Category: Uncategorized

You mentioned in one of your essays that Dirk rp’s a knight. Can you go into more depth on that? (Or direct me to someplace you already have?)

Yeah, my writing on roleplay is strewn all over the place. I really need to write about it as it’s own mechanic in more detail, which I suppose I’ll be doing for videos.

Here’s a couple of the sections that are most relevant:

https://medium.com/@RoseOfNobility/force-and-flow-steal-and-serve-83c1e077c50f 

The Serve part of this essay outlines how Pages tend to inspire characters to act like their Knights, and how Jake’s summoning of Brain Ghost Dirk fits that mold.

https://revolutionaryduelist.tumblr.com/post/159876062077/nobility

Here I talk about how Dirk and AR are both trying to emulate Dave in their narratives, though it could use a bit of updating. 

https://revolutionaryduelist.tumblr.com/post/159913879902/as-you-wish

Here I go over how Dirk’s attempt at roleplay is validated by the narrative through Grandpa.

https://medium.com/@RoseOfNobility/pulling-the-strings-dirk-as-manipulative-puppetmaster-ba781ad33c2c

And here I go on about how AR was the clear winner of the power struggle leading to Unite Synchronize and Dirk didn’t do like 90% of the shit people pin on him, which I’m dumping a link to as well because like, why not? I love dirk thanks

Man this stuff is going to be a nightmare to condense into a single video. rip

i understand why people talk about the alpha kids’ friendship so much, since it’s so deeply rooted in their character arcs, but i must admit i’ve always been a sucker for the beta kids as a whole and i’m sad that their relationship dynamics weren’t explored that much past the first acts. hey ARE the original BFFS 4 LIFE set of characters in homestuck, after all

i mostly talk about the alphas more because people dont really appreciate their friendships as much and typically regard one or more of them as assholes/don’t like to think about them

i, meanwhile, will not rest until the fandom understands that hating any one of the alphas in favor of the others is missing the point, and it would be a surefire way to get the other three to hate you.

also i need the fandom to know that dirk and jake are just as good a romance arc as davekat or vrisrezi or rosemary. homestucks good at romance y’all.

anyway the betas own too i just think they’re better understood/more celebrated. I’m not sad their relationships got less exposure later on because, hey, homestuck ain’t over. who knows how much beta interaction we can get soon enough!

I have trouble believing that the hemospectrum hierarchy originates from Equius and Gamzee’s souls in LE because it still existed on Beforus, and also because racism exists in real life even though we presumably don’t have a giant evil skull monster running things.

The hemospectrum as a biological thing is just part of how trolls are born, but Beforus doesn’t commit genocide and enforce slavery based on it. It has its problems as a society, but Alternia is a whole other ballpark of evil. And that has a lot to do with the hemospectrum as a violent, oppressive ideology, which is not really in Beforus to the same degree. That system is what I attribute to LE.

Also my view at this point is that Lord English is basically the God of all four worlds, with differing amounts of influence in each one of them–the least amount of influence in Beforus, the most amount of influence on Alternia. We don’t have a skull monster, but we do have systems of oppression, misinformation, and exploitative power, and Lord English is a villain that operates primarily through those abstract forces. That’s why I think Homestuck is such an important narrative–it presents the casting off of those toxic ideologies as inherently heroic, and necessary for both happiness and peace.

[1]OK so in your force and flow series,you said that Lords and Muses,which are both extreme examples of active and passive classes,are successful because they utilize their abilities in active and passive ways simultaneously,you also said that heirs/witches and mages/seers are successful for extremely similar reasons,and that they were the least extreme cases of active/passive classes,but if we consider similarity to either of the master classes to indicate activity/passivity

a-aromax:

revolutionaryduelist:

[2]Then wouldnt it follow that princes/bards and sylphs/maids would switch places with the heirs/witches and mages/seers

image

Hrmmm, I see what you’re saying. I was going off this quote from Calliope:

Along with the distinction of Lords as “Most Active” and Muse as “Most Passive”.

My logic was that the more intensely Active/Passive classes had more dramatic impacts on their sessions, while the less Active/Passive classes were more versatile and able to switch back and forth from Active to Passive easier, making them more flexible.

The Master Classes, then, have the best of both worlds–they can have incredibly high impacts like the far-end classes, but they can also reap the benefits of both Exploiting and Allowing their aspect as necessary like the closer ones.

But that may be inaccurate. I think we’re getting closer, but I’m not sure we’ve “figured out” all the nuances of the Active/Passive scale. 
There’s a couple things that are still puzzling me, and questions like this one shaking or playing with the model are definitely helpful for helping us figure things out.

I don’t necessarily have any thoughts on this right now except that I’d like to hear how you account for Princes being positioned close to Lords in the scale. I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong, I feel like I’m missing stuff in my model. I’m just not 100% sure how to square this with the evidence we’ve got in canon. 

Any thoughts?

So,this is my current version of the active passive scale.

My theory is that the further a class is positioned horizontally,the more direct control over their aspect they have,and the less likely they are to act in a more passive or active manner,and if they do it usually doesn’t go very well.The further vertically positioned a class is,the less direct control over their aspect they have,and the more likely they are to act in more active or passive manners successfully.So Princes and Bards are very active,just not the same way that lords are,and vice versa for Sylphs and Bards.

hmmm. I like this setup in theory, I think? I guess my main issue is that I don’t see how it’s provable or referenceable in Homestuck’s canon, and if we can’t pin down what Homestuck thinks it means for a class to be (-1) as opposed to (-2), then the whole setup becomes too abstract and theoretical to easily explain to a layperson.

Do you have any thoughts on how Homestuck would transmit these distinctions through its storytelling? 

[1]OK so in your force and flow series,you said that Lords and Muses,which are both extreme examples of active and passive classes,are successful because they utilize their abilities in active and passive ways simultaneously,you also said that heirs/witches and mages/seers are successful for extremely similar reasons,and that they were the least extreme cases of active/passive classes,but if we consider similarity to either of the master classes to indicate activity/passivity

catchaloststar:

revolutionaryduelist:

[2]Then wouldnt it follow that princes/bards and sylphs/maids would switch places with the heirs/witches and mages/seers

image

Hrmmm, I see what you’re saying. I was going off this quote from Calliope:

Along with the distinction of Lords as “Most Active” and Muse as “Most Passive”.

My logic was that the more intensely Active/Passive classes had more dramatic impacts on their sessions, while the less Active/Passive classes were more versatile and able to switch back and forth from Active to Passive easier, making them more flexible.

The Master Classes, then, have the best of both worlds–they can have incredibly high impacts like the far-end classes, but they can also reap the benefits of both Exploiting and Allowing their aspect as necessary like the closer ones.

But that may be inaccurate. I think we’re getting closer, but I’m not sure we’ve “figured out” all the nuances of the Active/Passive scale. 
There’s a couple things that are still puzzling me, and questions like this one shaking or playing with the model are definitely helpful for helping us figure things out.

I don’t necessarily have any thoughts on this right now except that I’d like to hear how you account for Princes being positioned close to Lords in the scale. I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong, I feel like I’m missing stuff in my model. I’m just not 100% sure how to square this with the evidence we’ve got in canon. 

Any thoughts?

If Lord being a very active class places them on the far side of the scale, then Witch (which Hussie says is “said to be a highly active class”) should also be towards the active end of the scale instead of the middle?

hrrrrm, yeah. My logic I wish I could find something in the text that helped us at least figure out how the structure works :[ I think we’re starting to understand what the spectrum means, but I’m not even sure that class pairs would be placed on it symmetrically.

All I can figure is that Witches are said to be highly active in context with all of the classes, including Passive ones? My mindset being that If they’re as active as, say, Princes, then I have to wonder why they don’t seem to struggle QUITE so dramatically when they’re in a Passive state, and why they seem to have an easier time switching back and forth. 

It’s quite possible my train of thought wrt how to understand the classes in this regard is completely off, but I’d like to see alternate interpretations for how to understand the classes more holistically to counter the view, if that makes sense. 

When I think about the distinction between active/passive classes, one of the most prominent things I think about is exerting influence through oneself vs through others. That’s how I can view both rogues, who give to others for their benefit, and pages, who inspire others to serve them, as both passive. Obviously, there is more to your argument for active/passive roles, and more to mine as well, but anon has a character limit, so i’ll just leave you with this new angle to view the dichotomy.

Yep, depending on what elements you weigh the heaviest, Knights and Pages in particular get complicated. That’s really the only thing that throws me off in determining which is Passive and which is Active.

The reason I currently come down on Pages as Active is twofold. One, I simply think shaking up the current reading of Knights and Pages is important, because most people’s readings of Pages is really off, frankly? 

But two, when considering it this way, I keep getting tripped up by other examples. Like, Muse is the Most Passive apparently–but Alt!Calliope has her greatest impact through her own direct action by blowing up a sun. Lord is the most active, yet Caliborn and Lord English have most of their direct impact on the plot through the ways they coerce, manipulate, and influence others. What stays consistent is who benefits, regardless of method. Calliope and Alt!Calliope’s actions are basically always to the benefit of others. Caliborn’s machinations always benefit himself. 

It’s possible that’s a quirk exclusive to Master classes and there’s more to figure out about how Active/Passive works for the other classes, but for the time being I use it as a guide and consider the “For oneself” vs. “For others” habitual distinction the most important one to consider for Pages and Knights. Pages tend to benefit themselves, Knights tend to benefit others.

Hey! So I couldn’t find it by browsing, but I’m curious: why do you pair maid with sylph & heir with witch? I always paired Maid and Heir, as well as Sylph and Witch, but mostly because (in my head) Maid and Heir seem the most similar out of the two couplings.

Heya! I think the pairs are explicitly shown to us in the comic through the use of unifying myths that connect two classes under a common symbol language.
As far as I can tell, these myths are:

Lord/Muse: Conductors

Maid/Sylph: Fairies

Prince/Bard: Royalty

Page/Knight: Warriors & Butlers, (Lawbringers)(?)

Thief/Rogue: Outlaws, including all variations: Pirates, Bandits, Robin Hood, etc.

Mage/Seer: Prophets

Heir/Witch: Magicians

I outline my views on all of these myths (minus the recently noticed ones, Royalty and Outlaws,
which I’m writing tumblr posts for right now) in my essay series on the Classes, Force & Flow.

I do think there are some strong resonances between Maid and Heir and Sylph and Witch, however. But my general mindset is that the Class system is a lot more hyperflexible and complex than we’ve given it credit for so far, and like the Aspects there can be resonances and relationships built up between Classes that aren’t necessarily linked by their established pairs. I can only view this as possible because I think the pairs are established so clearly, in fact. 

What are your thoughts on an alternate arrangement of classes? Namely, instead of witch/heir, maid/sylph as +/- pairs… witch/sylph, maid/heir? There’s canon textual evidence for witches and sylphs being linked, both seem tied to disorder/change in the sense that witches increase it, while sylphs decrease it. maids and heirs both seem tied to provenance, perhaps? maids generate/create actively, while heirs receive/become/are created passively. The terminology’s also conceptually more connected.

at this point, i think the unifying myths I’ve picked up on carry enough weight that I value them over nebulous rearrangements of the class terminology we don’t know. That’s because there’s a lot of overlap between the classes and how they might use their terminology: Thief/Rogue, Knight/Page, and Prince/Bard are all associated with weaponizing, for example.

I wouldn’t be averse to an alternate arrangement, but unless links are drawn from the canon that associate the classes together as strongly and as consistently as the unifying myths seem to, I’d probably continue to regard the setup we’ve developed on that basis as canonical. 

[1]OK so in your force and flow series,you said that Lords and Muses,which are both extreme examples of active and passive classes,are successful because they utilize their abilities in active and passive ways simultaneously,you also said that heirs/witches and mages/seers are successful for extremely similar reasons,and that they were the least extreme cases of active/passive classes,but if we consider similarity to either of the master classes to indicate activity/passivity

[2]Then wouldnt it follow that princes/bards and sylphs/maids would switch places with the heirs/witches and mages/seers

image

Hrmmm, I see what you’re saying. I was going off this quote from Calliope:

Along with the distinction of Lords as “Most Active” and Muse as “Most Passive”.

My logic was that the more intensely Active/Passive classes had more dramatic impacts on their sessions, while the less Active/Passive classes were more versatile and able to switch back and forth from Active to Passive easier, making them more flexible.

The Master Classes, then, have the best of both worlds–they can have incredibly high impacts like the far-end classes, but they can also reap the benefits of both Exploiting and Allowing their aspect as necessary like the closer ones.

But that may be inaccurate. I think we’re getting closer, but I’m not sure we’ve “figured out” all the nuances of the Active/Passive scale. 
There’s a couple things that are still puzzling me, and questions like this one shaking or playing with the model are definitely helpful for helping us figure things out.

I don’t necessarily have any thoughts on this right now except that I’d like to hear how you account for Princes being positioned close to Lords in the scale. I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong, I feel like I’m missing stuff in my model. I’m just not 100% sure how to square this with the evidence we’ve got in canon. 

Any thoughts?