Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
76
General Discussion / Sinking In The Truth, The Truth Sinks In -- A Global Warming
« on: March 14, 2006, 03:53:10 pm »
ZeaLitY has an informal prohibition in place on political debates around here, on the grounds that they scare off new users. So I figured, why not post something political that is factually non-debatable? Aha! We have just such a thing in global warming, whose "bandwagon" has gotten a fair bit bigger now that NASA has climbed aboard. I present the following short essay for your information. Attention on deck!
~~~
The truth isn’t always as conveniently obvious as a rising flood up to our necks. But sometimes it is. Take global warming, for instance. The very existence of this phenomenon was long a fierce scientific question with potentially serious ramifications for human society, and consequently fomented a tireless political debate that has only in recent years begun to peter out—not because conservatives, when finally faced with overwhelming evidence, were prepared to admit they were wrong, but because when the water is up to your neck it’s hard to argue with your head up your ass.
The scientific questions surrounding global warming continue. But what isn’t a question anymore is that global warming itself does indeed exist. Vast empirical evidence, in the form of observations of every kind, has proven at least this question beyond a reasonable doubt: The Earth is warming up. And now that no less an institution than NASA is behind this statement, following two major studies that the agency describes as the most comprehensive ever, the “global warming is a myth” myth will probably never recover. Instead we should expect to see conservatives focus more and more in the coming years on the argument that, yes, global warming is real, but that it is due to natural factors rather than smokestacks and tailpipes, and therefore should not affect our vaunted “free markets.”
That question has yet to be decisively answered in scientific circles. And conservatives, who often despise science, are going to exploit the absence of scientific certainty to the utmost, implying that their position is correct because it has not been disproved, just as they did with the issue of the mere existence of global warming. And the general public, for whom science is a vaguely unsettling cult practiced by bespectacled professors in white lab coats, won’t know the difference—nor would they be likely to care even if they did.
Nevertheless, something has been overlooked in all of this. Conservatives, in admitting that global warming is real, have implicitly conceded that there is indeed a problem to address. To a certain extent, it doesn’t matter if the problem is caused by humans or not. It will affect us all the same. We will have to adapt to our changing climates. Such a premise is the very antithesis of institutional inaction. We have to change. Government policy and industry practice alike, we have to change. Our opportunity to reverse this warming, if such a chance ever existed within our means, is probably gone. So the liberals were right all along. And when the need for change “sinks” into the heads of the chief Neanderthals of our knuckle-dragging conservative brethren in Red America, the debate over action will finally become not “if,” but “how.” If only the truth were so conveniently obvious more often, as a rising flood.
~~~
The truth isn’t always as conveniently obvious as a rising flood up to our necks. But sometimes it is. Take global warming, for instance. The very existence of this phenomenon was long a fierce scientific question with potentially serious ramifications for human society, and consequently fomented a tireless political debate that has only in recent years begun to peter out—not because conservatives, when finally faced with overwhelming evidence, were prepared to admit they were wrong, but because when the water is up to your neck it’s hard to argue with your head up your ass.
The scientific questions surrounding global warming continue. But what isn’t a question anymore is that global warming itself does indeed exist. Vast empirical evidence, in the form of observations of every kind, has proven at least this question beyond a reasonable doubt: The Earth is warming up. And now that no less an institution than NASA is behind this statement, following two major studies that the agency describes as the most comprehensive ever, the “global warming is a myth” myth will probably never recover. Instead we should expect to see conservatives focus more and more in the coming years on the argument that, yes, global warming is real, but that it is due to natural factors rather than smokestacks and tailpipes, and therefore should not affect our vaunted “free markets.”
That question has yet to be decisively answered in scientific circles. And conservatives, who often despise science, are going to exploit the absence of scientific certainty to the utmost, implying that their position is correct because it has not been disproved, just as they did with the issue of the mere existence of global warming. And the general public, for whom science is a vaguely unsettling cult practiced by bespectacled professors in white lab coats, won’t know the difference—nor would they be likely to care even if they did.
Nevertheless, something has been overlooked in all of this. Conservatives, in admitting that global warming is real, have implicitly conceded that there is indeed a problem to address. To a certain extent, it doesn’t matter if the problem is caused by humans or not. It will affect us all the same. We will have to adapt to our changing climates. Such a premise is the very antithesis of institutional inaction. We have to change. Government policy and industry practice alike, we have to change. Our opportunity to reverse this warming, if such a chance ever existed within our means, is probably gone. So the liberals were right all along. And when the need for change “sinks” into the heads of the chief Neanderthals of our knuckle-dragging conservative brethren in Red America, the debate over action will finally become not “if,” but “how.” If only the truth were so conveniently obvious more often, as a rising flood.
77
Chrono / Gameplay Casual Discussion / Chrono Trigger Meets Dungeons & Dragons
« on: January 19, 2006, 05:01:59 pm »
I was a bit hesitant to post this in the Analysis section, so I am posting it here. The premise is quite straightforward! We take Chrono Trigger characters, and assign them D&D alignments.
Before we get started, none of this discussion means anything without a common definition for these alignments that we can all work from. So, let us do that first.
~~~~~
Good vs. Evil
D&D, although being rather vague on the subject, suggests that Good is closely associated with altruism, compassion, courage, loyalty, and dependability, whereas Evil is associated with selfishness, malice, dishonesty, deceit, and conniption. (“Conniption,” for the 98 percent of you who don’t know that word, is a state of violent, overwhelming emotion…like a fit.)
This common depiction of Good vs. Evil suffers from being rather overly simplistic and often unrealistic, as characters assigned to one end of the spectrum will often exhibit traits from the other side. However, we will go with it for the sake of convenience, rather than, say, force my own definition on everybody, which would undoubtedly derail the topic.
Law vs. Chaos
D&D does a slightly better job with this axis, probably because it is much easier to define. It suggests that Lawfulness is associated with dutifulness, deference, dogmatism, and, in keeping with the letter D, deuteronomy. D&D takes a more relativist attitude with this axis, stating explicitly that residency anywhere on the spectrum has both its ups and downs. Thus, where Lawfulness is concerned, disadvantages include closed-mindedness, prejudice, disparagement, and conservativeness.
In contrast, in D&D Chaoticness (sic) is associated with caprice, flexibility, freedom, and liberalism—or, for our Republican-voting friends, let us call that last one an “openness to new ideas.” Likewise, the downsides of Chaoticness (does anybody have a better noun form?) include anarchism, inconsistency, hypocrisy, and recklessness.
I once again disagree with D&D’s definitions, but we’ll use them for the sake of convenience. Now, let’s get down to business!
~~~~~
Crono: Neutral Good
Most of the playable characters are rather dull in that they all fall predictably on the Good side of the Good vs. Evil axis. But things get a bit more interesting when it comes to the Lawful vs. Chaotic axis.
Crono is definitely a Good, almost to a fault. I say “fault” because his do-gooder schemes throughout the game are straightforward and sincere, but unnecessarily foolhardy and oftentimes brash. Things work out well for him, but often through sheer luck. Among other things, better planning might have saved his life—which was saved anyway, of course, but that’s RPGs for you. I would say that Crono is so far on the Good end of the spectrum that it becomes questionable whether he actually is Good anymore. If we consider his values only, and not his excessive zeal toward them, then he is clearly Good, but if zeal can be taken to an unhealthy extreme—and what a good game to highlight the idea that it can—then Crono is a hero only because the game dealt him a winning hand. In a more realistic world, his intentions and his fervor could have easily had disastrous results. Later RPGs finally began to explore this idea, but back in 1995 most RPGs were still black and white. Further insights might be gleaned by considering Crono in terms of the Zelda Triforce scheme; Crono has an abundance of courage, but with neither the wisdom nor the power to balance his persona. Fortunately for him, he has good friends to see him through.
Crono’s lawfulness, however, is not nearly so imbalanced as his goodness. He is very much a pragmatist when it comes to honoring established tradition and staying “inside the lines,” as it were—enough that you might even say he has a streak of anarchism in him. Definitely he would rate as a hardcore libertarian. Crono regularly breaks all sorts of laws, slaughters people without being provoked, and violates etiquette and ethic alike. He is a Neutral for all of this because his actions are always consistent in their reasoning; Crono always acts in the name of defending his friends and, later, saving the world. He is a Neutral without question.
~~
Marle: Lawful Good
If I were the type to sneer—and I’m not saying I am, but if I were—then “Lawful Good” would be the most odious alignment of them all. For starters it is a boring alignment, but, more to the point, it is the home of an uncommon number of those holier-than-thou types who exult in pretending to be superior and holding their morality and niceness above other people’s heads. Definitely these kinds of people are the scum of the Lawful Good alignment. On the other hand, many perfectly ordinary people fall into this alignment too.
Marle is just such a person. Other than being a princess and the love interest of a hero—perhaps even a hero herself, if you want to read the game that way—she is one of the clearest statements of Lawful Good in the whole adventure. I really don’t think I need to add further comment; you’re welcome to contribute.
~~
Lucca: Neutral Good
Lucca is harder to pin down. She’s more interesting in this regard than many of the other playable characters, because her belief in science and innovation is almost more innate than anything else about her, raising the possibility that she might be a Neutral on one or both axes.
We see in the game that Lucca always directs her creative energies toward D&D-sanctioned “good” goals, like helping others or, if nothing else, self-improvement. (“…Beat me up and get 15 Silver Points!”) Her affinity for Robo, who represents perhaps one of her life’s goals—that is, to fuse the human spirit with technology—leads her to great acts of kindness and bravery. And, of course, it’s a bit beyond the scope of Chrono Trigger, but let’s not forget that she opened an orphanage, for cryin’ out loud. I call her a Good.
Her place on the Law axis is harder to determine. She doesn’t get enough action in the game to really cement her on either end of the spectrum. Her willingness to help bust Crono out of jail, despite the fact that, from her point of view, he was only going to be in jail for three days, certainly suggests that her respect for authority is circumstantial at best. There is no specific event in the game to balance out this Chaotic tendency out; however, a quick look at her dedication to scientific enterprise establishes a clear acknowledgement of the importance of consistency, diligence, and perseverance—all of which work against the idea that she is Chaotic. In the end, I would rate her a Neutral, although it is a more difficult call than it was in Crono’s case.
~~
Frog: Lawful Good
I don’t need to say a thing on this one.
~~
Robo: Lawful Good
Most of the PC cast is, of course, Lawful Good, including Robo, but Robo’s explanation is more interesting than the others.
Lucca famously said in the game that machines aren’t capable of evil; that humans make them that way. It’s probably true, at least where simplistic machines like Robo are concerned, but also true is the converse: They aren’t capable of good either; we impart that to them, as well. Prior to the Apocalypse and the corruption of the Mother Brain, machines obviously served human society very usefully, living a utilitarian existence more so than anything else. It remains unanswered how humans felt about them, and I wouldn’t want to venture a guess, as this is a hot subject in anime and science fiction, but we can reasonably assume that the robots of 1999 were not as evil as they later became. Robo stands out in stark contrast to his counterparts from the 24th century; his adventures with Crono & Co., and especially his awakening under Lucca, contributed to create in Robo a Goodness that probably hadn’t been there before. Robo’s limited character drama is resolved pretty soon after his first appearance, and he spends the rest of the game being a clear Good, almost a goodie-two-shoes, to the point that by the time the Atropos episode rolls around, there really isn’t much drama at all, as we know what Robo is going to decide. Robo is definitely Good.
One of the interesting stereotypes about robots is that they are always designed to be fanatically lawful and always end up being horribly chaotic. Real life diminishes the extreme on both ends. No pseudo-intelligent machine could be as fanatically obedient as fantasy stories assume, for the same reason that computer programming is so challenging: Humans treat their language conceptually, whereas robots (simple-minded robots, anyway) interpret their programming literally. You can’t program “fanatical obedience” into a robot, because that’s a concept. To literally program obedience requires a much more quantitative, comprehensive effort, and the pragmatic expense of this undertaking would certainly be that no A.I. would ever be unwaveringly loyal. But, by the same token—and more importantly—these robots would never turn against their masters as colorfully and dramatically as the storybooks allege. Being possessed of a simpler intelligence than humans, their behavior would be inherently more obvious in its logical consistency, and will always tend towards Lawfulness. This is precisely what happens to Robo, just as his programming dictates:
Ain’t it interesting how robots are (written to be) so darn eager to ignore orders when it comes to respecting their base programming? A fanatically loyal robot would not have corrected its master, especially with a blanket statement like “impossible.”
~~
Ayla: Lawful Good
Ayla lives in a rougher world, and virtues like compassion don’t stand out as boldly in her as, say, courage, which is unquestionable. But her compassion is certainly there, too: She aided Crono & Co. when they first arrived in Prehistory; she aided them again after their defeat at Magus’ lair; and she even offered to aid Azala after defeating her just moments earlier. She is loyal to her friends, even committing to the fight against Lavos, despite the fact that its cold, selfless nature must have pushed the limits of her comprehension. She even altruistically agreed to hang out at the End of Time for easy recall, which must have been spectacularly boring for her. Ayla is Good.
Ayla’s Lawfulness is harder to ascribe than that of other characters, because her world is so much simpler than that of her descendents. But by the limited social constructs that do exist, Ayla loyally abides. My sig is a nice example of that, if somewhat dramatic. Ayla is consistent with a Lawful character type.
~~
Magus: True Neutral
The only playable character who isn’t a Good, Magus is bent on one objective alone, and will disregard or destroy anything that stops him.
As is true for some True Neutrals, there are interesting cases to be made for Magus from both sides of both spectra. Lavos is such an unspeakable evil to the world that Magus’ uncompromising hatred is the only proper response among any of the characters. Indeed, the attitudes toward Lavos of the others look awkwardly casual by comparison. In that light, it is tempting to wonder if Magus is indeed the most Good of all the characters. But here the inadequacies of the D&D scheme come to the forefront; they cannot accommodate difficult reasoning, and, by their relatively simple standards, there is no way to call Magus a Good character. The case for calling Magus an Evil is easier to make, mostly because he is the opposite of many of the virtues that typically defined Goodness, while embodying most of the Evil traits. But it just doesn’t seem right to look at Magus’ personality without looking at the reason his personality is the way that it is. Malice in him is not the same as it is in somebody like Dalton. Magus doesn’t seem to hold any particular grudge against anybody except Lavos, and although he developed a strong cynical streak in his life and times—such as would convince him that turning Glenn into a frog was a fun idea—he isn’t blatlantly malicious. His dishonesty, his selfishness…they all have a good reason. Moral purists might try to make the case that he is Evil, but I see in Magus a Neutral.
Magus’ placement on the Lawfulness axis is much easier, and runs along the same vein that Crono’s neutrality does. Thus, I needn’t repeat myself. Magus is a Neutral, which, together with his Neutrality on the Good vs. Evil axis, makes him a True Neutral.
~~~~~
Now we leave behind the rather uninteresting main cast, and get to some of Chrono Trigger’s truly fascinating characters!
~~
Spekkio: Chaotic Neutral
Spekkio is a very interesting character. Here we have somebody who we might think ought to be one of the most austere figures in the game, but instead he is one of the most fanciful and good-spirited. Being the Master of War is undoubtedly a mind-bending occupation, and we immediately cannot expect Spekkio to be Good or Evil, nor Lawful.
On the axis of good and evil, he encompasses none of the traits associated with either end. Good and Evil for Spekkio seem simply to not exist. Chrono Trigger is full of conflict and strife, full of wars fought for good reasons and bad, and battles between good and evil abound. The entity sitting at the top of this dubious monument to human nature is bound to be impartial, disinterested, and utterly neutral with regard to the reasons that bring people to war in the first place. When he imbues Crono & Co. with magic, Spekkio mentions that to use magic requires power of the heart, and “inner strength,” and that is exactly as I would define Spekkio: a personification of inner strength. Such a virtue is called upon by heroes and villains and life; it is a fundamental human trait. Spekkio is a Neutral.
His placement on the Law axis is just as intuitive and emphatic. Spekkio encompasses practically all of the traits that D&D associates with Chaoticness. The only law he seems to hold in any esteem is the physical boundary of warfare. Nothing else matters. Spekkio is bizarre, temperamental, boisterous, and utterly flamboyant—an unabashedly Chaotic figure.
~~
Kino: Lawful Neutral
I was thinking to myself, wondering whether I could find an example of a Lawful Neutral character. I hit upon Kino by chance, but I think he fits the bill quite nicely.
Kino’s intentions definitely tend toward the Good, but, like so many of us, Kino finds that the real world can be pretty tough on our ideals. His betrayal of Crono & Co. is motivated by sheer jealousy, and the cowardice by which he refuses to confront Crono directly, or at least talk to Ayla directly, as well as the cowardice by which he confesses to his crime as soon as he is found, is the hallmark of a rather weak-willed character…someone to be pitied. As much as he may strive for what is good—and I certainly believe he does, given his status as second-in-command and love interest to Ayla—Kino strikes me as somebody who regularly falls short of his ideals thanks to the corruptive powers of temptation and sheer pettiness. He is an impressionable fellow, and I would rate him a Neutral more so than a Good.
In Kino we have somebody who utterly respects the law, even to the point of being scared of it, and dominated by it. When he steals the gate key, he knows perfectly well what he is doing and it terrifies him enough that he conducts his mission with treachery and cunning more, in defiance not only of the law but of personal conviction as well. He seems almost compelled by his own jealousy to do something he utterly does not want to do: violate Iokan custom, cross his chief, and hurt the visitors. You can see how much it pains him to do so, which is what I use as the basis for my case that Kino is a Lawful character. By the trepidation and discomfort with which he breaks the law, we see him to be an utter adherent to it.
~~
Flea: Neutral Evil
Slash: Lawful Evil
Ozzie: Chaotic Evil
I am taking these tone-deaf, evil fiends together at once, because they fit so nicely together. They are three of a kind!
What isn’t in doubt is that all three of them are Evil. They are horribly unreliable, they delight in their own mischievousness, and anyone who turns his or her back to them deserves what comes next! Flea is like a mook with delusions of grandeur, and none of the willingness to commit to achieving those big ambitions. Slash is like the Samurai who gets expelled from his order for flagrant dishonor. He is loyal and dutiful only on the surface, and utterly rotten underneath. And Ozzie! Heh. Ozzie. Ozzie is the king of kings when it comes to cowardice, treason, and gross ineptitude. And he revels in it so…
Here’s somebody who isn’t meant to be taken seriously at all…comic book evil, as it were. I can’t believe Magus made him his top general.
But on the axis of Law, these three have an interesting relationship vis-à-vis one another. Prior to his first defeat, Slash behaves like a loyal servant. That’s why it seemed to me as though he was like a would-be hero who got thrown out for lack of qualifications. His famous last words are telling:
I really like that quote, and for the purposes of this discussion it smacks of Lawfulness. Maybe think of Slash as that apocryphal butler whose proclivity for evil overwhelms his sense of lawfulness in the most unsuspecting of ways.
Flea definitely is not Lawful. Here is someone who also follows Magus before being defeated. But Flea’s motives are inscrutable; the dedication to Magus doesn’t seem to have much of an explanation besides the old standby of establishing a new world order of evil. In the absence of evidence, it’s very hard to make a case that Flea is a Chaotic character. That leaves only the middle of the road.
And Ozzie, of course, will do whatever he can get away with. He is utterly consumed by his own fancy and has no regard for the law whatsoever. Once again, it is amazing that this guy got to be the top general. Maybe Magus didn’t want anyone who could possibly threaten him, so he settled for a buffoon to distract the continent with a war while he prepared to summon Lavos.
~~~~~
There are plenty of interesting characters yet to discuss, notably the three Gurus, the three Masamune spirits, Dalton, Alfador (tee hee), the Laruba chief, Yakra, and many more. I haven’t got the time to write about all of them just now, and I probably won’t for the next few days, so anybody who wants to try their hand at this is welcome. It’s a lot of fun!
Oh, and of course, as always, comment is invited. If you would align the aforementioned characters differently than I have, by all means do tell us about it.
Before we get started, none of this discussion means anything without a common definition for these alignments that we can all work from. So, let us do that first.
~~~~~
Good vs. Evil
D&D, although being rather vague on the subject, suggests that Good is closely associated with altruism, compassion, courage, loyalty, and dependability, whereas Evil is associated with selfishness, malice, dishonesty, deceit, and conniption. (“Conniption,” for the 98 percent of you who don’t know that word, is a state of violent, overwhelming emotion…like a fit.)
This common depiction of Good vs. Evil suffers from being rather overly simplistic and often unrealistic, as characters assigned to one end of the spectrum will often exhibit traits from the other side. However, we will go with it for the sake of convenience, rather than, say, force my own definition on everybody, which would undoubtedly derail the topic.
Law vs. Chaos
D&D does a slightly better job with this axis, probably because it is much easier to define. It suggests that Lawfulness is associated with dutifulness, deference, dogmatism, and, in keeping with the letter D, deuteronomy. D&D takes a more relativist attitude with this axis, stating explicitly that residency anywhere on the spectrum has both its ups and downs. Thus, where Lawfulness is concerned, disadvantages include closed-mindedness, prejudice, disparagement, and conservativeness.
In contrast, in D&D Chaoticness (sic) is associated with caprice, flexibility, freedom, and liberalism—or, for our Republican-voting friends, let us call that last one an “openness to new ideas.” Likewise, the downsides of Chaoticness (does anybody have a better noun form?) include anarchism, inconsistency, hypocrisy, and recklessness.
I once again disagree with D&D’s definitions, but we’ll use them for the sake of convenience. Now, let’s get down to business!
~~~~~
Crono: Neutral Good
Most of the playable characters are rather dull in that they all fall predictably on the Good side of the Good vs. Evil axis. But things get a bit more interesting when it comes to the Lawful vs. Chaotic axis.
Crono is definitely a Good, almost to a fault. I say “fault” because his do-gooder schemes throughout the game are straightforward and sincere, but unnecessarily foolhardy and oftentimes brash. Things work out well for him, but often through sheer luck. Among other things, better planning might have saved his life—which was saved anyway, of course, but that’s RPGs for you. I would say that Crono is so far on the Good end of the spectrum that it becomes questionable whether he actually is Good anymore. If we consider his values only, and not his excessive zeal toward them, then he is clearly Good, but if zeal can be taken to an unhealthy extreme—and what a good game to highlight the idea that it can—then Crono is a hero only because the game dealt him a winning hand. In a more realistic world, his intentions and his fervor could have easily had disastrous results. Later RPGs finally began to explore this idea, but back in 1995 most RPGs were still black and white. Further insights might be gleaned by considering Crono in terms of the Zelda Triforce scheme; Crono has an abundance of courage, but with neither the wisdom nor the power to balance his persona. Fortunately for him, he has good friends to see him through.
Crono’s lawfulness, however, is not nearly so imbalanced as his goodness. He is very much a pragmatist when it comes to honoring established tradition and staying “inside the lines,” as it were—enough that you might even say he has a streak of anarchism in him. Definitely he would rate as a hardcore libertarian. Crono regularly breaks all sorts of laws, slaughters people without being provoked, and violates etiquette and ethic alike. He is a Neutral for all of this because his actions are always consistent in their reasoning; Crono always acts in the name of defending his friends and, later, saving the world. He is a Neutral without question.
~~
Marle: Lawful Good
If I were the type to sneer—and I’m not saying I am, but if I were—then “Lawful Good” would be the most odious alignment of them all. For starters it is a boring alignment, but, more to the point, it is the home of an uncommon number of those holier-than-thou types who exult in pretending to be superior and holding their morality and niceness above other people’s heads. Definitely these kinds of people are the scum of the Lawful Good alignment. On the other hand, many perfectly ordinary people fall into this alignment too.
Marle is just such a person. Other than being a princess and the love interest of a hero—perhaps even a hero herself, if you want to read the game that way—she is one of the clearest statements of Lawful Good in the whole adventure. I really don’t think I need to add further comment; you’re welcome to contribute.
~~
Lucca: Neutral Good
Lucca is harder to pin down. She’s more interesting in this regard than many of the other playable characters, because her belief in science and innovation is almost more innate than anything else about her, raising the possibility that she might be a Neutral on one or both axes.
We see in the game that Lucca always directs her creative energies toward D&D-sanctioned “good” goals, like helping others or, if nothing else, self-improvement. (“…Beat me up and get 15 Silver Points!”) Her affinity for Robo, who represents perhaps one of her life’s goals—that is, to fuse the human spirit with technology—leads her to great acts of kindness and bravery. And, of course, it’s a bit beyond the scope of Chrono Trigger, but let’s not forget that she opened an orphanage, for cryin’ out loud. I call her a Good.
Her place on the Law axis is harder to determine. She doesn’t get enough action in the game to really cement her on either end of the spectrum. Her willingness to help bust Crono out of jail, despite the fact that, from her point of view, he was only going to be in jail for three days, certainly suggests that her respect for authority is circumstantial at best. There is no specific event in the game to balance out this Chaotic tendency out; however, a quick look at her dedication to scientific enterprise establishes a clear acknowledgement of the importance of consistency, diligence, and perseverance—all of which work against the idea that she is Chaotic. In the end, I would rate her a Neutral, although it is a more difficult call than it was in Crono’s case.
~~
Frog: Lawful Good
I don’t need to say a thing on this one.
~~
Robo: Lawful Good
Most of the PC cast is, of course, Lawful Good, including Robo, but Robo’s explanation is more interesting than the others.
Lucca famously said in the game that machines aren’t capable of evil; that humans make them that way. It’s probably true, at least where simplistic machines like Robo are concerned, but also true is the converse: They aren’t capable of good either; we impart that to them, as well. Prior to the Apocalypse and the corruption of the Mother Brain, machines obviously served human society very usefully, living a utilitarian existence more so than anything else. It remains unanswered how humans felt about them, and I wouldn’t want to venture a guess, as this is a hot subject in anime and science fiction, but we can reasonably assume that the robots of 1999 were not as evil as they later became. Robo stands out in stark contrast to his counterparts from the 24th century; his adventures with Crono & Co., and especially his awakening under Lucca, contributed to create in Robo a Goodness that probably hadn’t been there before. Robo’s limited character drama is resolved pretty soon after his first appearance, and he spends the rest of the game being a clear Good, almost a goodie-two-shoes, to the point that by the time the Atropos episode rolls around, there really isn’t much drama at all, as we know what Robo is going to decide. Robo is definitely Good.
One of the interesting stereotypes about robots is that they are always designed to be fanatically lawful and always end up being horribly chaotic. Real life diminishes the extreme on both ends. No pseudo-intelligent machine could be as fanatically obedient as fantasy stories assume, for the same reason that computer programming is so challenging: Humans treat their language conceptually, whereas robots (simple-minded robots, anyway) interpret their programming literally. You can’t program “fanatical obedience” into a robot, because that’s a concept. To literally program obedience requires a much more quantitative, comprehensive effort, and the pragmatic expense of this undertaking would certainly be that no A.I. would ever be unwaveringly loyal. But, by the same token—and more importantly—these robots would never turn against their masters as colorfully and dramatically as the storybooks allege. Being possessed of a simpler intelligence than humans, their behavior would be inherently more obvious in its logical consistency, and will always tend towards Lawfulness. This is precisely what happens to Robo, just as his programming dictates:
Quote
ROBOT: Understood.
Madam Lucca fixed me.
Lucca: Just Lucca will do.
ROBOT: Impossible.
That would be rude.
Ain’t it interesting how robots are (written to be) so darn eager to ignore orders when it comes to respecting their base programming? A fanatically loyal robot would not have corrected its master, especially with a blanket statement like “impossible.”
~~
Ayla: Lawful Good
Ayla lives in a rougher world, and virtues like compassion don’t stand out as boldly in her as, say, courage, which is unquestionable. But her compassion is certainly there, too: She aided Crono & Co. when they first arrived in Prehistory; she aided them again after their defeat at Magus’ lair; and she even offered to aid Azala after defeating her just moments earlier. She is loyal to her friends, even committing to the fight against Lavos, despite the fact that its cold, selfless nature must have pushed the limits of her comprehension. She even altruistically agreed to hang out at the End of Time for easy recall, which must have been spectacularly boring for her. Ayla is Good.
Ayla’s Lawfulness is harder to ascribe than that of other characters, because her world is so much simpler than that of her descendents. But by the limited social constructs that do exist, Ayla loyally abides. My sig is a nice example of that, if somewhat dramatic. Ayla is consistent with a Lawful character type.
~~
Magus: True Neutral
The only playable character who isn’t a Good, Magus is bent on one objective alone, and will disregard or destroy anything that stops him.
As is true for some True Neutrals, there are interesting cases to be made for Magus from both sides of both spectra. Lavos is such an unspeakable evil to the world that Magus’ uncompromising hatred is the only proper response among any of the characters. Indeed, the attitudes toward Lavos of the others look awkwardly casual by comparison. In that light, it is tempting to wonder if Magus is indeed the most Good of all the characters. But here the inadequacies of the D&D scheme come to the forefront; they cannot accommodate difficult reasoning, and, by their relatively simple standards, there is no way to call Magus a Good character. The case for calling Magus an Evil is easier to make, mostly because he is the opposite of many of the virtues that typically defined Goodness, while embodying most of the Evil traits. But it just doesn’t seem right to look at Magus’ personality without looking at the reason his personality is the way that it is. Malice in him is not the same as it is in somebody like Dalton. Magus doesn’t seem to hold any particular grudge against anybody except Lavos, and although he developed a strong cynical streak in his life and times—such as would convince him that turning Glenn into a frog was a fun idea—he isn’t blatlantly malicious. His dishonesty, his selfishness…they all have a good reason. Moral purists might try to make the case that he is Evil, but I see in Magus a Neutral.
Magus’ placement on the Lawfulness axis is much easier, and runs along the same vein that Crono’s neutrality does. Thus, I needn’t repeat myself. Magus is a Neutral, which, together with his Neutrality on the Good vs. Evil axis, makes him a True Neutral.
~~~~~
Now we leave behind the rather uninteresting main cast, and get to some of Chrono Trigger’s truly fascinating characters!
~~
Spekkio: Chaotic Neutral
Spekkio is a very interesting character. Here we have somebody who we might think ought to be one of the most austere figures in the game, but instead he is one of the most fanciful and good-spirited. Being the Master of War is undoubtedly a mind-bending occupation, and we immediately cannot expect Spekkio to be Good or Evil, nor Lawful.
On the axis of good and evil, he encompasses none of the traits associated with either end. Good and Evil for Spekkio seem simply to not exist. Chrono Trigger is full of conflict and strife, full of wars fought for good reasons and bad, and battles between good and evil abound. The entity sitting at the top of this dubious monument to human nature is bound to be impartial, disinterested, and utterly neutral with regard to the reasons that bring people to war in the first place. When he imbues Crono & Co. with magic, Spekkio mentions that to use magic requires power of the heart, and “inner strength,” and that is exactly as I would define Spekkio: a personification of inner strength. Such a virtue is called upon by heroes and villains and life; it is a fundamental human trait. Spekkio is a Neutral.
His placement on the Law axis is just as intuitive and emphatic. Spekkio encompasses practically all of the traits that D&D associates with Chaoticness. The only law he seems to hold in any esteem is the physical boundary of warfare. Nothing else matters. Spekkio is bizarre, temperamental, boisterous, and utterly flamboyant—an unabashedly Chaotic figure.
~~
Kino: Lawful Neutral
I was thinking to myself, wondering whether I could find an example of a Lawful Neutral character. I hit upon Kino by chance, but I think he fits the bill quite nicely.
Kino’s intentions definitely tend toward the Good, but, like so many of us, Kino finds that the real world can be pretty tough on our ideals. His betrayal of Crono & Co. is motivated by sheer jealousy, and the cowardice by which he refuses to confront Crono directly, or at least talk to Ayla directly, as well as the cowardice by which he confesses to his crime as soon as he is found, is the hallmark of a rather weak-willed character…someone to be pitied. As much as he may strive for what is good—and I certainly believe he does, given his status as second-in-command and love interest to Ayla—Kino strikes me as somebody who regularly falls short of his ideals thanks to the corruptive powers of temptation and sheer pettiness. He is an impressionable fellow, and I would rate him a Neutral more so than a Good.
In Kino we have somebody who utterly respects the law, even to the point of being scared of it, and dominated by it. When he steals the gate key, he knows perfectly well what he is doing and it terrifies him enough that he conducts his mission with treachery and cunning more, in defiance not only of the law but of personal conviction as well. He seems almost compelled by his own jealousy to do something he utterly does not want to do: violate Iokan custom, cross his chief, and hurt the visitors. You can see how much it pains him to do so, which is what I use as the basis for my case that Kino is a Lawful character. By the trepidation and discomfort with which he breaks the law, we see him to be an utter adherent to it.
~~
Flea: Neutral Evil
Slash: Lawful Evil
Ozzie: Chaotic Evil
I am taking these tone-deaf, evil fiends together at once, because they fit so nicely together. They are three of a kind!
What isn’t in doubt is that all three of them are Evil. They are horribly unreliable, they delight in their own mischievousness, and anyone who turns his or her back to them deserves what comes next! Flea is like a mook with delusions of grandeur, and none of the willingness to commit to achieving those big ambitions. Slash is like the Samurai who gets expelled from his order for flagrant dishonor. He is loyal and dutiful only on the surface, and utterly rotten underneath. And Ozzie! Heh. Ozzie. Ozzie is the king of kings when it comes to cowardice, treason, and gross ineptitude. And he revels in it so…
Quote from: Ozzie
Magus! You lied when you said you wanted to create a world of evil! You used me!
Here’s somebody who isn’t meant to be taken seriously at all…comic book evil, as it were. I can’t believe Magus made him his top general.
But on the axis of Law, these three have an interesting relationship vis-à-vis one another. Prior to his first defeat, Slash behaves like a loyal servant. That’s why it seemed to me as though he was like a would-be hero who got thrown out for lack of qualifications. His famous last words are telling:
Quote from: Slash
Unbelievable...! But falling in the line of duty for Magus...leaves me with few regrets!
I really like that quote, and for the purposes of this discussion it smacks of Lawfulness. Maybe think of Slash as that apocryphal butler whose proclivity for evil overwhelms his sense of lawfulness in the most unsuspecting of ways.
Flea definitely is not Lawful. Here is someone who also follows Magus before being defeated. But Flea’s motives are inscrutable; the dedication to Magus doesn’t seem to have much of an explanation besides the old standby of establishing a new world order of evil. In the absence of evidence, it’s very hard to make a case that Flea is a Chaotic character. That leaves only the middle of the road.
And Ozzie, of course, will do whatever he can get away with. He is utterly consumed by his own fancy and has no regard for the law whatsoever. Once again, it is amazing that this guy got to be the top general. Maybe Magus didn’t want anyone who could possibly threaten him, so he settled for a buffoon to distract the continent with a war while he prepared to summon Lavos.
~~~~~
There are plenty of interesting characters yet to discuss, notably the three Gurus, the three Masamune spirits, Dalton, Alfador (tee hee), the Laruba chief, Yakra, and many more. I haven’t got the time to write about all of them just now, and I probably won’t for the next few days, so anybody who wants to try their hand at this is welcome. It’s a lot of fun!
Oh, and of course, as always, comment is invited. If you would align the aforementioned characters differently than I have, by all means do tell us about it.
78
General Discussion / "Aerith" is only for people with a lisp.
« on: January 16, 2006, 01:28:32 pm »
I was sure we were working on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. But when I get there, the parking lot is practically empty and the doors are locked. Ah, well, it just goes to show that believing in something, no matter how fervently, isn’t going to make it true. Now I’m back home with a whole extra free day on my hands, and I decided to make the most of it by starting out with something extremely petty—hence this poll!
I was reading the Compendium before I left for work, and somebody mentioned the “Aerith” Rule. Aeris, as you surely know, is the tragic heroine of Final Fantasy VII, and Aerith is a close facsimile of the pronunciation of her name in the Japanese version of the game.
Nobody likes a pretender to cross their turf, and as a Certified Elitist™ it always boils my potato when people take it upon themselves to be pretentious with no good reason. I’ve boiled many a potato over these fiends who, in the worst Otaku tradition, insist on using Japanese forms like Aerith, Firaga, and Sara for their respective English counterparts Aeris, Fire 3, and Schala—just to name a few.
The problem is that this is complete pedantry. I’m certainly not against learning more about the original Japanese version of these games, or about the Japanese culture itself—I am strongly in favor of both. But this practice of fanatically rejecting the English form of a few select names in particular, without regard to other names—like, say, “Dalton”—or indeed to any other aspects of these games in general, adds nothing to the experience. It is simply bombastic.
You can see that when somebody comes along and asks “WTF is ‘Aerith’?” Then the bombasts will hasten to point out, with much snobbery, that the Japanese pronunciation is Aerith and only an uncouth rapscallion would use the English version.
Yeah. Uncouth rapscallions…or English speakers.
Those of like mind are welcome to add their snarls of disapproval to the fray. Those who disagree are welcome to try and justify the practice in a way that is less unflattering. Those with no opinion can simply move along. Having accomplished my petty feat, I now return to the black fog whence I came.
Oh, but before I go: Today is very much an abused holiday. Racism is still alive and well in this country, and maybe it wouldn’t hurt any of us to think about ways in which we subtly perpetuate this horrid institution. Unlike deeper forms of prejudice, like sexism, racism is an institution that our species is already mature enough to disestablish. We need only build up a powerful civil momentum, and that begins in the mirror.
I was reading the Compendium before I left for work, and somebody mentioned the “Aerith” Rule. Aeris, as you surely know, is the tragic heroine of Final Fantasy VII, and Aerith is a close facsimile of the pronunciation of her name in the Japanese version of the game.
Nobody likes a pretender to cross their turf, and as a Certified Elitist™ it always boils my potato when people take it upon themselves to be pretentious with no good reason. I’ve boiled many a potato over these fiends who, in the worst Otaku tradition, insist on using Japanese forms like Aerith, Firaga, and Sara for their respective English counterparts Aeris, Fire 3, and Schala—just to name a few.
The problem is that this is complete pedantry. I’m certainly not against learning more about the original Japanese version of these games, or about the Japanese culture itself—I am strongly in favor of both. But this practice of fanatically rejecting the English form of a few select names in particular, without regard to other names—like, say, “Dalton”—or indeed to any other aspects of these games in general, adds nothing to the experience. It is simply bombastic.
You can see that when somebody comes along and asks “WTF is ‘Aerith’?” Then the bombasts will hasten to point out, with much snobbery, that the Japanese pronunciation is Aerith and only an uncouth rapscallion would use the English version.
Yeah. Uncouth rapscallions…or English speakers.
Those of like mind are welcome to add their snarls of disapproval to the fray. Those who disagree are welcome to try and justify the practice in a way that is less unflattering. Those with no opinion can simply move along. Having accomplished my petty feat, I now return to the black fog whence I came.
Oh, but before I go: Today is very much an abused holiday. Racism is still alive and well in this country, and maybe it wouldn’t hurt any of us to think about ways in which we subtly perpetuate this horrid institution. Unlike deeper forms of prejudice, like sexism, racism is an institution that our species is already mature enough to disestablish. We need only build up a powerful civil momentum, and that begins in the mirror.
79
General Discussion / What's your favorite comic strip (or book, or webcomic)?
« on: December 17, 2005, 08:32:12 pm »
A couple of nights ago I thought of my old favorite comic strip, Calvin and Hobbes. It had been a few years since I'd last read any of them--maybe more than a few--and long enough in any case to be able to enjoy them practically as new, but with the comfortable familiarity of a strip I know I love. So I pulled out one of the books, dusted it off, and spent the rest of the evening with it. And of course it was just as brilliant as I had remembered. Truly, Bill Watterson is the greatest name in the history of the entire comic strip medium.
Last night I came down with a cold, which pretty much blew my weekend and consigned me to lots of bedrest, so this morning I pulled out another one and read it in bed. Once again I was not disappointed. How often can we say that when we speak of revisiting the things we enjoyed as children? Calvin and Hobbes is very special in that regard, and Watterson's genius is affirmed.
But that isn't to say he hasn't had some great competition. I got to thinking about it, and I came up with some other comics that I also really like. That inspired me to create this poll. Poll options are limited so I tried to list the biggest ones. If I missed yours, feel free to name it!
Last night I came down with a cold, which pretty much blew my weekend and consigned me to lots of bedrest, so this morning I pulled out another one and read it in bed. Once again I was not disappointed. How often can we say that when we speak of revisiting the things we enjoyed as children? Calvin and Hobbes is very special in that regard, and Watterson's genius is affirmed.
But that isn't to say he hasn't had some great competition. I got to thinking about it, and I came up with some other comics that I also really like. That inspired me to create this poll. Poll options are limited so I tried to list the biggest ones. If I missed yours, feel free to name it!
80
General Discussion / Vus Vet Zayn?
« on: November 05, 2005, 01:23:06 am »
Josh is good for more than crass politics... I wrote this for another audience, but figured it might be well-taken here too. Now's your rare chance to glimpse a page in the Book of J.
~~~~~
Today is the tenth anniversary of two rather remarkable events in the grand scheme of things, not entirely unrelated. First, ten years ago today was the day that Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by an ultranationalist right-wing Jew who opposed Rabin’s efforts to make peace with the Palestinians by giving away Israeli land. Second, ten years ago today was my Bar Mitzvah. Yes, religion touches us all; you’ll find it everywhere: Even in the life and times of Lord Josh, Esquire.
Imagine, if you will, back into the sepia-tinted annals of history. The year was 1995. Nickelodeon became America’s top-rated cable network. The World Trade Organization was established. O.J. Simpson went on trial, guaranteeing nine months of obsessive-compulsive news coverage. Seamus Heaney won the Nobel Prize in Literature. The Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma was bombed by a homegrown American terrorist. Jacques Chirac became president of France. The Nasdaq stock index passed 1000 for the first time. Windows 95 changed the face of personal computing. Bill Clinton abolished the 55 mph federal speed limit. Bill Waterston published the last original Calvin and Hobbes strip. And, fo’ sho’, Boyz II Men was tearing up the charts.
But there was another boy becoming a man that year. In Jewish tradition, when a child reaches the age of thirteen—or twelve if she is a girl—he or she is deemed an adult under Jewish law, and is therefore worthy to lead the congregation in prayer for the first time. It is a coming of age rite known as the B’nai Mitzvah, where one becomes a “Child of the Commandment.” And on that day, it was my turn.
Our congregation was a small little flock out in the desert wastes of California. There were only one hundred members or so…one hundred fifty at the most. A typical Shabbat service consisted maybe of twenty people, but on that Saturday nearly the entire congregation turned out, as well as some rarely-seen family members, all there to see me have my big day. For as shy as I was, going up before 130 people as the sole focus of attention was no small ordeal. But I had friends who had gone before me, and more who would follow in my footsteps. I felt excited more than anything else.
The turnout was huge…nothing turns ‘em out like a B’nai Mitzvah. I’d been attending services since I was a little boy. I knew all the prayers, all the songs. I had studied my Torah and Haf’Torah portions to the letter. I’d written my sermon. I had my own prayer garb. Everything was set to go. The video recorder got going, my parents, sister, and a couple of half-brothers took their seats up front, the kosher wine went on ice, and I got up there with the Rabbi, Jim Brandt—one of the best our congregation had ever had, but a horrible singer—and I did my thing! What it is like for a little kid to have an experience like that? I don’t know, to be honest. I can only speak for myself. If you have to ask, you’ll never know.
For the first few minutes I was ice-cold scared. But I guess that’s a part of growing up. You have experiences that expand your horizons and push you outside of your comfort zone. That was my day. The terror wore off, and by the time we rose for the first of the holy prayers, I was at peace with the world. From there on out, it was all rote…plus whatever personal savoring of the occasion I could muster. You might even say I had a good time, right then and there. Tough experiences are seldom enjoyable at the time, and while they certainly made for some good memories, it’s really a special occasion indeed when you can be right there, on the spot, and appreciate it even a little…especially when you’re so young.
I completed the main portion of the service, then read from the Torah, and then the Haf’Torah. That was the hardest part. Even with the vowels, my chanting was pretty flat and it was rough-going. I hadn’t practiced the Haf’Torah portion nearly as well as the Torah portion. But I made it through, with a cold sweat, and after that it was smooth sailing. The place fell silent, and I gave my traditional discussion of the Torah that I had read. My portion was “Lech Lecha,” the story of Abraham being told by God to leave his native land and journey to a land he did not know. I still have the original, typewritten copy of that speech, in a box sitting in the closet. I wrote it myself—I always liked to write. It wasn’t bad…for a thirteen-year-old.
Then I got pelted with soft candy, as per our synagogue’s now defunct tradition. (Someone used hard candy a couple of years later. You don’t throw hard candy at an ark surrounded by stained glass.) After the Torah services, I led us into the concluding prayers. While my dad was leading the congregation in those, I had a special private counsel on the bimah (the stage) with the Rabbi. I’d be lying if I told you I remember what he said…even a single word of it. But I’m sure it was very inspiring…because look how I turned out! =P
After that, we said the Kaddish—the prayer for those who have died—and finally I led the congregation in my favorite closing song: “Ein Keloheinu.” Then the service was over. But the party was just beginning: We had wine and broke bread, and then, as is the tradition worldwide, a mighty feast ensued! Judaism is infamous for its feasts and ritual love of celebration. Suffice it to say, it was one neat little reception I had. Golly! I even got the DJ to play “Earth Angel.” He asked me if I was dedicating it to anyone, and I think I blushed and told him no. Kids get embarrassed about the stupidest things, and I didn’t have the guts to tell him that I liked the song because I had heard it in Back to the Future.
What a morning that was…and the night before, and the afternoon following. I owe the whole thing to my dad. He made it happen. When you’re a kid, you’re told to do things that don’t always make sense to you, because “parents know better.” And if you have good influences in your life, and turn out to be an okay person, someday you’ll understand what they were trying to do. Honest to goodness, there’s no lump in my throat, but my eyes are a bit watery just thinking of it. My dad is a great guy. If you ever have kids…give ‘em the very best you have.
Legend has it outside the religion that a B’nai Mitzvah is like Christmas times infinity for presents and gifts. I’m hear to tell you…it’s all true! Because my extended family is so dispersed, few of them attended, but I got gifts from family I’d never met from all over the country, as well as gifts from throughout the congregation. Among the more interesting gifts I received was a coffee table trophy book, thicker than a phone book, about the Civil War. More usefully, I got a talking alarm clock that is sitting at my left hand even now, ten years later. These days it’s showing its age with worn-out buttons, but the cackling rooster is still as motherfucking loud as you’ll ever hear. That’s why I use it! =)
And in addition to the presents, I got about $1500 in monetary gifts, which to my thirteen-year-old self was a small fortune. I spent a bit of the money on frivolities and dainties, but I saved most of it in a locked red toolbox full of…whomever the hell it is on the $100 bill. Poor as I am, it’s been a while since I’ve seen one of those. Four years later I used half of the money to buy my first—and, to date, my only car: an old 1976 Plymouth Volare. That car was a real character. I owe that car some good times and the fondest of memories. And in 2000, one year after the car, I used the rest of the money to buy myself a computer, not only as a high-school graduation present but as a tool for my upcoming college life. Except for a different hard drive and an Ethernet card, that’s the same computer I’m using to type this very post.
I’ve come to believe that life is what you make of it. My Bar Mitzvah was an opportunity to do some growing up, to have an unforgettable experience, and to participate in something bigger than I was. In my heart of hearts, I was never truly religious in the sense that I understood and accepted the premise of God. When I was young I accepted, but I did not understand. When I was older I understood, but I did not accept. (If I can be forgiven to make such an audacious claim, the claim to understand God.) Whatever team I’m on, God is not my captain…never has been. Yet the richness of the Jewish community itself is undeniable. I am a better person because of experiences like the one I had on that day, ten years ago. I would not be who I am without this Jewish dimension to my character. And if God is the occasion who brings the Jewish community together, then I am grateful.
“Vus vet zayn” is Yiddish; the language historically spoken by Jews over the past centuries prior to the inception of the modern State of Israel. It means “What happens now?” and is the title of a klezmer song I like—klezmer being an eastern European genre of music which enjoys great popularity in Israel. The song asks this intriguing question of what will happen to the world once the Messiah finally arrives. But you and I don’t need to wait for the end of the world to find out what can become of us. In that sense, the question has a double meaning. We don’t know the fate of the world, but we have the opportunity to seek out a destiny, and, therein, to shape the fate of all things, for the world is that in which we all share.
Consequently, the flavor of life is in its nearness to our so-called “mundane” existence. Jews see themselves as very small, but with the potential to become very great. In that regard, our greatest dreams are always at arm’s length…here on Earth. And, once our worldly hours expire, we bequeath this unto our children. Unlike Christianity, Judaism focuses on this life, in this world, and our deeds as mortal beings of flesh and blood. To a Jew, corporeal life is more than some sad proving ground for the acceptance of a distant savior who might lift us up from our wretchedness. Nay, corporeal life—this life—is to be treasured. Humanity is a joy. And the corporeal world is a world fit to live in…a world worth keeping, worth exploring, worth perfecting—just as we ourselves are worth surpassing, and as is the human condition itself, across the generations, worth illuminating. Judaism suggests that we are greater than the angels because we can grow and learn, and become like God in this way, whereas the angels are forever fixed in form and nature. By living as mortal beings, we can achieve the sort of curiosity and zest for life, that brings true illumination into the soul. Humanity, rather than a pejorative for our weakness, is among the most joyous titles in the whole cosmic fugue. We may even find that immortality is a state of awareness more so than a state of persistence.
But in any event, Judaism requires no apocalypse, no everlasting state of sin. Judaism gives us the permission to love the moment, and to love the future, and to love ourselves and our power, which in turn leads us to the question of life in the here and now. So, looking back ten years into my past, I ask myself this question today…what happens now? And I consider both my life and the fate of the world together.
Judaism looks to improve the world, through prayer, repentance, and charity. Consider those words with an open mind, and my own goals are not so different. Certainly, I have a deeper fondness for sovereignty upon myself than many do, with a dash of vainglory thrown in for texture, but that’s just my way. The underlying ambition is much the same, so I like to think. How? Because the essence of Jewish faith, as I understand it, asks us to find our own way, and fashion our own destiny, with the help of God through the wisdom of God. In this sense, “God” is symbolic for always making the best choices, and always seizing the opportunities that come our way. Of course most branches of Judaism obviously still maintain that God is a separate entity, with its own divine identity, but perhaps that interpretation is behind the times. Perhaps, therein, lies the seed of Judaism’s success in the centuries to come—not as a ritualistic religion, but as a cultural glue with the worthy intention of surpassing ourselves…and becoming better people. Traditions die out, and customs change, but ideas can outlast the sun. Judaism has always adapted pretty well. And, considering what the Jewish people been through, from one generation to the next, it’s no wonder. As far as any religion goes, here is one with a future. All it has to do is reach out and take it.
Jewish faith is more elegant, in this way, than the harsh proselytizing religions that enjoy greater popularity but which restrict their followers’ freedom to think. Judaism, long the victim of a world full of bullies, has survived by fostering its own independence and seeking out the very best in human nature. Jews have achieved tremendous success in this way, by rising to meet the adversity in which they forever exist. That’s why, everywhere from Jon Stewart at The Daily Show to Leonard Nimoy in Star Trek, you will find Jews who have accomplished themselves richly in this society. I myself have become, not a star, but an intellect who knows what he is about. How many people can claim such abiding success in their lives? Too few, sadly. Jews aspire to succeed in this world because, through grim historical experience, they value appreciating both their plenty and their potential. And these values come from their families, cemented by their religious communities, whose common theme is the religion itself. These values are instilled nowadays through rituals like the B’nai Mitzvah, but are intentioned in the much more durable name of preserving the Jewish heritage in a world still teeming with those who would be hostile to the mere existence of even a single Jew. And the Jewish heritage is exactly representative of the answer to the question, Vus vet zayn? Still the butt of jokes even today, but for the most part free of bitterness at the rest of the world, Jews have succeeded in outlasting almost every culture that has ever opposed them. They have honorable goals for the outcome of humanity. They value this life. Step away from the orthodox nastiness of the extreme wings of the religion, and you’ll find Judaism to be an interpretation of life, the universe, and everything else, more so than a hardwired religion, and one with which I share more than a fringe of common ground.
While I cannot faithfully call myself Jewish even by those liberal standards, I bear little enmity for such a thoughtful enterprise. And I look back fondly, and proudly, at this piece of my identity. In more immediate, specific terms, this very reminiscence is also the answer to the question.
~~~~~
Today is the tenth anniversary of two rather remarkable events in the grand scheme of things, not entirely unrelated. First, ten years ago today was the day that Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by an ultranationalist right-wing Jew who opposed Rabin’s efforts to make peace with the Palestinians by giving away Israeli land. Second, ten years ago today was my Bar Mitzvah. Yes, religion touches us all; you’ll find it everywhere: Even in the life and times of Lord Josh, Esquire.
Imagine, if you will, back into the sepia-tinted annals of history. The year was 1995. Nickelodeon became America’s top-rated cable network. The World Trade Organization was established. O.J. Simpson went on trial, guaranteeing nine months of obsessive-compulsive news coverage. Seamus Heaney won the Nobel Prize in Literature. The Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma was bombed by a homegrown American terrorist. Jacques Chirac became president of France. The Nasdaq stock index passed 1000 for the first time. Windows 95 changed the face of personal computing. Bill Clinton abolished the 55 mph federal speed limit. Bill Waterston published the last original Calvin and Hobbes strip. And, fo’ sho’, Boyz II Men was tearing up the charts.
But there was another boy becoming a man that year. In Jewish tradition, when a child reaches the age of thirteen—or twelve if she is a girl—he or she is deemed an adult under Jewish law, and is therefore worthy to lead the congregation in prayer for the first time. It is a coming of age rite known as the B’nai Mitzvah, where one becomes a “Child of the Commandment.” And on that day, it was my turn.
Our congregation was a small little flock out in the desert wastes of California. There were only one hundred members or so…one hundred fifty at the most. A typical Shabbat service consisted maybe of twenty people, but on that Saturday nearly the entire congregation turned out, as well as some rarely-seen family members, all there to see me have my big day. For as shy as I was, going up before 130 people as the sole focus of attention was no small ordeal. But I had friends who had gone before me, and more who would follow in my footsteps. I felt excited more than anything else.
The turnout was huge…nothing turns ‘em out like a B’nai Mitzvah. I’d been attending services since I was a little boy. I knew all the prayers, all the songs. I had studied my Torah and Haf’Torah portions to the letter. I’d written my sermon. I had my own prayer garb. Everything was set to go. The video recorder got going, my parents, sister, and a couple of half-brothers took their seats up front, the kosher wine went on ice, and I got up there with the Rabbi, Jim Brandt—one of the best our congregation had ever had, but a horrible singer—and I did my thing! What it is like for a little kid to have an experience like that? I don’t know, to be honest. I can only speak for myself. If you have to ask, you’ll never know.
For the first few minutes I was ice-cold scared. But I guess that’s a part of growing up. You have experiences that expand your horizons and push you outside of your comfort zone. That was my day. The terror wore off, and by the time we rose for the first of the holy prayers, I was at peace with the world. From there on out, it was all rote…plus whatever personal savoring of the occasion I could muster. You might even say I had a good time, right then and there. Tough experiences are seldom enjoyable at the time, and while they certainly made for some good memories, it’s really a special occasion indeed when you can be right there, on the spot, and appreciate it even a little…especially when you’re so young.
I completed the main portion of the service, then read from the Torah, and then the Haf’Torah. That was the hardest part. Even with the vowels, my chanting was pretty flat and it was rough-going. I hadn’t practiced the Haf’Torah portion nearly as well as the Torah portion. But I made it through, with a cold sweat, and after that it was smooth sailing. The place fell silent, and I gave my traditional discussion of the Torah that I had read. My portion was “Lech Lecha,” the story of Abraham being told by God to leave his native land and journey to a land he did not know. I still have the original, typewritten copy of that speech, in a box sitting in the closet. I wrote it myself—I always liked to write. It wasn’t bad…for a thirteen-year-old.
Then I got pelted with soft candy, as per our synagogue’s now defunct tradition. (Someone used hard candy a couple of years later. You don’t throw hard candy at an ark surrounded by stained glass.) After the Torah services, I led us into the concluding prayers. While my dad was leading the congregation in those, I had a special private counsel on the bimah (the stage) with the Rabbi. I’d be lying if I told you I remember what he said…even a single word of it. But I’m sure it was very inspiring…because look how I turned out! =P
After that, we said the Kaddish—the prayer for those who have died—and finally I led the congregation in my favorite closing song: “Ein Keloheinu.” Then the service was over. But the party was just beginning: We had wine and broke bread, and then, as is the tradition worldwide, a mighty feast ensued! Judaism is infamous for its feasts and ritual love of celebration. Suffice it to say, it was one neat little reception I had. Golly! I even got the DJ to play “Earth Angel.” He asked me if I was dedicating it to anyone, and I think I blushed and told him no. Kids get embarrassed about the stupidest things, and I didn’t have the guts to tell him that I liked the song because I had heard it in Back to the Future.
What a morning that was…and the night before, and the afternoon following. I owe the whole thing to my dad. He made it happen. When you’re a kid, you’re told to do things that don’t always make sense to you, because “parents know better.” And if you have good influences in your life, and turn out to be an okay person, someday you’ll understand what they were trying to do. Honest to goodness, there’s no lump in my throat, but my eyes are a bit watery just thinking of it. My dad is a great guy. If you ever have kids…give ‘em the very best you have.
Legend has it outside the religion that a B’nai Mitzvah is like Christmas times infinity for presents and gifts. I’m hear to tell you…it’s all true! Because my extended family is so dispersed, few of them attended, but I got gifts from family I’d never met from all over the country, as well as gifts from throughout the congregation. Among the more interesting gifts I received was a coffee table trophy book, thicker than a phone book, about the Civil War. More usefully, I got a talking alarm clock that is sitting at my left hand even now, ten years later. These days it’s showing its age with worn-out buttons, but the cackling rooster is still as motherfucking loud as you’ll ever hear. That’s why I use it! =)
And in addition to the presents, I got about $1500 in monetary gifts, which to my thirteen-year-old self was a small fortune. I spent a bit of the money on frivolities and dainties, but I saved most of it in a locked red toolbox full of…whomever the hell it is on the $100 bill. Poor as I am, it’s been a while since I’ve seen one of those. Four years later I used half of the money to buy my first—and, to date, my only car: an old 1976 Plymouth Volare. That car was a real character. I owe that car some good times and the fondest of memories. And in 2000, one year after the car, I used the rest of the money to buy myself a computer, not only as a high-school graduation present but as a tool for my upcoming college life. Except for a different hard drive and an Ethernet card, that’s the same computer I’m using to type this very post.
I’ve come to believe that life is what you make of it. My Bar Mitzvah was an opportunity to do some growing up, to have an unforgettable experience, and to participate in something bigger than I was. In my heart of hearts, I was never truly religious in the sense that I understood and accepted the premise of God. When I was young I accepted, but I did not understand. When I was older I understood, but I did not accept. (If I can be forgiven to make such an audacious claim, the claim to understand God.) Whatever team I’m on, God is not my captain…never has been. Yet the richness of the Jewish community itself is undeniable. I am a better person because of experiences like the one I had on that day, ten years ago. I would not be who I am without this Jewish dimension to my character. And if God is the occasion who brings the Jewish community together, then I am grateful.
“Vus vet zayn” is Yiddish; the language historically spoken by Jews over the past centuries prior to the inception of the modern State of Israel. It means “What happens now?” and is the title of a klezmer song I like—klezmer being an eastern European genre of music which enjoys great popularity in Israel. The song asks this intriguing question of what will happen to the world once the Messiah finally arrives. But you and I don’t need to wait for the end of the world to find out what can become of us. In that sense, the question has a double meaning. We don’t know the fate of the world, but we have the opportunity to seek out a destiny, and, therein, to shape the fate of all things, for the world is that in which we all share.
Consequently, the flavor of life is in its nearness to our so-called “mundane” existence. Jews see themselves as very small, but with the potential to become very great. In that regard, our greatest dreams are always at arm’s length…here on Earth. And, once our worldly hours expire, we bequeath this unto our children. Unlike Christianity, Judaism focuses on this life, in this world, and our deeds as mortal beings of flesh and blood. To a Jew, corporeal life is more than some sad proving ground for the acceptance of a distant savior who might lift us up from our wretchedness. Nay, corporeal life—this life—is to be treasured. Humanity is a joy. And the corporeal world is a world fit to live in…a world worth keeping, worth exploring, worth perfecting—just as we ourselves are worth surpassing, and as is the human condition itself, across the generations, worth illuminating. Judaism suggests that we are greater than the angels because we can grow and learn, and become like God in this way, whereas the angels are forever fixed in form and nature. By living as mortal beings, we can achieve the sort of curiosity and zest for life, that brings true illumination into the soul. Humanity, rather than a pejorative for our weakness, is among the most joyous titles in the whole cosmic fugue. We may even find that immortality is a state of awareness more so than a state of persistence.
But in any event, Judaism requires no apocalypse, no everlasting state of sin. Judaism gives us the permission to love the moment, and to love the future, and to love ourselves and our power, which in turn leads us to the question of life in the here and now. So, looking back ten years into my past, I ask myself this question today…what happens now? And I consider both my life and the fate of the world together.
Judaism looks to improve the world, through prayer, repentance, and charity. Consider those words with an open mind, and my own goals are not so different. Certainly, I have a deeper fondness for sovereignty upon myself than many do, with a dash of vainglory thrown in for texture, but that’s just my way. The underlying ambition is much the same, so I like to think. How? Because the essence of Jewish faith, as I understand it, asks us to find our own way, and fashion our own destiny, with the help of God through the wisdom of God. In this sense, “God” is symbolic for always making the best choices, and always seizing the opportunities that come our way. Of course most branches of Judaism obviously still maintain that God is a separate entity, with its own divine identity, but perhaps that interpretation is behind the times. Perhaps, therein, lies the seed of Judaism’s success in the centuries to come—not as a ritualistic religion, but as a cultural glue with the worthy intention of surpassing ourselves…and becoming better people. Traditions die out, and customs change, but ideas can outlast the sun. Judaism has always adapted pretty well. And, considering what the Jewish people been through, from one generation to the next, it’s no wonder. As far as any religion goes, here is one with a future. All it has to do is reach out and take it.
Jewish faith is more elegant, in this way, than the harsh proselytizing religions that enjoy greater popularity but which restrict their followers’ freedom to think. Judaism, long the victim of a world full of bullies, has survived by fostering its own independence and seeking out the very best in human nature. Jews have achieved tremendous success in this way, by rising to meet the adversity in which they forever exist. That’s why, everywhere from Jon Stewart at The Daily Show to Leonard Nimoy in Star Trek, you will find Jews who have accomplished themselves richly in this society. I myself have become, not a star, but an intellect who knows what he is about. How many people can claim such abiding success in their lives? Too few, sadly. Jews aspire to succeed in this world because, through grim historical experience, they value appreciating both their plenty and their potential. And these values come from their families, cemented by their religious communities, whose common theme is the religion itself. These values are instilled nowadays through rituals like the B’nai Mitzvah, but are intentioned in the much more durable name of preserving the Jewish heritage in a world still teeming with those who would be hostile to the mere existence of even a single Jew. And the Jewish heritage is exactly representative of the answer to the question, Vus vet zayn? Still the butt of jokes even today, but for the most part free of bitterness at the rest of the world, Jews have succeeded in outlasting almost every culture that has ever opposed them. They have honorable goals for the outcome of humanity. They value this life. Step away from the orthodox nastiness of the extreme wings of the religion, and you’ll find Judaism to be an interpretation of life, the universe, and everything else, more so than a hardwired religion, and one with which I share more than a fringe of common ground.
While I cannot faithfully call myself Jewish even by those liberal standards, I bear little enmity for such a thoughtful enterprise. And I look back fondly, and proudly, at this piece of my identity. In more immediate, specific terms, this very reminiscence is also the answer to the question.
81
General Discussion / The Abortion Thread Ex Ultra!
« on: November 03, 2005, 12:15:24 am »
After I made a casual reference to abortion in a different topic, the whole conversation was hijacked. It seems like that always happens when it comes to abortion. So, I know you all have an opinion on it. But some arguments get boring after you've heard them a zillion times without variation. In that spirit, I'd like to invite everyone to get their abortion feelings out on the table in this thread, and leave the topic be in other threads...or at least try not to hijack the whole discussion. Here is the decisive Compendium Abortion Extravaganza!
Isn't it crazy? No one is going to change anyone else's mind on this subject. Yet we bicker about it endlessly! Let's just accept the fight as a part of human nature, and try to contain it here.
I'll throw the first stone. In my following post, I will reproduce a copy of an argument I had on the GameFAQs War on Terror board early this year. It isn't my best abortion argument, but it is the only one that I thought to save a copy of. The italicized paragraphs are quotes from other people. The regular paragraphs are my replies.
Game's on!
Isn't it crazy? No one is going to change anyone else's mind on this subject. Yet we bicker about it endlessly! Let's just accept the fight as a part of human nature, and try to contain it here.
I'll throw the first stone. In my following post, I will reproduce a copy of an argument I had on the GameFAQs War on Terror board early this year. It isn't my best abortion argument, but it is the only one that I thought to save a copy of. The italicized paragraphs are quotes from other people. The regular paragraphs are my replies.
Game's on!
82
General Discussion / RPG Maker XP finally Legit in English
« on: October 24, 2005, 08:53:16 pm »
It's here! It's here! Hooray for the legit English version of RPG Maker XP! Hooray!! And hooray for Enterbrain for making it happen!
RPG Maker XP is big. Bigger than you think! Previous versions have not offered enough power, nor enough features, and, excepting the Playstation version, have not even been legally published in English. But now savvy video game authors have the legal and technical means to produce (and sell) games of the same caliber as anything from the 16-bit era. Something wonderful has happened here.
RPG Maker XP is big. Bigger than you think! Previous versions have not offered enough power, nor enough features, and, excepting the Playstation version, have not even been legally published in English. But now savvy video game authors have the legal and technical means to produce (and sell) games of the same caliber as anything from the 16-bit era. Something wonderful has happened here.
83
General Discussion / Bickering
« on: October 09, 2005, 06:18:58 pm »Quote from: Exodus
The FES guy admitted to it being a joke. It doesn't matter if other people actually believed his bullshit, because he still said it was a joke.
You've got it exactly wrong. It matters very much that others believe in a flat Earth, without regard to the beliefs of the theory's creator.
84
General Discussion / Maestro J’s Classical Music Appreciation Hall
« on: October 09, 2005, 04:50:36 am »
This topic hopes to promote the enjoyment of classical music among people who might not otherwise have much contact with it, by showcasing specific compositions and going into a bit of their background. Those who are interested in a piece of recommended music are encouraged to listen to it for themselves. Anyone is welcome to participate.
85
General Discussion / What Is Your Innate Elemental?
« on: October 08, 2005, 05:03:59 am »
As I was visiting the city of Kajar, I came across a Nu, who spoke:
Those silly Nu! They always speak in riddles…if at all.
We are but children of the world, doomed to die yet insatiable in life. And in life the elemental powers of the world flow through us like ichor to give form to our wild energies. Each offers its own, unique glimpse into the emptiness of mundane reality. One of the elementals—the one most like us in nature, or we most like it—will always take the strongest hold in us, and this elemental above the others becomes our own. We become excited or enthused when our innate elemental is strong in us, and we become dejected or irate when it is suppressed from us. When we look into the outer world and see our own face reflected back, this is where our innate elemental is strongest, and all our works of magic and material take a form most like unto ourselves.
There are four elemental powers; Fire, Water, Rock, and Air.
Rock is the placement of physical substance before the spirit of the world, and casts shadows in this way; as such the Gurus now and of ages past have described it by this essential quality, and they call it Shadow. Air is not only the breath of the living spirit within all of us, but the living winds of the spirit of the world that set all things in motion; and the Gurus have combined these two ideas in a most striking way, and they sometimes call it Lightning.
And the Nu spoke:
The elementals are all connected, and I believe it was this that the Nu had tried to convey…in its strange and distant voice. Their distinctiveness plays off that of the others; and that is why our innate elemental is so important.
Which is yours?
Fire: Imagination
One who embodies the Fire elemental is creative, energetic, has a strong intuition and a very intense personality. The Fire innate is flamboyant, sensual, works hard and plays hard, and has a deep appetite for food, drink, and sex. The kind of kid who makes all the other kids cry at dodge ball. Fire innates always win, even when they lose. And they would dream more, if only they weren’t so busy living.
Water: Passion
One who embodies the Water elemental is affectionate, artistic, has powerful emotions and cares more deeply than others. The water innate is given to artistic expression, prefers feelings over hard logic, and can be extremely opinionated. A kind of person both easily bruised and easily pleased. Water innates are inconsistent from moment to moment, just like the real world. They are deeply sensitive.
Rock: Determination
One who embodies the Rock elemental is diligent, loyal, has a knack for organization and details, and hungers for a more consistent world. The Rock innate is eminently practical, a veritable paragon of responsibility. They are the type of people to have seven of the same shirt in their closet. And why not? They found what works best; why keep looking? Rock innates find contentment in the familiar. They organize projects, moderate disputes, and temper the excesses of others. They are balance.
Air: Curiosity
One who embodies the Air elemental is rational, intelligent, has an unbiased mind, and lives somewhat detached from the everyday concerns of the world. The Air innate may ponder and vacillate, but rarely makes foolish mistakes. An eccentric bunch, but scrupulously logical. Air innates are the hardest to understand and predict. They always think things through well in advance and plan very carefully before ever committing to action. They are lifelong students, they talk to themselves, and they love to share their ideas. They are dreamers.
The Nu spoke:
We should all be so sure.
Quote from: Nu
Water summons wind…
Wind makes fire dance.
Those silly Nu! They always speak in riddles…if at all.
We are but children of the world, doomed to die yet insatiable in life. And in life the elemental powers of the world flow through us like ichor to give form to our wild energies. Each offers its own, unique glimpse into the emptiness of mundane reality. One of the elementals—the one most like us in nature, or we most like it—will always take the strongest hold in us, and this elemental above the others becomes our own. We become excited or enthused when our innate elemental is strong in us, and we become dejected or irate when it is suppressed from us. When we look into the outer world and see our own face reflected back, this is where our innate elemental is strongest, and all our works of magic and material take a form most like unto ourselves.
There are four elemental powers; Fire, Water, Rock, and Air.
Rock is the placement of physical substance before the spirit of the world, and casts shadows in this way; as such the Gurus now and of ages past have described it by this essential quality, and they call it Shadow. Air is not only the breath of the living spirit within all of us, but the living winds of the spirit of the world that set all things in motion; and the Gurus have combined these two ideas in a most striking way, and they sometimes call it Lightning.
And the Nu spoke:
Quote from: Nu
The brighter the persona, the darker the shadow.
The elementals are all connected, and I believe it was this that the Nu had tried to convey…in its strange and distant voice. Their distinctiveness plays off that of the others; and that is why our innate elemental is so important.
Which is yours?
Fire: Imagination
One who embodies the Fire elemental is creative, energetic, has a strong intuition and a very intense personality. The Fire innate is flamboyant, sensual, works hard and plays hard, and has a deep appetite for food, drink, and sex. The kind of kid who makes all the other kids cry at dodge ball. Fire innates always win, even when they lose. And they would dream more, if only they weren’t so busy living.
Water: Passion
One who embodies the Water elemental is affectionate, artistic, has powerful emotions and cares more deeply than others. The water innate is given to artistic expression, prefers feelings over hard logic, and can be extremely opinionated. A kind of person both easily bruised and easily pleased. Water innates are inconsistent from moment to moment, just like the real world. They are deeply sensitive.
Rock: Determination
One who embodies the Rock elemental is diligent, loyal, has a knack for organization and details, and hungers for a more consistent world. The Rock innate is eminently practical, a veritable paragon of responsibility. They are the type of people to have seven of the same shirt in their closet. And why not? They found what works best; why keep looking? Rock innates find contentment in the familiar. They organize projects, moderate disputes, and temper the excesses of others. They are balance.
Air: Curiosity
One who embodies the Air elemental is rational, intelligent, has an unbiased mind, and lives somewhat detached from the everyday concerns of the world. The Air innate may ponder and vacillate, but rarely makes foolish mistakes. An eccentric bunch, but scrupulously logical. Air innates are the hardest to understand and predict. They always think things through well in advance and plan very carefully before ever committing to action. They are lifelong students, they talk to themselves, and they love to share their ideas. They are dreamers.
The Nu spoke:
Quote from: Nu
Nu…!
We should all be so sure.
86
Chrono / Gameplay Casual Discussion / Chrono Trigger Super-Original Script
« on: September 13, 2005, 07:39:45 pm »
One of the Compendium's best features is its scripts for all three Chrono games. The scripts are important because they represent just about the purest encapsulation of canon besides actually playing the game firsthand. Thus, when I turn to the script for answers, I know that I'm looking at the ultimate authoritative source. But there is always one caveat that bugs me when I do that: Is this what the original Japanese text says?
We need to repeat the script project, except with the original Japanese versions of the game rather than the English ones. And the trouble with this is that I don't speak Japanese at all, nor does there seem to be anyone else here capable of undertaking that.
For instance, Truce village. Why is it named Truce? Just which "truce" are they talking about? Is this what the village is called in the Japanese version? Is some cultural reference missing? As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but all these little curiosities add up until I cannot help but suspect that we are missing out on a lot of interesting details, simply because our version of the Chrono Trigger canon is actually The Canon As Told By Ted. He's a good guy, but I'd like a second opinion.
I imagine it wouldn't be terribly hard to get ahold of the raw Japanese text, but cleaning it up into the Japanese counterpart of our English scripts is certain to be a much greater challenge. This may be an ambition beyond the Compendium's direct ability to satisfy. So I would ask, does anyone have any ideas of how we might go about, or to whom we might turn, in order to get this done? For all I know, the very thing I'm looking for already exists. If so, maybe we can find it. But if not, how about finding people who know Japanese and would be able to clean up the raw text and produce a clean-cut script for the games--for Chrono Trigger in particular?
Thoughts? Ideas?
We need to repeat the script project, except with the original Japanese versions of the game rather than the English ones. And the trouble with this is that I don't speak Japanese at all, nor does there seem to be anyone else here capable of undertaking that.
For instance, Truce village. Why is it named Truce? Just which "truce" are they talking about? Is this what the village is called in the Japanese version? Is some cultural reference missing? As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but all these little curiosities add up until I cannot help but suspect that we are missing out on a lot of interesting details, simply because our version of the Chrono Trigger canon is actually The Canon As Told By Ted. He's a good guy, but I'd like a second opinion.
I imagine it wouldn't be terribly hard to get ahold of the raw Japanese text, but cleaning it up into the Japanese counterpart of our English scripts is certain to be a much greater challenge. This may be an ambition beyond the Compendium's direct ability to satisfy. So I would ask, does anyone have any ideas of how we might go about, or to whom we might turn, in order to get this done? For all I know, the very thing I'm looking for already exists. If so, maybe we can find it. But if not, how about finding people who know Japanese and would be able to clean up the raw text and produce a clean-cut script for the games--for Chrono Trigger in particular?
Thoughts? Ideas?
87
General Discussion / How Bush Bungled the Katrina Aftermath
« on: September 11, 2005, 09:39:39 pm »
There's been some talk in the September 11 thread about Hurricane Katrina. Rather than continue to litter that thread with off-topic material, I figured I would point out an interesting piece of journalism published in Newsweek this morning, which might help my fact-poor Republican friends here understand how President Bush failed to properly respond to Hurricane Katrina. This article does not address his administration's crimes that occured before the storm--such as the gutting of FEMA and the cutting of funds for New Orleans levee and floodwall improvements--but it does focus at length on the reason why Bush is largely responsible for the Katrina disaster that resulted from the lack of a coordinated response after the hurricane had struck and the disaster was underway. This insightful reconstruction of events explains why it was George Bush and the federal government who are largely to blame, rather than state and local officials in the affected states and particularly in New Orleans, and it details how his failure came to pass.
What you are about to read is a scathing indictment of the president's ineptitude and personal inability to cope with disaster situations. Bush supporters with preexisting heart conditions or a vitriolic hatred for legitimate criticism of Bush should not read this article.
What you are about to read is a scathing indictment of the president's ineptitude and personal inability to cope with disaster situations. Bush supporters with preexisting heart conditions or a vitriolic hatred for legitimate criticism of Bush should not read this article.
88
General Discussion / Daily Kos Is as Large as the Entire Conservative Blogosphere
« on: September 09, 2005, 01:42:31 pm »
I'm not sure if the Chrono Compendium actually has any liberals on it besides me, but if there are, then here's a real zinger that I think you'll enjoy: According to some tree-hugging bean counters, Daily Kos has more traffic than the top 50 conservative websites combined. Daily Kos also attracts more traffic than the Fox News website. And five other liberal blogs each have audiences larger than Instapundit, the biggest conservative blog. So now we know! Now we know why the GOPs control the radio and television: All the liberals are online! I've always known that the mainstream of the first Internet generation--the 2800ers--was liberal, because they came out of college labs and basement apartments. But now, several generations later, some of those pioneering liberals have gone on to control many of the most important parts of the Internet, from Google to Slashdot to Daily Kos. Given how integral the Internet will prove in the coming decades, I can't help but intuit that in these statistics we liberals have a major raw advantage slowly fermenting into the sweet ambrosia of victory. The Republicans may control this decade, but they are no match for the full power of a mature secularism, whose coming day has waited ten thousand years. The dynamics of information and accessibility are becoming globalized, instantaneous. Old conservatism has no roots.
89
General Discussion / Howl's Moving Castle
« on: July 28, 2005, 08:57:01 pm »
If you don’t live in a big city (or in Japan) then you haven’t seen this film yet—excepting those with mad torrent skillz—but if there is anyone who has seen Howl’s Moving Castle I’d be very interested in hearing your thoughts on it. Hayao Miyazaki’s films are for people who find their most elaborate dreams fascinating. I am one of those people, so I am a big fan.
The prevailing review of the film amongst the movie critic community seems to be that it has lovely visuals and lovely music, but suffers from tissue-thin story, disruptive pacing, and a number of loose ends and storyline errata that don’t seem to belong anywhere. I don’t disagree with these criticisms, but I don’t think they bear the sort of relevance that the critics presume. This movie is so abstract, above and beyond its storyline, that the storyline itself almost doesn’t matter. Watching it is like watching two hours of artwork on parade. It fits more like a dream than anything else; whatever seems out of place is actually right where it belongs. The details are simply incredible, and richer grounds for imagination than any other director’s work I can bring to mind.
This is borderline heresy for me, since I am a disciple of the school of plot, but I would dare go so far as to say that a more coherent, dominant plotline would actually diminish the impact of this movie. Similarly, the characterizations are almost irrelevant…they are as superficial to the purpose of this story as the plot. The lush imagery is an exposé of our own identity—watching this film is like looking into yourself and seeing what you are all about. What parts of the story resonate with you? The tea in bowls? Sophie’s discipline and the rewards that follow? The architecture of the kingdom? Everything, absolutely everything is like some gorgeous final exam of how much a person you have become thus far in your life. Everything you recognize from the real world—every time you smile or nod in recognition—is a gold star for you.
The music, which supports the visuals rather than leading on its own, demonstrates almost the limits of Joe Hisaishi’s maestro’s expertise. The music has a limited identity outside of the film—listen to the soundtrack if you get the opportunity—but inside it lends great depth to the art as only music can. Never overbearing, never self-sufficient, the music completes the scene in an entirely submissive role.
As for my own complaints? I would like to have seen better pacing, a little more exploration of ideas throughout the film, and maybe even a bit of follow-up to various minutiae here and there, such as the color dial beside the door…but I am prepared to accept that nothing is perfect, not even the work of Mr. Miyazaki. These complaints are summarily dismissed.
This film, simply put, is as deep as your own imagination. It is either a technical masterpiece or a stroke of genius…take your pick.
The prevailing review of the film amongst the movie critic community seems to be that it has lovely visuals and lovely music, but suffers from tissue-thin story, disruptive pacing, and a number of loose ends and storyline errata that don’t seem to belong anywhere. I don’t disagree with these criticisms, but I don’t think they bear the sort of relevance that the critics presume. This movie is so abstract, above and beyond its storyline, that the storyline itself almost doesn’t matter. Watching it is like watching two hours of artwork on parade. It fits more like a dream than anything else; whatever seems out of place is actually right where it belongs. The details are simply incredible, and richer grounds for imagination than any other director’s work I can bring to mind.
This is borderline heresy for me, since I am a disciple of the school of plot, but I would dare go so far as to say that a more coherent, dominant plotline would actually diminish the impact of this movie. Similarly, the characterizations are almost irrelevant…they are as superficial to the purpose of this story as the plot. The lush imagery is an exposé of our own identity—watching this film is like looking into yourself and seeing what you are all about. What parts of the story resonate with you? The tea in bowls? Sophie’s discipline and the rewards that follow? The architecture of the kingdom? Everything, absolutely everything is like some gorgeous final exam of how much a person you have become thus far in your life. Everything you recognize from the real world—every time you smile or nod in recognition—is a gold star for you.
The music, which supports the visuals rather than leading on its own, demonstrates almost the limits of Joe Hisaishi’s maestro’s expertise. The music has a limited identity outside of the film—listen to the soundtrack if you get the opportunity—but inside it lends great depth to the art as only music can. Never overbearing, never self-sufficient, the music completes the scene in an entirely submissive role.
As for my own complaints? I would like to have seen better pacing, a little more exploration of ideas throughout the film, and maybe even a bit of follow-up to various minutiae here and there, such as the color dial beside the door…but I am prepared to accept that nothing is perfect, not even the work of Mr. Miyazaki. These complaints are summarily dismissed.
This film, simply put, is as deep as your own imagination. It is either a technical masterpiece or a stroke of genius…take your pick.
90
Characters, Plot, and Themes / Character Development in Chrono Trigger
« on: July 28, 2005, 03:17:49 pm »
I posted the following in a topic on GameFAQs, but since it's more than two sentences long you know no one is going to read it. So, not wanting my twenty minutes to go to waste, I thought I'd post it here for some more thoughtful consideration. The accusation was that Chrono Trigger suffers from lack of character development. This is my rebuttal of that premise. Perhaps you have some opinions of your own.
~~~
Chrono Trigger’s character development is more subtle and definitely left more to the imagination than perhaps some people are used to, but the development is absolutely there. To call these characters flat is like saying Howl’s Moving Castle was a straightforward movie. It was that...provided you have no sense of imagination. Likewise for Chrono Trigger. The unassuming hints and cues sprinkled throughout the game are more than enough for either a mature or an imaginative mind to nurture to good fruition.
Character development does not solely depend on an audience being beat over the head with an Obvious Mallet. When Lucca is revealed not to like frogs, you can take that at face-value as a meaningless piece of trivia, or you can try to use it to interpret her personality. Frog-aversion does not occur in a vacuum. You, the player, can draw on your knowledge of archetypes and cultures to flesh out Lucca’s personality more than the canon explicitly allows, by filling in some of the gaps with your own experiences. That’s called intuition.
If you want an example of an RPG with relatively weak character development, The Secret of Mana is noteworthy. Despite having a story nearly as good as Chrono Trigger’s, most of the characters, good and evil, PC and NPC alike, simply had no opportunity to express their identity in the course of events. A few of them turned out nicely, like The Boss and Geshtar and Thanatos, but most everyone else was devoid of personality in their actions and dialogue. What distinguishes games like Chrono Trigger, where character development is mostly left to the imagination, from games like The Secret of Mana, where there simply isn’t much character development to speak of, is the illustrations of the characters via dialogue that interprets the events of the plot in their own words. SoM reads like a history text; CT reads like a historical novel. That’s the difference.
I think the flattest character in Chrono Trigger is Robo. He is too much of a stereotype to stand out as a unique character. But nevertheless, it isn’t to say that he doesn’t have his moments. His simple line “Good morning,” after being repaired from his encounter with the other RY robots is one example. The lines tells us about the culture from which he came. He also mentions that no one has ever asked him about his plans for the future. This too speaks to Robo’s identity.
Ayla is probably the most underestimated character in the game in terms of depth of development. If you can get past her incredibly hackneyed dialogue—which isn’t easy, and I admit that some people can’t—it becomes apparent that every scene in the game in which she features speaks volumes on her, from the way she wipes out those Reptites the first time you see her, all the way to her last-ditch attempt to save Azala before the red star crashes, and everything in between. Consider her line “Ayla fight while alive! Win and live. Lose and die. Rule of life. No change rule.” This is one of the game’s better attempts at philosophy. Ayla comes from a simpler era, before our social taboos and psychological inhibitions started preempting our most straightforward observations. From her exposure in the game thanks to moments like this, Ayla comes off as forthright, vivacious, provocative…and all of these general attributes have the in-game specifics to back them up.
I grant that the character development in Chrono Trigger is much less overt than that of a game like Final Fantasy VI. However, it is mistake to assume that the styles of subtlety and intimation amounts to a lack of meaningful character depth. Those who make such an assumption are beneath the depth of the material…it speaks more to their simplicity than to that of the game’s. Much like those Magic Eye 3D books, if you don’t know how to look at these characters, you’re not going to see their dazzling personality.
~~~
Chrono Trigger’s character development is more subtle and definitely left more to the imagination than perhaps some people are used to, but the development is absolutely there. To call these characters flat is like saying Howl’s Moving Castle was a straightforward movie. It was that...provided you have no sense of imagination. Likewise for Chrono Trigger. The unassuming hints and cues sprinkled throughout the game are more than enough for either a mature or an imaginative mind to nurture to good fruition.
Character development does not solely depend on an audience being beat over the head with an Obvious Mallet. When Lucca is revealed not to like frogs, you can take that at face-value as a meaningless piece of trivia, or you can try to use it to interpret her personality. Frog-aversion does not occur in a vacuum. You, the player, can draw on your knowledge of archetypes and cultures to flesh out Lucca’s personality more than the canon explicitly allows, by filling in some of the gaps with your own experiences. That’s called intuition.
If you want an example of an RPG with relatively weak character development, The Secret of Mana is noteworthy. Despite having a story nearly as good as Chrono Trigger’s, most of the characters, good and evil, PC and NPC alike, simply had no opportunity to express their identity in the course of events. A few of them turned out nicely, like The Boss and Geshtar and Thanatos, but most everyone else was devoid of personality in their actions and dialogue. What distinguishes games like Chrono Trigger, where character development is mostly left to the imagination, from games like The Secret of Mana, where there simply isn’t much character development to speak of, is the illustrations of the characters via dialogue that interprets the events of the plot in their own words. SoM reads like a history text; CT reads like a historical novel. That’s the difference.
I think the flattest character in Chrono Trigger is Robo. He is too much of a stereotype to stand out as a unique character. But nevertheless, it isn’t to say that he doesn’t have his moments. His simple line “Good morning,” after being repaired from his encounter with the other RY robots is one example. The lines tells us about the culture from which he came. He also mentions that no one has ever asked him about his plans for the future. This too speaks to Robo’s identity.
Ayla is probably the most underestimated character in the game in terms of depth of development. If you can get past her incredibly hackneyed dialogue—which isn’t easy, and I admit that some people can’t—it becomes apparent that every scene in the game in which she features speaks volumes on her, from the way she wipes out those Reptites the first time you see her, all the way to her last-ditch attempt to save Azala before the red star crashes, and everything in between. Consider her line “Ayla fight while alive! Win and live. Lose and die. Rule of life. No change rule.” This is one of the game’s better attempts at philosophy. Ayla comes from a simpler era, before our social taboos and psychological inhibitions started preempting our most straightforward observations. From her exposure in the game thanks to moments like this, Ayla comes off as forthright, vivacious, provocative…and all of these general attributes have the in-game specifics to back them up.
I grant that the character development in Chrono Trigger is much less overt than that of a game like Final Fantasy VI. However, it is mistake to assume that the styles of subtlety and intimation amounts to a lack of meaningful character depth. Those who make such an assumption are beneath the depth of the material…it speaks more to their simplicity than to that of the game’s. Much like those Magic Eye 3D books, if you don’t know how to look at these characters, you’re not going to see their dazzling personality.