Alex
Full Member
Posts: 165
|
Post by Alex on Apr 11, 2010 3:36:27 GMT
And I'll admit that I'm probably biased about this strip because I love Jack.
|
|
|
Post by Fhqwhgads on Apr 11, 2010 4:14:41 GMT
You Jack-lover, Alex.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pitchfork on Apr 11, 2010 6:31:16 GMT
I like Jack, too. But he killed someone.
|
|
|
Post by Jiminiminy on Apr 11, 2010 18:24:33 GMT
I like Jack, too. Plus he killed someone.
|
|
|
Post by shouqi on Apr 11, 2010 21:05:13 GMT
I'd like to know who was driving when Jack offed that robot -- Jack, or the spider. That would change a great deal of perceptions. Let's not be too quick to judge one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by drakebloodiv on Apr 11, 2010 21:49:40 GMT
I don't think the spider is an actual thing, I think it's more a representation of the fact that zimmingham messed up his head ethereally.
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 11, 2010 22:18:45 GMT
I can't help feeling a bit disturbed, also, that a couple of the posts here (thankfully, *only* a couple of the posts) actually excused or defended the act.
|
|
|
Post by legion on Apr 11, 2010 22:38:37 GMT
I can't help feeling a bit disturbed, also, that a couple of the posts here (thankfully, *only* a couple of the posts) actually excused or defended the act. What about mitigating circumstances?
|
|
|
Post by Jiminiminy on Apr 11, 2010 22:51:56 GMT
I can't help feeling a bit disturbed, also, that a couple of the posts here (thankfully, *only* a couple of the posts) actually excused or defended the act. Really the act itself is up for interpretation regarding one's views of Jack, the robots, Guard Robot specificially, and the extent of Jack's knowledge about the robots. Personally I don't really defend it, but I do call into question the severity of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2010 2:14:22 GMT
The problem is that 1) the scene is a bit too obviously manipulative and 2) the only reason what he did was even "bad" is because Court computers seem to work a lot different from normal computers. Combine the two and while intellectually I can appreciate that I'm supposed to think "woah, Jack has major problems", emotionally I just am not affected. ^This sums up my thoughts pretty much exactly. I feel sorry for Sivo, who Reynardine killed. I feel sorry for Jeanne, who Diego indirectly/Steadman directly killed. I feel sorry for the young man Reynardine killed. I feel sorry for Surma, who we don't really have enough information about yet. I feel sorry for the boy who accidentally killed himself and his family in a fire. I feel sorry for Mort. I even feel sorry for the ANT that Annie smushed just so she could talk to Muut. Remember that? Pretty cold. Nobody cried about that one. I can't, and don't feel the least bit sorry for a glorified chatterbot wrapped in a tin can. I don't care if it was portrayed as a comic relief character, it has no more worth than any of those Nobodies Annie gopped or even that little ant she smashed.
|
|
|
Post by hal9000 on Apr 12, 2010 2:37:10 GMT
I can't help feeling a bit disturbed, also, that a couple of the posts here (thankfully, *only* a couple of the posts) actually excused or defended the act. Why don't you say what you mean? Also, consider: If no one played devil's advocate, the discussion wouldn't be nearly as interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Apr 12, 2010 3:39:26 GMT
Also, consider: If no one played devil's advocate, the discussion wouldn't be nearly as interesting. No one ever really makes it clear when they're just playing Devil's Advocate, or stating their own true opinion, so that doesn't really help.
|
|
|
Post by hal9000 on Apr 12, 2010 4:01:22 GMT
Also, consider: If no one played devil's advocate, the discussion wouldn't be nearly as interesting. No one ever really makes it clear when they're just playing Devil's Advocate, or stating their own true opinion, so that doesn't really help. It's not really necessary to differentiate between the two for the purposes of an internet debate, since it's the ideas that matter, not the people who hold them. I mean, whether someone actually thinks an idea is correct or is just saying it is correct to spark discussion is largely irrelevant if you can show that said idea is incorrect; either way, the state of the discourse is improved.
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Apr 12, 2010 4:11:32 GMT
That would be true if arguing from a logical position, but the conversation here seems to be heading more towards how people -feel- about the events, which sort of implies that they aren't just arguing for its own sake. People do appear to be speaking from a pretty emotional place on the topic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2010 4:37:21 GMT
Might we just accept that the point being made here is "If everyone agreed with you all the time, the world would be one ridiculously boring place"?
Because really, no matter how much you might think that would be great, it wouldn't. Disagreement is the lifeblood of civilization.
And Guard Bot's "death" is still no more important than Nobodies and Ants that are gopped and squished merely for convenience's sake. Annie is a hypocrite, and that's frankly the most interesting thing about any of this to me.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pitchfork on Apr 12, 2010 10:04:47 GMT
I don't see why someone would feel sorry for the ant but not for the robot, which is certainly MORE capable of cognition and emotion than the ant is. Tom even mentioned that the Court robots have souls. He at least implied it.
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 12, 2010 10:42:11 GMT
I don't think that people would have made as much of a fuss about what Jack did to the robot if it had been portrayed as a sleek, ruthless, cold-hearted killing machine out of the "Terminator" movies. But it was depicted as the robotic equivalent of a kindly old eccentric night watchman, and that's what I think disturbs them.
Not to mention that some of the justifications given for Jack's act (the robot was in the way, an obstacle) sound almost sociopathic.
Of course, maybe Tom didn't quite think out the possible discrepancy between this scene and the Nobodies scene or the ant scene a few chapters ago, and that might have caused some of the problem. (Which raises the question: is this discrepancy a deliberate and subtle attempt to point out Annie's faults, or a failure to think out the ramifications of some of Annie's past actions?)
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pitchfork on Apr 12, 2010 11:06:14 GMT
Most people wouldn't think twice before killing an ant, and the Nobodies were, literally, nobody. They were hallucinations. What's different about the robot isn't how he was portrayed, it's that he was alive every bit as much as Annie or Jack are, and had real emotions and real experiences and a real soul. Annie knew this, and this is what disturbed her.
Jack probably knew it too, and what disturbs us is his sudden inability to see how alive the Court robots truly are.
|
|
|
Post by the bandit on Apr 12, 2010 14:30:13 GMT
There is no robot afterlife. At least, the evidence so far strongly points that direction.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pitchfork on Apr 12, 2010 17:52:52 GMT
Tom said that robots have every ability to form souls. Why would we have an afterlife and they wouldn't?
|
|
|
Post by hal9000 on Apr 12, 2010 18:04:23 GMT
Tom said that robots have every ability to form souls. Why would we have an afterlife and they wouldn't? IIRC Tom said that there is no psychopomp for robots, which strongly implies that they do not have an afterlife in the conventional sense.
|
|
cognizanita
New Member
Where do you think you're going? Because I don't think you're going where you think you're going.
Posts: 14
|
Post by cognizanita on Apr 13, 2010 1:48:03 GMT
Hmmm, some really interesting points, and I've cooled off a bit about how much Jack's actions upset me, though I still think that it's strong evidence of something going seriously haywire concerning him. I don't think that people would have made as much of a fuss about what Jack did to the robot if it had been portrayed as a sleek, ruthless, cold-hearted killing machine out of the "Terminator" movies. But it was depicted as the robotic equivalent of a kindly old eccentric night watchman, and that's what I think disturbs them. Not to mention that some of the justifications given for Jack's act (the robot was in the way, an obstacle) sound almost sociopathic. Right, because if it were a sleek, non-sentient, ruthless killing machine it would have been in self defense and/or not harmed a feeling being and/or been a challenge thus proving the import of removing it from its post. Jack wad doing it more for convenience than actual need.... from my perception at least. Although I do feel sorry for the destroyed guard bot, I think it's more Jack's disregard for it (pun intended. Okay, sorry that was lame) that I'm concerned about. As for the Nobodies, I don't know much about them, but I assumed they were figments of imagination with no meaningful existence. (If I thought they might have some sort of perception of the world, I'd be much more troubled by Annie's actions. Because I don't know either way, I am bothered by the destruction she caused. And without good reason too, or at least not a good reason that is apparent to me) Annie "killed" the first nobody unintentionally, and since her proximity to Zimmy toned down Zimmy's.... um...... "creations" before, I figured that gopping was just banishing Zimmy's weird tangible mind creations. I feel sorry for Sivo, who Reynardine killed. I feel sorry for Jeanne, who Diego indirectly/Steadman directly killed. I feel sorry for the young man Reynardine killed. I feel sorry for Surma, who we don't really have enough information about yet. I feel sorry for the boy who accidentally killed himself and his family in a fire. I feel sorry for Mort. I even feel sorry for the ANT that Annie smushed just so she could talk to Muut. Remember that? Pretty cold. Nobody cried about that one. I can't, and don't feel the least bit sorry for a glorified chatterbot wrapped in a tin can. I don't care if it was portrayed as a comic relief character, it has no more worth than any of those Nobodies Annie gopped or even that little ant she smashed. If you are comparing the ant and guard bot, I can see your point as far as relevance to the story, personality depth, as well as the purpose they served. (gaining access to information) It's a rather valid comparison if you put aside cuteness, intelligence, and uniqueness. (Since I don't see guard bots running around in the hundreds of thousands, I value a talking robot who posses some reason and probably emotion compared to an ant that certainly doesn't have any of the above. And also ants get smushed for absolutely no reason due to accidents every day. ) Jack had to use some violence to get rid of the guard bot, and there may have been some other, better ways. I didn't see him ruling out other possibilities, just obliterating it without care. This doesn't necessarily make the robot any more important or worthy of sorrow, but it does damage Jack's reputation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2010 22:31:28 GMT
People get smushed for absolutely no reason due to accidents every day as well. And you know, I think it was Muut himself who said to Antimony: "You should not have wasted a life in such a way."
Having to kill anything when there's another (reasonable) way is a tragedy. Doing it merely for your own convenience is cold, whether it's a Robot, a Nobody, or even a little Ant.
And no one say that the Nobodies are "only" Hallucinations, because we don't know that for certain. I'm talking about the people who rationalize Annie's actions by saying they were "just nobodies". Well, it was "just a dumb robot", too. None of us know exactly what Zimmy is tapping into, and I sincerely doubt that it's only in her mind.
If you look at them when Annie gops them, they seem to be experiencing some kind of pain. They're contorting, at least. And when Zimmy throws the trash can through the window, they're clearly reacting to it. Food for thought, because I really think this might come back to bite Annie.
Jack's role in the story so far seems to be as a foil to Annie, maybe even her Shadow Archetype, who brings her flaws into the light. At least that's how he acted in Residential, and I'd bet quite a bit that we'll be seeing something similar happen again. Maybe even in this chapter.
"You (really) should not have wasted a life in such a way."
ps: Nice GLaDOS quote!
|
|
|
Post by cazador on Apr 13, 2010 23:04:03 GMT
People get smushed for absolutely no reason due to accidents every day as well. And you know, I think it was Muut himself who said to Antimony: "You should not have wasted a life in such a way." Having to kill anything when there's another (reasonable) way is a tragedy. Doing it merely for your own convenience is cold, whether it's a Robot, a Nobody, or even a little Ant. And no one say that the Nobodies are "only" Hallucinations, because we don't know that for certain. I'm talking about the people who rationalize Annie's actions by saying they were "just nobodies". Well, it was "just a dumb robot", too. None of us know exactly what Zimmy is tapping into, and I sincerely doubt that it's only in her mind. If you look at them when Annie gops them, they seem to be experiencing some kind of pain. They're contorting, at least. And when Zimmy throws the trash can through the window, they're clearly reacting to it. Food for thought, because I really think this might come back to bite Annie. Jack's role in the story so far seems to be as a foil to Annie, maybe even her Shadow Archetype, who brings her flaws into the light. At least that's how he acted in Residential, and I'd bet quite a bit that we'll be seeing something similar happen again. Maybe even in this chapter. "You (really) should not have wasted a life in such a way." ps: Nice GLaDOS quote! Didn't Muut also state that "We do not deal in electrical appliances"? Meaning that they do not include robots under 'life'. Nice try.
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Apr 14, 2010 1:02:08 GMT
Didn't Muut also state that "We do not deal in electrical appliances"? Meaning that they do not include robots under 'life'. Nice try. We don't know that's what he meant. We only know he was referring to the Tic-Toc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2010 1:32:55 GMT
...What the hell, cazador?
'Nice try', but you really need to work on your reading comprehension. You completely missed the point, and your "response" has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.
There are these little things called discussions, in which you have to read more than one post to get the point... or even to understand what the most recent poster is referring to, as in this case.
Not to mention I don't think that you even read that entire post, let alone any of the others.
But hey, the first two sentences are always enough to understand everything, right?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Pitchfork on Apr 14, 2010 3:12:24 GMT
Calm down. There is no reason to become angry and aggressive.
|
|
cognizanita
New Member
Where do you think you're going? Because I don't think you're going where you think you're going.
Posts: 14
|
Post by cognizanita on Apr 14, 2010 6:01:56 GMT
I like Jack, too. Plus he killed someone. Whoahahahaha! I didn't read that closely until now. x] I don't think the spider is an actual thing, I think it's more a representation of the fact that zimmingham messed up his head ethereally. And I think you're right. People get smushed for absolutely no reason due to accidents every day as well. *cackles* Excellent point, and I stand corrected concerning the frequency of smushing being relevant! (somewhat, I still think that an ants life is less 'valuable' than a humans. However, that discussion is quite deep! Still, its worth having the discussion, though perhaps now is not the time or place.) I knew of Muut's quote, but took it to mean that all life has some value, (the key word being "some") and should not be wasted needlessly. Antimony's reply was that she knew of no other way to reach Muut and thus she ultimately valued the information he had more than the ant's life. I'm beginning to think my position regarding Jack's behavior is less in the act itself, (the death of the robot) and more in the fact that I'm unaware of him pursuing alternatives. To me, these alternatives seem to be many and easily taken, but I'll admit it is open to interpretation. Especially since we don't know what Jack has been thinking or the situation. Why couldn't the pair sneak past, deactivated the robot using alternative means than physical, tricked the robot, explored elsewhere, left its personality chip unharmed...... This is the senseless waste that I see whether or not the robot is alive. And it is from what I think Tom said. Having to kill anything when there's another (reasonable) way is a tragedy. Doing it merely for your own convenience is cold, whether it's a Robot, a Nobody, or even a little Ant. We agree for the most part, just have differing degrees of evaluation of the "tragedy" of it. I think the ant death is less tragic than the robot deactivation. You think the robot deactivation is less tragic than the ant death, correct? And no one say that the Nobodies are "only" Hallucinations, because we don't know that for certain. [snip]None of us know exactly what Zimmy is tapping into, and I sincerely doubt that it's only in her mind. If you look at them when Annie gops them, they seem to be experiencing some kind of pain. They're contorting, at least. And when Zimmy throws the trash can through the window, they're clearly reacting to it. Food for thought, because I really think this might come back to bite Annie. You're right. We don't know about the Nobodies for certain. It hadn't crossed my mind that they were 'alive' in any sense before. (I took the contortions as merely a shimmering effect....) You're right, they do react, but I took it as more dream logic of how a crowd will all focus on you if you "act against the rules" within a dream world. Of course, using this mode of thought, the Nobodies could be indistinguishable from live creatures and reality because dreams are capable of that. So it would come down to whether you think they are figments or else think that they have some sort of independent existence, with no real evidence to differentiate between them. (Its just an act/dream. Its actually true. How can you tell either way?) Too big to be a single girl's mind to create it all? My opinion differs, but I'm not sure either way. Assuming Annie is in the same position of not knowing, she shouldn't have gopped them. Which links to your next point.... Jack's role in the story so far seems to be as a foil to Annie, maybe even her Shadow Archetype, who brings her flaws into the light. I hope he keeps playing the Shadow Archetype! Why thank you! x] It's not really necessary to differentiate between the two for the purposes of an internet debate, since it's the ideas that matter, not the people who hold them. I mean, whether someone actually thinks an idea is correct or is just saying it is correct to spark discussion is largely irrelevant if you can show that said idea is incorrect; either way, the state of the discourse is improved. Quite right. Respond because it makes you think, and hopefully their next post will make you think even more. Admittedly sometimes you might unintentionally answer a sarcastic comment or unintentionally ignore a serious post, but it's a very good rule of thumb.
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 14, 2010 10:39:04 GMT
One other possibility: Tom might have forgotten about the Nobodies and ant scenes when he wrote this chapter - or the ant scene at least. (And it might not have occurred to *him* that the Nobodies were living beings; the killings of the ant and the robot both receive rebukes from other characters, while no one rebukes Annie for what she did to the Nobodies.) It could be an "author nods" moment.
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Apr 15, 2010 14:59:57 GMT
For those of you still in the "it's just a dumb robot" category... I assume you haven't seen this question/answer on Formspring:
|
|