Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT

WCDT Strips 3221 to 3225 (16 - 20 May 2016)

<< < (33/78) > >>

Zebediah:

--- Quote from: Wildroses on 18 May 2016, 04:56 ---I hope Claire isn't sitting at home freaking out because Clinton hasn't come home so he must still be mad after all *sob*

--- End quote ---

Nah, Claire is at Marten's, having hot sex on the sofa. Even if she was at home, that's not where Clinton was headed - he was going back to his dorm at UMass. And as far as we know, Claire has no idea that he didn't make it there.

BenRG:
When Clinton tells her that he visited a bar and it subsequently burned down... oh, and he's sort of been self-nominated as the carer for the former barkeep...? Well, I doubt that Claire will let him out on his own ever again.

TheCollector:
Y'know, quick thought I had to post.

So, I'm not saying Clinton burned down her bar. I'm just saying it didn't burn down till he went there.

mikmaxs:

--- Quote from: Case on 18 May 2016, 01:23 ---
--- Quote from: mikmaxs on 17 May 2016, 21:27 ---
--- Quote from: TheEvilDog on 17 May 2016, 19:38 ---
--- Quote from: mikmaxs on 17 May 2016, 08:42 ---I'm all for representation, but I'd rather that representation be with positive characters.

--- End quote ---

Why? Is that really an accurate representation? I think a fairer representation is showing that sometimes there can be negative people. Being different from thes societal norm doesn't preclude that sometimes people can be jerks. Even if they don't set out to be.

If we do see a broad spectrum of people in the QC-verse, than isn't it more realistic and engaging to the reader that they run the gamut of of the emotional and temperamental spectrum as well?

--- End quote ---
It's not that people can't be jerks, it's that I don't really know of many autistic characters in fiction who *aren't* jerks.

...

I'm optimistic about Brun, but the introduction of her character made it clear that she really wasn't a likeable person in the slightest. This might change overtime, Jeph usually takes a few weeks or months of comics to really pin down his characters, and even if the most recent comics her negative traits haven't been around at all (Though this is mostly true because there's not been a chance to showcase them), but if she keeps her personality from her introduction, she's just a repellent person to be around.

--- End quote ---

Ok, I 'get' why Sheldon and the Rainman tick you off, in terms of representation. And that you don't like a particular character - well, contrary to popular opinion (and local custom), there's this proverb that "there's no accounting for taste".

But ... quite a few people (myself included) seem to like Brun -  and her 'special' (sorry - sleepdep & 2nd language. Usually, I'd strangle folk for that one, but I can't come up with better right now) isn't played for laughs-and-pointing-fingers (well, not more than any other character in a webcomic), so in terms of "representation to the world at large", she might not be as much of a worry as you seem to believe? (Assuming, of course, she does indeed represent people with ASD)

(And neglecting, of course, the teensyweensy problem of being represented by a character that you personally can't stand  :-\)

--- End quote ---

Well, that's why I started this whole discussion by saying that *I* wasn't a big fan of her representing.

pwhodges:

--- Quote from: Tova on 18 May 2016, 04:38 ---Isn't the intent and meaning behind the words the point, rather than the use of a euphemistic word with an identical meaning?
--- End quote ---

Yes - but how do you get that across?  There are various ways to explain, but sometimes using a different word provides a hook for that which would not otherwise arise.


--- Quote ---Is it possible that the euphemism treadmill (which Baphomet was describing) does harm rather than good?
--- End quote ---

Harm? - probably not.  But for there to be a benefit, there has to be explanation going along with the modified vocabulary at some point; while a few people might get it on their own as a result, that will not necessarily be a significant proportion.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version