|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Feb 20, 2014 19:30:36 GMT
I outlined Artyman's one appearance in the comic in red for those still confused. [explanatory picture] Oooo, fancy! He's so...Red Coat. How long ago exactly did they say the court was founded? Sometime around the 18th or 19th century if you take your cues from the garb, maybe as early as the 16th. Of course, how long the forest itself has been a place of great magic, or when exactly humans came or Coyote crossed the pond is open to interpretation. He fell down an elevator shaft. Onto some bullets. Fuck me sideways.  |
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Feb 20, 2014 19:56:57 GMT
I thought I was the only one who saw that movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by forestflight on Feb 20, 2014 20:59:56 GMT
I'm pretty sure "the Gunner's Crag" was not named after some "Krigg".  I kind of want to make it into Krieg (king, German) — like, His Majesty Gunner Krieg I? (random hypothesizing) |
|
|
|
Post by eightyfour on Feb 20, 2014 23:50:06 GMT
I'm pretty sure "the Gunner's Crag" was not named after some "Krigg". I kind of want to make it into Krieg (king, German) — like, His Majesty Gunner Krieg I? (random hypothesizing) The German word for king is König. Krieg means war. |
|
|
|
Post by keef on Feb 20, 2014 23:54:13 GMT
You mean he died of speculation?  In that he thought they're stupid animals and he could easily outsmart them, but then fell into their trap. Especially possible with Coyote. If you mean that on his deathbed he stated that Coyote had outsmarted him in some way, it is possible, but there is no other evidence yet. It is good and wild speculation; I think Tom likes hiding clues in plain sight. |
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Feb 21, 2014 0:59:34 GMT
Oooo, fancy! He's so...Red Coat. How long ago exactly did they say the court was founded? Not sure they did, but judging by the styles of clothing I would guess 18th/19th Centuries. I don't know much about fashion though. The complication is that fashions repeat periodically. In one webcomic I briefly read, a major character used knowledge of this fact. Given allegedly-custom-designed dresses they absolutely abhorred, she and a friend looked up when such dresses had previously been popular and then copied designs from two years later. It isn't a standard thing in GKC, but for it to NEVER occur would be very-mildly odd. (Of course, it could happen several times among people we don't see. Perhaps one of the cooks in the students' cafeteria is named Cooke. Assuming they aren't all robots, of course.) (Very-mildly-relevant but amusing fact: the custodian at my granddaughter's high school has the surname Schoolcraft.) |
|
|
|
Post by SilverbackRon on Feb 21, 2014 1:45:27 GMT
Gunner is also a nickname for members of the British Royal Artillery and that dates back to the early 1700's. Kind of like how in the US Marines, a Gunnery Sergeant is often called "Gunny". |
|
|
|
Post by arf on Feb 21, 2014 2:08:35 GMT
Surnames were often used to denote a person's trade (esp. when the business was handed down through generations) Today, spotting such 'nominative determinism' is something of a sport. At the moment, as far as I am aware, the only thing we know about the Artilleryman is that he was ' a close friend of the Archer.' (Steadman. Jones may know the name, but she appeared to have other things on her mind at the time.) |
|
|
|
Post by SilverbackRon on Feb 21, 2014 2:29:48 GMT
Surnames were often used to denote a person's trade (esp. when the business was handed down through generations) Today, spotting such 'nominative determinism' is something of a sport. Very true. My last name is Smith. Take a wild guess at what my ancestors did for a living centuries ago... |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyhoo on Feb 21, 2014 5:27:04 GMT
Calling it now, Gunner is the dog Steadman tripped over.
|
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Feb 21, 2014 5:47:31 GMT
Surnames were often used to denote a person's trade (esp. when the business was handed down through generations) Today, spotting such 'nominative determinism' is something of a sport. Very true. My last name is Smith. Take a wild guess at what my ancestors did for a living centuries ago... Hmm. I'm gonna say, they were sheepherders? |
|
|
|
Post by forestflight on Feb 21, 2014 20:36:53 GMT
I kind of want to make it into Krieg (king, German) — like, His Majesty Gunner Krieg I? (random hypothesizing) The German word for king is König. Krieg means war. Hahaha! As I fail epically. * /me crawls into a corner |
|
|
|
Post by AluK on Feb 21, 2014 23:52:31 GMT
Surnames were often used to denote a person's trade (esp. when the business was handed down through generations) Like Carver, for instance. |
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Feb 22, 2014 2:22:02 GMT
Surnames were often used to denote a person's trade (esp. when the business was handed down through generations) Today, spotting such 'nominative determinism' is something of a sport. Very true. My last name is Smith. Take a wild guess at what my ancestors did for a living centuries ago... It would be "nominative determinism" (or, more likely, an amusing coincidence) if you were, in fact, a smith - as well as a Smith. If your ancestor had done, in principle, the same sort of thing, but working primarily in non-metals, then your last name might be Wright. Or if your ancestor had restricted his metal-work to shoes and tack for horses and draft animals, your last name might be something along the line of Farrier. |
|
|
|
Post by eyemyself on Feb 24, 2014 22:11:51 GMT
For some reason I always assumed the guy in the firs panel of this page was the artilleryman. Probably because he's kept in the shadows, just like any other information regarding him. . You are right, and it is interesting that the guy the Court was named after, refused to go along with Diego's plan.[/quote] The page with the fellow protesting on it is page 654. The top question on the formspring asks about page 656 which has a man's hand holding a pocket watch and giving Steadman the order to ready the device. He wasn't the one objecting, he was at the scene calling the shots when the deed was done. www.gunnerkrigg.com/?p=654Unknown Character in Top Left Corner www.gunnerkrigg.com/?p=656Word of Tom says that the Top Left Corner is the Artillery Man. I suspect he is also the one talking on the bottom. |
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Feb 25, 2014 1:06:15 GMT
Word of Tom says that the Top Left Corner is the Artillery Man. I suspect he is also the one talking on the bottom. I'm pretty sure that the latter is still Sir Young. |
|
|
|
Post by sidhekin on Feb 25, 2014 6:22:31 GMT
Ah, thank you. The unknown character in 654, I always thought was Steadman.
He was the most recent speaker, he is absent from all further shots of the scene, and his appearance and apparel, as far as I can make it out on 654, does not significantly differ from those of Steadman on 653.
But people seemed so sure 654-guy was the artilleryman, so I started questioning my hasty assumptions ... still couldn't figure out what made them so sure, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by eyemyself on Feb 25, 2014 11:44:21 GMT
For some reason I've always had in my mind that Sir Young had a beard because of the lines coming from his chin in the simulations. Looking at the faces again I think you are right Daedalus. |
|
|
|
Post by keef on Feb 25, 2014 11:54:30 GMT
The page with the fellow protesting on it is page 654. The top question on the formspring asks about page 656 which has a man's hand holding a pocket watch and giving Steadman the order to ready the device. He wasn't the one objecting, he was at the scene calling the shots when the deed was done. www.gunnerkrigg.com/?p=654Unknown Character in Top Left Corner www.gunnerkrigg.com/?p=656Word of Tom says that the Top Left Corner is the Artillery Man. I suspect he is also the one talking on the bottom. I think you forgot the renumbering of the comic pages took place after the formspring questions. Or I'm terribly wrong, but then neither the question or the answer at formspring seems to make sense. Compare the question about page 582 and page 582 as it is now. Now go back 2 pages. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2014 12:06:26 GMT
Ah, thank you. The unknown character in 654, I always thought was Steadman. He was the most recent speaker, he is absent from all further shots of the scene, and his appearance and apparel, as far as I can make it out on 654, does not significantly differ from those of Steadman on 653. But people seemed so sure 654-guy was the artilleryman, so I started questioning my hasty assumptions ... still couldn't figure out what made them so sure, though. Steadman fires the green arrow on page 656 and promises to do so on page 653, so he's probably not the dropout. |
|
|
|
Post by sidhekin on Feb 25, 2014 18:21:51 GMT
Why not? He promises to fire it. Why not? It's his job, and apparently the community is set on at it. Doesn't mean he wants any other part in it. Ah, but the renumbering renders that moot. Can't argue against Word of Tom. ... and it's neat to have a glimpse into the character of the Artilleryman, compensating for the loss of conflict in Steadman's character. |
|
