|
|
Post by aline on Apr 18, 2015 7:41:27 GMT
A part of me still really hopes that this is not anything supernatural or mind-control related though, because I'm afraid that would cheapen what's so tragic here. I don't think Annie is an abused child, but she was clearly a neglected child. Abuse and neglect are two separate things. My shot in the dark theory is that Annie's independence and many of the qualities I've come to admire from her actually comes from the neglect. They made her appear mature and collected as a child, but also crippled her from learning in a way other children can, because she cares more about appearing collected than learning. I dunno. Neglect doesn't change one's personnality overnight. The only thing I can consider (aside from mind control) that would make Annie act like this, is that she cannot imagine that anything bad could happen to Rey under Anthony's control. The one constant aspect we have seen is that critic of her father is apparently non-existent in her mind. She always assumes he has good reasons, positive motivations for whatever he's doing. While Kat, like us, find this man's actions very questionable at least, Annie never questions it. Remember how your dad was your hero when you were little? It's quite possible she trusts him too absolutely to understand why Rey doesn't want to be given to Anthony. She just assumes everything will be fine because she sees him as the good guy. Even that level of trust, though, is quite strange in a 14 years old, especially one who has been left alone so long. Neglect doesn't usually enforce trust, on contrary. It's so very unnatural. I'm still thinking there must be more than just psychology going on. |
|
|
|
Post by guitarminotaur on Apr 18, 2015 8:01:34 GMT
Annie's experience of her father would have been watching him try to save her mother from her illness. If that's not fertile ground for building a pedestal for a parent then I don't know what is.
|
|
|
|
Post by youwiththeface on Apr 18, 2015 8:47:28 GMT
Granting that Anthony has done nothing that I have seen that rises to the level of legal neglect, I agree with all of this. Sending her to a boarding school without telling her where he was going or giving her or anyone else a way to contact him could be considered abandonment. And abandonment is generally considered to be pretty neglectful. A part of me still really hopes that this is not anything supernatural or mind-control related though, because I'm afraid that would cheapen what's so tragic here. I'm a bit worried about this myself. What's been so striking about this chapter so far is how seriously the story is taking how Annie's father is treating her, which, while painful to watch, is considerably refreshing. Magic would take away the realness of that. However, if mind control was a factor, depending on how carefully something like that is used in the story, it could actually work well. If Tom used it as a metaphor for the way a parent's mistreatment or emotional manipulation of a child affects them inside, then it could still turn out very powerful. If the story continues to treat it as seriously even after injecting magic into it, that is. If that is indeed the angle he's approaching this from, I'm only hoping he's careful. Really, I'm not 100% convinced that this is what's going on here; it's just that the way Annie's acting on this page seems...off. I get that's she's not questioning her father and he knocked her severely off balance, but the sheer emotionlessness I'm seeing from her here, especially considering what she's doing, is weirding me out. A couple more pages and it might seem less off or it could explain why she's acting this way, but for now it's bothering me. And her speech seems too formal. It's reminding me of Tony's 'I have matters to attend to' and Jimmy-Jims' 'Who talks like that!?' Like I said, that could change in a couple of pages, but for now it's wigging me out. |
|
|
|
Post by AnUpliftedCuttlefish on Apr 18, 2015 10:23:33 GMT
I suppose it bears wondering why Anthony was taken into the Court in the first place? Surma and Anja were both dispositioned favorably towards magic, Brinnie has that whole Norse god relations thing going, Donny and James both ended up being important figures in the Court (a teacher and Protector respectively), but apart from his supernatural lack of people skills, the Court must have seen, or foreseen, something special in Anthony, right? Unless HIS parent(s) had attended before him and requested he receive his education there. I remember a word of Tom where he said the court picks the students it wants, and invites those whose parents didn't attend themselves. So that would seem to confirm that the Court must have seen something special in, or, about Anthony (that, or one/both of his parents attended) to want him there. That he was in Queslett would indicate he's gifted in either a mundane or supernatural fashion (maybe both), since Annie noted most everyone in the house is talented in someway (but in a subtle way, otherwise they'd be in Chester). That it could be based on something foreseen is quite an interesting idea. |
|
|
|
Post by guitarminotaur on Apr 18, 2015 11:03:26 GMT
I guess part of me is hoping its mind control, because mind control can be reversed.
Psychological damage is a little more permanent...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jelly Jellybean on Apr 18, 2015 12:16:37 GMT
All the forum discussion about what is going to happen with Annie and Kat's relationship, Reynard, and mind control is missing some plot critical observations...
It is now quite clear that Kat's current hairstyle (Tom called it The Claw) has a part on both sides. Some pages ago I made a little fun of the way the part jumped from side to side, but now it is obvious that there are parts on both sides. I guess she is brushing the hair on top of her head forward creating both the parts and the claw.
Tom uses the hair as a reflection of the character's personality. Annie's long hair getting chopped down is the most obvious example in this chapter. Kat often changes her hairstyle, but she is consistent in that all her styles are kind of wild and expressive. In this chapter Kat's hair remains consistently wild despite the disruption Anthony's return is causing. And as noted on earlier page threads, Kat's expressive personality gives her more resiliency compared to Annie's brittle personality that cracked under her father's pressure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Refugee on Apr 18, 2015 15:18:28 GMT
Tom uses the hair as a reflection of the character's personality. Annie's long hair getting chopped down is the most obvious example in this chapter. In one of his videos, Tom mentions the first chapter in which Annie's hair begins to curl up at the ends, in a flame-like fashion. Your comment makes me wonder if Annie has abandoned her etheric powers. (I assume that Tom showed us all the conditions that Mr. Carver imposed. It would be a kind of storytelling cheat if he failed to show us everything Annie's Father did, like hiding a crucial piece of evidence from the reader in a mystery.) |
|
|
|
Post by Refugee on Apr 18, 2015 16:03:49 GMT
Granting that Anthony has done nothing that I have seen that rises to the level of legal neglect, I agree with all of this. Sending her to a boarding school without telling her where he was going or giving her or anyone else a way to contact him could be considered abandonment. And abandonment is generally considered to be pretty neglectful. "Abandonment". Good word, that. In the U.S., child abandonment is defined as: Specific examples of child abandonment vary, but common actions that may lead to child abandonment charges may include: - Leaving a child with another person without provision for the child's support and without meaningful communication with the child for a period of three months;
- Making only minimal efforts to support and communicate with a child
- Failing for a period of at least six months to maintain regular visitation with a child;
Barring that Anthony's activities precluded communication, a good case could be for at least the last item. (The first two involve failing to "support" the child, for which I think he is covered by virtue of leaving her with the Court, which has provided her with substantial resources. Findlaw also notes that most states set an upper limit on the age of the child, typically around thirteen.) (Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer. The exact definition of "abandonment" depends on jurisdiction; in the U.S., state law controls. Read the entire article; it looks to me as if these laws are intended to deal with parents who have left children to fend for themselves--clearly not the case for Annie.) === A couple of inconsistent arguments I've noticed in the discussion of this chapter: If Annie is in essence (if not the law) a competent adult, then she cannot be regarded as a helpless child for the purposes of maligning her Father. If Anthony has abandoned Annie, then he cannot be said to be a control freak. === I don't much care about what legal charges can be brought against Anthony (anymore than I care about a psychological diagnosis for either him or Annie). My interest is in how Annie responds to the challenges she faces. Still, I believe I've mentioned that I don't regard Anthony as a very good Father. If he has indeed abandoned Annie, and now returns to exert heavy handed control to achieve his own purposes with total disregard for her needs and interests without damn compelling, world-saving need, he becomes actively malignant. The story is not yet told; I'll wait at least to the end of the chapter. |
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Apr 18, 2015 17:34:49 GMT
Granting that Anthony has done nothing that I have seen that rises to the level of legal neglect I guess you didn't notice that he abandoned her for two years, making no provisions for emotional support and providing no means by which she could contact him. And even when Annie was in the hospital, either *the court* had no way of contacting him, or he didn't bother to respond - or the court could have contacted him and didn't try, which is the least plausible possibility by far. Yes, we have it on good authority that in the UK (where the story occurs) and several US states that neglect DOES reach the level of legal abuse. Possibly even criminal abuse (where the government isn't satisfied with taking the child away, it also puts the parent in prison). Neglect doesn't change one's personality overnight. I don't think this is a change in personality at all. I think this is her *normal* response *to Anthony*. And it's strange and sick to see a child of ANY age that blindly obedient in non-emergency situations. I've never seen anything close to it outside of extremely-abusive relationships and ethical BDSM relationships (the latter, by definition, do not exist between parent and minor child). A couple of inconsistent arguments I've noticed in the discussion of this chapter: If Annie is in essence (if not the law) a competent adult, then she cannot be regarded as a helpless child for the purposes of maligning her Father. Are you maintaining that Annie, the day she arrived at the court, was in essence a competent adult? Is the Annie we're seeing in this chapter a competent adult? Annie was where he told her to be doing what he told her to do. He was confident that he could exercise complete control any time he wanted to - as this chapter demonstrates. He was simply putting his attention elsewhere for a time. There is no conflict with him being a control freak. |
|
|
|
Post by juxander on Apr 18, 2015 17:51:44 GMT
Specific examples of child abandonment vary, but common actions that may lead to child abandonment charges may include: - Leaving a child with another person without provision for the child's support and without meaningful communication with the child for a period of three months;
- Making only minimal efforts to support and communicate with a child
- Failing for a period of at least six months to maintain regular visitation with a child;
Barring that Anthony's activities precluded communication, a good case could be for at least the last item. I would hope it would be a good case. Item three says "regular visitation". Anthony and Annie had no visitation for four years. Assuming the premise of the first statement your conclusion is true. While Annie has had to "self-parent", I don't believe anyone would consider a 14-year-old to be an emotionally competent adult. There is some distance between "mature" and "helpless", but the unhealthy nature of their parent-child relationship demonstrably warps her psychologically. As to your second point, I disagree; if Anthony himself never viewed it as abandonment, then he is still internally consistent. When he performed ethereal whatevers on Annie he did not ask or even tell her or anyone else; he just did it. No warning - she just suddenly collapsed in the hallway. This, to me, is the act of someone who views his daughter as essentially property. When she is the focus of his attention, he is absolutely controlling. When he has matters to attend to, she is irrelevant and he expects her to self-govern. I don't view Anthony as a not-very-good father, I view him as a manifestly unqualified father. If he had a compelling, world-saving interest then I am grateful for his world-savery, but that doesn't make him not a failure as a dad. Just as someone can be a great CEO but a bad husband, Anthony could absolutely be working on noble things and also completely unfit to have a daughter. |
|
|
|
Post by bluevitriol on Apr 18, 2015 18:50:55 GMT
Here's the catch: does Kat know that this would happen? Because if Kat knew that theft would free Rey, she'd definitely do it. Annie knows this, because Jimmy Jims elucidated it way back in Chapter 9. Kat and Annie are/were close, so it all comes down to how faithfully Annie's reported this conversation to Kat. ... Perhaps THIS is the Tree of this chapter then? would be interesting if Kat ran away with the doll to the tree and Renard used the tree/limb to escape to the forest. Oooooh, Anthony would be so mad at one miss Katerina Donlan. |
|
|
|
Post by philman on Apr 18, 2015 18:53:02 GMT
I haven't read the whole thread yet, but what if Rey gets freed somehow through all this, and ends up taking another body again. What if he takes Anthony's body? Annie might have to choose between saving Rey's life or saving her father. Now, Kat, please steal Rey ! Rey will either be yours or be free, and then, that should be interesting. Or this happens and Rey ends up in the body of a Fox Mulder action figure... |
|
|
|
Post by Refugee on Apr 18, 2015 19:25:18 GMT
Granting that Anthony has done nothing that I have seen that rises to the level of legal neglect I guess you didn't notice that he abandoned her for two years, making no provisions for emotional support and providing no means by which she could contact him. And even when Annie was in the hospital, either *the court* had no way of contacting him, or he didn't bother to respond - or the court could have contacted him and didn't try, which is the least plausible possibility by far. See the discussion of "abandonment". A couple of inconsistent arguments I've noticed in the discussion of this chapter: If Annie is in essence (if not the law) a competent adult, then she cannot be regarded as a helpless child for the purposes of maligning her Father. Are you maintaining that Annie, the day she arrived at the court, was in essence a competent adult? Is the Annie we're seeing in this chapter a competent adult? I am not the one who has argued that she is, but I have seen that argument in this discussion. What I will argue is that Annie is not a helpless child, either, which is the class abandonment laws seek to protect. She has shown considerable self determination, and that she has considerable resources. She is not defenseless, and has very much made her own way. She is far more independent than most children her age are, and even her adult friends and allies at the Court think she is going outside reasonable bounds. That said, I to am uncomfortable, to say the least, with Anthony's attempt to wrest control of Reynard away from Annie, and possibly even with his forcing her to remove Surma's makeup. Most of the rest of what he's done is reasonable for her offense. Annie was where he told her to be doing what he told her to do. He was confident that he could exercise complete control any time he wanted to - as this chapter demonstrates. He was simply putting his attention elsewhere for a time. There is no conflict with him being a control freak. Then he has not abandoned her. But again, I will argue that in fact, he has not abandoned her, merely left her to her own devices. I also think there's something else going on here beyond Anthony's faults as a father. We'll see. |
|
|
|
Post by Refugee on Apr 18, 2015 19:34:39 GMT
Barring that Anthony's activities precluded communication, a good case could be for at least the last item. I would hope it would be a good case. Item three says "regular visitation". Anthony and Annie had no visitation for four years. Yeah, that's why I pointed to it. Also, keep in mind that the laws are typically written to protect children who are so young that they cannot "self-parent". Assuming the premise of the first statement your conclusion is true. While Annie has had to "self-parent", I don't believe anyone would consider a 14-year-old to be an emotionally competent adult. There is some distance between "mature" and "helpless", but the unhealthy nature of their parent-child relationship demonstrably warps her psychologically. The law is intended to protect the helpless, not the merely immature. I've met people well into their fifties and beyond who were "immature". (I weep for my generation.) When he performed ethereal whatevers on Annie he did not ask or even tell her or anyone else; he just did it. We do not yet know he did this, or why. I'm not saying your argument is unreasonable, I'm just saying we do not know. |
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Apr 18, 2015 22:00:16 GMT
The problem is that there is too much we don't know, but too many worrisome indications to ignore. To start with, who the hell is Antimony's guardian in her father's absence? Or is he absent only from the comic; has he been hiding somewhere in the Court all this time? The way she wandered around unsupervised in the earlier chapters was dangerous but she escaped from her caregivers by way of lockpicks and sneakery. Were they actually monitoring her the whole time by way of her food or TicTocs or robots or what-have-you, or was she on her own? Did Anthony leave SOMEONE ELSE his contact information when he split so only Antimony and Anthony's old friends had no way to contact him for whatever reason (likely so because of the when he came back and what he's doing but why, just so he wouldn't have to interact with them?) and was he therefore informed all along of Antimony's activities/injuries? And then there's the other stuff that's been beaten to death in both directions.
Maybe we can all agree that there is enough evidence of a problem in the comic that things should ideally be adjudicated from our point of view, but the Court is probably one of the worst places for that to happen. For starters the legal environment at Court seems a bit dodgy. Mr. Siddell has said that it is a formal gathering of people but hasn't given any other details. We do know that the Court is not in the act of union (would link but the search engine is currently down again, thanks Proboards!) so it might be operating on 17th century common law. As long as Anthony feeds and clothes Antimony and he doesn't beat his daughter with a switch thicker than his thumb it's all good, maybe. Perhaps the Court is so loosely organized there is no structure other than its own cliques and offices that don't here apply. So who would make the decision? Hopefully there would be a judge. The chain of command around here sometimes isn't very clear (Ch.28 "I guess we could call...") so since the population isn't very big here there probably is not anything like a dedicated child services or anyone who specifically handles such things. Would he or she know emotional abuse if he/she saw it? And then there is the fact that Anthony seems to have an in with the Court and Antimony has sorta flipped them off; they have a vested interest in reining her in so there might be bias as well. Also a lot of the evidence in the comic would not be admissible (how do you depose a headpidgeon?) or the people wouldn't be terribly credible in the eyes of the Court (like little Kat).
So, Anthony: Even if guilty, not gonna get convicted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jelly Jellybean on Apr 18, 2015 23:08:33 GMT
Now, Kat, please steal Rey ! Rey will either be yours or be free, and then, that should be interesting. Or this happens and Rey ends up in the body of a Fox Mulder action figure... Or Hellboy. Or Batman. I vote for Batman! He has studied all three. I think he wants to be Batman. |
|
|
|
Post by arf on Apr 19, 2015 12:35:16 GMT
Professor Oswald! (Before the Lord strikes him down) |
|
|
|
Post by Jelly Jellybean on Apr 19, 2015 13:57:04 GMT
Professor Oswald! (Before the Lord strikes him down) I never could figure out which one was Professor Oswald. Mulder, Hellboy, Batman, or Reynard himself? |
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Apr 19, 2015 16:59:59 GMT
Quoth the Siddell: Seriously, there's a WoT for everything. |
|
|
|
Post by stef1987 on Apr 19, 2015 19:01:31 GMT
I dunno. Neglect doesn't change one's personnality overnight. Her personality didn't change, it's a part of her personality we just hadn't seen (much of) before, because her father simply wasn't there before. Even that level of trust, though, is quite strange in a 14 years old uhm, no, it isn't, most kids trust there parents with their lives. In fact I'd say children trust people a lot easier than adults Neglect doesn't usually enforce trust, on contrary. It's so very unnatural. I'm still thinking there must be more than just psychology going on. It can work both ways I think, depends on what the child believes, well to some amount I guess. Personally I think how Annie behaves isn't all that strange given the situation. I think it's far more strange how Anthony behaves, and the fact that he is back without the court, and Kat's parents, caring, or at least we haven't seen them (any court people and Kat parents) yet, which I find rather strange. remember how everyone (Kat's parents and Eglamore) was freaking out when Anthony called, but apparently not now Anthony's back? I find that rather strange. |
|
|
|
Post by keef on Apr 19, 2015 20:42:43 GMT
The problem is that there is too much we don't know, but too many worrisome indications to ignore. To start with, who the hell is Antimony's guardian in her father's absence? Or is he absent only from the comic; has he been hiding somewhere in the Court all this time? The way she wandered around unsupervised in the earlier chapters was dangerous but she escaped from her caregivers by way of lockpicks and sneakery. I always thought that was pretty cool. Only the last weeks I have learned I was to consider this irresponsible behaviour. YesNot Court controlledMy speculation is he may have been in contact with the leadership of the Court, but they didn't bother to tell their underlings. Tom answered a lot of questions with something like: "That's really not what this comic is about." That's what I've been thinking a lot, reading (and blocking) endless discussions in legalese and psychobabble. Although of course I do not know what Tom wants us to think this comic is about, I don't think it's autism, neglect, or medical consent. I do not mean these things shouldn't be addressed, I love it when the forum goes mad or off-topic once in a while, but complete threads? |
|
|
|
Post by youwiththeface on Apr 19, 2015 22:21:29 GMT
Tom answered a lot of questions with something like: "That's really not what this comic is about." That's what I've been thinking a lot, reading (and blocking) endless discussions in legalese and psychobabble. Although of course I do not know what Tom wants us to think this comic is about, I don't think it's autism, neglect, or medical consent. I do not mean these things shouldn't be addressed, I love it when the forum goes mad or off-topic once in a while, but complete threads? My interpretation of what Tom means by that is that he doesn't want the many legal problems the court (and Tony) would have if this comic took place in our reality to get in the way of the story. If there was somebody competent watching the watchers there's probably a lot of the comic that wouldn't have happened. The school just being so close to such a dangerous forest would, at the very least, raise some eyebrows. (Let's not even talk about the fact that we have just about no idea what the world outside the court is like.) I don't think that means we can't use legal definitions to try to work out an idea of the characters and their actions though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2015 23:49:54 GMT
And then there's the other stuff that's been beaten to death in both directions. Maybe we can all agree that there is enough evidence of a problem in the comic that things should ideally be adjudicated from our point of view, but the Court is probably one of the worst places for that to happen. For starters the legal environment at Court seems a bit dodgy. Mr. Siddell has said that it is a formal gathering of people but hasn't given any other details. We do know that the Court is not in the act of union (would link but the search engine is currently down again, thanks Proboards!) so it might be operating on 17th century common law. As long as Anthony feeds and clothes Antimony and he doesn't beat his daughter with a switch thicker than his thumb it's all good, maybe. Perhaps the Court is so loosely organized there is no structure other than its own cliques and offices that don't here apply. So who would make the decision? Hopefully there would be a judge. The chain of command around here sometimes isn't very clear (Ch.28 "I guess we could call...") so since the population isn't very big here there probably is not anything like a dedicated child services or anyone who specifically handles such things. Would he or she know emotional abuse if he/she saw it? And then there is the fact that Anthony seems to have an in with the Court and Antimony has sorta flipped them off; they have a vested interest in reining her in so there might be bias as well. Also a lot of the evidence in the comic would not be admissible (how do you depose a headpidgeon?) or the people wouldn't be terribly credible in the eyes of the Court (like little Kat). So, Anthony: Even if guilty, not gonna get convicted. Tom answered a lot of questions with something like: "That's really not what this comic is about." That's what I've been thinking a lot, reading (and blocking) endless discussions in legalese and psychobabble. Although of course I do not know what Tom wants us to think this comic is about, I don't think it's autism, neglect, or medical consent. I do not mean these things shouldn't be addressed, I love it when the forum goes mad or off-topic once in a while, but complete threads? I got the impression from this page that the Court doesn't really have anything equivalent to a normal legal system; I'd imagine they consider themselves above that. (A libertarian paradise! ...well, not really.) I highly doubt they have common law, and I really don't think they would have a judiciary system either. The Court has its own goals, and it is willing to do what it has to do to accomplish them. However, I think this is fairly relevant to what the comic is about. Some of the major events in the comic, like Jeanne's death and Zimmy's wandering around the court, can be traced to this idea that the Court is not accountable any external authorities, and the consequences of that attitude. If the Court is "man's attempt to become God", what human values and institutions are they willing to give up to achieve this goal? Even though this might not be the main focus of the comic most of the time, it seems to be a persistent theme on the periphery. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 20, 2015 0:11:28 GMT
I think it's far more strange how Anthony behaves, and the fact that he is back without the court, and Kat's parents, caring, or at least we haven't seen them (any court people and Kat parents) yet, which I find rather strange. remember how everyone (Kat's parents and Eglamore) was freaking out when Anthony called, but apparently not now Anthony's back? I find that rather strange. I suspect that Tom hasn't shown any of this yet - indeed, had Anthony return without any foreshadowing or hints of his return - so that we would feel the same flabbergasted astonishment that the students felt when he showed up. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 20, 2015 0:14:05 GMT
However, I think this is fairly relevant to what the comic is about. Some of the major events in the comic, like Jeanne's death and Zimmy's wandering around the court, can be traced to this idea that the Court is not accountable any external authorities, and the consequences of that attitude. If the Court is "man's attempt to become God", what human values and institutions are they willing to give up to achieve this goal? Even though this might not be the main focus of the comic most of the time, it seems to be a persistent theme on the periphery. Yes, as I've mentioned in the past, it does remind me a bit of the motto of C. S. Lewis's "scientist" villains "Ours is a high and lonely destiny" - though as I've also mentioned, the Court, for all its flaws, hasn't fully descended to their level yet (including that it really does seem to be interested in scientific research, rather than viewing it as just a means for seizing power). And unfortunately, the local "talking-animal-god" is no Aslan. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 20, 2015 0:21:08 GMT
The school just being so close to such a dangerous forest would, at the very least, raise some eyebrows. (Let's not even talk about the fact that we have just about no idea what the world outside the court is like.) I've thought about the Court being next door to the dangers of Gilltie Wood myself - and how some of its worst deeds were attempts to counter those dangers. The perils make me doubt that the Founders just fled to the forest as a place of refuge (rumors which Jones mentioned in her medium classes); no matter what amount of trouble was going on in the world outside, I doubt it could have been as serious as some of Gilltie's inhabitants. It'd be like taking refuge from a wolf in a tiger's den. (Though the evidence indicates that Coyote and Ysengrin didn't come to Gilltie Wood until after the Founders did.) More likely they were running *towards* something (like the Bismuth Seed) than away from it. I assume that the world outside's reasonably like our own, in light of all the pop culture references - maybe a few differences here and there (I recall Tom saying that the queen of Great Britain in the Gunnerkrigg universe isn't Elizabeth II, but someone else), but nothing too dramatic. Unless the references to Batman, "The X-Files", and the rest are intended as "translations" to keep things simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Refugee on Apr 20, 2015 1:23:25 GMT
Tom answered a lot of questions with something like: "That's really not what this comic is about." That's what I've been thinking a lot, reading (and blocking) endless discussions in legalese and psychobabble. Although of course I do not know what Tom wants us to think this comic is about, I don't think it's autism, neglect, or medical consent. I do not mean these things shouldn't be addressed, I love it when the forum goes mad or off-topic once in a while, but complete threads? My sense is that the story is about how Annie, Kat, and a few other characters overcome the obstacles they face. And one of those obstacles is her relationship with her Father. Note I said "her relationship" rather than "her father". |
|
|
|
Post by youwiththeface on Apr 20, 2015 1:40:06 GMT
Yes, as I've mentioned in the past, it does remind me a bit of the motto of C. S. Lewis's "scientist" villains "Ours is a high and lonely destiny" - though as I've also mentioned, the Court, for all its flaws, hasn't fully descended to their level yet (including that it really does seem to be interested in scientific research, rather than viewing it as just a means for seizing power). As far as we know. I'd be willing to bet that, as was the case with the existence of Jeanne and her ultimate fate, there's a lot more going on under the service than we are privy to just yet. Also, I'm not incredibly familiar with how boarding school's work, but is it really necessary that Annie move out, if there isn't another year ten student who needs the space? Couldn't she just take year nine classes while staying in the year ten dorms? |
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Apr 20, 2015 2:00:07 GMT
The problem is that there is too much we don't know, but too many worrisome indications to ignore. To start with, who the hell is Antimony's guardian in her father's absence? Or is he absent only from the comic; has he been hiding somewhere in the Court all this time? The way she wandered around unsupervised in the earlier chapters was dangerous but she escaped from her caregivers by way of lockpicks and sneakery. I always thought that was pretty cool. Only the last weeks I have learned I was to consider this irresponsible behaviour. Eh. There was the alarm to keep kids from falling over the edge of the Annan but there were probably other hazards in the Court where kids could fall, or get hurt in other ways. True, it is a comic and beyond that the population is low so there are few strangers but still... But if they think all the children are safely locked up in the dorms would anyone be tasked to monitor their signals, or how does that system work? I dunno. True, the TicTocs are not Court controlled. But they are made with Court technology. So, possible someone in the Court is behind them? Tom answered a lot of questions with something like: "That's really not what this comic is about." That's what I've been thinking a lot, reading (and blocking) endless discussions in legalese and psychobabble. Although of course I do not know what Tom wants us to think this comic is about, I don't think it's autism, neglect, or medical consent. I do not mean these things shouldn't be addressed, I love it when the forum goes mad or off-topic once in a while, but complete threads? People enjoy the comic in various ways. Theorizing about the legal environment is no less legitimate then theorizing about how the ether works or why Antimony's fire lineage works the way it does. Psychoanalyzing or diagnosing the characters is also okay for the same reasons (but nobody psychoanalyze the author on his own forum because that's in poor taste).  I got the impression from this page that the Court doesn't really have anything equivalent to a normal legal system; I'd imagine they consider themselves above that. (A libertarian paradise! ...well, not really.) I highly doubt they have common law, and I really don't think they would have a judiciary system either. The Court has its own goals, and it is willing to do what it has to do to accomplish them. However, I think this is fairly relevant to what the comic is about. Some of the major events in the comic, like Jeanne's death and Zimmy's wandering around the court, can be traced to this idea that the Court is not accountable any external authorities, and the consequences of that attitude. If the Court is "man's attempt to become God", what human values and institutions are they willing to give up to achieve this goal? Even though this might not be the main focus of the comic most of the time, it seems to be a persistent theme on the periphery. Well, the Court probably has some sort of formal founding documents. They would be grounded in common law of the period. They also would still have disputes between people from time to time so even if they have no formal structure for handling them they would have an unofficial go-to person who could mediate. If there's a noble in charge of the Court he or she might have to make any official decisions. But my speculation is that you are correct; the Court would simply go with whatever law is closest to whatever they (majority opinion? strongest clique? fief lord?) decide they want to do, be it common law or current UK or whatever if they need to cite chapter and verse. I doubt they're big on precedent and even if they are the unique natures of the people there probably give them all sorts of outs. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 20, 2015 12:43:45 GMT
Also, I'm not incredibly familiar with how boarding school's work, but is it really necessary that Annie move out, if there isn't another year ten student who needs the space? Couldn't she just take year nine classes while staying in the year ten dorms? Anthony probably thinks that the presence of Annie's Year Ten classmates in the dorms might distract her and keep her from focusing on her schoolwork. |
|
