Comic for Monday, May 29th
May29
…and we’re back!
Hopefully it’s not too confusing to lurch back into the main story… if you’re feeling a lost, here’s the last story comic for a refresher 🙂
Ah god, so many hands, and worse yet, handshakes .shudder.
Yes, Amy is definitely hiding behind Tyler. She’s sort of scared of the Consul.
Loading ...
It is interesting that “Ambassador Kokato” has hair close to natural, but not quite. I wonder if that is intentionally. Going from the context, I am not sure that Designer Children are common in Arpon, and maybe she was was supposed to blend in while still technically following the laws regarding hair color on Designer Children?
Arron’s third-personness sounds odd. Though maybe it’s just this case.
I wonder if Weber cares about being a pawn so long as he knows(/thinks) he’s being used in a way that he’d prefer to be used. (So if he knew/understood the details he’d be okay with that path anyway, just, obviously, he doesn’t know the details.)
Um, demonstration? Demonstration as in: “Down with Arpon”, or demonstration as in: “This is what we can do to anyone who crosses us.”?
And, as for hands, “…a remarkable improvement is apparent at this end…” 🙂
I suspect demonstrating the portal detection doodad that Peter whipped up for them.
That is an interesting idea. Would sure stir up a storm of shit and a half. Fits with Tyler saying that they cannot really talk about the source too, as the source is Peter, who would be a touchy subject to bring up with the IDS.
I wish it were unrealistic for somebody as smart and powerful as Biana to be so blinded by her opinions that she cannot see the truth, but unfortunately that is just the way things work.
Her perception of Arron is not based on Arron, but on her wish for him to be as she thinks of him and it will continue to bite her staff on the ass. I imagine eventually it will bite her, too, but at how high a cost before it gets there?
_” I wish it were unrealistic for somebody as smart and powerful as Biana to be so blinded by her opinions that she cannot see the truth, but unfortunately that is just the way things work. “_
That’s a good point. And it is unfortunate. Also, it’s sad how often it occurs.
I wouldn’t worry too much for Biana’s staff, though. Yes, they will eventually have hell to pay for one of these days, one way or the other. The question is when and in what form.
I suggest not worrying much for her staff because, as I see it, they’re guilty as long as they know enough about Biana’s plans to know that it is both highly illegal and at least morally questionable. There’s certainly something to be said for loyalty, particularly in a government organization like IDS. But there is also such a thing as crossing a line that should never be crossed. Fascist regimes get started that way, to say nothing of criminal organizations.
Assuming there is a portion of her staff that does not know much about her plans, then I would imagine that they won’t get much punishment. And if Biana manages to get her way, they can at least take small comfort in their ignorance of her plans.
My comment was about the last page. Biana’s reply to Arron was going full retard. Where, I would say that any IDS that could read the writing on the wall would do whatever they had to to put space between them and Biana.
But, like Josh alludes to, many can’t (or won’t) read the writing on the wall.
In my experience, advancement and positions of power tend to fall to those willing to push forward with bold plans, without a lot of regard to their ability to deliver on their promises. Ambition is a self fulfilling prophecy when it really should not be.
I can definitely see how Biana could be in charge if she promising to deliver on the ambitions of the politicians back in central, as the vast majority of the time people are more interested giving power to the people that tell them what they want to hear than any sort of competency.
My personal theory on why someone like Biana is in power. Maybe this comes from watching The Great War channel about World War I and seeing how Generals were promoted though.
I do wonder how clever Biana actually is. She is at least self aware enough to realize that she screwed up talking to Arron. At very least, she is capable of coordinating a fairly large scale conspiracy to some degree. The effectiveness is still up in the air though.
More clever than most commentators give her credit for. You don’t get to that position without being both clever and ambitious. While the small snippets we get from her may cause doubts, we have a lot more reason to be pro-Kepler due to narrative perspective. This is their story, not hers.
My bias against Biana stems from more than foolishness. It’s about her seeming total lack of moral fiber and her failing to see the big picture. It is abundantly clear that she will step over anyone and stoop to any level to reach her goals. She’s willing to not only trample all over the sovereignty of other world nations, lie like a dog, engage in secret deals and black market trading, kill innocent people and those who get in her way (e.g., Naomi), etc., etc. And for what? Ambition? She’s a heartless psycho.
Technically, the (official) past tense of “drag” is “dragged,” although apparently “drug” is used in particular dialects.
Given that, it really needs to be something akin to “I’m sorry that you’ve been…” rather than “I apologize you’ve been…”
Drug as a past tense of drag just doesn’t sound right to me….in what “dialects” is it correct? (Other than ‘too dumb to learn correct grammar’-sville, obviously.)
(Honest curiosity, just with sarcasm tacked on.)
I updated it as I reckon Arron should say things like a smart folk person, but I think I’d say “drug” rather than dragged” if I was just writing normally, not sure why. I can’t say I’ve given it much thought if that’s normal or just a PastUtopia-ism. I’m not really known for my stellar written grammar.
I dunno, I’d use hung for the past tense of hang, too? I suppose I tend to meander toward the less syllables approach when they seem functionally equivalent.
Update: I polled the people in my immediate vicinity, the end result was 2 votes for drug, 2 votes for dragged. One of the votes on dragged converted to drug after he heard the other people (he thought saying “the meeting drug on” sounded more right after comparing them), but before I told him that dragged was the actual right answer, so I’d say it’s about 50/50 in ridiculously small sample size of the local dialect conducted.
For whatever it’s worth, I’d conjugate it as follows:
I dragged him out of that dangerous situation.
I have drug him out of dangerous situations.
I believe this is the difference between past and past perfect.
However, I cannot find that in any online dictionaries.
It seems that the constructs I learned in school have been eliminated from the vocabulary.
To be fair, I know many who say that the “u” conjugations for past perfect are wrong, and that both past and past perfect should be the same for verbs you might otherwise conjugate that way.
“I sneak,” “I sneaked,” “I have snuck” vs. “I have sneaked”
“I drag,” “I dragged, “I have drug” vs. “I have dragged”
Though I don’t think I’ve seen objection to “I bring” “I brang” “I have brung.” Except now, because spellcheck is objecting to both “brang” and “brung.” I suppose “brought” used for both is the more technically correct. But I’ve never heard anybody complain about “brang” and “brung” before I saw spellcheck whine about it now.
the 2nd 1/2 of the Consul’s line: “You’re such a RELIABLE young man Weber. Well done.”
Fixed, thanks 🙂
you’re welcome.