|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 21, 2015 22:01:28 GMT
zimmyzims: Well, his moments of decency tend to be the exception (anything else has merely been informed rather than shown) compared to his less pleasant behavior. While that doesn't mean that we are right, it certainly doesn't contradict him being in the wrong either. His life tends to be in secrecy from us and for large parts from most of the GKC characters as well. I wholly expect Tom to reveal Anthony's secret life to us at some point, probably through some moment Anthony and Annie share together, and it will shed light on this person. But so far, we just don't know much anything about it, definitely not enough to judge. |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 21, 2015 22:03:07 GMT
He needs Annie to hate him for her own safety? This, at least, is very possible. Shouldn't be too hard to think of such a situation? |
|
|
|
Post by avurai on Mar 21, 2015 22:04:35 GMT
On another level, making Anthony into a positive figure within the comic at this point would require such flagrant and elaborate plot-twisting gymnastics that it would ring entirely hollow. On yet another level, it would send a terrible message, that has been given again and again and again and again, over and over and over, that when an authority fi... And so on. This has the "if Kat is gay that is completely implausible to the extent that the whole plot no longer makes any sense" written all over it. It is rather simple to make Anthony a positive figure: reveal the reason why he has been away and tell what he has been doing, and by that help see that there indeed is a bigger issue that he is dealing with all the time. This would be completely in line with the plot so far, at least with the plot of the webcomic that I have been reading. Of course, it would not probably make him completely positive in black/white manner. Thank goodness for that. One of the best things in GKC is that its characters are not simple, they are certainly not simply heroes and villains. If Tom now starts to introduce simple heroes and villains, I'm very much disappointed. But so far there is no reason to suppose he has started to do so, these characters may remain as ambiguous as they are. Applying to Tony as well. By the way, it is pretty bizarre how you emphasise how we don't know anything and then follow that by stating massive speculations as facts. Again, it would maybe not make sense that Anthony was a good figure, if we take all your interpretations of events and persons in the story so far. But we do not all share your interpretations, and it is sometimes hard to see how you can justify those interpretations. And then, to claim that Anthony could not be seen as positive character without such a plot-twist "that it would ring entirely hollow" is just to impose your interpretation about the story over those of others. This likely all stems from me having an averse reaction to abuse. I've seen many an apologist completely undermine valid concerns in too many real life situations to be at all comfortable seeing it repeated in fictional ones as well, simply because the consequences can be dangerous and harmful. Media and fiction are important as they are influential and help inform real life perception. To put Anthony in a positive light at this point would serve only to undermine the weight the story has put on his immoral behavior at this point. It would be equivalent to having the cake and eating it too. The comic gets to be serious and show the averse effects of abuse, then undercut it with a twist that attempts to undo all the unpleasant aspects of the plotline. Some things are plainly unpleasant. Some times are simply bad. Often times there are layers of complexity residing within those more simple structures, but acknowledging that sometimes people really are just that unhealthy to be around is incredibly important and rarely done in a manner that's not so in-your-face that it feels forced and unnatural. This is one of the most realistic representations of neglectful abuse I've ever seen in fiction, and the idea of it being needlessly undermined is disheartening. |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty Hamilton on Mar 21, 2015 22:51:55 GMT
He needs Annie to hate him for her own safety? This, at least, is very possible. Shouldn't be too hard to think of such a situation? Actually, it is pretty hard to think of such a situation. I can't think of one. |
|
|
|
Post by TBeholder on Mar 21, 2015 22:59:22 GMT
I predict on the next page, class will be over and there won't be any time left for someone to stand up to him. Either Annie nervously talks to him after class, or it'll take place out in the hall between Annie and Kat. The important part here is when she is going to re-apply makeup. |
|
|
|
Post by keef on Mar 21, 2015 23:09:51 GMT
Also, Microsat 5 and Divine occur IMMEDIATELY after one another. What if the reason he wanted to speak to Annie was to get a target lock on her for imminent bone lasering? |
|
|
|
Post by Lightice on Mar 21, 2015 23:11:05 GMT
This, at least, is very possible. Shouldn't be too hard to think of such a situation? Actually, it is pretty hard to think of such a situation. I can't think of one. There were some hints during Anthony's disappearance that he might be in some kind of trouble. Most notably how he used a code phrase to have ordinary surgical supplies that he could find at any hospital delivered straight to him through an untraceable system. It is within the realm of possibility that he thinks that Annie is being targeted by some unknown party, and decides to put her safety ahead of his own, struggling against his inability to interact with his daughter normally. Maybe. I can come up with a hundred plausible scenarios given enough time, but I have absolutely nothing to verify any of them. But still, whatever Anthony's reasons are, I'm certain that he could handle himself better than he has. |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty Hamilton on Mar 21, 2015 23:15:18 GMT
Actually, it is pretty hard to think of such a situation. I can't think of one. There were some hints during Anthony's disappearance that he might be in some kind of trouble. Most notably how he used a code phrase to have ordinary surgical supplies that he could find at any hospital delivered straight to him through an untraceable system. It is within the realm of possibility that he thinks that Annie is being targeted by some unknown party, and decides to put her safety ahead of his own, struggling against his inability to interact with his daughter normally. Maybe. I can come up with a hundred plausible scenarios given enough time, but I have absolutely nothing to verify any of them. But still, whatever Anthony's reasons are, I'm certain that he could handle himself better than he has. I can think of a bunch of scenarios in which he might have to avoid Annie, or even appear to have a bad relationship with her, but I can't think of many scenarios where he wouldn't be able to communicate his intentions to Annie in some way. That's the sticker for me. Okay, you have to keep your distance from Annie for her own protection...any chance of you, you know, TELLING her that somehow? In SOME way? |
|
|
|
Post by matoyak on Mar 21, 2015 23:28:10 GMT
Urgh, do I hate that phrase. It's completely false, and helps perpetuate a horrible mentality. SOMETIMES pain is necessary, but most of the time that phrase is used it is not only avoidable, but SHOULD be avoided. |
|
brokshi
Full Member
About as furious as my icon appears ecstatic.
Posts: 108
|
Post by brokshi on Mar 21, 2015 23:53:24 GMT
I still can't believe people are defending Anthony to be honest. We're being shown that he's rude and impolite, he's being set up as a bad person, possibly for a subversion later on, but in the VERY BEST LIGHT right now he's a guy who goes by "the ends justify the means" which is never a good thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Mar 22, 2015 0:07:07 GMT
zimmyzims: Well, his moments of decency tend to be the exception (anything else has merely been informed rather than shown) compared to his less pleasant behavior. While that doesn't mean that we are right, it certainly doesn't contradict him being in the wrong either. His life tends to be in secrecy from us and for large parts from most of the GKC characters as well. I wholly expect Tom to reveal Anthony's secret life to us at some point, probably through some moment Anthony and Annie share together, and it will shed light on this person. But so far, we just don't know much anything about it, definitely not enough to judge. Well usually if a character in fiction is suppose to be in the grey zone, mysterious or not, you don't present one side more than the other (in this case showing more of his missteps than good ones). Now fine, we might, might be jumping the gun, but are you saying that it's implausible that he won't be an antagonist in the end? |
|
|
|
Post by calpal on Mar 22, 2015 0:11:28 GMT
zimmyzims: Well, his moments of decency tend to be the exception (anything else has merely been informed rather than shown) compared to his less pleasant behavior. While that doesn't mean that we are right, it certainly doesn't contradict him being in the wrong either. His life tends to be in secrecy from us and for large parts from most of the GKC characters as well. I wholly expect Tom to reveal Anthony's secret life to us at some point, probably through some moment Anthony and Annie share together, and it will shed light on this person. But so far, we just don't know much anything about it, definitely not enough to judge. Bah, we don't let lack of context stop us from judgement! |
|
|
|
Post by Lightice on Mar 22, 2015 0:44:51 GMT
I can think of a bunch of scenarios in which he might have to avoid Annie, or even appear to have a bad relationship with her, but I can't think of many scenarios where he wouldn't be able to communicate his intentions to Annie in some way. That's the sticker for me. Okay, you have to keep your distance from Annie for her own protection...any chance of you, you know, TELLING her that somehow? In SOME way? That's where being socially awkward and an arsehole comes in. Or, if you want a benefit for doubt, he could be under surveillance and unable to communicate freely. My personal theory is still that Tony doesn't really want to be in contact with Annie for personal reasons, i.e. reminding him that Surma is dead, but has come to the Court either compelled by an outside force or knowledge that Annie is in some sort of danger that he can't ignore in spite of inability to function as a parent. Basically, I have a Severus Snape-style thing in mind; a genuine jerkass who nevertheless wants to sincerely look out for the child who is the last remaining link to his dead love interest. Really, the only reason why I'm not in the "Tony's pure evil"-camp is because it'd make for a rather boring story as it is. When you've got a disappeared parent who comes back to be a dick, I feel there should be a bit more to him than a one-dimensional antagonist. Hence all the various scenarios I'm coming up with, none which negate the fact that Tony's a jerk. |
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Mar 22, 2015 0:59:18 GMT
Really, the only reason why I'm not in the "Tony's pure evil"-camp is because it'd make for a rather boring story as it is. When you've got a disappeared parent who comes back to be a dick, I feel there should be a bit more to him than a one-dimensional antagonist. Hence all the various scenarios I'm coming up with, none which negate the fact that Tony's a jerk. And that's fine. As log as his behavior isn't forgotten or whitewashed in the end. Even if there were no (immediate) better ways, things between them shouldn't immediately be all hunky dory in the end. |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty Hamilton on Mar 22, 2015 1:39:29 GMT
That's where being socially awkward and an arsehole comes in. Or, if you want a benefit for doubt, he could be under surveillance and unable to communicate freely. My personal theory is still that Tony doesn't really want to be in contact with Annie for personal reasons, i.e. reminding him that Surma is dead, but has come to the Court either compelled by an outside force or knowledge that Annie is in some sort of danger that he can't ignore in spite of inability to function as a parent. Basically, I have a Severus Snape-style thing in mind; a genuine jerkass who nevertheless wants to sincerely look out for the child who is the last remaining link to his dead love interest. Really, the only reason why I'm not in the "Tony's pure evil"-camp is because it'd make for a rather boring story as it is. When you've got a disappeared parent who comes back to be a dick, I feel there should be a bit more to him than a one-dimensional antagonist. Hence all the various scenarios I'm coming up with, none which negate the fact that Tony's a jerk. Yeah, I basically agree. I'm pretty confident he's not pure evil, and I wouldn't be surprised if he was mostly not evil...but he's still a jerk. |
|
|
|
Post by edzepp on Mar 22, 2015 4:12:13 GMT
This likely all stems from me having an averse reaction to abuse. I've seen many an apologist completely undermine valid concerns in too many real life situations to be at all comfortable seeing it repeated in fictional ones as well, simply because the consequences can be dangerous and harmful. Media and fiction are important as they are influential and help inform real life perception. To put Anthony in a positive light at this point would serve only to undermine the weight the story has put on his immoral behavior at this point. It would be equivalent to having the cake and eating it too. The comic gets to be serious and show the averse effects of abuse, then undercut it with a twist that attempts to undo all the unpleasant aspects of the plotline. Some things are plainly unpleasant. Some times are simply bad. Often times there are layers of complexity residing within those more simple structures, but acknowledging that sometimes people really are just that unhealthy to be around is incredibly important and rarely done in a manner that's not so in-your-face that it feels forced and unnatural. This is one of the most realistic representations of neglectful abuse I've ever seen in fiction, and the idea of it being needlessly undermined is disheartening. I agree very much with this. And I'll say it again: If your 'good intentioned plan' involves having to psychologically and emotionally hurt someone who couldn't possibly understand why you're doing it ( and let's face it, Annie doesn't know what he's doing, if anything), maybe reconsider your life decisions a little. Good intentions are not a 'get out of jail free' card. And neither is 'no pain, no gain' for that matter. I expect the comic to be honest about this. I want Tony to have complex motivations, but I also want someone to call him out for some of his bull hockey. |
|
|
|
Post by zbeeblebrox on Mar 22, 2015 4:51:56 GMT
The important part here is when she is going to re-apply makeup. This is indeed the most important question, and I'm bewildered as to why it's not receiving more discussion here |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 22, 2015 6:49:12 GMT
There were some hints during Anthony's disappearance that he might be in some kind of trouble. Most notably how he used a code phrase to have ordinary surgical supplies that he could find at any hospital delivered straight to him through an untraceable system. It is within the realm of possibility that he thinks that Annie is being targeted by some unknown party, and decides to put her safety ahead of his own, struggling against his inability to interact with his daughter normally. Maybe. I can come up with a hundred plausible scenarios given enough time, but I have absolutely nothing to verify any of them. But still, whatever Anthony's reasons are, I'm certain that he could handle himself better than he has. I can think of a bunch of scenarios in which he might have to avoid Annie, or even appear to have a bad relationship with her, but I can't think of many scenarios where he wouldn't be able to communicate his intentions to Annie in some way. That's the sticker for me. Okay, you have to keep your distance from Annie for her own protection...any chance of you, you know, TELLING her that somehow? In SOME way? There's the thing that Annie feels attached to Anthony. So, if he'd try to just tell her to keep distance to him, it would unlikely be very successful. Would you not think that she would actually do the opposite and get completely tangled up in whatever mess Anthony is in? This is like the oldest adventure storyline there is. Edit: maybe not the oldest, but not unusual either. And you can think of (at least I can) real everyday life situations where you have to make someone hate or at minimum dislike you for him or her to avoid your company (instead of looking for it) for his or her own good (if not usually his or her safety). Edit2: And I mean that the storyline where somebody, often the father or the mother of the main protagonist, is in trouble and the protagonist gets involved against his/her wishes. There the functional way to keep the protagonist out of trouble would be (and sometimes is) is that the person in trouble detaches the protagonist from his/herself. |
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Mar 22, 2015 7:39:22 GMT
Either Surma or Anthony (or another unknown parental figure) had to give Antimony that name. Who did it? Why? Was there a symbolic reason? Is this a part of fire elemental heritage that's been going on for a few generations now and Surma's mother was named after another similar element? Not exactly. Surma Stibnite was named after antimony. Twice over: surma is a cosmetic that contains antimony, and stibnite is a mineral that is one of the most common sources of antimony. |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty Hamilton on Mar 22, 2015 8:57:12 GMT
I can think of a bunch of scenarios in which he might have to avoid Annie, or even appear to have a bad relationship with her, but I can't think of many scenarios where he wouldn't be able to communicate his intentions to Annie in some way. That's the sticker for me. Okay, you have to keep your distance from Annie for her own protection...any chance of you, you know, TELLING her that somehow? In SOME way? There's the thing that Annie feels attached to Anthony. So, if he'd try to just tell her to keep distance to him, it would unlikely be very successful. Would you not think that she would actually do the opposite and get completely tangled up in whatever mess Anthony is in? This is like the oldest adventure storyline there is. Edit: maybe not the oldest, but not unusual either. And you can think of (at least I can) real everyday life situations where you have to make someone hate or at minimum dislike you for him or her to avoid your company (instead of looking for it) for his or her own good (if not usually his or her safety). Edit2: And I mean that the storyline where somebody, often the father or the mother of the main protagonist, is in trouble and the protagonist gets involved against his/her wishes. There the functional way to keep the protagonist out of trouble would be (and sometimes is) is that the person in trouble detaches the protagonist from his/herself. Nope, still doesn't strike me as a compelling enough reason. He disappeared for two years then popped up without warning: Annie is going to stick her nose in his business no matter what. And if she did start getting involved, it's not like he's helpless. He's her father. He has more power over her than anyone else. He could send her away from Gunnerkrigg Court. And there's a difference between putting up an unfriendly facade to keep acquaintances and near-strangers from interacting with you and emotionally abusing your own daughter, who you have a responsibility toward as a parent. |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 22, 2015 8:58:19 GMT
Urgh, do I hate that phrase. It's completely false, and helps perpetuate a horrible mentality. SOMETIMES pain is necessary, but most of the time that phrase is used it is not only avoidable, but SHOULD be avoided. Learning is a painful experience, because it forces you to give up something you had established and struggle for coming to something better than you were. If you need not struggle to win something, it only tells that you had already won it, i.e. you had struggled earlier to win it now. Which is the normal case: you exercise, and when the moment of truth arrives, the things are easy for you. But there was a pain before. |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 22, 2015 9:01:01 GMT
His life tends to be in secrecy from us and for large parts from most of the GKC characters as well. I wholly expect Tom to reveal Anthony's secret life to us at some point, probably through some moment Anthony and Annie share together, and it will shed light on this person. But so far, we just don't know much anything about it, definitely not enough to judge. Well usually if a character in fiction is suppose to be in the grey zone, mysterious or not, you don't present one side more than the other (in this case showing more of his missteps than good ones). Are you serious? There's not just one or two characters in history of fiction who have been presented as evil first, even for long times, before it turns out they have been heroes all the time. The first one that comes in mind was that guy in Harry Potter who saved his life, somebody may recall the names too, but I'd suppose most know what I mean. In fact, there were at least two characters who only came out as evil for long time until it in the end was revealed that they were the best and most caring allies of Harry. But the guy I mean was that teacher (maybe this is why I recall him at this point, aside from that I saw it quite recently, in the end of last year) who tormented Harry (and to a lesser degree many other students) for the whole duration of the story, and in the end he had good reasons to do so: firstly, Harry was about to grow astray, and needed somebody to humble him down; secondly, he had to make it so that he looks like a villain to Harry to keep Harry safe; thirdly, being a double agent, he was actually watched in the story. Basically, he was not a completely good person (again, it would be awful if there was such, if you want completely good and completely evil characters, I can only suggest crap literature, e.g. Ivanhoe by Walter Scott), but definitely he was a hero and a lot of what he had done that looked bad at first was completely justified. (This is on the basis of the films, I have not read the Potter books.) I have several other good examples right on my tongue, but cannot quite name you a one... maybe it's just that I have not read much fiction for about a decade, and particularly I've read the type of "adventure" literature where this kind of scenario is more at home in my youth and cannot just remember the names of books and characters. I used to read a lot of fiction, so much of it that most of it doesn't remain in any kind of literature canon of mine, holding no significant place in my memory. But this story where someone is represented as one of the antagonists first, and then turns out to be the protagonists greatest ally, essentially saving him/her, rings so incredibly familiar to me that I am sure I've seen that in dozens of books and films so far. So much so that as a general turn of events I do not find it surprising at all. I'm sure somebody else can give you another example aside from the Potter one. By the way, interesting thing to notice is that scientific study ( a developed version of Milgram experiment) recently showed that the people regarded as nice and sociable are likelier commit the most horrendous atrocities (basically being a norm that asks to torture or even kill others for minimal reasons, a type of behaviour associated historically with genocide, ethnical cleansing, maltreatment of minorities, and so on) when such things are commanded or even just accepted, whereas those considered to be dicks tend to refuse doing anything of that sort. Just want to say, do not judge a person just because he/she seems to be a dick. (S)he may be the good guy, exactly because (s)he is a dick. Now fine, we might, might be jumping the gun, but are you saying that it's implausible that he won't be an antagonist in the end? I have never said that. I have said that it is not only completely plausible but also would fit perfectly to the story if he was revealed to be a great protagonist in the end. |
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 22, 2015 9:15:35 GMT
well... I could be wrong, but isn't adenine a nitrogenous base itself, not a "component" of a nitrogenous base? It's a base because of the amino group attached to the cyclic structure... It is a component of a larger DNA molecule, or of adenosine triphosphate He didn't say it was a component of a base, he said "...A component of the nitrogenous base in-" and then was interrupted. If he had been able to say DNA he would be fully correct as Adenine is indeed one of its components. Your confusion is a PERFECT example of why teachers do not like to be interrupted. Edit: On that note I like Mr. Carver, he has severe OCD and dislikes chaos, when presented with it he immediately falls into a familiar routine with set structures and rules. A place for everything and everything in its place, as it were. Look at it like this: Tony sets up as a new teacher, I'm sure his class Syllabus has a list of rules and what to have to not delay the class or open yourself to injury, etc. Her wearing the makeup was clear proof she did not read it and is not taking this seriously. Answer: He has her correct the issue, making it an example the rest will NOT forget, so it won't happen again. She returns, having missed the book handout, and INTERRUPTS him (and the class) a 2nd time. You don't interrupt. You raise your hand and ask when spoken to. Answer: Make her wait till there is time to get her the book without interruption, even if til end of class, in a nice orderly manner. Tony does not understand or like Chaos or things he cannot quantify, that has been shown aplenty. His first job is to establish an ordered way of things. I am betting the farm that he is trying to quantify and control etheric power through scientific means in order to counteract what happened to Surma and bring her back or at least save his daughter from that fate. Hate him if you will but he is what he is and I find him one of the best characters here. Well him and Kat. I wouldn't be surprised if he takes on Ys or Coyote and shuts them down (to their surprise) when he is good and ready to. He seems like the "Prep-time' type. I had to search back for this, because this is a great point that we are missing here a lot. Firstly, as a teacher I understand completely the problem with interruption. No matter how good our material, we work with our memory. Memory does not work well with interruptions, you forget what you were talking about, and may omit important things or say something wrongly. Today that is less and less popular to think that students should have discipline and listen and wait for permission to speak, but that's because the universities are becoming fuming playgrounds which lowers the level of education the students receive. You don't have to hate chaos to hate the students to destroy your well made teaching plan just because of their negligence - those plans only work if executed as supposed, and if they do not work, then the students will not learn what they were supposed to. Secondly, I think this is the only post where somebody has taken note on the syllabus. It is extremely possible that the "no make-up rule" was not arbitrary and should not have been surprising but had been written in the syllabus. In which case, only odd word there would have been "ridiculous" and yet, I think that suddenly sounds completely a thing that one would hear from a teacher after deliberately (or by negligence) breaking against the syllabus on the first class. After that, indeed, it is possible he wants to hold that professional distance to Annie during classes, which is completely reasonable (what is less reasonable is that he is teaching his own daughter, of course). And then we're back at Annie interrupting him, as if she did not know that she is not supposed to speak unless told so. If indeed the syllabus said "no make-up" and there's a general rule (or just in the syllabus) that you should not interrupt teaching, but raise your hand and wait for the teacher to give you a permission to speak (which is normal rule in all schools that still teach something), then she has been constantly breaking the rules, misbehaving in the class, and the strict teacher is just not favorising him. This is one completely plausible explanation, although not necessarily the true one. |
|
|
|
Post by psybershadow on Mar 22, 2015 9:25:04 GMT
I just realized something. This wouldn't be the first time we've seen a very flawed person do something that was either good or questionably good, or whose work laid the foundation for potential prosperity.
Remember Diego? Not including his flawed way of thinking and attempt to get even just because he was rejected and was basically part of the reason Jeanne was killed.
|
|
|
|
Post by avurai on Mar 22, 2015 9:53:56 GMT
I just realized something. This wouldn't be the first time we've seen a very flawed person do something that was either good or questionably good, or whose work laid the foundation for potential prosperity. Remember Diego? Not including his flawed way of thinking and attempt to get even just because he was rejected and was basically part of the reason Jeanne was killed. The juxtaposition of this post is brilliant, good job. |
|
|
|
Post by psybershadow on Mar 22, 2015 10:28:21 GMT
Thanks I think. XD Sorry, I couldn't tell if it was sarcasm or not. Seems sincere though so thanks. X)
|
|
|
|
Post by youwiththeface on Mar 22, 2015 12:08:12 GMT
Would like to ask for those of you saying it's possible Carver couldn't give or leave a message for Annie because he might've been being watched...that didn't stop him from giving Antimony and Donny a coded message to ask for medical supplies. What stopped him from including in that message something to reassure Annie? Or sending a message to her earlier that could've explained where he was, why he couldn't be with her and why they wouldn't be able to see each other again for a long time? Did I miss something about that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2015 15:39:36 GMT
I feel like the posts justifying Anthony's behavior as a teacher are kind of missing the point. It's true that, while he's been presented in a way that makes him look like a jerk, his actions in class are consistent with just being a good and strict teacher. But his role as a teacher is not his most important responsibility; Antimony is not only his student, but his daughter that he abandoned without explanation after her mother died. This is the first time they've met in person since then, and Tony is behaving as if they are complete strangers. We can see the emotional harm this is doing to Annie. And Tony could have avoided this situation, either by making some kind of contact with Annie before class, or by not choosing to make an example of her. Just because something is an effective teaching style doesn't mean it isn't cruel, and being a good parent is a hell of a lot more important than being a good teacher.
|
|
|
|
Post by SilverbackRon on Mar 22, 2015 16:08:12 GMT
I feel like the posts justifying Anthony's behavior as a teacher are kind of missing the point. It's true that, while he's been presented in a way that makes him look like a jerk, his actions in class are consistent with just being a good and strict teacher. But his role as a teacher is not his most important responsibility; Antimony is not only his student, but his daughter that he abandoned without explanation after her mother died. This is the first time they've met in person since then, and Tony is behaving as if they are complete strangers. We can see the emotional harm this is doing to Annie. And Tony could have avoided this situation, either by making some kind of contact with Annie before class, or by not choosing to make an example of her. Just because something is an effective teaching style doesn't mean it isn't cruel, and being a good parent is a hell of a lot more important than being a good teacher. Couldn't have said it better!  That whole line of thinking is just speculation, nothing more. There is no evidence that he was/is being watched or that he felt Annie has been in danger if "someone" sees them talking. It boils down to grasping at straws to come up with any kind of justifiable reason why he hasn't called to say hello or been nice to her at all. Because there hasn't been any reason given so far. Now, there COULD be a reason (other than he is a jerk) and that might be it. We won't know until Tom tells us. Edit: That sounded harsher than I meant it to. There is some evidence, the fact that Anthony had to contact Donald through a coded message. Why bother with a code if he wasn't afraid of "someone" overhearing it? And the theory has built from there. |
|
|
|
Post by avurai on Mar 22, 2015 17:14:52 GMT
I feel like the posts justifying Anthony's behavior as a teacher are kind of missing the point. It's true that, while he's been presented in a way that makes him look like a jerk, his actions in class are consistent with just being a good and strict teacher. Directly insulting a student based on an aspect of their appearance is about as unprofessional as it gets. That "ridiculous" was really Anthony's biggest wart. That was teaming with cold animosity. A strict teacher would certainly use phrases like "Your coursework will be more challenging than you're used to, but I can assure you you'll find it to be ultimately more rewarding" and even a cold "I am aware." But calling a student's makeup ridiculous crosses the line. The reason seeing these pages made me angry wasn't that Anthony was cold and distant, that was to be expected, it was the fact that his behavior was immediately, bitterly, unprofessional. His very first introduction to the class consisted of singling out a student and insulting them. It also happened to be his daughter. If he had said the same to Kat if Kat were still wearing her headband out of insecurity, it would be just as unprofessional, just as uncalled for, and just as inappropriate to use that word. It's a subtle microaggression that he can get away with as an authority figure without repercussion. He can insult a student to their face and the student is powerless to defend themselves out of fear of punishment. This is incredibly common teaching behavior unfortunately, but it is not the sign of a competent strict teacher, it's the behavior of a bully putting on as a competent strict teacher. |
|
