Hooray! The Dumbing of Age Book 5 Kickstarter reached $50k, meaning everybody who pledges for a paper book (versus a PDF) will get a free Amber magnet. That’s pretty sweet.
Discussion (247) ¬
[ Comments RSS ]
Hooray! The Dumbing of Age Book 5 Kickstarter reached $50k, meaning everybody who pledges for a paper book (versus a PDF) will get a free Amber magnet. That’s pretty sweet.
Loading ...
fuckin’ do-goodin’ and charitableness and shit takin’ time out of my immature bullshitting
No one said she has to, jeez! Would be great if Carla did, but no one’s forcing her.
Her conscience is probably going to force her too, though. She pretends to be an asshole, but I think we all know by now that she’s really a bleeding-heart do-gooder.
And we hate that …… But wait! There’s cookies right? … We can still be grumpy and complain about it right?
that’s what i’m talkin’ about! why don’t people get that, man??
I’m fairly sure you guys need your humor and “inner lies we tell ourselves” sensors checked, because Ana’s comment indicates fondness for Carla and her current mental state to me.
I think you may need your verbal irony sensor checked.
wouldn’t really wanna be in Carla’s shoe–rollers right now.
Stuck doing broken-hearth-courrier jobs between Ruth (which is something close to a friend. With their interactions, I assume they’ve known each other outside what we’ve seen on panel) and some kid she barely know.
Broken-Hearth Couriers: the premier alert system for at-risk fireplaces.
Making me care, racksafrackin’. Don’t they know I’ve got a paper-thin mask of “too cool for school” rebel to maintain?
Her and Sal have much more in common than a fondness for beer and toleration of Malaya.
and then there’s Sarah…
I somehow suspect Sarah would not tolerate Malaya.
Sal and Carla are bitter misanthropic opponents of the System, leaning up against a wall and sneering at it.
Sarah is bitter and misanthropic, but she basically supports the System and is trying rise in it.
They fight crime!
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
And now Ana Chronistic needs a new avatar.
Oh, Carla. You’re such a sucker.
Is there a compendium somewhere of the characters of DOA? I only know what little I do from this strip. I have no idea what all the other universes are that many people refer to (walky-verse et al)
Well, it’s not official, but there’s Walkypedia.
Panel 2: Me choosing my D&D character’s alignment.
Panel 7: Me after my character had to turn down doing something awesomely evil.
Which is exactly why I play True Neutral.
Yeah, but in my experience a whole party of Neutrals inevitably leads to weird shit happening, even when they have clear goals and motivations.
But true neutral means you’re not excessively one thing or the other in any regard, not that you can do whatever you want so long as you balance it out later.
“You’re neutral, why are you burning down that orphanage?!”
“Don’t worry, I’ll give some money to charity later.”
Incidentally, this is one of my favorite Pathfinder images ever.
Carbon Offset!
Besides, that orphanage attacked me! You all saw it!
I will vouch for you.
Please tell me you picked that gravatar specifically for this response.
True neutral can mean allot of things. As long as you don’t comfortably fit under good or evil and don’t comfortably fit under lawful or chaotic you’re true neutral.
That’s why I always swing Chaotic Good. You can get away with everything if ya say it’s just followin’ your own definition of right and wrong.
Lawful Good can do that too.
Yeah, but generally speakin’ Chaotics don’t have to deal with collateral damage the same way Lawfuls do. Depends on the DM.
There was a rather lovely essay I read once that pointed out what each alignment was capable of at its worst, but I can’t seem to find it now. Their take on Neutral Good involved someone so dedicated to their ideals they were all but blind to collateral damage and willing to make some pretty questionable calls.
I suppose that is not what you meant, but it at least contains one cautionary sentence on each: http://www.easydamus.com/alignment.html
So, Groo, then?
Me too, but the creation of undead is an inherently evil act, so the GM was unimpressed with my plan to cast Command Undead on some wights, give them each a tube of Sovereign Glue, and make them spread it on themselves and grapple anyone I don’t like.
Remember: creating undead is evil but commanding them is fine and dandy.
Yeah, but anyone I have them kill becomes a wight too.
Yeah, but they’re sovGlue’d to another wight, so you essentially still only have one wight. Two wights don’t make a universal solvent.
So you’re saying two Wights don’t make a Wrong?
Wight you are.
There’s a test to find out what kind of character you would be IRL. I came out as a ChG Wizard7. I guess because the test didn’t have the Warlock class. 😀
Here: http://www.easydamus.com/character.html
There were some others, but nothing that would allow being a Warlock. I keep testing as either a Wizard or Cleric.
Well, Easydamus’ test was around before the Warlock class was made, and Warlock wasn’t a core class until 4E.
I usually test as a muticlass Ranger/Sorcerer. The suboptimal build makes me want to scream.
Woah I got true neutral bard/wizard. Human.
It surprised me to see I answered like 4 questions with the “evil” option. I wish I knew which they were.
Lawful Good Elf Wizard. No evil, although almost equal in Law and Chaos (very few Neutral, strangely). Leaned heavily towards monk and sorceror, but wizard was strongest.
That’s really cool! 🙂 I got Neutral Good Elf Wizard, Level 4. 😀
I got away with trying to kill the whole party as a good-aligned character by using a Sword of Berserking. I pointed out to the DM that although I knew the sword was cursed, my character wasn’t aware of the curse and still thought it was a +5 bastard sword, and therefore it wouldn’t make sense for my character to avoid using what she thought was her best weapon.
At least I think it taught them to think twice before trying to prank me with cursed gear again.
I think you managed to metagame by avoiding metagaming. (My head hurts…)
I generally go Chaotic Neutral because it provides the most leeway for telling the DM to fuck off when he starts trying to tell me my character wouldn’t do things because of my alignment.
I’ve said it before: Alignment is the single worst concept ever introduced to role-playing.
Alignment isn’t the worst concept. D&D alignment is.
Okay, I’m a tabletop game designer, this is going to be a rant. Brace yourself.
D&D has an axis of Good/Evil and Law/Chaos. This is utterly, completely ridiculous. It’s ridiculous on the surface. What is goodness? What is evil? What is lawfulness? What is chaotic? That which tears down the law of man enforces the law of nature. That which tears down the law of one nation enforces the law of another. That which creates chaos by freeing the slave enhances the moral law of equality.
And Good/Evil is even worse.
It’s not that we can’t define these terms. Personally I’d define anything that helps people as good, anything that harms them as evil. But that definition is so vague, and any given situation in reality is so full of nuanced degrees of these things, that in a game setting they become useless.
Is it good to destroy the civilization of the Drow, to slaughter their warriors and leave them defenseless against the beasts of the Underdark, simply because we have deemed certain aspects of their primary society evil? What about the Drow children made vulnerable by such an act? What about the Drow civilians left without warriors to defend them from Illithids that would enslave them in turn? What about the free will of Drow to establish their own sovereign nations in the Underdark, however oppressive their laws?
John Wick, one of the best game designers out there, shows the folly of D&D alignment with a simple question: What alignment is Batman? The answer is ALL OF THEM. Yes, even chaotic evil. And I’m not just talking about the way he’s written by different authors, I mean a case can be made that Batman’s core motivation is chaotic evil. He is a vigilante, inherently unlawful, and his core motivation is vengeance through the use of violence, which is evil.
And, of course, he’s also lawful good. And everything else.
Alignment can work. But you can’t just toss out axes like “Good” and “Evil”, or “Paragon” and “Renegade”.
So what can you do? You can set up a more clearly defined ideal. Take the Force, for instance. In The Empire Strikes Back, we get a pretty good explanation for the axis of the Force. The Light Side is for knowledge and defense. The Dark Side is for attack. When you are at peace, passive, you are of the Light Side. Anger, fear, aggression, the Dark Side are they.
Note that every single Star Wars video game gets this completely wrong. They just make it a standard Good/Evil axis, and it’s horrible. And also the Prequels pretty much fail to follow these rules, but I like to think that’s because of the corruption in the Jedi Order.
Anyway, think of the axis as originally presented. Does it work? Oh yes. It works great. But is it good/evil? No. There are times when anger can be righteous. There are times when attacking can be necessary. There are times when passivity works great evil. There are times when pure defense causes disaster.
The Light Side can be evil. The Dark Side can be good. But we have a clear picture of how the Light Side works, and how the Dark Side works. That makes it a valuable axis for alignment in a game.
Here’s another example: Ultima IV: Quest of the Avatar. There is no Good/Evil dichotomy here. Instead, you have virtues. Virtues like Compassion, Justice, and Honor. These are more clearly defined. A man steals bread to keep his children from starving. The law of the land demands that he lose his hand and be forever branded for his crime. Should that unduly harsh sentence be carried out? There is no “good” answer. There is no “evil” answer. There might be an answer that I think is good, or that you think is good, but any answer will have elements of both good and evil.
But there is certainly an answer that serves Justice: Yes he should be punished as the law demands. That is justice. There is also an answer that serves Compassion: No he shouldn’t, because the law is too harsh and he stole out of necessity. That is Compassion.
In this instance the virtues are opposed to each other. In another instance, Justice and Compassion might be on the same side. Unlike Good/Evil, they are easier to define. These definitions are still not perfect, and there is some quibbling room (can an unjust law truly serve Justice? Is it compassionate to allow a baker’s bread to be stolen for any reason?), but they are easier to define than Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos.
Alignment mechanics are wonderful. I’m a firm believer that you should have mechanics for anything in your game you want to promote, and the exploration of morality, of virtue, is one of the most powerful things you can promote in a game.
But Good/Evil is ridiculous. Law/Chaos is ridiculous. And don’t even get me started on spells that are contingent on alignment, or “Always Evil” races.
Honestly, for D&D I say scrub alignment altogether, and instead go with piety. Good? Evil? Law? Chaos? Doesn’t matter. What are the tenets of the god, or if you do not serve a god the ideology, that you swear to. How PIOUS are you. That works great for a high fantasy campaign where gods play such a huge role. A follower of Tyr and a follower of Bane will have very different ideas on what is good and what is evil, but they can be judged by how closely they adhere to the tenets of their god.
I’ve seen certain campaign settings based off DND kind of do this for divine spellcasters, with each god having a list of tenets that have to be followed to keep your power, but they still keep the alignment on top of that. Why not get rid of it? It’d still serve the same purpose. If you are typically heroic, then you’d consider a high piety score toward a god that upheld heroic ideals a good thing, and a high piety score toward, say, the god of murder an evil thing.
Plus it gets rid of Detect Evil, the bane of GMs everywhere.
/rant off
…
This is the greatest thing I never knew I needed.
In a world of Detect Alignment, “Disguise Alignment” Amulets are very popular.
In my tabletop group, we kinda dropped the alignments altogether. We detailed a good enough amount of our characters and the world around them so we can call bs on an action, though we rarely have to. Instead our alignment can be something descriptive of the personality like unmapped seas or ditzy snake. We just do those for fun. Same with classes although those tend to be more accurate.
Something I’ve done is said that people don’t have alignments, but gods do. Gods are stronger than people, but they are also less than people. They are constrained by their natures, unable to act in ways that contradict their purpose. So gods have alignments. When people worship gods, particularly divine spellcasters, they develop an aura of alignment and become susceptible to spells that affect that alignment.
So the secret polymorphed ogre infiltrating the castle doesn’t detect, but a Cleric of Shar would, because Shar’s divine alignment would taint the Cleric’s aura.
I didn’t come up with the idea, it was used in the Arcanis setting (although their gods didn’t have alignments, rather alignments were assigned by the aspect of the god worshiped, nor did they get rid of alignments altogether, they just had detect spells and the like fail to work unless their was a divine aura), but I’ve taken it further and used it with a degree of success. The downside is it makes alignment spells weaker and less useful, but not completely so.
Not following the law has nothing to do with the good/evil alignment. That just makes the character chaotic.
Except when Batman is portrayed as a bad guy, he is Good. Unless he’s working for the police ala the 30s serials or the 60s TV show, he’s Chaotic. He is Chaotic Good–the alignment for vigilantes.
Don’t get overly caught up in the minutia. Alignments are broad overviews. And that’s why they don’t really work as ways to shackle characters into acting certain ways. No character is 100% consistent with their alignment.
Consider real life. You probably consider yourself to be basically a good person. But do you ever do jerkish things? Do you ever get so angry that you hurt someone? You can’t be perfectly good all the time, now can you?
Alignment should be a tool–a broad outline for player characters and important NPCs. And a way to have lesser NPCs have motivations without having to get deep inside their heads.
And, sure, make it a mechanic to “detect evil” or something. Or as a way to see how much you follow your god. But let the characters move around the chart. Let the characters grow.
I agree with most of what you say. Curious how your stance would change with my personal definitions of “good” = prioritizing others and “evil” = prioritizing self. I could also add “lawful” = deliberate and “chaotic” = arbitrary (approximately, society vs. “natural order”).
seems like that would be Charity/Selfishness and Intention/Disarray (but perhaps with better words)
though, admittedly, even with that modification, it’s still a pointless stat set
So… does she eatthe femurs, or..?
She carves them into flutes, on which her orchestra of the damned will soon play the song that ends the earth.
Another awesome example of why we need an upvote system.
They’re already practicing!
Don’t be silly.
Everyone knows THAT tune will be played on the Bone Violin of Erich Zann.
Now, The Laundry…THAT’S an RPG for REAL paranoid maniacs…
now begin the adventures of Carla the babysitter
So does she give her a key, or…?
She just directs her to the secret shed filled with a week’s worth of copies.
“HEY HEY HEY, STAY OUT OF MY SHED”
Looks forward to the appearance of Thor.
Nobody leaves until they sing the Blues.
Wow, I guess Carla really is human
And thus, the transition of Carla into a gruff but lovable mentor figure begins!
I am so okay with Carla, the reluctant older mentor to the folks on the margins.
So, does this make her the Kenobi to everyone else’s Skywalker? (Original. Not prequel.)
I hope not. More powerful than Mary can possibly imagine or not, I’d rather not see the cute pacifistic badass get struck down.
I’m thinking more Yoda.
Snarky, poking fun at his charges, incredibly reluctant to help, but ultimately providing the most material help to the well-being and development of others.
Is the Snark Side stronger?
Hmm, now I’m imagining Carla having Billie carry her on her back while chuckling and offering pieces of advice.
“Crap, all this screen time is giving me chances to be likable.”
yes…I heartily approve of this new little subplot…
*plays Alice Cooper’s “No More Mister Nice Guy” on the hacked Muzak*
Really, I could only think of this upon first observation.
While I’m glad no one’s said ‘you owe us, we’re only putting ourselves through this cos of you’, I also really hope that’s nothing like the narrative going thru Carla’s head. Being a good person is inconvenient enough without being false-guilted into it, or false-guilting yourself
Carla doesn’t seem like the kind of person to allow herself to be guilted into anything.
But, a simple straight forward plea seems to be doing something to her. 😉
Except by herself. Except by herself.
I’m not saying I ship it, but I suddenly find myself wondering what a Carla/Mike relationship would look like.
Angrily shoving a nickel back and forth between each other, because she’s no one’s mama (and doesn’t want to be one, or even ‘practice’ at being one), and he doesn’t work for free. :p
This. This is why we need a +1 button.
It’s 22 hours of constant insults in between or during the most epic hate fucks ever witnessed in the history of mankind and then 4 hours passed out from exhaustion and overloadin’ the jerk-ass centers of their brains.
Also it apparently warps the Earth’s rotation, giving us a new 26 hour day?
Nah, they just don’t match their schedule to the days of the week.
wonder all you like, but Carla’s not into dudes.
Mike abusing her until she gets tired of it and pisses off.
Mike trying to get under her skin, but Carla having none of it and refusing to give him an entrance for more*.
So basically, her and Mary Part 2, but without the religious appeals to authority.
*Sadly Mike in this universe as been consistent as a voice adding weight to the loads of the marginalized. I have no doubt he would try to do the same to Carla, relying on her presentation, but likely having no idea that she’s heard all this shit a thousand times before.
And yeah, Carla ain’t interested in men and probably isn’t even interested in sex, so yeah, sexytimes are never going to happen between them.
Carla was confirmed as asexual, in or around the same tumblr post that confirmed her as trans.
I think. I’m sick and it’s been well over a calendar year since said post.
Willis has explicitly said on Tumblr that DoA Carla is trans and asexual.
Yeah, she’s ace and her counterpart was also pretty repulsed by “human mating habits” so I suspect that would translate into being sex-repulsed as well, but that might no longer be the case.
IIRC Willis has stated that Carla is as sex-repulsed as Ultra Car.
*googles “morlock”*
*also googles “morlock”*
So, does Ruth resemble an H.G. Wells morlock, or a Marvel Comics morlock?
Probably refers to the Marvel comics one, given Willis’ preoccupation with comics in general.
Given that the alt text mentioned the Eloi, that’s a bad bet.
[Billie rushes in wearing a Captain Hammer shirt]
“The Eloi is my clitoris.”
Wells. The overtext talks about Eloi, so that’s how you know- Marvel has no standin for the Eloi (unless you count non-powered people living on Marvel’s Earth, just waiting for something to happen to them).
and complaining about all the supers, for saving them and existing.
Or a Doctor Who morlock?
They made a classic film of Wells’ story
And then, more recently, they made another.
(Though technically, neither film is Wells’ story, which was very much a product of its time and would probably not play well with modern audiences. Just one notable difference between both movies and the original is that there’s no love interest; Weena, like all Eloi, is such a simple creature that the Traveller treats her more like a pet.)
Somebody has to say it: No good deed goes unpunished.
Ahh yes, Rule #285.
Yes, but Carla, if you’re nice to Ruth and Billie, they’re less likely to “notice” when Mary ends up stapled to the wall with magic marker all over her face. Just sayin.’ :3
The Ding Dong Bandit will ride again!
YO DING DONG MAN DING DONG YO
Don’t you quote Weird Al to ME young man!
You ain’t fat! You ain’t NOTHIN’!
It’s just as the Blue Willis said! “If you prove yourself to be brave, true, and unselfish, then you too will be a real girl!”
And we got to skip the trauma of Pleasure Island! Win-win!
Interesting. I’m interested to see how Carla is going to handle this.
Ruth and Billie need each other. Even if they are terrible for each other.
I really hope they get their shit in one sock. They could be so good together.
Ruth and Billie are like sodium and chlorine. Dangerous separately, but put them together and you get something that makes French Fries, (and cookies), taste better. And isn’t that what really matters.
Carla has to learn, the is no such thing as a ‘Free Cookie’. Now, let the lesson, begin.
Turns out the price of free cookies is a steep one.
She was temped to the light side.
WITH COOKIES.
It’s really a good thing that Carla is in on the fact that these two have a thing and that no one has ever really probed into it, because these two are utterly fucking horrible at hiding it!
It’s also why they so desperately needed a confidant. Someone they can drop the pretense with and who they can just be open and honest with. Carla may hate that, but they’ve needed someone as anti-authoritarian and mellow about queer stuff as her even before Mary.
This will also displace some of the pressure and the co-dependence and allow both to be healthier whether they get back together or not. Not that Carla will enjoy being their go-between or not resent having that role thrust upon her by her own empathy.
Carla is adorable. I say this a lot but she keeps being adorable.
So the Asian girl with a ponytail and glasses is asking for help of the redhead with a ponytail and glasses.
They even have the same hairdo in the front!
It also happens to be the same hairdo Willis’ avatar’s got sans ponytail. Coincidence? Maybe, I’m not really sure.
Yeah. The bangs part of a lot of character hair designs is similar.
I’m still saying Carla is obviously Billie and Ruth’s secret lesbian baby who came back in time to make sure her moms get together. She inherited Billie’s hairstyle and eyes, and Ruth’s build and glasses (yes, cartoon character genetic inheritance includes hairstyle and glasses), and kind of mixed their hair colors.
You might be on to something. Willis has just introduced time travel to the story by mentioning Morlocks and Eloi.
Must have been a project sponsored by the Keener Administration.
And she thought it was just a dead end project to keep Walky busy.
Excuse me, the propor term is Gayby, thank you very much.
I should know better than to trust Howard and his American sex ed.
Fun fact: If you scroll down. I made the exact same joke on that strip almost 3 years ago.
Oh Carla, you’re such a babe. And omg Billie’s face in panel 3 (and 5 for that matter) . She cares soooo much :3
The reward of a commandment is the opportunity to do another commandment. It.. it’s not always a very good reward.
Bob damn empathy will get you every time.
Huzzah! Redeeming quality!
The same redeeming quality she’s had for-goddamned-ever.
Come on, Carla, don’t be racist against us Morlocks.
After all, Morlocks ARE our future! Don’t believe me? Just watch the evening news.
We’re the ones who know how to run this Internet that’s keeping all you Eloi fat, dumb, and
tastyhappy.Carla’s services ain’t free, Billie. She charges a 6 cookie fee per job.
Dumbing of Triangle: DAY 12
http://imgur.com/Lf0aCAr
Old strips now being ported: http://imgur.com/a/7FHYX
Oddly fitting.
But more seriously, I’m loving this one so much.
Not only is it the confirmation of what I suspected. That Carla is an empathetic and caring person but tries and avoid it because she sees it as putting her in vulnerable situations and too in touch with her emotions.
Also that she can’t help herself. She had to stop when she had an opportunity to just walk with the remaining cookies. She checks in with Ruth and provides some solid albeit snarky comforting, setting herself up as a confidant down the road (much to her chagrin). She reports back to Billie even though she knows it will further emotionally entangle her in a situation that is very much not her problem. And when she’s asked to check in on Ruth, she grumbles about it, but there’s no doubt that she’s going to agree to it anyways.
Just like she was quick to provide first-aid to Amber, it’s clear that she identifies a little too strongly with the person hurting and alone separated away from everyone else to allow herself to fully disconnect from humanity and its disappointments and bigotries (I mean, she was right, she was treated as a tool by Mary as well as not a full person herself, in the same way that NC’s governor sees trans people both as a means of stoking up the base and a hatable minority worth oppressing).
Despite herself she cares when others hurt. She cares when she’s being attacked or thinks she’s being attacked. She even is sure to be there to the loner alienating themselves in a corner away from the world (Sal). Despite how little she identifies herself with “good person” and how much she has wrapped in the self-identity of “asshole”, she is a good person and it peeks through consistently.
A complete jackass, yes, but also a genuinely empathetic and good person.
Panels 2 and 6 demonstrate all this the most. You can see her desperation to cling to the mask of “I don’t give a fuck, I’m Carla” just losing the battle against how much she cares. And that’s scary for her, because all of her confidence is wrapped up in projecting not caring when people like Mary target her.
In her mind, if it gets known that she’s a big softie, she’ll just become a victim again. For those of you who’ve seen Zootopia, there’s a major character she reminds me a lot of for that reason.
It seems to be a running theme in this comic, characters who think they can protect themselves by not caring or pretending not to care, and yet, they can’t help it. Carla, Sarah, Ruth, and probably others as well.
–oh and Joe. I knew I was forgetting at least one other character. It’s a thing!
Wait, when did Joe have one of those moments?
He sorta had a moment with Joyce last chapter?
forizzle tho I’m drawing a blank. Even his broest moments with Danny still have him be an uncaring meathead.
We know that he makes choices specifically to avoid feelings (especially his own, but also those of others), which is a large part of what makes him a douche. He’s way more successful at it, though, so perhaps he’s not quite in this category of people-who-still-can’t-help-but-care. http://www.dumbingofage.com/2015/comic/book-5/02-threes-a-crowd/fetishy/
Yeah, which is kinda a thing a lot of people have to unlearn in early college. That the practiced disaffection sold as armor to the world will neither dissuade your empathy nor protect against pain.
I bet you’re right. I don’t encounter this stance very often, probably because I care about everyone and everything ever, which selects for friends who are also empathetic, passionate, and genuine about it. Empathetic overthinkers, unite!
I’m a teacher who teaches a lot of high school students and mentored a lot of college kids. So I see this sort of thing a lot and I see it most in those who are the most empathetic and passionate because they are used to being teased by peers or dismissed by adults for those qualities.
Hi yes this.
A surprising number of adults, when met with a sensitive and empathetic kid who is getting taken advantage of and pushed around and bullied for their sensitive and empathetic nature, decide the solution is that there needs to be less sensitivity and empathy in the world, not fewer places where abusive jackasses act with impunity.
True. I imagine my early environment was a good fit for my personality in that way. My immediate sphere rewarded empathy, and nobody modeled Invulnerability Through Having No Feelings. When later people tried to get me to not feel things, I had a very basic belief that my feelings are mine, dammit, and I remember to this day how angry I was about it. /therapysession
For me, about that age, it was acknowledging that even though I’m an introvert, I do have strong feelings and a desire/need for social contact, I can’t deny or ignore them forever by shutting myself up in my room with my books etc, and if I don’t learn to handle and express them appropriately, they will eventually come out in inappropriate ways … which, up to then, drove me back into hiding and declaring sour grapes over the whole thing.
Hooboy I relate to Carla in this strip. That feeling of, “… fuck. I care about this too much to blow it off, don’t I? Damn it.”
If you grew up being bullied and taken advantage of for your empathy, following an empathetic impulse is scary. Cuz you’re never quite sure if this person actually needs your help or if this is yet another con game so they can make fun of you for being sensitive or wanting to help people. So every time I come across a situation where someone obviously needs help, my wariness and my empathy are at war and I get that I want to help but I’m scared to help but I want to help, rinse and repeat with bonus analysis paralysis until a decision is made.
Gets easier with each time I decide to help since I’ve left high school because I am not required to spend much of my day around sadistic assholes who take joy in causing other people pain and misery, so I don’t tend to run into situations where someone is staging an elaborate hoax where the punchline is I actually have a shred of empathy that hasn’t been stamped out yet.
This makes me want to read some Carla backstory. Also, I’m sorry you had to go through that kind of mindfuckery.
Very much! I think it’d be heart-breaking though.
Also *hugs* for ischemgeek and yeah, that high school and internet culture thing of mocking people for caring about things is really fucking stupid and probably why I encourage and reward actually caring about things in my classes where I can.
Clearly a Roadblock poster is needed in this situation.
Oh Carla. You’re hard to love. But you’re even harder to hate.
And Carla gets yet another reason for revenge on Mary.
Later on, Carla is standing over Mary with pie in hand:
“You made me care about people! I’ll never forgive you!”
“Wait, what about the transphobia?”
“That’s what the second pie is for!”
Mary: “Wha…What flavor are they?”
Carla: “Pie 1 is apple. Pie 2 is fig.”
Mary: “NNNNOOOOOOOO-” *splat of pie*
Canonically, they were sweet pickle pies.
Really.
JOKES ON YOU. I LIKE CREAM PIES.
(everyone on the floor laughs)
Mary: No, no, not like in the porn I- er… RUTH’S SLEEPING WITH A GIRL!
Everyone else: Knew it, it’s Mandy isn’t it?
Mandy: Hey!
Your pie, sir!
*claps raucously*
Meanwhile on the boys side…
Joe: “I just felt a disturbance in the force.”
I doubt pie is sufficient for “the machinations of my revenge will be cold, swift, and absolutely ridiculous”, UNLESS the pies are the skin staining type.
“What about the third pie?”
“Because I felt like it.”
“Hrm, looks like my transphobia-curing pie needs more work. Maybe a bit more cumin…”
“Extra butter! Less nutmeg! I’m a genius!”
Don’t worry Carla, I don’t think anyone could EVER mistake you for a good person.
She does work very, very hard at not appearing to be a good person, doesn’t she.
Too bad she’s failing with anyone who matters.
Yup and a yup to TamiDOA as well.
She wants to appear to not be a good person, just someone you steer away from, but she can’t help it. She cares. And it peeks its way through too damn easily, either in reaching out to people like Ruth or Amber or Sal or in amping up her persona for assholes like Mary.
So will someone whitemail her with a threat to reveal her good deeds to the world?
Years later, Billie and Ruth would remember this as the day Carla became one of their best friends and confidants. Carla meanwhile, would remember it as that one time she let her conscience convince her to do something nice and began the slow downward spiral into a “good person”, even if she secretly had been before.
She’s invited as their joint Maid of Honor and quietly curses to herself as she rolls into place.
Caring about people leads to further caring. What a goddamn travesty.
Endless upward spiral, like a goddamned Escher print.
Better morlock than aryan
It fits well with the Murder Cave too, which is nice.
I misunderstood Carla’s comment as “Murloc” at first and have no regrets about the ensuing mental images.
Mrglmrgl!
Aryan murlocs sound horrifying, though. I’m sure there’s fanart of the things wearing toupees, and I do not want to see it.
Maybe Blizz will feature them in one of the future expansions where they will take revenge on all the adventurers that killed them for decades and they will take over the world. Suck on that demons!
I remember when there were rumours that Murlocs were going to be playable at one point.
That would probably get me back into WoW.
Okay, Carla’s alright. Wasn’t too keen on her these past strips but now I buy that she’s a decent person. 🙂
Damn you human decency!
Friggin morlocks!
She can’t look that bad, can she? o_O
Well, she seems to have developed the reflective eyes…
And the moral of the story is never do nice things for anybody 🙂
No good deed goes unpunished.
I didn’t know what morlocks were prior to looking them up just now, so when I saw the strip title I interpreted it as the ship name for Moriarty/Sherlock.
Not sure why that Morlock would be in Dumbing of Age, but I was 100% convinced that this was the case for the five seconds it took the page to load.
*Googles*
So that ship is referred to as either Sheriarty or Jimlock. Yeah, I guess Morlock wouldn’t be the best ship name given the existing definition.
I like Morlock better than either of those.
Oh, phew, I feared, from the preview panel, that Mary would walk by and say something awful.
Poor Carla! She desperately wants to be a carefree, cares-for-no-one type. Unfortunately, she has that damn conscience, which kicks in whenever she actually interacts with people! Besides, no-one with a modicum of humanity could turn their backs on Billie’s heartbreaking desperation here!
I feel you, Carla. I totally feel you.
Gah, now you’ve got me thinking that Well’s The Time Traveler is some kind of fascist warning about the “subhumans” taking over the world. Wells was a eugenicist as well as peddling in other forms of dodgy racism IIRC
One of the great unexplained mysteries of The Time Machine is just who were the subhumans: The industrialised and highly intelligent Morlocks or the barely-civilised Eloi? Arguments can be made for both.
The classic film version makes a good point that the Eloi met the Victorian mind’s idea of a utopia – pastoral, peaceful and with infinite leisure. However, in the end, they had no learning, no civilisation and no culture. They had no purpose other than to serve as food animals for the Morlocks. As for the Morlocks? They were cannibals, yes, but they were also perhaps better suited to survive from the most brutalistic Darwinian perspective.
FWIW, the backstory of the Daleks is a very slight modification of the events in The Time Machine. Once again, we see that those more able to survive took on a horrific aspect, having set aside all morality and higher perspectives in favour of an absolute focus on survival. Whilst repugnant to our ethics, the Daleks were the ones who made it into space and ultimately became the second greatest civilisation in the universe after the Galifreyans whilst the Thals descended into hunter-gatherer barbarism and finally faded into extinction as the Daleks inevitably claimed all of their homeworld for their own.
Purely IMHO, Wells wasn’t marketing any kind of racism or eugenics in this book (although I believe he was a believer in both). He was highlighting something that we also see in The War of the Worlds and The Island of Doctor Moreau – That technological progress and biological enhancement is valueless if it is not matched by equally great strides in ethics and morality to enable these changes not to ultimately become destructive in nature. It was Wells’ argument that a perfect future had to have equally great technological, biological and ethical foundations to not unbalance in one way or another.
Your comment is a little more thought-out than my first reaction. Still, even in Mr Polly, I can’t shake off the feeling that the moralising eugenicist in Wells is somewhere lurking. In the film of The Shape of Things to Come, the same dichotomy of views hold sway. The Airmen are vaguely fascist and face a revolt when they reach for the stars. As the USA – and a lot of other democratic societies – shows, you can reach for the stars and still be thought of democratic.
I wonder though if Wells was the typical late Victorian moralist, rather than the more modern ethicist. At the end of the Time Machine, the friend who’s left behind says “what books would you take with you if you were going to re-build civilisation?” Civilisation has come to be seen as different things since the 2WW. In Wells’s day, they were seen as marrying Christian morals and progress, often for suppressing minorities and the lower orders. See the White Man’s burden as an example. He may not have been *marketing* racism or eugenics – he was too good a writer for that – I believe that this is often the underlying tone. Like any good polemicist author, he’s submerging the overtly political tones in an adventure story but I think it’s still there.
As for technology, the English – from Wordsworth onwards – have an ambivalent view of industrialisation. On the one hand, it’s a source of wealth, on the other hand, it usual requires artisans who have knowledge but were usually lower class, and thus fewer morals. In Brideshead Revisited, Rex is very much seen as stupid and, being a self-made industrial good at making money, completely lacking in morals and humanity. That I think cuts towards Well’s view, but it really is an overly simplistic view of humanity. I’m not sure Bertrand Russell would agree with scientists and engineers being amoral.
Zulu – an otherwise terrible film – has an engineer as hero who is given a ‘war is hell’ speech. I find this is atypical of my fellow countryman’s attitude towards science and engineering.
The Daleks I see are a stand in for the Nazis, where they are technically brilliant, and efficient and end up at the top of the pile. This even crops up in Star Trek where Spock even has a little speech praising the Nazis. The problem with this meme is that the Nazis lost so badly that, rightfully so, their culture was trashed into the ground and people still following it are viewed as idiots.
Also (I suppose technically this is more anti-Mussolini than Nazi, specifically), the trains didn’t always run on time. The fascist efficiency was corrupt and overblown.
And Hitler spent a lot of time personally reviewing individual half-Jews’ requests to be classified as German and have their army posts reinstated. Much of the work was done by subordinates, but he had the final say, and he took time out of, say planning battles in Russia to decide if Heinrich or Wolfgang looked sufficiently German to fight. This is in no way even close to efficient or effective.
You have to remember that eugenics was a predominantly middle-class phenomena; most favoured among nouveau riche and intellectual workers like doctors, lawyers, bankers, clerks, etc., more than anyone else.
Wells’ depiction of eugenics is a pretty common view for the time, seeing the aristocrats on top of society as decadent and useless, with the Morlocks being identified with the working class; able to work machines but otherwise little more than inhuman savages. Most importantly, the thing gone from this world is those in the middle; humanity having migrated towards two extremes and eliminated the thing which gave it balance and guidance.
Is that the intended reading? No-one can say. There are nuances, though, that need to be considered from the time it was written.
Guys, it’d be interesting to look at HG Wells’ backstory as he was actually a kind of crazy ridiculous progressive for his time. The WAR OF THE WORLDS is about Imperialism and how much it would suck if someone like Super-Britain came to YOUR place to murder you and steal your land. The Time Machine was actually a gross satire on the ideas of the nobility and idea of subhumans having their place. The Eloi are a bunch of stupid children degenerated into becoming cattle for those who actually did the real work in society. Which is meant to be an inversion of the Time Traveller’s idea that the Eloi were somehow the “rulers” of the future and illustrate how little Wells thought of the pretensions of the aristocracy.
HG Wells helped found the Progressive League which believed the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_League. Now, there’s at least one area which is absolutely evil but he believed in the decriminalization of homosexuality, the equality of women, the equality of races, and free-love.
Note: The absolutely evil part is the treatment of the mentally handicapped.
Also, his belief in free-love mostly went against the wishes of his wife.
That too. Still, if you wanted to talk to a dude from the 19th century who didn’t sound like an enormous racist classicist bigot then you could do worse than Wells.
Yeah, you’re not really disagreeing with my point, is the thing: Wells apparently agreed enough with a society that called for the sterilization of people with mental handicaps that I don’t feel uncomfortable saying he was in favour of eugenics.
Again, eugenics wasn’t really an aristocratic movement; it was way more popular with the rising middle-class. Wells was taking a swipe at the aristocrats, certainly, but he was also taking a swipe at the working class. He was saying that, in their present state, this was the destiny of both: Decadence rendering the aristocrats superficial and useless, and drudgery turning the working class savage and vicious.
Don’t get me wrong, he was a cool dude, but eugenics was popular and he definitely saw something in it.
Aryan = A Ryan
Coincidence? I THINK NOT!
Hmmm that could explain some of the…war crimes.
literally all I could think of
I know exactly how you feel, Carla. It’s real easy for other people’s problems to become my problems, to end up caring to the point where you feel like you’re going to have a breakdown because you can’t set things down. Sometimes it feels easier just to keep everybody at arm’s length.
I can’t tell whether Carla is into HG Wells or mid-80s X-Men.
Oh, nice Carla is nice.
I had this conversation happen to me in real life with more or less the exact same results.
Post your alternative Carla answers!
“It depends, are there cookies in this for me?”
“No.”
“Will I check on her to make sure she’s dead? Sure.”
Is this going to evolve into some weird love triangle?
Because if it does, I will be so done it won’t even
I really don’t see Carla putting up with either of those two’s enormous piles of drama.
I think Carla appreciates a healthy amount of ribbing in her relationships. If Billie or Ruth were able to more effectively deal with their problems, I could kinda see it happening.
Oh no jackassery and drama are different things entirely. I’m referring more to their extreme codependency and alcoholism than their being asshats.
Well, Ruth and Billie is doomed and it’ll be good for both when they’re done so Carla would be good for both individually I think.
Kinda like the whole Amber-Danny-Ethan thing?
Or am I reading this wrong?
Pretty much, yeah.
What makes you think Amber and Danny are doomed?
Insofar that they probably are doomed, as DoA’s supposed to go on for years and years so it’s unlikely that any one pair will stay together through the entire runtime of the series.
Well, I think they’re doomed in the same sense Billie and Ruth are in that Amber needs to be someone who Danny doesn’t encourage her to be.
I mean, that’s kinda been the gist of things for him for a while now, hasn’t it? Even his last appearance was him being point blankly told by Sal that he was enabling her, and prior to that whenever he thinks she’s in some kind of pain he tries to help her by seeking outside support, rather than encouraging her to still be a superhero. It was Amber (and Ethan that one time) telling him that things are fine and there’s nothing to worry about because she just needs time to reboot that motivated him to just go with it.
He was absolutely into the superhero fantasy aspect of their relationship because he didn’t realize how harmful it was to her, but that’s something he’s gradually been getting pulled out of since the Blaine fight, and his talk with Sal was basically the nail in the coffin for him thinking that it was okay for Amber to still be Amazi-Girl.
*chanting* triad, triad, triad, triad!
Heh. She does the bare minimum for basic human decency and literally gives herself a cookie.
‘Carla has a good person peeking out thru her asshole’
-Cerberus
Dammit Carla! Stop putting tiny good people up your asshole…it’s not nice!
*slow clap*
Well shit. All that grousing about Carla this past week and I’m right back around to being willing to like her more. QUITE PLAYING GAMES WITH MY HEART, WILLIS!
But that’s his job.
Sooooo. That person talking about how Carla has no redeeming qualities want to talk about this page?
I don’t know why but I read Billie’s voice in a southern bell accent.
If you give a Ruth a cookie…
I’m right there witcha, Carla.
So I’m going to pull a Sal here because experience:
I understand that certain universities frown on moving dorms mid semester, but that doesn’t mean its impossible. I was in a terrible situation with one of my RAs and my dorm mate that was not being resolved normally because the RA and dorm mate were best friends and the Residence Hall People refused to take my word over my RAs. I spent a very annoying 2 months “dealing” and “working around” the situation. Finally I contacted my Dorm’s Manager, and he pointed out that they wouldn’t object to me changing halls, only moving ROOMS was an issue (since many people did it to get with friends or to get the “best room” … vanity really).
All I had to do was talk to the Residence people on campus and find a dorm with room, and make sure that my loans that they received before would cover the cost of the new dorm, or if I had to pay more etc.
I moved in a week. The remainder of the semester rocked.
Right now the ONLY issue that Billie and Ruth have is that Ruth is her RA. That’s it. That is the ONLY thing Mary has on them. If Billie were to change Dorms that would no longer be the case. it would open up the world a bit, but Billie and Ruth could have a relationship, and Ruth could still protect students like Carla from students like Mary.
Done.
I mean, there’d be some suspicion cause once they “came out” with their relationship it would become super obvious that they didn’t just start dating yesterday, but yeah at that point Mary would have nothing on them except hearsay.
…So, did you reference the Time Machine just so that you could have a strip title that you hadn’t used yet?
Being a jerk sucks emotionally, but you have so much more free time