|
|
Post by Daedalus on Jan 11, 2014 1:37:33 GMT
I do think, incidentally, that Andrew's argument is weak - at least, a lot weaker than other possible arguments. I can't see how Jeanne's imprisonment would be more "all right" because it had gone on for a long time. (Unless what he meant was that the length of her imprisonment might have undermined her sanity to the point where it would be dangerous to free her.) I think the point is that freeing her could disrupt a delicate balance between the Court and Forest that has existed for a long time, with major unforeseen consequences. Not that her being there would be morally better. |
|
|
|
Post by arf on Jan 11, 2014 3:34:54 GMT
Jeanne's plight, and Smitty's* caution, reminds me of the moral dilemna posed by Ursula LeGuin's short story ' The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas'. It's a parable about a city whose happiness and prosperity are conditional on the existence of a squalid room holding a miserable, starved child. The dilemna is this: do you accept the price of the city's happiness, or end it for all by allowing the child even a small mercy. Most do, with varying levels of acceptance. Some walk away from the city, seeking another place which is not described. It's the old chestnut of zero vs. positive sum games. Perhaps a deeper question to ask is: can happiness be provided for this sort of price? * At this stage, I don't think Smitty's passing any judgment. He's just asking the gang to stop and think this through. |
|
|
|
Post by Angry Individual on Jan 11, 2014 3:48:22 GMT
It really is just a question between Morals or a possible Survival/Status Quota... at least until we get more information.
That, and I still think this is an awful idea and is going to end badly for one or more of the kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by arf on Jan 11, 2014 3:53:05 GMT
A possible outcome: Annie manages to put Jeanne and lover to rest, but only because Parley and Smitty take their place.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Jan 11, 2014 4:12:11 GMT
A possible outcome: Annie manages to put Jeanne and lover to rest, but only because Parley and Smitty take their place. NO! Too sad  |
|
|
|
Post by Intelligence on Jan 11, 2014 4:33:28 GMT
A possible outcome: Annie manages to put Jeanne and lover to rest, but only because Parley and Smitty take their place. As daedalus said, too sad, and Parley and Smitty haven't been married yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Jan 11, 2014 5:03:05 GMT
I found that very profound. Another deep short story (non-GKC related) is Harrison Bergeron (by Kurt Vonegut) about the meaning of equality. |
|
fishtie
Full Member
...I've learned to be amazed first and ask questions later.
Posts: 114
|
Post by fishtie on Jan 11, 2014 6:34:57 GMT
A possible outcome: Annie manages to put Jeanne and lover to rest, but only because Parley and Smitty take their place. Way too sad.  Incidentally: When Parley and Smitty do get married then won't Parley no longer be Parley? Will they have to call her Miss Smith or just George? |
|
|
|
Post by arf on Jan 11, 2014 12:04:58 GMT
There's no requirement for a bride to take the name of her husband. My wife hasn't.
Well, if not Smitty and Parley, how about Jones and Eglamore?
Zimmy and Gamma?
...No! That's *way* too scary.
|
|
|
|
Post by philman on Jan 11, 2014 15:27:19 GMT
I think Smitty's caution is more related to that Jeanne seems to be a murderous psychopath right now, and freeing her without knowing the consequences might be a very dangerous thing to do...
|
|
|
|
Post by eyemyself on Jan 11, 2014 15:50:53 GMT
I think Smitty's caution is more related to that Jeanne seems to be a murderous psychopath right now, and freeing her without knowing the consequences might be a very dangerous thing to do... This. Jeanne herself has stated that only her rage survives, forged white hot into the sentinel of the waters. I don't thinks a straight-up replacement situation would work... My speculation is that at least part of the reason Jeanne was chosen was because her lover was from the forest. I think the deception and betrayal was part of the recipe for making a successful terror ghost to guard the waters. |
|
|
|
Post by eightyfour on Jan 11, 2014 16:47:05 GMT
Incidentally: When Parley and Smitty do get married then won't Parley no longer be Parley? Will they have to call her Miss Smith or just George? It may be traditional in our part of the world for the woman to take the man's last name in marriage, but there's no rule saying it has to be done like that. In fact, there are plenty of women who keep their last name and even some men taking the woman's name. |
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Jan 11, 2014 18:05:46 GMT
I do think, incidentally, that Andrew's argument is weak - at least, a lot weaker than other possible arguments. I can't see how Jeanne's imprisonment would be more "all right" because it had gone on for a long time. (Unless what he meant was that the length of her imprisonment might have undermined her sanity to the point where it would be dangerous to free her.) I think the point is that freeing her could disrupt a delicate balance between the Court and Forest that has existed for a long time, with major unforeseen consequences. Not that her being there would be morally better. I have been thinking this too. If Jeanne is the only thing keeping the Court and the Forest on their sides of the divide, removing her might not be such a good idea... |
|
|
|
Post by aaroncampbell on Jan 11, 2014 19:10:12 GMT
On a different note, Parley's behavior is worrying me a bit in this page. She is being very cavalier with that giggle-bokken. Anyone who has taken sword training knows that the very first thing you're taught is to treat your practice swords with the same respect as a live blade, not just because they are effective weapons themselves but because doing so ingrains the habit of proper blade handling. In this instance, this should especially be the case. Her posture and expression are clear indicators that she has forgotten what she learned when she held the real giggle-blade. Today she's got the edge right up along the side and back of her head, though she wasn't so keen to hold it up by her ear the last time. Them she brings the tip of the blade down in panel 5 right near Smitty's leg, possibly even touching it. No way she'd get that near her beloved holding this; she may trust her swordsmanship, but she knows Coyote enough now not to trust his blade that completely. Long and short, she' practicing like she would with any other weapon, and being especially lazy now. Coyote's Tooth is not like any other weapon, and I'm afraid that may get her into trouble some day. |
|
fishtie
Full Member
...I've learned to be amazed first and ask questions later.
Posts: 114
|
Post by fishtie on Jan 11, 2014 21:32:34 GMT
Incidentally: When Parley and Smitty do get married then won't Parley no longer be Parley? Will they have to call her Miss Smith or just George? It may be traditional in our part of the world for the woman to take the man's last name in marriage, but there's no rule saying it has to be done like that. In fact, there are plenty of women who keep their last name and even some men taking the woman's name. Oh I'm aware. My own mother kept her maiden name. I just thought it was kind of a silly thought. |
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Jan 11, 2014 23:48:37 GMT
It may be traditional in our part of the world for the woman to take the man's last name in marriage, but there's no rule saying it has to be done like that. In fact, there are plenty of women who keep their last name and even some men taking the woman's name. Oh I'm aware. My own mother kept her maiden name. I just thought it was kind of a silly thought. So did mine. She said that after her first husband, she was tired of getting mail in other people's name so she changed it back for good. |
|
|
|
Post by atteSmythe on Jan 12, 2014 4:09:00 GMT
Annie was about to fill her in, but Jones cut her off and said (paraphrasing) that Annie should come back to her when she knows more. To our knowledge, Annie never did. Actually it has always seemed to me more like Annie was trying to figure out how to dodge the question when Jones gave her and easy out: www.gunnerkrigg.com/?p=588I think that's true enough...I guess I think that Jones knows (or more likely strongly suspects something) already. This is actually getting into a subject I haven't quite been able to set right in my head for quite a while now. Annie is about to (reluctantly) present Jones with some information about the early days of the court. Information which is lost, because it has been intentionally wiped from the record - valuable information. Jones cuts her off, and says that this is meaningless until she has the whole story. I've always taken scene to mean that Jones knows that Annie knows something, but is telling her to finish the job of getting the whole story. Fast forward not too far to Spring Heeled. At the end of that arc, Jones lectures Annie on not doing everything herself, saying that if she knew something, she should have told someone. Jones doesn't strike me as being contradictory, so I've often wondered how to reconcile those scenes. I would have taken the latter as a prompt for Annie - now that you've gotten yourself in trouble with one little investigation, mind telling me how that other investigation is going? - but she never pauses to give Annie a chance. Now, Annie has pretty much the whole story, but still hasn't gone back to Jones. I expect that to become a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Jan 12, 2014 6:40:46 GMT
I really hope they have a good plan.
I just don't see how Parley will be able to disarm Jeanne, or render her harmless so that Annie can reason with her and help her move on. The other option is that they have to actually "kill" her (even if it is a mercy killing and technically she isn't alive anymore, it's still somewhat sentient).
Perhaps it's like a boss fight, and her weak point is that big nasty green arrow.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Jan 12, 2014 18:11:07 GMT
What I find interesting is that Kat thinks she'll be able to figure out the arrow. It's a very etheric artifact, presumably, something Kat's never been comfortable with. Maybe with her mother's help she could? Or with Annie's, but it would be a stretch.
|
|
|
|
Post by zimmyhoo on Jan 12, 2014 21:10:59 GMT
What I find interesting is that Kat thinks she'll be able to figure out the arrow. It's a very etheric artifact, presumably, something Kat's never been comfortable with. Maybe with her mother's help she could? Or with Annie's, but it would be a stretch. DAE get the distinct sense that our heroic team is going to experience the wonderful terror of making a horrible mistake? |
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Jan 12, 2014 22:27:04 GMT
What I find interesting is that Kat thinks she'll be able to figure out the arrow. It's a very etheric artifact, presumably, something Kat's never been comfortable with. Maybe with her mother's help she could? Or with Annie's, but it would be a stretch. DAE get the distinct sense that our heroic team is going to experience the wonderful terror of making a horrible mistake? This is an odd feeling. Usually, I'm the one making pessimistic predictions. |
|
|
|
Post by arf on Jan 13, 2014 4:56:49 GMT
On a different note, Parley's behavior is worrying me a bit in this page. She is being very cavalier with that giggle-bokken. Anyone who has taken sword training knows that the very first thing you're taught is to treat your practice swords with the same respect as a live blade, not just because they are effective weapons themselves but because doing so ingrains the habit of proper blade handling. In this instance, this should especially be the case. Her posture and expression are clear indicators that she has forgotten what she learned when she held the real giggle-blade. Today she's got the edge right up along the side and back of her head, though she wasn't so keen to hold it up by her ear the last time. Them she brings the tip of the blade down in panel 5 right near Smitty's leg, possibly even touching it. No way she'd get that near her beloved holding this; she may trust her swordsmanship, but she knows Coyote enough now not to trust his blade that completely. Long and short, she' practicing like she would with any other weapon, and being especially lazy now. Coyote's Tooth is not like any other weapon, and I'm afraid that may get her into trouble some day. Tom seems to be a stickler for details, and I think he would be very interested to hear what safe posture(s) Parley should adopt. |
|
|
|
Post by feraldog on Jan 13, 2014 6:37:23 GMT
Jones doesn't strike me as being contradictory, so I've often wondered how to reconcile those scenes. I would have taken the latter as a prompt for Annie - now that you've gotten yourself in trouble with one little investigation, mind telling me how that other investigation is going? - but she never pauses to give Annie a chance. Now, Annie has pretty much the whole story, but still hasn't gone back to Jones. I expect that to become a problem. She may have been trying to push Annie to use more of the resources available to her to get information without alerting the Court. In this case, her friends count as resources... Annie failing to tell Jones now that she knows could still be a problem, but we have no idea what Jones' motivation for information is. |
|
|
|
Post by zbeeblebrox on Jan 13, 2014 6:43:52 GMT
Damn it Parley you're supposed to be practicing blade discipline! You would've lost your ponytail and half your ear if that'd been the real Giggleblade >  I'm glad Eyebrows over there is being the voice of reason. It's important to stop and consider your basic motivations for doing things sometimes, lest you get caught up in big plans that amount to nothing. In this instance though, those motivations seem to rest on Carver's rationalizations. I hope we hear a counter-argument before everyone goes running headlong into a big diplomatic fiasco. Which is to say - there might be a better way to free Jeanne that -gasp- doesn't involve sneaking around like thieves in the night behind everyone's back. |
|
|
|
Post by SilverbackRon on Jan 13, 2014 7:24:37 GMT
Jones doesn't strike me as being contradictory, so I've often wondered how to reconcile those scenes. I would have taken the latter as a prompt for Annie - now that you've gotten yourself in trouble with one little investigation, mind telling me how that other investigation is going? - but she never pauses to give Annie a chance. Now, Annie has pretty much the whole story, but still hasn't gone back to Jones. I expect that to become a problem. She may have been trying to push Annie to use more of the resources available to her to get information without alerting the Court. In this case, her friends count as resources... Annie failing to tell Jones now that she knows could still be a problem, but we have no idea what Jones' motivation for information is. Jones' motivation? Curiosity. She has allowed potentially dangerous things to happen in the past simply because she was interested to see what would happen next. We know that she claims (and we have every reason to believe it) that she has no capacity for emotional connection. The death of others would mean nothing to her... emotionally. However, I think logically she would not allow the children into a life or death situation, even if only because she is aware that is contrary to her position as a teacher at the court. She isn't stupid, far far from it. Nor is she desiring to see others come to harm. Personally, I think the kids now know enough that it is time to tell Jones. I think she would want to know. And then she would probably tell them to proceed as they think best. (although I bet she would have some kind of extra info to share, or perhaps have some sort of safety net plan that she wouldn't tell them about unless she had to actually use it). |
|
|
|
Post by King Mir on Jan 13, 2014 9:23:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Jan 13, 2014 15:16:44 GMT
Rather similar to Coyote, then. (Except Coyote instigates interesting things happening and shows less regard for others.) |
|
|
|
Post by Angry Individual on Jan 13, 2014 16:04:27 GMT
Hm. It would make sense if he's making the final decisions, but a place that big just doesn't seem right to just have one "head honcho" who makes all the calls. Oh well, I'll take your word for it. Gunnerkrigg court feels more like something along the lines of an evil villain story circle time where everyone is talking through monitors that are dimly lit so you can't tell whose face is whose. At least, that's how I like to imagine how their meetings go. |
|
|
|
Post by eyemyself on Jan 13, 2014 16:47:51 GMT
She may have been trying to push Annie to use more of the resources available to her to get information without alerting the Court. In this case, her friends count as resources... Annie failing to tell Jones now that she knows could still be a problem, but we have no idea what Jones' motivation for information is. Jones' motivation? Curiosity. She has allowed potentially dangerous things to happen in the past simply because she was interested to see what would happen next. We know that she claims (and we have every reason to believe it) that she has no capacity for emotional connection. The death of others would mean nothing to her... emotionally. However, I think logically she would not allow the children into a life or death situation, even if only because she is aware that is contrary to her position as a teacher at the court. She isn't stupid, far far from it. Nor is she desiring to see others come to harm. Personally, I think the kids now know enough that it is time to tell Jones. I think she would want to know. And then she would probably tell them to proceed as they think best. (although I bet she would have some kind of extra info to share, or perhaps have some sort of safety net plan that she wouldn't tell them about unless she had to actually use it). I think the fact that Jones has her own agenda and is really not aligned with either the court or the forest is something we often overlook. Jones is a force unto herself and despite the fact that we now have some understanding of what she is... there is still much we don't know about her. Also, unlike Coyote, we have nothing to suggest that she might not choose to lie from time to time. I suspect that Jones operates under orange/blue morality far more than she lets on. |
|
|
|
Post by King Mir on Jan 14, 2014 1:30:34 GMT
Jones' motivation? Curiosity. She has allowed potentially dangerous things to happen in the past simply because she was interested to see what would happen next. We know that she claims (and we have every reason to believe it) that she has no capacity for emotional connection. The death of others would mean nothing to her... emotionally. However, I think logically she would not allow the children into a life or death situation, even if only because she is aware that is contrary to her position as a teacher at the court. She isn't stupid, far far from it. Nor is she desiring to see others come to harm. Personally, I think the kids now know enough that it is time to tell Jones. I think she would want to know. And then she would probably tell them to proceed as they think best. (although I bet she would have some kind of extra info to share, or perhaps have some sort of safety net plan that she wouldn't tell them about unless she had to actually use it). I think the fact that Jones has her own agenda and is really not aligned with either the court or the forest is something we often overlook. Jones is a force unto herself and despite the fact that we now have some understanding of what she is... there is still much we don't know about her. Also, unlike Coyote, we have nothing to suggest that she might not choose to lie from time to time. I suspect that Jones operates under orange/blue morality far more than she lets on. Jones is a free agent currently employed but not loyal to the court, but there is no reason to say she has "orange/blue morality". Her longevity may give her a unique perspective on mortality and the like, but she seems to be moral. She was saving factory workers from a shelled factory, and she seemed to take Edward Jones's name out of compassion. Her relationships with Mr Langdon and Mr Eglamore also don't seem so strange either. |
|
