that's important. I noticed this too. It seems to be a pretty important distinction. Notice she has the white dot under her left eye (though this seems interchangeable) when in the ethereal realm. And notice how it's obviously missing in the next page. It's reappearance in today's strip, while Annie is out and about in the real world, makes me think it's deliberate. Maybe this is a sign of ( spooky) things to come.
|
|
Pig_catapult
Full Member
Keeper of the Devilkitty
Posts: 171
|
Post by Pig_catapult on Nov 13, 2009 23:44:45 GMT
There's a white dot under Annie's left eye in every panel. I wonder if that's important. I noticed this too. It seems to be a pretty important distinction. Notice she has the white dot under her left eye (though this seems interchangeable) when in the ethereal realm. And notice how it's obviously missing in the next page. It's reappearance in today's strip, while Annie is out and about in the real world, makes me think it's deliberate. Maybe this is a sign of ( spooky) things to come. Orrrr. . . it could be that it's cold and windy out, so her cheeks are pink and shiny.
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Nov 13, 2009 23:50:20 GMT
Question: "Acting like enemies now, hm... One day they will both jump each other." (yazzydream) reminds me of Janet and William. Anyone think George and Andrew are just being like them? Janet and William hide from others, but still make out in the occasional empty classroom. They are unwilling to tell others of their affection. George and Andrew are unwilling to tell each other. At least that's my take. Close. They are unwilling to tell themselves.
|
|
|
Post by nonfactor on Nov 13, 2009 23:53:08 GMT
I noticed this too. It seems to be a pretty important distinction. Notice she has the white dot under her left eye (though this seems interchangeable) when in the ethereal realm. And notice how it's obviously missing in the next page. It's reappearance in today's strip, while Annie is out and about in the real world, makes me think it's deliberate. Maybe this is a sign of ( spooky) things to come. Orrrr. . . it could be that it's cold and windy out, so her cheeks are pink and shiny. Or maybe it's the same white mark under her eye that she appears to have in the ethereal realm making its way out into the physical world.
|
|
|
Post by todd on Nov 13, 2009 23:56:46 GMT
Why not intervene? She's training to be a mediator, right? This would be good practice, and everyone involved could learn a thing or two. Because it was outside intervention (from Jones) that caused the mess. After seeing the consequences of that, I'm not sure it's a good idea for anyone else to get involved; Annie's attempt to do so might make things worse rather than better.
|
|
|
Post by isabellemoerman on Nov 13, 2009 23:59:07 GMT
Oooh, personally I love the Andrew/Parley relationship and have been waiting to see how it will develop. The only functioning, loving relationship we've seen so far is Kat's folks. Even Janet & William's is hidden from their fellow students.
Here's to hoping they won't get Whedon'ed.
|
|
|
Post by Robo Alchemist on Nov 14, 2009 0:11:54 GMT
Orrrr. . . it could be that it's cold and windy out, so her cheeks are pink and shiny. Or maybe it's the same white mark under her eye that she appears to have in the ethereal realm making its way out into the physical world. Or maybe you're just making a big deal out of nothing. Seriously, it's just the way it's drawn. You honestly think that there would be symbolism or plot in a white spot that A) changes from cheek to cheek, B) is not present when the setting is mostly dark or mostly light, and C) is on both cheeks when light is directed right at her face? Come on, Tom's not trying to be that discrete with the story. Just go over to the Wild Speculation thread for stuff like this. That's what it's for- for things that would otherwise seem really crazy and/or strange to other people.
|
|
|
Post by King Mir on Nov 14, 2009 0:44:03 GMT
Janet and William hide from others, but still make out in the occasional empty classroom. They are unwilling to tell others of their affection. George and Andrew are unwilling to tell each other. At least that's my take. Close. They are unwilling to tell themselves. I spent a good couple minutes deciding which of those to write. It's both really. They're unwilling to face each other, so they deny it to themselves.
|
|
|
Post by nonfactor on Nov 14, 2009 1:21:40 GMT
Or maybe it's the same white mark under her eye that she appears to have in the ethereal realm making its way out into the physical world. Or maybe you're just making a big deal out of nothing. Seriously, it's just the way it's drawn. You honestly think that there would be symbolism or plot in a white spot that A) changes from cheek to cheek, B) is not present when the setting is mostly dark or mostly light, and C) is on both cheeks when light is directed right at her face? Come on, Tom's not trying to be that discrete with the story. Just go over to the Wild Speculation thread for stuff like this. That's what it's for- for things that would otherwise seem really crazy and/or strange to other people. Slow down there, man. I specifically used words like "seems" and "appears" and "maybe" and "makes me think" just so I could avoid contentious replies like yours. I'm simply pointing out a (seemingly) purposeful difference in the appearance of the main character of this story, a difference that appears to persist over multiple chapters in the story. If you have a problem with my noticing, or my defending the fact that I noticed, then say so; don't imply that my noticing is any less valid than that of others simply because you disagree with it or think I'm picking nits. I think I have a pretty good point. I think I've been able to demonstrate my point via various citations from the story. If you have any evidence to suggest that I'm wrong in believing what I believe then I would be delighted to see it. I'm not the type to obsess over strips of this story in order to find some deeper meaning or hidden subtext, but when they present themselves I notice them, and occasionally I will mention the fact that I noticed to people on this forum. I saw an artistic discrepancy, I looked back at a few other pages of the story to make sure I wasn't assigning any meaning to that artistic discrepancy that wasn't there, I noticed a pattern for the discrepancy, and I made a post explaining my thought process; if I'm wrong it will be because of that artistic discrepancy, not because of an error in my reasoning. I'm sorry if you have a problem with that. I don't doubt that this could very well be nothing. For example, it could be something that appears only when characters are blushing (and then only at Tom's discretion). I just noticed something and pointed it out. There's no need to take issue with my noticing when it takes only 2-3 days to see if the artistic difference was or wasn't purposeful (or does or doesn't have a deeper meaning). I was simply raising the question of whether or not the difference is intentional, partly because I felt that xenakis's point was dismissed all too quickly, but also because I find it an interesting topic of discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Rasselas on Nov 14, 2009 3:31:26 GMT
I think we're being visited by the tinkering rascally owls let loose.
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Nov 14, 2009 5:36:35 GMT
There's no need to take issue with my noticing when it takes only 2-3 days to see if the artistic difference was or wasn't purposeful (or does or doesn't have a deeper meaning) In truth, there are so many things that get (discussed / speculated about / bet upon in a quest for cookies) which would be resolved in 2-3 days, but somehow that doesn't keep so so many people from (discussing / speculating / betting). It's not my place to speculate on people's motivations for doing the above, but they do it. It seems that for some, they do so because they like discussing things and for others it seems like it's because they want to (be right / outdo others / look smart). I think that makes other people sensitive or testy: I know I'm guilty of being tired of seeing every new page's discussion turned into a contest of jockeying for position to grab the next virtual cookie, and I probably bring that point of view up too often. Which isn't to say that I think the latter is what you were trying to do. Don't misunderstand me. I'm just trying to explain how it's gotten to the point that some people get kind of fed up at every minute detail being speculated on, and don't investigate anymore the poster's reason for posting. If that's something that you can forgive in others, it might be nice to do so. It's also the reason why I've stayed out of discussion of this thread and largely most of the threads of the pages of this chapter so far. The ratio of actual new information being discovered, to the amount of speculation being generated, is more than I want to wrestle with. ...okay I think that's everything I planned on typing. Forgive people for rolling their eyes at the sheer volume of wild speculation these innocent introductory pages are generating.
|
|
|
Post by hepcisbad on Nov 14, 2009 13:47:05 GMT
If Andrew is Shinji and Parley is Asuka, would that mean Annie is Rei and Jones is Gendo? No, I think that the comparison only extends to Andrew and Parley. Annie has too much emotion to be Rei. If you're really stretching to make that comparison, then Jones would be Rei and Annie's Father would be Gendo. I was noting earlier that our two characters in question were similar in nature to two central characters of an animated show called Neon Genesis Evangelion, a rather dark show that can be summed up in the sentence: Emotionally screwed up sexually repressed 14 year old children (2 Girls and a Boy) use super-powered robots to protect the world from Revelation and the End of the World as the Adults that use them scheme to bring about the End of the World.The incredible action shown here pretty much sums it up: www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeHMRzVfPAs
|
|
|
Post by tyler on Nov 14, 2009 13:58:16 GMT
The thing about the white dot is that Tom (the artist and writer and person who would know) has said it was an art thing representing shininess.
It's a HIGHLIGHT. And someone's already said that in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Robo Alchemist on Nov 14, 2009 14:05:55 GMT
I second Casey's comment there. Sorry if I seemed at all contentious, but like Casey said, a lot of us sorta get fed up with every tiny detail brought up. This isn't necessarily right, so again I apologize for this and try to do better. And Casey, I think that people trying to look better than others is a sort of mixture of just sharing common-ish knowledge, and a case of basking in Self difference and freedom. I've noticed this trait a lot (not just on the internet [although that's where it seems the most apparent] but also in real life) where people take too much pride into their own thoughts and, if it makes sense to them (and possibly a few others), start to think that's how it works- that it's some sort of universal rule that can't be changed and how they're so smart for seeing it before anyone else. But the thing that many have learned is that it's our duty to build our own worlds around us, and no two worlds have to be the same. There of course would be many similarities, but no rule is ever concrete (especially when reason has the upper hand of the situation) So all the speculation we do that might make people seem smarter than others is either a mixture of these two feelings, or just simply how we were raised. I mean, everyone who goes or went to a public school of some kind can agree with this. Young children seem to always have a nack for coming up with pure fantasy-like stories and just being really creative with the world around them. When they go into school though, they're taught the things that the rest of humanity has all complied to - be it true or false - to be true. If something they're taught conflicts with a previous creation of the world around them, the less believable thought goes down and the other one rises up. If a child gets the courage up to protest with an account of their own creation, not only are they told the "correct" thing(s), but are also told that they need to listen to their teachers more than come up with fantasy-like creations. So, the easily directed young mind sets up rules for thought, one being that creating your own perception of the world is a big no no (even if that was what was really told to the child or not). But for years on end, the rule does not overcome the desire to come up with your own knowledge, but it does route it somewhere else. The somewhere else, happens to be the mouth. The desire to create is also mixed with the "scientific" method and how it needs physical proof or citation, but pure logical reasoning can't be part of said proof. So now, you're not creating, but building up the already existing world with your two cents on the matter, and when it comes out through your mouth, you're saying what you think should be the accepted rule and putting yourself on a sort of pedestal. So our constant desire to speculate about everything from romance to simple spots of light ( ), and think it's the right answer, can come from two places: our pride over the thoughts we have at present, or how we were raised in the past. Whoo! that was looong. sorry about that. and just so I'm not a big huge hypocrite, nothing I said is set in stone either. hope that cleared some things up though
|
|
|
Post by Tom Siddell on Nov 14, 2009 14:59:17 GMT
It's a meaningless highlight on her cheek. The reason it's causing such confusion is because I'm not a good artist.
|
|
|
Post by yazzydream on Nov 14, 2009 15:16:15 GMT
Oh, great. Now look at what you've all done.
Tom, you are a fantastic artist.
People are stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Robo Alchemist on Nov 14, 2009 15:21:37 GMT
yeah...now I feel really dumb... oh well
|
|
|
Post by Rasselas on Nov 14, 2009 15:34:27 GMT
It's a meaningless highlight on her cheek. The reason it's causing such confusion is because I'm not a good artist. It's your own damn fault for making a comic with such intricate detail and all kinds of intrigue that we tend to look for clues even where there are none. I bet other authors don't get their shiny-cheek-dots inspected from all possible angles. If I was in your position I'd be paranoid with fear of letting some inconsistency slip, what with all the scrutiny that your fans apply to the comic. Dude. The shiny cheek is the least of your problems. ;D
|
|