I think the aspects work the ways most people think they do, but for classes I go in for the “some class-verbs/functions are opposite to others” and more specifically:
key-Verb: active passive
Destroy: Prince/Bard
vs
Heal: Witch/Sylph
~
Steal: Thief/Rogue
vs
Give: Maid/Heir
~
Fight: Knight/Page
vs
Understand: Mage/Seer
there are some posts with the reasonings/evidence behind this system on my blog already, but I’m going to try and post more after my exams are over (which is like, in a week)
oh yeah that theory sounds familiar! opposites r always fun and pleasing.. im not sure sure about seer/mage tho, rose and terezi both seemed awful active?
oh also im curious if those are meant to be verb aspect or verb with aspect or either
uh, I think we might have “word of god” on the seer thing; here Hussie says:
Jade was especially passive for a lot of the story, spending a lot of time falling asleep (or being put to sleep) at key moments. It wasn’t until she reached god tier as a Witch (said to be a highly active class) that she became extremely active, making lots of stuff happen, rounding up planets and all that. Rose may have been a similar case, being excessively active as a Derse dreamer, but then flipping over to a passive role upon reaching god tier as a passive class.
also you said:
oh also im curious if those are meant to be verb aspect or verb with aspect or either
and I want to answer this question but I’m not really sure what you mean by it?
When I said “verbs” I meant the descriptive words like “destroy” and “heal”; like the classes’ function?
So like I think Knights and Pages “fight” which is opposite to “Understand”, which is what I think Seers and Mages do?
Btw ymaw I had been meaning to say I read your post on Knight/Pages as ‘fight’ and I think you touched on some pretty interesting stuff (I do in a way agree with the core verb after all) but overall I came away with a lot of questions. I’d be happy to jam about it whenever you have time, but I’m not convinced by a few of the examples you list that, imo, are directly contradicted by canon.
I think you’re definitely right about the contrast between Knights/Pages and Seers/Mages with regards to their short-term vs. long-term thinking though, and that’s an interesting thing to pick up on.
(@revolutionaryduelist I’m starting a new post cause the last one was getting a bit long)
For now I’d just be curious to know: In what way would you say Karkat “exploits” Blood? He’s not really cognizant of where his strengths lie even by the end, and yet he routinely solves conflicts by establishing bonds almost magically.
And what about Jake in the Masterpiece? There might be ambiguity to Karkat and Tavros (I’d argue Tavros’ behavior is much more in line with exploitation, but I already did so I won’t here), but Jake’s final act in the story is wielding his gay hope bubble against Caliborn as a weapon, which he does specifically because he, himself, decides he wants to save Dirk.
That seems much more in line with exploitation than with allowance to me–it’s willful, conscious and pre-determined.
Also I’m definitely interested in hearing your take on the contrast between Seer/Mages and Knights/Pages! I should be clear that I think the Classes, like the Aspects, can resonate in all kinds of different ways.
I really don’t think the nuance ends at what classes are Active/Passive pairs, or what the key verbs are. So i’m always interested in hearing people’s takes on how they’re connected, regardless of disagreement over the pairings I think they’re still relevant and interesting.
Cool! I’ll write it up when I get the chance, but for now I’ll respond to a couple of things you mentioned.
Haha I appreciate it, but all of Homestuck is personal to me. It’s incredibly hard to upset me in general, and even if I *were* to get upset, I would try to consider why I was upset and deal with it.
I’m not trying to advance and insist on my version of Homestuck, and I actively strive against letting my emotional investment interfere with my view of the comic.
I don’t like using the word “objective” because the concept as it applies to this is inherently false, so instead I’d say I’m interested in what Homestuck, as a complete, cohesive work, adds up to and tries to say in totality. I part from the starting premise that Homestuck is coherent and meaningful and has things to say. I also think it’s ruleset is applied consistently–it’s just more complicated than it seems like at first glance.
So yeah, I’m invested in Dirkjake. But that doesn’t mean I want to steer clear from being questioned about it and challenged on the basis of the canon–and in those terms I’ve faced much harsher rebuttals than you, anyhow 😛
Me being invested in Dirkjake means I want to push the fandom and make it aware of alternate perspectives and new views. I want conversation and if necessary rhetorical conflict, not stagnation in the status quo reading of Homestuck as mediocre and Dirkjake as vague/ambiguous at best and mediocre at worst.
I want those things because I think Dirkjake–and Homestuck at large–deserve it. I think these are better stories than they’re given credit for, and I’m trying to put words to why.
If I were doing anything less than trying to revolutionize the way people think about Homestuck and putting my own views of it on the line to be put under scrutiny in the name of advancing a view of it that stands a chance at getting people excited about the comic like they used to be, I wouldn’t be trying to make a job out of it.
But I’m not going to accomplish real change in the fandom’s thought sphere solely through pleasant conversations (this conversation so far has been extremely pleasant btw). I have to be comfortable with being challenged and questioned if I want to change anything.
And if I can’t argue a point as concisely and completely as possible by using the canon as my source, then it just means that Homestuck isn’t exactly what I think it is–either because it’s not clear enough about making the points I’m trying to argue to give me evidence that holds any real conviction, or because I’m misunderstanding what it’s trying to say altogether.
In both cases, that information would also be valuable to me.
Honestly I should prob put this in my about or something. It would help rhetorically if people knew where I’m coming from with all this.
Anyway,
I do think however, that in homestuck, in reference to classes, it implies “use against the will of the aspect”?
Yeah, that’s what throws me. I don’t remember anyone in the comic so much as implying that. The closest thing I can think of is that by saying passive classes act “through the will of the Aspect”, maybe some have taken that to mean Active classes work against that will?
If that’s the root of the view, then I’m skeptical. Mainly because I think framing it as Active players being a Yang force on their Aspect is cleaner, and more in line with the Ying/Yang mentality Calliope explicitly establishes.
That doesn’t imply that they’re acting against the Aspect’s will–it implies that the Aspect is reactive to their wills, and moves to accomplish what that will desires.
Maybe there’s an implication or statement that I’m missing somewhere that implies that more “contentious” relationship though, in which case I’d appreciate having it pointed out to me for sure.
AR’s actions aren’t a manifestation of Dirk’s powers, his existence is, and we don’t know that Dirk can’t control BGD, especially since the “I failed” line to John seems to imply (at least to me) that he was attempting to do more than just flying full pelt towards the medium?
I’ve always interpreted it that BGD was one of Dirk’s soul splinters?
Like, in the same way that a waking and dreaming self are paradoxically the same person and also different people, BGD was both Jake’s subconscious puppeteering Jake’s perception of Dirk and an actual sentient being with his own consciousness and stuff?
As for AR: Exactly.
AR’s existence is a manifestation of Dirk’s Heart, and AR is also a Prince of Heart as such. Dirk’s struggle is that he technically has the power to stop his other Self, but instead keeps allowing him to do what he’s doing because he feels he owes it to him due to the moral implications of his very existence.
As for BGD: This is correct. Dirk is explicitly one of Dirk’s splinters:
TT: I don’t think one of Dirk’s splinters could exist nearly as well in anyone’s mind other than yours.
But that doesn’t mean he’s a vector for Dirk. He’s essentially Jake’s imaginary friend, who takes the form of Dirk as expressed through all of Jake’s thought patterns about him:
GT: So im talking to myself! Thats kind of stupid! TT: Well, yeah. But not quite. TT: You could view me as a projection of the real Dirk within your mind, as expressed through all of your thought patterns about him. TT: So I’m kind of a splinter of his corporeal self who happens to live in your awareness.
GT: There is something that feels kind of weird about this. You being in my head… its a little messed up! TT: What’s messed up about it? TT: You were the one who put me here, with your intimate understanding of all his mannerisms and predilections.
The root of BGD’s behavior isn’t what Dirk himself would do, but what Jake thinks of him at any given time–and what Jake thinks is colored by AR conflating and muddying his and Dirk’s personalities. But even so, Jake himself draws a distinct difference between BGD (and AR’s) behavior and Alpha Dirk’s:
GT: No offense but I kind of get the same smartass vibe from you as i do from the responder. GT: Like har har i have the same basic personality as dirk but without any accountability or anything so let me just be kind of flippant and mess with this jake fellas head! GT: You know what im saying? TT: Yes. TT: That’s a surprisingly decent observation about me. GT: Yeah see i think i maybe did a little TOO good of a job brain cloning you? This is way too much like talking to the REAL fake dirk.
And that divide grows wider later on. What Dirk likes about Jake above all else is Jake’s faith in him, and Dirk breaks up with Jake and talks about how he thinks he was toxic and bullying to him.
So if Dirk is actually in control of Brain Ghost Dirk at all, wouldn’t his priority upon contacting Jake be, like, apologizing or something? Or trying to find out what’s going on in the session while he’s trying to fly back in after getting zapped out by Jade?
But Brain Ghost Dirk doesn’t do any of that. Instead we get:
DIRK: You’ve never really believed in anyone your whole life, and you know it. DIRK: Everything’s always about you. Don’t you remember? You already had this epiphany, dingus.
DIRK: Will you stop crying? DIRK: It’s reflecting poorly on both of us. JAKE: (Sorry.) JAKE: (*Sniff.*) DIRK: Hey. DIRK: Did you shave your legs? JAKE: (No i think the magic god tier fire burned it all off…) DIRK: God damn. DIRK: They’re so smooth. DIRK: A car could swerve outta control on those gams.
Which is…a pretty drastic difference in mindset and characterization. At the very least, you’d expect Dirk to use his connection to Brain Ghost Dirk to do recon or try to find out what’s going on, but he doesn’t do that.
And it’s hard to imagine Dirk flirting with Jake after the speech he gave Jane, let alone calling himself Jake’s boyfriend without having talked to him yet. Especially since we know that throughout all this Dirk is carrying around the view of himself that eventually comes out once he talks to Dave.
If you think Brain Ghost Dirk is his own different, separate Dirk, then sure. But he’s still simultaneously a reflection of Jake’s mind, and linked to it. If he was acting against Jake’s will in any way or doing his own thing, wouldn’t the comic need to telegraph that somehow?
Hence why I think Occam’s razor leads me to think BGD is just accomplishing what Jake wants to get done, and thus his creation is Jake benefiting himself.
Sure but like, if the Hope was only being controlled by Jake, then why would it expand out in any direction other than at Caliborn?
I mean, Caliborn is a Time player, so creating a bigass field he can’t dodge doesn’t sound like a bad idea to me. But really my answer to “why a Hope bubble” is that that’s how Hussie wanted to present his powers.
And I don’t think the Masterpiece presents Jake as wholly in control of his powers–seems to me like in this timeline it’s likely the first time he awakens them. A really big deal is made of the fact that Jake gets absolutely furious about Caliborn beating up Dirk, and that he wants to save him, and that the outburst exhausts him. Seems like a climactic moment of personal development to me.
I will, however, note the fact that the Hope field encompasses the other Alpha kids too, and while it hurts Caliborn, it doesn’t hurt them–Which is suggestive of some degree of control.
I’d also note that the most Passive player–Alt Callie–is able to precisely create a Black Hole conciously and of her own accord. That is precise and deliberate the way Aradia and Jade demonstrate their powers is.
uu: AS A LORD OF TIME. I THINK I’M GOING TO MASTER TIME. NOT WITH MY BRAIN. WHICH WOULD BE TOO HARD. BUT WITH MY INSTINCTS. uu: LIKE IN A WAY THAT WORKS WITH MY NATURAL IMPULSES. SUCH AS MY AMBITION. MY WILL TO COMMIT MAYHEM. MY DESIRE TO PUNISH THOSE I DESPISE.
Caliborn, in contrast, subjugates the Alpha Timeline without actually having to think about how–he does it through pure willpower and desire, and leaves controlling the minutiae to underlings and proxies. He isn’t particularly thinking in terms of precise control–he just sees what he wants and gets it. Time works it all out for him.
So I’m not sure the level of direct control the classes exhibit is really the determining factor in how Active/Passive they are. It seems to me to rely much more on achieving their own wills vs. benefiting the wills of others.
Anyway that’s all for now cause I got kinda sidetracked today but I might have more to say later. Curious to hear your responses!
(@revolutionaryduelist I’m starting a new post cause the last one was getting a bit long)
For now I’d just be curious to know: In what way would you say Karkat “exploits” Blood? He’s not really cognizant of where his strengths lie even by the end, and yet he routinely solves conflicts by establishing bonds almost magically.
And what about Jake in the Masterpiece? There might be ambiguity to Karkat and Tavros (I’d argue Tavros’ behavior is much more in line with exploitation, but I already did so I won’t here), but Jake’s final act in the story is wielding his gay hope bubble against Caliborn as a weapon, which he does specifically because he, himself, decides he wants to save Dirk.
That seems much more in line with exploitation than with allowance to me–it’s willful, conscious and pre-determined.
1) Karkat is also difficult to comment on, since we can’t know what’s going through his head at the points where he ends the fights with Slick, Gamzee and Clover.
I will say however, that whether or not he cognizant of what he’s doing isn’t the only element of whether or not he “exploits” Blood? As in, he might not be directly aware of what he’s doing, but could still be using Blood in a way that it “shouldn’t” be used?
Hmm. I’m not sure what definition of Exploit and Allow you’re using–I don’t remember Exploit ever being clearly delineated as the Aspect being used in a way that it “shouldn’t” be used or doesn’t want to be used.
I’m using the dictionary definitions of the terms Exploit and Allow:
ex·ploit
make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource).
al·low
give (someone) permission to do something.
Retooled slightly to reflect Aspects, of course. Basically, if a character is knowingly using their Aspect and thinking about their connection to the Aspect as a means to achieve a goal, I consider it exploitation. The aspect is “being used”, and the Player’s will is the Yang force on that use.
If a character is unaware of what they’re causing but their actions lead to a manifestation of the Aspect, then I count it as allowance. The player is “being used”, and the Aspect’s will is the Yang force on the player.
Ergo, Karkat dropping Sollux down the stairs is allowance–he isn’t aware of what he’s doing, didn’t want to drop Sollux down the stairs, and it ultimately benefits Sollux.
That seems pretty in line with “The will of the Aspect” to me–Karkat achieved Blood-y ends, but it wasn’t Karkat’s will that solved a problem Sollux never told him about or even realized he wanted solved. Blood just happened to do that through Karkat.
Dave being presented with time loops he has to comply with is also allowance, because he finds himself dancing to the predetermined loops Time presents him with in the first place.
As such, I think we can say that Karkat establishing relationships as a method of winning fights is more often than not Allowance.
Slick and Gamzee might be questionable, but Clover really isn’t–even if Karkat were aware of what he’s doing, he doesn’t seem to have a clue Clover wants a relationship with him, and the Felt’s romantic practices are unrecognizable to him anyway.
Karkat’s never met the Felt, and doesn’t know about Clover’s massive luck attribute. As far as he knows, he beat the leprechaun by tying him up. Karkat knowing more than that would require exposition that isn’t given, so for now counting it as allowance seems like by far the most elegant solution.
As for Jake’s hope bubble in the masterpiece, this is why I feel it isn’t a Passive activity. It’s not Hope’s will at play here–It’s Jake’s. The narrative makes a big deal of *Jake* wanting to save Dirk here, *Jake* getting mad, *Jake* having a goal in mind that he achieves through Hope.
If he can’t control all of the specifics of it, well, sure–but Dirk can’t control how AR behaves all the time, either, and he doesn’t seem able to control BGD at all. Roxy, meanwhile, literally trains into being able to control Void to a staggering degree.
I still think that Jake making brain-ghost Dirk real was an example of him allowing/inviting others to fight through hope, and that Tavros’ army is an example of the same thing (Brain-ghost-Dirk especially I think is due to Dirk’s own will rather than anyone else’s) but you’ve explained it explicitly enough that I think our disagreements are pretty subjective now.
Jake is definitely Allowing Hope to benefit him in the case of Brain Ghost Dirk, but that’s the point–Jake wants to benefit himself, and Brain Ghost Dirk is an extension of his will in that regard.
I’m not sure how Dirk’s will comes into BGD, since Dirk scarcely seems aware of the Brain Ghost, doesn’t react at all when BGD is summoned, and is completely unaware of Aranea or the position Jake is in or anything.
Especially given that by this point, Dirk thinks of himself as a toxic element in Jake’s life and they’re technically broken up. Whilst the Brain Ghost is proudly declaring himself Jake’s boyfriend.
There’s a cognitive dissonance between them that can only be solved in two ways, as far as I can tell:
You either assume bad/unclear writing, or you assume this is Jake’s will manifesting through Brain Ghost Dirk, which lines up with all of the themes built up between Jake and Dirk up to this point.
It also means Dirk and Jake’s relationship got an actual conclusion, because we know Dirk still has feelings for Jake, and BGD gives us Jake’s actual answer and a clear view into what Jake actually wanted.
I’d be curious to hear your interpretation, of course. This is just how it looks to me right now.
She does! But Calliope also says that her definitions are just starting points, and that the system is much more complicated than what she describes. And there are clear examples of “Passive” classes exploiting (Roxy’s matriorb is as exploitative as it gets), and “Active” classes allowing.
My argument isn’t that Knights don’t exploit their Aspect at all, but rather that both Knights and Pages can make use of the “Exploit” and “Allow” uses–the determining factor is whether classes use their influence primarily for the benefit of “others” or for “themselves”.
3) One thing I would still like to challenge you on though, is that I still can’t see Thieves and Rogues being the opposites to Knights and Pages? Like Vriska literally says she weaponizes her aspect?
Like with the Aspects, I’m taking to viewing the Classes as complements, not opposites. And I don’t remember Vriska saying she weaponizes her Aspect. I don’t necessarily doubt it, but I feel it only backs up my point?
It would mean that Thieves/Rogues and Knights/Pages have a common underlying motif, tying them all together. Seers/Mages and Heirs/Witches have a similar underlying motif as I see it, so I wouldn’t be shocked to hear it honestly.
In my opinion, Weaponizing isn’t the most important thing Pages do–the Serve verb includes that connotation, but the most obvious way it’s dichotomous with Steal is the simple contrast of Give/Take.
Also I’m definitely interested in hearing your take on the contrast between Seer/Mages and Knights/Pages! I should be clear that I think the Classes, like the Aspects, can resonate in all kinds of different ways.
I really don’t think the nuance ends at what classes are Active/Passive pairs, or what the key verbs are. So i’m always interested in hearing people’s takes on how they’re connected, regardless of disagreement over the pairings I think they’re still relevant and interesting.
revolutionaryduelist said: Definitely the latter, I mean–I only picked up on the fairy god troll and gnome things because you messaged me! I’d be curious to know who you pair with Sylph/Maid and what the root of your disagreement is, if you find you have the time–but hopefully my reasoning will come into clearer focus with the next two essays :B
Thank You!! 😀
In answer to your question @revolutionaryduelist to be honest you’ve sold me on the Sylph/Maid pairing more than anyone else (Dahni, BKEW, etc) has. The root of my disagreement now is definitely more that I just can’t see Heirs and Witches being a pair?
Hmmm yeah, it looks to me like most of this is stuff I address in some way or another over the next two essays, so I’m going to play a bit coy with the caveat that I’m excited to hear what thoughts/critiques you have of those when they come out 😉
Hey @revolutionaryduelist, I’m going to hold off most of my counter arguments until I’ve seen your Witch/Heir post, but there’s one thing I would like to point out, namely-
The Master/Servant dynamic you suggest is interesting, but it suggests Knights are Active to Page’s Passive, which I strongly disagree with now (I used to consider it true).
-I’d argue that which class is more selfless and self-centered isn’t the only thing to look at when deciding which class is active and passive.
Going back to what Calliope has to say on the matter:
Aside from the selfish/selfless dichotomy, two other main concepts stand out to me:
Firstly, active classes directly do things to or through their aspect, whilst Passive classes do things indirectly, “allow”ing and “invite”ing their key verb to be actuated.
I’d argue that Knights more often do things directly through their aspect and that Pages more often do things indirectly?
For example Tavros assembles an army using metaphorical Breath, and in doing so invites/allows combat through his aspect. Similarly Jake uses Hope to allow Dirk to fight (or “Serve” as I know you’d put it) Aranea, and the way he uses his hope powers very much feels like he’s “allowing Hope” to beat down Jade and Caliborn, rather than consciously an directly using it?
Secondly, active classes “exploit” their aspect, while passive classes use their powers “as if by the will of the aspect”.
You may say that this point is a lot more subjective, and I’d agree with you, except that we have this quote from Aradia:
Note the explicit use of the word “exploit”.
That’s all I wanted to say really, thanks for reading!
I won’t go into tooo much depth because my post on Steal/Serve is going up literally tomorrow, but I will say you’re definitely correct here! I hold to Selfish/Selfless solely because I think it’s the most consistent element of characterization with regards to the Active and Passive classes.
Basically, I think the most critical element to determining Active/Passive is the “For oneself” or “For Others” distinction. Exploitation and Allowance come into it, but are more complicated. The next essay should make what I mean a lot clearer there.
For now I’d just be curious to know: In what way would you say Karkat “exploits” Blood? He’s not really cognizant of where his strengths lie even by the end, and yet he routinely solves conflicts by establishing bonds almost magically.
And what about Jake in the Masterpiece? There might be ambiguity to Karkat and Tavros (I’d argue Tavros’ behavior is much more in line with exploitation, but I already did so I won’t here), but Jake’s final act in the story is wielding his gay hope bubble against Caliborn as a weapon, which he does specifically because he, himself, decides he wants to save Dirk.
That seems much more in line with exploitation than with allowance to me–it’s willful, conscious and pre-determined.
So it seems to me that there’s definitely ambiguity here. I’m excited to see if I was successful in my attempt to clarify that ambiguity tomorrow :B
revolutionaryduelist said: Definitely the latter, I mean–I only picked up on the fairy god troll and gnome things because you messaged me! I’d be curious to know who you pair with Sylph/Maid and what the root of your disagreement is, if you find you have the time–but hopefully my reasoning will come into clearer focus with the next two essays :B
Thank You!! 😀
In answer to your question @revolutionaryduelist to be honest you’ve sold me on the Sylph/Maid pairing more than anyone else (Dahni, BKEW, etc) has. The root of my disagreement now is definitely more that I just can’t see Heirs and Witches being a pair?
Hmmm yeah, it looks to me like most of this is stuff I address in some way or another over the next two essays, so I’m going to play a bit coy with the caveat that I’m excited to hear what thoughts/critiques you have of those when they come out 😉
I do want to respond to some stuff, though:
I do want to clarify, I think the key verb for Heirs and Witches is “Change”, not “Manipulate”, which I’d regard as a more specific sub-verb that could fall under the Change label.
The Master/Servant dynamic you suggest is interesting, but it suggests Knights are Active to Page’s Passive, which I strongly disagree with now (I used to consider it true). I will say you’re closer than you think though, because according to wikipedia Pages were already considered Knights in Training anyway–a Squire is just a pretty well-trained Page, so you don’t need the middle step.
I think you’re onto something with the connection between Witches and Fairies in particular, btw–nothing I have super canonical evidence for outside of Jane, but suffice it to say I DO think there are ways classes thematically resonate with each other even if they’re not paired–just like many think Aspects do. It brings some interesting stuff to light, in my view.
As for the Unifying Myths, I currently only use Unifying Myths that are, in canon, tied to particular classes. IE: Ones that recur again and again related specifically to a pair of classes (instances of roleplay like Vriska’s also show up to muddy the waters elsewhere, but they are similarly resolved.), and which tell us interesting things about how both classes can be read.
Hence why I don’t list any for Prince/Bard and Rogue/Thief–I could probably hazard some guesses, but they don’t seem thematically or mechanically tied together by any notable trends I’d feel comfortable pointing to, other than the obvious key verbs we were given in the first place.
I also want to say that I struggled for the longest time with Heirs/Witches exactly because of this–I tossed some guesses, but hadn’t identified a Unifying Myth for them. I also struggled with the “Change” verb for a long time because it felt too broad to me, before I finally parsed it in a way that made sense along with “Know”.
If you think about it, all the classes Know things about their aspect or through their aspect, too. So whether you use Know or Understand, the Seer/Mage pair also seems sort of redundant. I think the relative broadness of these verbs is intentional, and is the reason why Eridan beat out Sollux in their little magic duel.
I don’t want to spoil the surprise as to how I think Change/Know work because I’m really proud of that essay in particular, but I owe a debt to a couple pals for pointing me in the right direction there, because I was honestly about to make these posts with a big old :shrug: for the Heir/Witch dynamic before I made the links that changed everything. That wasn’t a purposeful pun, I promise.
Also, I’ll let you know if you come off mean or something, but for now you’ve seemed entirely earnest and in good faith about this stuff, and I love having to question and shore up my views to make sure they actually do hold up under scrutiny! I appreciate the insight a lot and you’ve been great, no worries 🙂
Ok, this is a pretty good reasoning of the motif, however there are still a couple of things I think you’ve missed:
1: Vriska’s motivation for dressing up as fairy is to fulfill the whole pupa pan story, and this is then connected to her GT outfit. She doesn’t do it in conscious reference to her ancestor at all, and I don’t think her admiration for Mindfang is ever verbally or image-ly linked to her fairy motifs? Also Vriska’s tinkerbell reference is also sort of present in WV’s dream, something that isn’t really connected to Tavros?
2: The references to people being fairies are connected to the troll god tier outfit, as is the fairy imagery (butterfly wings, fairy dust – which is connected to tinkerbell in [S]wake but continues to be present in the comic afterwards). The reason I think this is important is that the Maids and Sylphs who aren’t troll god tiers (Jane, Kanaya, Porrim?) are never called fairies, which sort of implies that the motif has more to do with the god tier accesories than it has to do Maids and Sylphs?
Ok, so:
1. You’re right! A lot of Vriska’s playing up the Fairy thing has to do with Tavros…but Vriska wants to win over Tavros because of Mindfang in the first place. And as far as I can tell, these dynamics are just as often presented through…for lack of a better term, narrative game mechanics, as they are through explicit text.
As far as Mindfang is relevant to the narrative, she exists as a being Made of Light in Vriska’s eyes–her importance, agency and storytelling define her, and this a Light Vriska steals for herself, to make herself feel more important and capable.
For as long as Vriska is trying to live out Mindfang’s image specifically, and trying to recreate her relationship with the Summoner through herself and Tavros, she spends her time trying to act like a Sylph.
Think about what she’s doing with Tavros: She’s trying to get him to get stronger and more assertive, trying to increase his willpower, trying to get him to become more important.
If that sounds familiar, it’s because it’s what Aranea successfully does effortlessly with Jake. Vriska tries (and is equally harmful in the process) but she isn’t playing to her strengths like Aranea is. This isn’t her forte or where she excels–it’s a role she’s playing out because it’s Important to her.
And that’s reflected in the mechanics of how she tries to handle the people around her, just as it does with Dirk and Hal.
This is also why I don’t think WV’s dream presents a conflict–being a Fairy is something important to Vriska because of Mindfang as much as because of Tavros, though the two are deeply interrelated.
There’s lots of other examples of this in the story, too–I’m fairly certain I’ve missed many even now, since Vriska as a fairy wasn’t on my radar until you sent this. Again, I’ll go over some in more detail as this series goes up.
2. The troll god tier thing is complicated somewhat by the fact that the only two trolls who god tier are…Aradia, a fairy class, and Vriska, who’s trying to fit into the fairy figure. I agree there’s some muddling of themes, but not as much as it seems like. This is because no God Tier trolls are described as fairies besides Aradia or Vriska, and Vriska drops the aesthetic completely after dying/getting punched by John.
It’s also worth noting that the forms of exposition for the classes aren’t always symmetrical–like I pointed out in my Jade essay, Witches’ powerful guardians aren’t literally called Familiars, but by all definitions that’s exactly what they are. The implication is built into the nature of the title Witch, while their complement classes have parallels built up through other means.
This, again, will hopefully become clearer soon.
So too it is with a Sylph. Maybe they aren’t literally called fairies as often, but I’d argue they don’t need to be, because a Sylph by definition is a species of Fairy. It’s also untrue that Kanaya is never referred to as a Fairy! She receives the title “Fairy God Troll” in reference to her being Rose’s Patron troll, although Doc Scratch later says this about it:
As she prepares to alchemize new items, she is contacted by her “fairy god troll”, a distinction which does not necessarily have anything to do with being a kid’s patron troll.
She’s the only troll to be described this way, with one exception: Tavros in this pesterlog with Jade, where he’s described as a Fairy God Troll…and where he attempts to do the same thing Vriska is doing by inserting himself into Jade’s story, and even considers following Vriska’s ideology briefly and controlling Bec over Jade’s protests.
Tavros ultimately doesn’t end up being Jade’s patron troll–Karkat fills that role, and is not described as a Fairy. Kanaya is described as a Fairy God Troll and successfully lives out the role that implies, setting her apart in this regard.
Finally, Jane is complicated. Like Kanaya and Karkat, Jane’s entire arc is about struggling to find herself, and she spends a lot of time slotting herself into the role of an Heiress instead–something I think I’m likely to talk about in my essay about her now that I noticed it, ALSO thanks to you so thanks.
Hey! So, this is a really good point (and is leading me to thinking about Vriska in some interesting new Lights…)
What I will point out is this: I looked it over, and pretty much every time Vriska is referenced as a fairy, it either directly concerns or surrounds a pivotal moment in her arc with Tavros specifically. After [S] Wake, Vriska is never referenced as a Fairy again.
Vriska also at least somewhat admired two Fairy figures–she thought Kanaya’s lusus was the coolest of all of them, and she literally crafted herself in the image of Mindfang–a Sylph of Light herself. This is not the only instance of a character from one mythological role actively trying to fit into the context of another. I’ll be going into at least some others–but not all–in the next two posts. One thing I’m noticing more and more now that I have the understanding I do is that the way these mythological motifs affect different classes is complicated, and that this system has kind of essentially infinite depth. There’s a lot in this story for us to reconsider and rediscover, and I’m very excited about sharing it with you guys.
Stay tuned 😉
PS: As I release these essays, I’ll begin tagging posts concerning these mythological figures with their tags instead of going for the more awkward Active/Passive setup. I just think it’ll be more elegant that way, though I might have to think up terms for Prince/Bard and Thief/Rogue, who don’t seem to get them (as far as I can tell right now) because they’re freebies from Calliope.
Ok, you’ll try it out with one of your less prized possessions just to prove how dumb it is. You never liked this hat much. It makes you look like a gnome and basically isn’t funny at all.
Hey! So, this is a really good point (and is leading me to thinking about Vriska in some interesting new Lights…)
What I will point out is this: I looked it over, and pretty much every time Vriska is referenced as a fairy, it either directly concerns or surrounds a pivotal moment in her arc with Tavros specifically. After [S] Wake, Vriska is never referenced as a Fairy again.
Vriska also at least somewhat admired two Fairy figures–she thought Kanaya’s lusus was the coolest of all of them, and she literally crafted herself in the image of Mindfang–a Sylph of Light herself. This is not the only instance of a character from one mythological role actively trying to fit into the context of another. I’ll be going into at least some others–but not all–in the next two posts. One thing I’m noticing more and more now that I have the understanding I do is that the way these mythological motifs affect different classes is complicated, and that this system has kind of essentially infinite depth. There’s a lot in this story for us to reconsider and rediscover, and I’m very excited about sharing it with you guys.
Stay tuned 😉
PS: As I release these essays, I’ll begin tagging posts concerning these mythological figures with their tags instead of going for the more awkward Active/Passive setup. I just think it’ll be more elegant that way, though I might have to think up terms for Prince/Bard and Thief/Rogue, who don’t seem to get them (as far as I can tell right now) because they’re freebies from Calliope.
Flying through Storytelling 