|
|
Post by foxurus on Apr 29, 2021 3:28:30 GMT
That's a thing I like about GC. There don't seem to be any completely evil characters. Everybody's got reasons for doing what they do. A villain who does evil things just because they like being evil is unrealistic. They're less effective a character than one who does something that hurts another because they're hurting, they don't realize what they're doing is harmful, they think they're doing the right thing, they're doing a good thing for a third character, etc. Though I'm really glad it improves the story for you, as someone who's always hated Coyote I have to disagree, haha. Fun to read about, but I think he's decidedly Evil in D&D terms. ("Evil" in real life is always murkier, but I'd personally argue he's that, too.) |
|
|
|
Post by flowsthead on Apr 29, 2021 4:21:20 GMT
Worst person in the story? Not by a long shot. But she certainly had a track record of not considering other people and caused a lot of problems which everyone else decided to blame on anyone-but-her because of her charisma. I mean, Annie has done some bad things. As a natural medium, she seems to feel compelled to help ethereal beings who come to her for help, even if it means she harms herself or someone else in the process, like when she consequently doesn't have time to figure out her homework in subjects she has trouble with and has to plagiarize. But that does mean that she can be manipulated into spending more time away and even cancelling her summer plans. Or harboring the body-stealing criminal and getting herself on the Court's naughty list. I guess most of what Annie does wrong harms herself, though. The worst thing Annie's done is involve Red and Ayilu in the Jeanne situation. I think that is bad enough, and she'll probably always feel terrible about it. Everything else is interpersonal stuff or, like you said, stuff that would cause Annie harm. Surma's list of faults is pretty bad, but it's really only the Renard situation that is truly horrible. For the most part, it's Surma's attitude that I find displeasing. I don't think she's a bad person. I think Surma was decidedly average as a person, she had good traits and bad. Annie is not an adult yet, but I think she is doing ok. I think she is a better person than her parents, and sometimes, that's all we can really ask of someone. |
|
V
Full Member
I just think it's a pity that she never wore these again.
Posts: 168
|
Post by V on Apr 29, 2021 6:20:30 GMT
Surma is a self-absorbed asshole because, from what we know, she: 1. manipulated someone who had done nothing wrong into believing she loved him so that the Court could imprison him, simply because Coyote liked him and that made him theoretically dangerous; Court scheme. As I said earlier, this may have been the very reason behind making her the medium in the first place. This did not come out of the blue sky, things have not been great between the two prior to Get Lost. With Surma's directness I doubt that James would not feel it. Not to mention the other girl did follow him there, however much he could have assured Surma she's not a rival. And it's not like he made his choice for Surma: he started his training independently of Surma being made a medium. That's relatable, though. I'd been there in my thoughts and given a terminal diagnosis I'm certain I'd do the same, so it didn't take me all that strange in the story. Also, we're not sure it was without explanation. It was only said she cut off all contact. It could equally well be a long goodbye with a "Please don't call me or try to contact me. It will be just as hard for me as for you but I want to be alone." More than bad is this one really weird and yet waiting for an canonical explanation. I don't want to judge before it gets cleared. What could one do? "Be friends!"? It's not like she and Tony didn't talk about it - on the contrary, I think that's precisely what they discussed prior to the "he still loves you" line. I went to the same university and same school there as my dad. That's all I knew at that moment. Why should he be telling me of any people I'd meet there, any politics that's going on? a) Things may have changed anyway and b) there's plenty of time for one to make their own picture at their own pace. Sure, GC is somewhat specific, but if Annie was send anywhere else, she would be for a complete freak. You don't tell a child that was a reason why you chose this school. Re: denying social interaction - how so? Would there be more kids to play with if it was a GC hospital? Annie was not prevented from going out by Surma but presumably by physical or mental pain caused by the fire elemental. Re: kid thought she had to not cry about her mom being dead. I'm blaming Tony here. Transferring to the school was certainly not immediate, and in the meantime he would be what Annie took an example from. Tony was absolutely grieving, and crying for sure, but not when Annie saw him, so that's why she thought being stoic and locking that inside was the appropriate reaction. Also, I mean, Annie has done some bad things. As a natural medium, she seems to feel compelled to help ethereal beings who come to her for help, even if it means she harms herself or someone else in the process, like when she consequently doesn't have time to figure out her homework in subjects she has trouble with and has to plagiarize. But that does mean that she can be manipulated into spending more time away and even cancelling her summer plans. Or harboring the body-stealing criminal and getting herself on the Court's naughty list. I guess most of what Annie does wrong harms herself, though. The worst thing Annie's done is involve Red and Ayilu in the Jeanne situation. I think that is bad enough, and she'll probably always feel terrible about it. Everything else is interpersonal stuff or, like you said, stuff that would cause Annie harm. Surma's list of faults is pretty bad, but it's really only the Renard situation that is truly horrible. For the most part, it's Surma's attitude that I find displeasing. I don't think she's a bad person. I think Surma was decidedly average as a person, she had good traits and bad. Annie is not an adult yet, but I think she is doing ok. I think she is a better person than her parents, and sometimes, that's all we can really ask of someone. There's more that we're inclining to forgive, probably because Annie has been given enough screen time to repent. For example, missing out on her arrangement for summer with the Donlans arguably caused more confusion and direct trouble than the point 3 above. Being outwardly cruel to Renard (and later to her other self) uncovered some quite nasty aspects of Annie's character, too. Yes, unfortunate impulsive decisions on Annie's part were shown to usually backfire on her more than on others, but sometimes it was sheer luck. I can count three other times when it could have gone horribly wrong. - When she ran into the forest, unheralded, uninvited, and against a ban, they could have responded by a full attack and be in the right. Not to mention she could have killed James while doing do.
- She told Renard the truth about Surma's perceived love not long after Anja shared the story with her with a literal warning that "it's important that Renard doesn't find out".
- Also, in New Contract, she was ready to let Renard go from her possession on his own will, fully aware that he could just return to the forest or his body snatching.
(And I'm leaving out Smitty just because I'm willing to take her word that she really knew what she was doing, maybe she witnessed before that a psychopomp saved a dying person.) I'm not saying all this to attack Annie, I just think we should apply the same measure on both. I love her story deeply, so that's why I'm extending my defense to her mum. |
|
|
|
Post by flowsthead on Apr 29, 2021 6:47:34 GMT
The worst thing Annie's done is involve Red and Ayilu in the Jeanne situation. I think that is bad enough, and she'll probably always feel terrible about it. Everything else is interpersonal stuff or, like you said, stuff that would cause Annie harm. Surma's list of faults is pretty bad, but it's really only the Renard situation that is truly horrible. For the most part, it's Surma's attitude that I find displeasing. I don't think she's a bad person. I think Surma was decidedly average as a person, she had good traits and bad. Annie is not an adult yet, but I think she is doing ok. I think she is a better person than her parents, and sometimes, that's all we can really ask of someone. There's more that we're inclining to forgive, probably because Annie has been given enough screen time to repent. For example, missing out on her arrangement for summer with the Donlans arguably caused more confusion and direct trouble than the point 3 above. Being outwardly cruel to Renard (and later to her other self) uncovered some quite nasty aspects of Annie's character, too. Yes, unfortunate impulsive decisions on Annie's part were shown to usually backfire on her more than on others, but sometimes it was sheer luck. I can count three other times when it could have gone horribly wrong. - When she ran into the forest, unheralded, uninvited, and against a ban, they could have responded by a full attack and be in the right. Not to mention she could have killed James while doing do.
- She told Renard the truth about Surma's perceived love not long after Anja shared the story with her with a literal warning that "it's important that Renard doesn't find out".
- Also, in New Contract, she was ready to let Renard go from her possession on his own will, fully aware that he could just return to the forest or his body snatching.
(And I'm leaving out Smitty just because I'm willing to take her word that she really knew what she was doing.) I'm not saying all this to attack Annie, I just think we should apply the same measure on both. I love her story deeply, so that's why I'm extending my defense to her mum. I know lots of people in these discussions disagree, but I am still not comfortable that we are just willing to hold Annie, a literal child, responsible for her reaction to finding out she effectively killed her mother and every adult around her knowing that and keeping it from her. Running out on the Donlans is the least important part there. As far as the bulleted points: 1) There is no indication that she used that fire to try to harm or kill James. It wasn't reaching him, he used his bubble to put it out and go after her. She was clearly just using it as a way to keep others from chasing after her. And Coyote gave her an open invitation to the Forest. 2) She did it in a cruel way in the moment, but what she did there was right a wrong that her mother had done. Immediately. She changed how she called Renard and told him the truth as soon as she found out. 3) Again, willing to let Renard go I think should still be viewed as a kindness. The only reason not to is to take the Court's side of things. The things that Surma was doing to Renard were to the Court's benefit at the expense of Renard. The things that Annie was doing for Renard were to make up for her mom and for Renard's benefit against the Court. We can't call both of these things wrong if they are diametrically opposed. Either Renard was taken advantage of, and Annie is making up for that, or humanity was defending itself, and Annie is a traitor to humanity. It can't be that Surma was wrong for capturing him and Annie is also wrong for trying to free him. |
|
|
|
Post by foxurus on Apr 29, 2021 11:53:57 GMT
Surma is a self-absorbed asshole because, from what we know, she: 1. manipulated someone who had done nothing wrong into believing she loved him so that the Court could imprison him, simply because Coyote liked him and that made him theoretically dangerous; Court scheme. As I said earlier, this may have been the very reason behind making her the medium in the first place. That doesn't make it okay at all. Surma had agency and could say no to the Court, we have absolutely no reason to think anything counter to that. Imprisoning someone who hasn't done anything is a great hill to die on. Because it's a magic school with two gods living next door and a demon imprisoned inside?? This isn't politics. Nowhere else is like Gunnerkrigg Court, even if you're a kid who can see psychopomps. I don't get your last sentence. You don't tell the kid she's a freak, you tell the kid, "Hey this is where I grew up, and I think you'll like it there, and there's these things you should know about it." Because there were things she should have known about. Yes. Like Kat. Because it is at a school where children are, instead of a hospital which is just a hospital, and Surma knew other people there. Even if she had to leave the Court, she could have done literally anything proactive about Annie's social life and it'd be better than Annie being socialized almost exclusively by dead and dying people. Surma was a parent who was keenly aware that she'd be bedbound until she died. She had plenty of time to solve this problem, and she should have figured it out. That's her job. Tony didn't raise her. Surma could have prepared Annie for her death, and if she did, then Tony's stoicism would just be "the weird no-emotions thing Dad does" and not Annie's entire basis for how to deal with her mom being dead. Tony being a bad father doesn't make Surma a good mother. She can also be a bad parent. They can both be bad. Something being understandable or believable doesn't make it okay or the person not an asshole. Assholes are humans too. The things that Surma was doing to Renard were to the Court's benefit at the expense of Renard. The things that Annie was doing for Renard were to make up for her mom and for Renard's benefit against the Court. We can't call both of these things wrong if they are diametrically opposed. Either Renard was taken advantage of, and Annie is making up for that, or humanity was defending itself, and Annie is a traitor to humanity. It can't be that Surma was wrong for capturing him and Annie is also wrong for trying to free him. I mean, he did kill two sapient creatures in between Surma deceiving him and Annie trying to free him. That's a pretty notable change in circumstance. So I don't think it's hypocritical to admonish both of them for their actions. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 29, 2021 12:47:43 GMT
That's a good point (Gemminie's about no one being all good or all bad) - and I think it applies, in particular, to the conflict between the Court and the Forest.
Both sides have committed a lot of atrocities (the Court murdered Jeanne and her lover, deceived Renard in order to control him, while Loup and the more monstrous denizens of the Forest have wreaked a lot of damage on the Court). But both sides are acting out of fear for their safety. The Court is afraid (with some reason) that the forest-folk intend to invade and destroy it. The forest-folk fear the Court because its experiments with the ether are endangering their existence. And, of course, their actions against each other only convince each other that "the other side is a threat to us; we'll never be safe until it's gone", continuing the war.
The Court probably bears the greater responsibility for the conflict by deciding to research the ether in the first place. But the forest-folk have certainly mishandled the situation as well (there's no evidence that they've even tried to alert the Court to the dangerous side effects of those experiments and activities; the closest we've come to that is Loup telling Annie that in a private meeting).
I'm not certain that Annie's adventures are the reason why she did so poorly in her classes that she wound up copying off of Kat; there's no sign that Kat's schoolwork suffered as a result of her robot project, for example. More likely she just didn't have a strong affinity for those subjects. (This seems all the more likely since Antony mentioned she had done legitimately well in history and biology.)
|
|
|
|
Post by lurkerbot on Apr 29, 2021 15:50:09 GMT
<snip> 5. seemingly didn't do anything when she saw her husband struggling to connect to their child; What could one do? "Be friends!"? It's not like she and Tony didn't talk about it - on the contrary, I think that's precisely what they discussed prior to the "he still loves you" line.[emphasis mine] A most intriguing possibility. |
|
|
|
Post by lurkerbot on Apr 29, 2021 17:05:01 GMT
<snip> I went to the same university and same school there as my dad. That's all I knew at that moment. Why should he be telling me of any people I'd meet there, any politics that's going on? a) Things may have changed anyway and b) there's plenty of time for one to make their own picture at their own pace. Sure, GC is somewhat specific, but if Annie was send anywhere else, she would be for a complete freak. You don't tell a child that was a reason why you chose this school. Because it's a magic school with two gods living next door and a demon imprisoned inside?? This isn't politics. Nowhere else is like Gunnerkrigg Court, even if you're a kid who can see psychopomps. I don't get your last sentence. You don't tell the kid she's a freak, you tell the kid, "Hey this is where I grew up, and I think you'll like it there, and there's these things you should know about it." Because there were things she should have known about. Things like, "When you get to your new school at Gunnerkrigg Court, be sure to look up my best friend Anja Donlan so she can show you how stuff works there". Instead, it seems Antimony was unceremoniously deposited at the Court and Anja was left to find out about Surma's death indirectly. That said, we do know that Surma didn't want her child born (and by implication raised) in the Court, so she most likely didn't plan for it. So when she knew she was dying, what did she have in mind for Antimony's future? Did she discuss Antimony's education with Tony, or did she just leave him to figure it out on his own? What did she assume he would do, especially when he had already repeatedly suggested bringing them back to the Court? If she was strongly opposed to Antimony ending up at the Court, we're not shown that she tried to make other arrangements (although I'm rather glad she didn't because then we would have no comic...). As several others have pointed out, Surma really dropped the ball with respect to her daughter's future; I'd like to know why. |
|
|
|
Post by beaukm on Apr 29, 2021 18:10:12 GMT
Interesting, interesting... This suggests that while the aspect of Annie being perceived as an 'imposter' of Surma is something Tony thinks may be affecting him, a part of it may be UNRELATED to his emotional attachment to Surma, and instead goes to the fact that he sees Annie as TWO PEOPLE- Surma & Annie, and he has trouble interacting with MORE THAN ONE PERSON. That he could better communicate with 'Fannie' may be that he saw her not as Annie (and thus Surma) and ALSO that because of that he only 'registered' her as one person.
|
|
|
|
Post by foxurus on Apr 29, 2021 20:26:17 GMT
That said, we do know that Surma didn't want her child born (and by implication raised) in the Court, so she most likely didn't plan for it. So when she knew she was dying, what did she have in mind for Antimony's future? Did she discuss Antimony's education with Tony, or did she just leave him to figure it out on his own? What did she assume he would do, especially when he had already repeatedly suggested bringing them back to the Court? If she was strongly opposed to Antimony ending up at the Court, we're not shown that she tried to make other arrangements (although I'm rather glad she didn't because then we would have no comic...). As several others have pointed out, Surma really dropped the ball with respect to her daughter's future; I'd like to know why. , it was Surma who wanted her to go to the Court, though she probably wasn't privy to her parents' discussions about it. Regardless, Surma did at least plan that before she died. |
|
|
|
Post by lurkerbot on Apr 29, 2021 23:10:32 GMT
That said, we do know that Surma didn't want her child born (and by implication raised) in the Court, so she most likely didn't plan for it. So when she knew she was dying, what did she have in mind for Antimony's future? Did she discuss Antimony's education with Tony, or did she just leave him to figure it out on his own? What did she assume he would do, especially when he had already repeatedly suggested bringing them back to the Court? If she was strongly opposed to Antimony ending up at the Court, we're not shown that she tried to make other arrangements (although I'm rather glad she didn't because then we would have no comic...). As several others have pointed out, Surma really dropped the ball with respect to her daughter's future; I'd like to know why. , it was Surma who wanted her to go to the Court, though she probably wasn't privy to her parents' discussions about it. Regardless, Surma did at least plan that before she died. Ah. I had forgotten about that early revelation; thanks for pointing it out. Assuming Antimony's recollection is accurate, that makes Surma's omission of mentioning the Donlans that much more inexplicable to me. Antimony seemingly didn't know anything about them until Kat told her. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 30, 2021 0:35:09 GMT
An oversight of Tom's? Or maybe he sacrificed probability for dramatic effect (having Annie be as unaware as the reader about the Donlans).
|
|
|
|
Post by magicman23 on Apr 30, 2021 1:51:07 GMT
2) She did it in a cruel way in the moment, but what she did there was right a wrong that her mother had done. Immediately. She changed how she called Renard and told him the truth as soon as she found out. I don't know about giving Annie points for "righting a wrong" when that whole incident was an exercise of calculated cruelty from everyone involved. Annie didn't tell Renard about the honeypot gambit because it was the right thing. She did it because he enraged her by bringing up Anthony and knew this was the single most hurtful thing she could do to him (and she proceeds to put the boot in during in a very disturbing manner). Shortly afterwards she told Coyote and Ys the truth too because, in my opinion, she wanted them to punish the adults in her life from hiding the secret from her (only realizing when Jones scolded her after that she might have hurt Kat and a TON of other people if Coyote had been less cool with this). This lines up from what we see of Annie's developing responses to her anger. When we were first going through the Double!Annies Saga, I was constantly rolling my eyes at the legion of people who were insisting that Court!Annie had to be an imposter because Annie "would never be that cruel". I meanwhile was going, "Ah Hell, that is Annie because she has the same exact kind of anger." Annie doesn't just get explosive when she gets angry. She gets cruel and scalpel like. Its not enough to blow up at someone, she has to do or say the most hurtful thing she thinks of in the heat of the moment. So, I'm absolutely not going to applaud the act especially since we've seen Annie fall to this form of behavior since and she's not doing a lot to overcome it. I trust that she eventually will cause ultimately she's a good kid but I don't care what the aftermath of that was. It was a monstrous thing to do. *sigh* I guess I've kind of gotten tired of this fandom twisting these characters and their motivations* until they're unrecognizable. If they're not making Annie some grand hero or wide-eyed waif who doesn't make terrible or stupid decisions sometimes or should not be judged when she does, they're turning Surma/Tony/Paz into a monster or some other nonsense. I'm this close to doing something to my browser so I can't lurk on these forums or the comments anymore. *Tony planning to kill the "other" Annie to bring back Surma was the single stupidest fan theory I'd ever seen and the fact that it went as long as it did is a testament to how fan hatred truly occludes any ability to think about or analyze a story. Same with how a ton of people were like ,"PAZ'S EYES ARE DARK BECAUSE SHE"S LYING OR PLOTTING SOMETHING AND SHE'S A FILTHY RUMOR MONGER TRYING TO DESTROY OUR PRECIOUS ANNIE". Jesus, sometime people are just ashamed of their own behavior or shoot their mouth off to the wrong people under stress you know. |
|
|
|
Post by flowsthead on Apr 30, 2021 2:51:25 GMT
2) She did it in a cruel way in the moment, but what she did there was right a wrong that her mother had done. Immediately. She changed how she called Renard and told him the truth as soon as she found out. I don't know about giving Annie points for "righting a wrong" when that whole incident was an exercise of calculated cruelty from everyone involved. Annie didn't tell Renard about the honeypot gambit because it was the right thing. She did it because he enraged her by bringing up Anthony and knew this was the single most hurtful thing she could do to him (and she proceeds to put the boot in during in a very disturbing manner). Shortly afterwards she told Coyote and Ys the truth too because, in my opinion, she wanted them to punish the adults in her life from hiding the secret from her (only realizing when Jones scolded her after that she might have hurt Kat and a TON of other people if Coyote had been less cool with this). This lines up from what we see of Annie's developing responses to her anger. When we were first going through the Double!Annies Saga, I was constantly rolling my eyes at the legion of people who were insisting that Court!Annie had to be an imposter because Annie "would never be that cruel". I meanwhile was going, "Ah Hell, that is Annie because she has the same exact kind of anger." Annie doesn't just get explosive when she gets angry. She gets cruel and scalpel like. Its not enough to blow up at someone, she has to do or say the most hurtful thing she thinks of in the heat of the moment. So, I'm absolutely not going to applaud the act especially since we've seen Annie fall to this form of behavior since and she's not doing a lot to overcome it. I trust that she eventually will cause ultimately she's a good kid but I don't care what the aftermath of that was. It was a monstrous thing to do. I don't necessarily disagree that she was cruel, but she can be both cruel and being honest with Renard in a way that makes up for what her mother did. And when she came back from the Forest she almost immediately offered to let him go back to the Forest. Like these events have context. It doesn't have to be just one thing or the other. Cool beans. Good for you for being so much better at analyzing the comic than the rest of us. |
|
|
|
Post by foxurus on Apr 30, 2021 6:47:18 GMT
[...] I trust that she eventually will cause ultimately she's a good kid but I don't care what the aftermath of that was. It was a monstrous thing to do.*sigh* I guess I've kind of gotten tired of this fandom twisting these characters and their motivations* until they're unrecognizable. If they're not making Annie some grand hero or wide-eyed waif who doesn't make terrible or stupid decisions sometimes or should not be judged when she does, they're turning Surma/Tony/Paz into a monster or some other nonsense. Do you see the irony here? You're being pretty rude about other people having different opinions than you about a story. People were not caps locking about how eeeeeviiiil Paz is in that thread, they were offering a different reading of the comic that put her in a more negative light. Not liking a character doesn't make everything someone says about the character irrational and over the top. It seems to me that people do point out Annie's faults an awful lot. Which is fine. But every time someone defends a character they immediately jump to how beloved and defended Annie is and how hypocritical that is, and from where I'm sitting it doesn't seem like she's any more defended than Paz. Or Surma. Or even Tony. People have different opinions on characters and will voice theirs in discussions, that's to be expected. And it's perfectly fine, as long as the personal attacks are left to fictional characters. If it's bothering you, it probably is a good idea to take a break. People exaggerating events is really not helpful in conversations. Exaggerating characters' negative attributes, or the arguments of the opposing point of view, just escalates things and makes everyone feel a lot more angry and annoyed. I feel like it's been happening a lot in this thread and it hasn't led to anything productive yet, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's going to continue to not be productive. |
|
|
|
Post by pyradonis on Apr 30, 2021 13:27:08 GMT
The mention of the Court-Forest tensions and Surma being the previous Court medium reminds me of one feature of the medium business which puzzles me. According to Jones, the role of mediums is to serve as impartial figures to help resolve the conflict between the two worlds, the human and the etheric. But the mediums serving as representatives of the Court and the Forest makes them seem more like lawyers, assigned to "win the case" for their client, who would - in a sense - have to be biased towards the group they're representing. Now, if the mediums lived in neither the Court nor the Forest, but somewhere else, and served in the meetings between Court and Forest like a judge or a jury, hearing the arguments from the representatives of both sides and then making their decision after digesting all that they'd heard, they'd seem more like true mediators between the two worlds. Personally, I see a medium as more of an ambassadorial role, being from the faction they represent, but making contacts with and knowing enough about the other to handle diplomatic incidents and exchanges. Their primary duty is in diplomatic negotiations, impartiality would be nice, but it's not strictly necessary. One might also think of them as interpreters. I would think that the choice of medium is something of a political play as well, where Ysengrin is a general and Surma deals with psychopomps. Her appointment might have been a sign that the court wants to move past conflict and needless death, while her fiery disposition, pun intended, means that she would be uniquely suited to holding the forest's respect without having to be a dedicated warrior/soldier for the court. Whether mediator, lawyer or ambassador, Ysengrin was ridiculously unfit for each interpretation of that role. Not even Klingons would have given him this job. But now I am wondering whether there have been other Forest mediums before Ysengrin, and what they have been like.
Given the state of their relationship in the hospital, I do wonder how Tony got around to teaching Annie judo. Surma probably said something to the effect of "put down the stethoscope and go bond" and judo was probably the best way for him to do it, since talking over icecream obviously wasn't going to happen. Has it been explicitly stated who handled Annie's education before gunnerkrigg? We know she learned languages from the psychopomps, but was it tony, surma or both teaching her everything else? I'm going to guess it was mainly surma since Tony was so busy otherwise. So I wonder how much experience he's had with teaching in general. Annie said Surma "taught me all that she could", I assume that means Surma handled the majority of Annie's education. Why said education did not include a single word about the Court, the Forest, her nature, or Tony's mental issues, is anyone's guess. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on Apr 30, 2021 13:55:56 GMT
Whether mediator, lawyer or ambassador, Ysengrin was ridiculously unfit for each interpretation of that role. Not even Klingons would have given him this job. But now I am wondering whether there have been other Forest before Ysengrin, and what they have been like. I suspect that Coyote chose Ysengrin because of that; he wouldn't want the tensions between the Court and the Forest eased too much, since it might get in the way of his fun and his schemes. (He did later on appoint Annie to the role, who's much better suited - presumably he thought that the advantages of keeping Annie connected to the Forest would outweigh the disadvantage of no longer having Ysengrin's anger and instablility undermining diplomatic meetings.) |
|
|
|
Post by maxptc on Apr 30, 2021 16:08:07 GMT
*sigh* I guess I've kind of gotten tired of this fandom twisting these characters and their motivations* until they're unrecognizable. If they're not making Annie some grand hero or wide-eyed waif who doesn't make terrible or stupid decisions sometimes or should not be judged when she does, they're turning Surma/Tony/Paz into a monster or some other nonsense. I'm this close to doing something to my browser so I can't lurk on these forums or the comments anymore. Considering the worst I've seen is two people with true hatred for Tony being mildly to moderatly rude to anyone who likes/defends Tony, and beyond that its just people posting differing theories and opinions about how much they like or don't like characters, you probably should. In fact, if this is to much twisting, bad theories and inaccurate characterizing for you, you should avoid online fandoms in general, because this is literally as mild as I've ever seen anywhere. Animal Crossing fourms are aggro compared to this place. I say this as someone who thinks Tony, Surma and Paz catch way to much heat and that Annie, Kat and Rey get away with everything. |
|
|
|
Post by pyradonis on Apr 30, 2021 20:45:45 GMT
Surma is a self-absorbed asshole because, from what we know, she: 1. manipulated someone who had done nothing wrong into believing she loved him so that the Court could imprison him, simply because Coyote liked him and that made him theoretically dangerous; Court scheme. As I said earlier, this may have been the very reason behind making her the medium in the first place. That someone else cooked up the scheme does not excuse Surma partaking in it as a leading actress. |
|
|
|
Post by maxptc on Apr 30, 2021 22:40:14 GMT
That someone else cooked up the scheme does not excuse Surma partaking in it as a leading actress. Or we can forgive everyone involved in all Court schemes if they didn't plan said scheme and get a Steadman appreciation thread going? đ |
|
|
|
Post by pyradonis on Apr 30, 2021 23:14:32 GMT
That someone else cooked up the scheme does not excuse Surma partaking in it as a leading actress. Or we can forgive everyone involved in all Court schemes if they didn't plan said scheme and get a Steadman appreciation thread going? đ Diego will want to be absolved of everything then as well. Because while he devised the plan, it was "Young, that monster", who "forced" him. Totally innocent, just following orders! |
|
|
|
Post by maxptc on May 1, 2021 1:00:38 GMT
Or we can forgive everyone involved in all Court schemes if they didn't plan said scheme and get a Steadman appreciation thread going? đ Diego will want to be absolved of everything then as well. Because while he devised the plan, it was "Young, that monster", who "forced" him. Totally innocent, just following orders! Good news all around. I guess it also absolves Coyete, because he is sending the court souls which is definitely part of a scheme. |
|
|
|
Post by silicondream on May 1, 2021 23:47:51 GMT
I see it as Annie being Surma's reincarnation, just that the reincarnation process occurred over several years rather than an instant death/rebirth case. As do I. Sheâs a phoenix with a slight temporal overlap between generations. Given the state of their relationship in the hospital, I do wonder how Tony got around to teaching Annie judo. is that Tony spent as much time with Annie in the hospital as he could. I imagine he applied his usual obsessiveness to teaching her Useful Things, as Bat-Dads are wont to do. Also, it was probably easier for him to interact with her if they were focused on a task instead of on each other. Thatâs true of many fathers, even without Tonyâs issues. The mention of the Court-Forest tensions and Surma being the previous Court medium reminds me of one feature of the medium business which puzzles me. According to Jones, the role of mediums is to serve as impartial figures to help resolve the conflict between the two worlds, the human and the etheric. But the mediums serving as representatives of the Court and the Forest makes them seem more like lawyers, assigned to "win the case" for their client, who would - in a sense - have to be biased towards the group they're representing. I think law is an excellent analogy. In principle, lawyers are supposed to be impartial and objective, even though theyâre taking on roles within an adversarial system. Theyâre supposed to construe the facts and the law in the most favorable possible way for their client, but they must not lie or bring in irrelevancies or otherwise violate their professional code of ethics. And they should recognize the merits of the opposing case, even if itâs not their job to argue it. In practice, everyone knows that lawyersâ choice of client is informed by personal bias, and that they have strong social, financial and psychological motivations to try to âwin no matter what.â And most people are fine with that, as long as itâs their lawyer acting that way. If we look at the four mediums weâve met so far, they have wildly different roles and philosophies. Smitty works hard to be a cultural ambassador for the Court, but he also tries to be impartial and resist political influence. Surma, OTOH, was a willing covert agent for the Court. Annieâs more like Coyoteâs personal emissary to both factions, and so far sheâs spent most of her time schmoozing with the Forest dwellers. And Ysengrin...is not anyoneâs idea of a lawyer, diplomat, covert agent, shaman, or really anything that Iâd connect to the word âmedium.â I think Jonesâ description of the mediumâs role is a mixture of what she thinks it ought to be, and what the Court pretends it is. The Forest doesn't even pretend. Personally, I see a medium as more of an ambassadorial role, being from the faction they represent, but making contacts with and knowing enough about the other to handle diplomatic incidents and exchanges. Their primary duty is in diplomatic negotiations, impartiality would be nice, but it's not strictly necessary. Also a good analogy. A diplomat should appear sufficiently impartial for the opposing side to safely host them and negotiate in good faith, but no one really expects them not to try to gain some advantages for their faction. And this is why Annieâs acceptance of the Forest Medium position was so scandalous. Imagine a young American diplomat from the Cold War era, losing their job and immediately accepting a senior position with the USSR! The Court authorities must have been thinking âdouble agent,â âtraitorâ or less polite terms when she did that. We don't know if the whole fire in Surma instantly went to Annie on her birth, and what she had was an All Might like situation. Which if it did, Surma has lost part of herself right then and it was part of Annie. We don't know that, but I kind of suspect that this is what happened. After all, the guides and Surma both agreed that she couldn't help them anymore, whereas Annie could. But if so, it raises the question of why Surma lived for 12 years after giving birth, then died. I figure Annie didnât get the whole thing right away. The fire could sustain an adult self and a baby self at the same time, but not two adults. As Annie grew in body, mind, and etheric power, there was less and less left for Surma--certainly not enough for her to engage in any astral shenanigans. Alternatively, if it worked as you describe, then maybe the fire left Surma a finite residual charge and she had to stretch that out in order to mother Annie for as long as possible. Surma is a self-absorbed asshole because, from what we know, she: 1. manipulated someone who had done nothing wrong into believing she loved him so that the Court could imprison him, simply because Coyote liked him and that made him theoretically dangerous I wouldnât say that makes her self-absorbed; she was just much more loyal/obedient to the Court than Annie is. And the Court wasnât wrong to worry about Renard getting corrupted by Coyote and granted incredible power--look whatâs happened with Loup! But they dealt with it in their usual arrogant and manipulative way, instead of just talking to Renard and finding out that heâd been resisting Coyoteâs temptations for decades or centuries. ...so yes, it was cruel of her, but it was a soldierâs cruelty. Yeah, thatâs not great. Anja had already reminded her that James was training for her sake, too. Iâm willing to believe that these were due partly to Phoenixy âthe child must be socially/psychologically separate from the motherâ reasons, and perhaps partly to external pressures. Surma may have been under binds or geasa not to say certain things to certain people, analogous to Tonyâs security obligations with the Court. All that is just speculation, of course. The fact that even Tony canât come up with a better justification for her self-isolation than âprideâ is pretty damning, though. We saw her try at least once, during Annieâs dream in âFire Spike;â she was just terrible at it. It seemed like she had a hard time maintaining a parental voice with Annie, rather than just venting her inner feelings. Basically the opposite of Tonyâs problem. ...again, mmmaybe she couldnât? For some unknown reason? Iâm not trying to make excuses for her, but every other adult in the story is hiding various things for various reasons, so she probably wasnât an exception. Not really her fault, if she was bedridden and Annie was etherically bound to her. It would have been hard to recruit other kids for hospital playtime, especially because the hospital staff didnât seem to like the Carver family very much. Besides, Antimony âI see dead peopleâ Carver was a strange little girl with a very strange life. Before she was old enough to keep the supernatural stuff a secret, friendships with normal families could have gone disastrously wrong. Again, not great, but fairly understandable. Surma was a tough cookie and had probably learned to suppress her own grief in order to cope with her lost mom, short lifespan and duties as a Guide. Maybe she figured that would work for Annie too, but unfortunately Annie took after her dad in that respect. Agreed. I know lots of people in these discussions disagree, but I am still not comfortable that we are just willing to hold Annie, a literal child, responsible for her reaction to finding out she effectively killed her mother and every adult around her knowing that and keeping it from her. Running out on the Donlans is the least important part there. Well, yes, the more important parts are that she charged through a demilitarized zone while spewing flame at the only person who got near her. There is no indication that she was competent to judge. Consider Tonyâs glance back at Annie after crying on Surmaâs bosom, and compare to Annieâs glance back at Eglamore. The difference is that Tonyâs pain canât actually turn people to ash. That said, I certainly don't blame Annie for that burst. She was out of control, and I donât believe she had any idea yet of the kind of heat she could put out. I do blame her for fleeing into the forest; child or not, she had plenty of experience with the kind of trouble that would cause. It was just her good luck that both Court and Forest authorities were extremely forbearing that day. Itâs not a huge deal for me, though. I agree with Jones and Kat; she hurt and endangered people she cared about, but she was sorry for it afterwards and did her best to make up for it. Water under the bridge. (unfortunately, the masters of the Court are neither fair, forgiving nor forgetful.) I mean, it certainly can be; many dangerous criminals were abused or mistreated earlier in life. Regardless of whether Surma should have gone along with the honey trap, what Renard did in response made him more of a threat and justified his imprisonment...at least at first. I donât think Annie was wrong to try to free him, though. She was a child, with no allegiance to the Court, and no knowledge of his history, and he was perfectly friendly to her in their first meeting. The adults were still crazy to let Annie live with him unprotected, but thatâs not Annieâs fault. Or are you talking about later, after she came back from Fire Spike? I think Annie was absolutely justified in offering to release Renard then. By that point, it was obvious that Renardâs a far safer and better person than anybody who might be in charge of the Court. Though I'm really glad it improves the story for you, as someone who's always hated Coyote I have to disagree, haha. Fun to read about, but I think he's decidedly Evil in D&D terms. I had noticed.  (And I know I still owe you a response in the case of Morally Problematic Dog Vs. Other Morally Problematic Dog. Soon!) |
|
|
|
Post by silicondream on May 1, 2021 23:55:48 GMT
Crikey, that was a wall. Apologies! Whether mediator, lawyer or ambassador, Ysengrin was ridiculously unfit for each interpretation of that role. Not even Klingons would have given him this job. But now I am wondering whether there have been other Forest before Ysengrin, and what they have been like. I suspect that Coyote chose Ysengrin because of that; he wouldn't want the tensions between the Court and the Forest eased too much, since it might get in the way of his fun and his schemes. That makes sense to me. Coyote didn't want the tensions within the Forest eased too much either; Ysengrin is hardly universally beloved in there. That, and Coyote didn't want Ysengrin's own tension eased! He loves to lead his audience into increasing contradiction, then see which way they'll snap. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on May 2, 2021 0:03:51 GMT
I wouldnât say that makes her self-absorbed; she was just much more loyal/obedient to the Court than Annie is. And the Court wasnât wrong to worry about Renard getting corrupted by Coyote and granted incredible power--look whatâs happened with Loup! But they dealt with it in their usual arrogant and manipulative way, instead of just talking to Renard and finding out that heâd been resisting Coyoteâs temptations for decades or centuries. I suspect it was the old case of "It's beneath our dignity to speak with talking animals" (the attitude of the Court that Jones brought up all the way back in Chapter Seventeen). But it is the great irony that the Court's attempt to deal with Reynardine produced the very situation they wanted to avoid - Rey accepting Coyote's offer - and cost two Court members their lives. The Court's arrogance and willingness to take an "ends justify the means" approach backfired on it. |
|
|
|
Post by silicondream on May 2, 2021 1:19:45 GMT
Yup. The Court grew out of tiny humans traumatized by the vast beast-gods around them, and they always hoped to return the favor.
Problem is, if animals are just dumb beasts, then tormenting them makes you a bully. And if they're not, then you're 4fph....
|
|
|
|
Post by foxurus on May 2, 2021 3:15:43 GMT
silicondream (I hope that works, walls of text are a pain to edit down on mobile  ): A difference in definitions, then, I think. Ignoring(?) how other people will be affected by something and doing it anyway because it furthers your goals is self-absorbed, in my book. I think I'd define it loosely as being generally selfish, usually as a result of (often willfully) not self-reflecting. Surma's lack of self-reflection might be understandable, maybe she felt she didn't have time for bad feelings cuz she wasn't gonna live very long anyway, but not excusable, imo. Letting yourself hurt people because it's easier that way is no bueno. I feel like she was probably more obedient than loyal; doing what the Court wanted likely gave her privileges (like visiting the forest) and in my doesn't-self-reflect interpretation, she probably didn't think too hard about the ethics of it all. It's a fair point about her dealing with her own intense trauma, though. That she reacted by putting it all in a box and shoving it into the deepest part of her brain and then Never Ever opening the box again is a fair reason to not be able to teach Annie good coping skills. If she can't cope with it, then it's a bit much to ask her to teach someone else to. Don't feel obligated to respond re: Awful Dog Gods, Coyote's gaslighting is sommin that makes me really uncomfortable so I won't be great at being reflective and contemplative during a convo about it, haha. (But also you can respond if you do want to.)
|
|
|
|
Post by silicondream on May 10, 2021 2:17:06 GMT
silicondream A difference in definitions, then, I think. Ignoring(?) how other people will be affected by something and doing it anyway because it furthers your goals is self-absorbed, in my book. As Paz observed, however, the Court is other people. If Surma believed in its goals or cared for its inhabitants, she would probably be willing to betray a single dangerous, dubious beast-god for their sake. Quite possible. I'm seeing her as more of a reflective but pragmatic agent, like John Drake or the Operative or (sometimes) James Bond. It's hard for me to imagine a telepathic medium and spirit guide not being thoughtful about these things, even if she arrives at the wrong conclusion. Hey, whatever works--ignore, dissect or condemn as you will. Ping! |
|
|
|
Post by torontoregonian on May 11, 2021 23:30:55 GMT
First thing I thought of was "Your father looks at you and sees the ghost of his dead wife." www.gunnerkrigg.com/?p=1579Guess Ysengrin had Tony's number from the get-go. |
|
(And I know I still owe you a response in the case of Morally Problematic Dog Vs. Other Morally Problematic Dog. Soon!)
):
