Attention Snowflakes


I’m still on hiatus. Feeling much better, but felt that this required a small post just to clarify my position. If you catch yourself bemoaning how over-sensitive and easily-offended people are these days, and how nobody got offended by politically incorrect harmless fun in the good old days, just remember:

The premise of Blazing Saddles was that ignorant racists were such utter snowflakes that they’d be offended enough at the idea of a black sheriff that they would move en masse out of town in response to his appointment.

If you rail against how some things are no longer accepted in civilised society when they were fine fifty or twenty or even ten years ago, you’re not the hero of this story. You’re railing against humanity getting better.

If you want to rail against how offensive and unacceptable Blazing Saddles is in terms of its treatment of minorities of all kinds, bless your heart. It is unacceptable now – almost unthinkable. Because we’re getting better. Or at least we’re trying. I think that’s probably okay. It’s not supposed to stand up to today’s sensibilities, because the whole point of the movie was to mock the bigots until our sensibilities evolved.

You really think people have gotten easier to offend? They haven’t. They’ve just stopped accepting the casual assumption that it’s okay to offend people who don’t have the power to slap back.


– Posted from my Huawei mobile phone while sitting in the carpark.

About Hatboy

I’m not often driven to introspection or reflection, but the question does come up sometimes. The big question. So big, there’s just no containing it within the puny boundaries of a single set of punctuationary bookends. Who are these mysterious and unsung heroes of obscurity and shadow? What is their origin story? Do they have a prequel trilogy? What are their secret identities? What are their public identities, for that matter? What are their powers? Their abilities? Their haunted pasts and troubled futures? Their modus operandi? Where do they live anyway, and when? What do they do for a living? Do they really have these fantastical adventures, or is it a dazzlingly intellectual and overwrought metaphor? Or is it perhaps a smug and post-modern sort of metaphor? Is it a plain stupid metaphor, hedged around with thick wads of plausible deniability, a soap bubble of illusory plot dependent upon readers who don’t dare question it for fear of looking foolish? A flight of fancy, having dozed off in front of the television during an episode of something suitably spaceship-oriented? Do they have a quest, a handler, a mission statement, a department-level development objective in five stages? I am Hatboy.
This entry was posted in Hatboy's Nuggets of Crispy-Fried Wisdom and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

84 Responses to Attention Snowflakes

  1. brknwntr says:

    I dont wanna ask, I really dont, but Aaron’s not doing it…… what caused this?

    • stchucky says:

      Haaa, nothing. Just random reflection on bigotry and the phenomenon of conservative sensitivity. The idea that back in the good ole days we were politically incorrect and funny and everything was better is just fundamentally flawed. We were fine. Nobody was making us feel like shit over the quality of our jokes or the content of our culture. It’s easy to mistake that for some kind of happy ideal.

    • My ears are burning!

      This connected with me in relation to my embattled governor (of Virginia), who is being told to resign because of one picture of blackface and clan costume (2 people in a picture) that happened back in 1985. Other details are unclear which is why I’m being so vague. But needless to say, I think people are missing a lot of the big picture on this one, and I don’t want to encourage the selective outrage machine. 1985! Shillary Clinton supported horrible policies against blacks in the nineties, and called them “superpredators”.

      So, anyone who supported her for president needs to STFU about this one picture, for starters.

      Did I mention it was 1985? I did the Tomahawk Chop along with every other white American who had a Native-American-mascotted sports team, back in those times. So I guess none of us can hold political office, right?


      I could write a lot more but I really don’t wanna. Will if asked about this, happy to discuss. But so tired of this crap. Stop eating our own, people.

      This really bothered me given what happened to Cenk last year.

      • brknwntr says:

        I’m still mad at the Fighting Illini mascot being retired. I dont even care that it’s not politically correct, fuck them.

      • Was it a Native American of the, what, “Illini” tribe or something?

        Yeah that’s the sort of one I don’t think is non-PC or racist. Braves, Seminoles, etc. etc. where’s the offense in those? Now…Redskins? Enh…I can see it.

        Mascots. Fucking stupid anyway, LOL.

      • stchucky says:

        See this is why we Australians use sharks, eagles, and nightmarish, nightmarish sandgropers as mascots and steer well clear of Aboriginal stuff. I mean, I’m cringing just thinking of some of the mascots we could have had. One of them would have to just take the shape of a massive heap of corpses piled up under a rug, with a bloodstained broom resting against it.

      • stchucky says:

        In other news, sometimes I don’t like my imagination very much.

      • brknwntr says:

        the mascot was an “Indian chief” with a long head dress. the headrest was in orange and blue feathers. and his face paint was also orange and blue. the team colors. No claims were made that he represented any particular tribe or nation. The Native Americans of the Illinois Indians threw a hissy fit because a head dress was a Souix Indian thing. Then that his war dance was made up. Then that it was just all around offensive to Native American culture. The NCAA finally ruled that every sporting event he appeared at would be fined like 10-20,000 dollars or something. He made a few more appearances, but they retired him a year or two later.

      • brknwntr says:

        well, correction, I was told at the time (early 2000’s) that he didnt represent any specific tribe of Indians. however his name was Chief Illiniwek. Illiniwek it turns out was the name of the Illinois Indian tribe confederation. so they had a valid point of contention there. Fair play to them for complaining about him wearing Souix Indian regalia.

      • brknwntr says:

        There are still chants of “Chief” during the halftime shows when they play the music he used to dance to. music which has no relation to Indians in anyway shape or form. There are calls for this music to be banned as well. Occasionally an unofficial chief illiniwek will show up at an event or rally. I’m not sure how I feel about that. But banning the music performance known as “Three In One” can fuck right off.

      • brknwntr says:

        this is turning into allot of replies. But I’m eating lunch and thoughts keep coming. I think allot of the hostility towards the removal of the mascot comes from the way it was handled. In 1995 the issue was raised and the leadership of the former Illinois tribes stated that they were proud that the university was utilizing the mascot as a symbol, and that they were honored. five years later the same leadership petitioned to have the symbol removed. After his retirement, students claimed they were suicidal because other students wore school clothing which featured the old logo. There were petitions to ban students from wearing specific clothes. that’s a free speech argument. there were petitions that fans who joined in chants of “Chief” should be ejected from events, again, free speech. there have been mishandlings of the situation on the part of the university, opinions were ignored and Native American organizations, including the faculties own department of Native American studies was NOT consulted in decisions being made. that can and did only serve to alienate the representatives of native American leadership and students from any sort of reasonable dialogue on the subject. However, as with all things, and what is sort of the subject of this parent post, attitudes and organizations and intentions change. While the school is currently attempting to find a way to preserve the tradition of a native American mascot, they are trying to find a way to do that in a historically and culturally accurate manner. they are receiving NO cooperation. Perhaps they should just rebrand. the Team names Fighting Illini is in fact based on the students who left school and fought in WW1. both the name Fighting Illini and the branding of the students and faculty as the Illini existed prior to the adoption of Chief Illiniwek. so let’s get a guy out there in WW1 soldiers uniform and make him the mascot. While we are at it we can pretend any team from Michigan are Axis forces. We already sell t shirts in school colors that say Muck Fichigan.

      • Brkn about the Illini stuff, I generally agree with each point you made there so I’m just going to recommend finding an outlet to talk out all of those pent-up feels…I’m no psychologist but damn there’s a lot to unpack there!

        There’s nothing simple about this, but opinions change and different people may be representing the NA view in those differing cases of how it was treated. No idea.

        I do generally think that wearing a headdress and dancing around is offensive unless you’re doing it because your PEOPLE wear headdresses and dance around. Especially if there is whooping. Was there whooping? LOL

        Haven’t heard that song, don’t really want to, but if it bears no resemblance to stereotypical NA music then again I agree, back off, folks.

      • stchucky says:

        My ears are burning!


        This connected with me in relation to my embattled governor (of Virginia), who is being told to resign because of one picture of blackface and clan costume (2 people in a picture) that happened back in 1985. Other details are unclear which is why I’m being so vague. But needless to say, I think people are missing a lot of the big picture on this one, and I don’t want to encourage the selective outrage machine. 1985! Shillary Clinton supported horrible policies against blacks in the nineties, and called them “superpredators”.

        All true. I mean, blackface and Klan costume is pretty bad, don’t get me wrong, even for the 1980s … but sure, I’m sure there’s more to it and even for the worst offenders, I would hope that the fact that they reformed, got better, did good deeds to balance old prejudices, and now condemn such things is enough. Obviously if actual violent crimes were committed (you know, Klanny shit) I would expect him to have paid his debt to society. And equally obviously, I can understand (on some level; of course I can never really understand this firsthand) how a picture like that would disgust and distress the governor’s African American constituents and all decent Virginians.

        But yeah. That’s … that’s something.

        So, anyone who supported her for president needs to STFU about this one picture, for starters.

        Isn’t logic grand?

        Did I mention it was 1985? I did the Tomahawk Chop along with every other white American who had a Native-American-mascotted sports team, back in those times. So I guess none of us can hold political office, right?

        Dude, I wake up with cold sweats at night thinking about any of us holding political office. Let’s leave it to the Millennials. Generation X is as apathetic and cynical as the Boomers are toxic.

        I could write a lot more but I really don’t wanna. Will if asked about this, happy to discuss. But so tired of this crap. Stop eating our own, people.

        Fair to say, fair to say. And of course, you don’t need to provide more than this.

        I suppose this post emerged from a couple of cases and a bit of an emergent social media phenomenon, that are all interlinked:

        First, the idea that we can judge entertainment (for example Blazing Saddles, Friends, Seinfeld, anything really) on today’s merits. And acccording to today’s sensibilities. Yes, on one level it makes sense, we can look back and say “man, they sure were sexist and racist and homophobic back then,” but it doesn’t mean we can’t still enjoy it on some level. Blazing Saddles makes me flinch, but it’s supposed to. Bill and Ted is still stupid fun, even though they call each other “fag” when they accidentally touch one another. These are just things that exist, and we can’t change the past – only the future.

        Second, and pretty much directly related to that, is the idea that we can destroy someone for an attitude they held decades ago. I’m not talking about actual crimes, that’s why we have statutes of limitations and stuff. I’m just talking about personality issues that were for the most part an unconscious and unpreventable result of living in a certain time and place.

        Yes, there are always people in those same times and places who had more progressive attitudes and were basically better humans. For every thousand eyes-down just-get-through-the-day German there was a person who risked everything to say “this is wrong” (you know, only in German). Those people are amazing, and should be celebrated. Those of us who fall short can feel ashamed … but ultimately, as long as we learn and improve, I don’t think we should be holding our past selves accountable for errors we have already corrected.

        Depends on the errors, of course.

        This really bothered me given what happened to Cenk last year.

        Exactly, another good example. And just in the past couple of days, I saw that Liam Neeson had volunteered a story from his ugly past, to illustrate how attitudes change and how harmful bigotry can be. I hope he’s not crucified for it, I think the people who are shouting about it are really missing the big picture. But again, of course, I can only imagine how distressing it is to learn that someone you might admire may have tried to kill you if you’d looked at him the wrong way 40 years ago.

        I mean, that seems super obvious to me. I reckon I could have gotten Liam Neeson to cosh the shit out of me 40 years ago, if I’d gotten in his face. It doesn’t make him awful now, it just means he was a bit of a cunt back then. And I’m not even slightly surprised.

        The following Facebook cap is from a friend of mine, sums it up quite neatly. My comments underneath it also sum up my thoughts on the matter.

      • stchucky says:

        And I am aware of the irony of my good-German comparison and then immediately talking about Liam Neeson’s crappy past. That’s just icing on the cake to me.

  2. stchucky says:

    Of course, all of that is really going on under the surface of my original post (in the comments, if you will). The main point was to gently chew out people who complain about how weaksauce and oversensitive “PC culture” is today. We’re not weaker. We’re better.

    Pretending we can fix things by condemning the present based on a past that is set in stone is just as unrealistic and (almost as) shitty as pretending the past was just wacky irreverent fun and the occasional rope-related oopsie daisy.

  3. ohilya says:

    Did anyone else think “Jeez Liam, maybe save that one for your psychologist and *not* the mass public?”

    • stchucky says:

      Also a valid response. My immediate reaction was “this is definitely going to upset people but didn’t we all know this was a Liam Neeson when we picked him up?”

      • Good thoughts, all, and I feel no need to elaborate further on my governor’s story except to affirm that yes, no actual deeds or crimes, just a costume. And I hear there are African-American groups that are saying he does not need to resign, so that’s good. There’s just a lot of what Sargon would call “SJWs” but what I just call “people what are further left than I am” calling for him to resign. I hope he just lets them peter out. Reelection? No. But he can serve his term, or try and impeach him if you like. If you think THAT’s a wise idea.

        Hmm, guess I had more to say. Also, given how dangerous a lot of sport is to human (‘s brains, mostly), that mascot you suggested is somehow appropriate.

        I should have boycotted the superbowl over that, and over Kaepernick and BLM. I wish I had realized that sooner. Game was shit anyway.

      • brknwntr says:

        this super bowl? THIS SuperBowl LIII was shit? The Rams scored 3 points. The Patriots only MARGINALLY better. This super bowl wasnt flashy and full of teams giving up huge gains and numbers, no. It was however a defensive master class. Arguably one of the greatest defensive super bowls in history.

      • stchucky says:

        SQUEEE I have USians talking about The Big Game on my blog, this is so exotic!

      • stchucky says:

        Not even sarcasm by the way.

      • Yes, THIS Superbowl was shit. Sorry dude, but way over there in Finland you apparently aren’t in touch with the vast majority opinion of Americans. Everything you said was correct, it was a defense master class. More by the patriots, and those short drives from the Rams eventually wore THEIR defense out due to time on the field.

        But Americans hated how fucking boring it was. Americans like excitement. Again maybe you forgot over there in the hinterlands XD

        Also, please tell me you didn’t actually watch the game real time over there! What did it start at, like 0 dark 30?

        Also also since we’re talking about stuff, I had some questions on Oathbringer in that blog post and I was hoping someone who had finished the book because they’re not so busy only caring about their own writing that they can’t be arsed would talk to me.

        ;P Hatboy.

      • brknwntr says:

        I usually do watch it live. usually starts around 0100 and ends about 0500. somewhere thereish. This year, Monday was my first day on a new job and I decided to be adult and sleep the night before. I don’t know about the majority of Americans, but all of my friends enjoyed the game.

        i saw your request for conversation about Oathbringer. Its on my list to reread. I’m doing the FFoM now, but I got hung up and grumpy when the fucking weasel dies. I read Oathbringer last about 3 months and no lie or exaggeration 25 books ago. I counted back through my Kindle library. Once i finish FFoM I’ll read it again and then we can talk. give me….. a week? Maybe two to be safe.

      • Oh well I didn’t say the game wasn’t enjoyable. But sub-par and so were the commercials, so given the buildup I think I can fairly say it was shit. Bullshit? That doesn’t imply as low quality, just a huge disappointment. Hyperbole and all that.

        Sure, I just didn’t know if you missed it or whatever. Happy to discuss whenever you want. I used to read like that…those were the days.

      • brknwntr says:

        we don’t get the commercials over here. just a live feed from the stadium. The reason I enjoyed it is because I’m a Bill Belichick fan. Not a Patriots fan, NOT a Brady fan, a Belichick fan. He took the (I think) oldest, least mobile QB in the league, and a group of mostly past their prime receivers and running backs, and won a super bowl. Not that they arent GOOD, just not as good as three years ago. Arguably according to the Belichick era status quo, Brady, Gronk, Edelman, and a few others should have been out the door last year. He runs his team as a business, to win. he uses good players, but they dont piss their salary cap away on one single player and consequently usually dont have the single best player for any position. But they consistently have the best overall team, and it is consistently being utilized in the best way possible on any given game day. And I LOVE watching that. Anytime someone says The Patriots cant beat XXXX because they lack a good “insert position player ” Belichick pulls that hood up and reminds them that they are Jon Snow. Other teams are enjoyable to watch for action and flash, and the Patriots have those moments. usually in the fourth quarter when Brady finally figures out what the opposing defense is doing. (I could write paragraphs about how Brady is a GREAT student of football and STELLAR at reading a defense, but only a so-so QB in his other skills) But the Patriots are the best team in the league, without any doubts, questions, footnotes, or caveats, at winning football championships. And that’s what they did on Sunday. They did their job.

      • I have to admit I have very little knowledge of football but I could tell he’s a great coach. HOWEVER, what of the cheating scandals that recurred year after year? Again I’m no expert but I’m pretty sure deflating and scuffing the balls was cheating. And no one was lip reading other coaches, that we knew of, until he did it.

        What of all that? Could he still be cheating in other ways that haven’t been caught yet? I have little investment in this, due to my general lack of interest, but I hesitate to think so highly of someone that so many say has been “caught” cheating over and over.

      • brknwntr says:

        It’s a true fact, the Patriots have been caught cheating. you know why people hate that? Besides, oh we want fair play, dont cheat. Because their team ALSO got caught cheating, but didn’t win. Other teams deflate balls, other quarterbacks ADMIT to asking that the ball be deflated. Brady got a worse suspension than a player who beat his spouse on camera. Other teams got caught illegally video tapping opposition play calling. In fact, video tapping the play calling isnt illegal. That’s why you see coaches holding the play card up in front of their mouth. Its WHERE they tapped from that was illegal. Other teams have jammed the radio frequencies used to talk to players on the field, opened stadium doors for opposing team field goals to create wind currents (I still dont think that’s cheating, fuck you Roger Goodell) crashed the Windows tablets the team uses for communication with the press box and to call plays, piped in fake crowd noise to distract opposing teams (also not cheating in my opinion) and any number of other dirty tricks, from PED’s to paying a bounty for injuring opposing players (that’s BS and should get you ejected from the league). You know what Bill Belichick figured out a couple of seasons ago? That he was completely allowed to confuse the other team as to who was an eligible receiver. perfectly legal, right there in the rules. at the end of the season 31 team owners voted to draft a new rule outlawing that. How many NFL teams are there? 32. Half of the “scandels” involving the Patriots are the result of Belichick knowing a rule better than any other coach in the league and sometimes better than the officials. Take for example the infamous Tuck Rule, was Brady cancelling his forward pass and trying to tuck the ball? Abso-fucking- lutely. The rule read that until he places his second hand back on the ball though, it’s still an incomplete pass. Belichick challenged, video revealed his second hand hadnt made contact yet, he was CLEARLY, oh so very very DESPERATELY trying to get that second hand on the ball to avoid dropping it, but he DIDNT. And according to the rule, that means an incomplete pass because he had brought it back and then forward. Belichick knew that, the Patriots retained possession of the ball, and won the game. There was less than a minute left in that game, had the fumble call stood, the Raiders would have taken a knee twice, and won. But they didnt, and they still whine about it as an example of “legal cheating”

        The other example of why I like Belichick’s coaching is the Super Bowl game against the Seahawks, the one that ended with the Malcolm Butler interception. The Seahawks still had Marshawn Lynch at that point. they were on the ONE yard line. Everyone in the world thought they were gonna run the ball. But during practice that week, Belichick said “I think they might try to pass it in the red zone, probably outside. Let’s run a couple drills where you can break that play up. they ran it three times, and Butler failed to stop the play all three times in practice. But because of that preparation, on the one yard line, with less than a minute to go, Malcolm Butler recognized the developing play, cut inside, and made the interception of his life. Because his coach is, to quote Good Will Hunting, wicked smart.

        So yeah, he skirts the lines occasionally, and steps over it too. Speaking of stepping over lines, what about Rex Ryan or Mike Tomlin, both coaches who “physically stepped onto the football field to impede forward progress of the opposing team.” They tripped the runner. Well, Tomlin tried, but only slowed him down so he got tackled, Rex Ryan laid that dude OUT.

        Cheating happens in professional sports. it would be great if it didn’t, but it does. As long as the other team is cheating, I’ll excuse it the same way I excuse boxers and fighters who cut weight. Everyone knows that they are so dehydrated on that day that they can barely stand. If a fighter wants to ACTUALLY weigh 145 and fight at 145, hes gonna be fighting an opponent who weighs 165-170. And he’s gonna get destroyed. So he has to weigh 165 to start also, and cut down to 145 just like the other guy, just to be competitive.

        To be honest though, I doubt Belichick was involved in the Deflategate debacle. BECAUSE it was a debacle. when he cheats, its clever, and when he gets caught,he pays his fine and moves on. He’s just doing his job. Keeping his team at the top.

      • Well allright then, man, that all sounds reasonable to me. And very well informed. It’s really awesome to see a realtalk breakdown of all of this. I have to agree with you, Belichick sounds like a genius.

        This is almost cool enough to make me want to watch this sport where people are getting brain damage and THEN beating their wives and killing themselves and others. Almost.

        Thanks for all the detail! As I said at the start, I really didn’t have much but the surface information. I just knew they were getting accused of all this cheating, and no one else seemed to be.

        Knowing the rules better than anyone else is definitely something I can respect. I’d do the same..I think I do the same in my life as best I can. LOL

      • brknwntr says:

        I’ll be honest, I dislike football. I never followed it back home, and didnt start watching it for more than the Super Bowl commercials until about 5 years ago. But it’s very American, and oh so many things here aren’t. So now i indulge.

      • stchucky says:

        Ooh, I just realised why all this was sounding so familiar, this is one of my favourite SNL sketches and now you guys have given me even more layers on it! So thank you.

      • aaronthepatriot says:

        LOL dibs on Gisele. You can take that any way you want.

        And heh, yeah it was funny. It was no Dick in a Box or Motherlover IMO but I laughed.

      • stchucky says:

        I was going to ask how your FFoM re-read was going, sorry about Boonie. Again.

      • ohilya says:

        So, uh, that Liam Neeson thing, eh?

        (/Ignores Yanks rabbiting on about that sportsball thing I don’t care about.)

      • Oh yeah that was good of him to admit. I grew up in the South of the US, and I’m no spring chicken. So, yeah. I never had that kind of rage, but definitely the Louis C.K. thing, yeah. Not the one where he exposes himself, the other thing. From the bit.

      • brknwntr says:

        we moved on to an arguably more important topic. The Liam Neeson thing is a non-issue. The Sportsing matter

      • brknwntr says:

        fuck it, Hatboy’s books can wait. (sorry) I needed something to listen to at work and went with Oathbringer as audio book. Somebody link me back to the previous discussion. Or Aaron can hit me up with an email. I’ll listen today, and whatever I dont get listened to I’ll read tonight and tomorrow. let’s do this.

      • stchucky says:

        I’m happy for the discussion to be here on the blog instead of e-mail, just for traffic purposes and also I will finish this damn book some day (I have swapped to a different book now [sorry]), and then I will be happy to dust this off and join in again, dreameling-style.

      • aaronthepatriot says:

        Damn, sir, happy to email you and really happy you’re going to this effort to discuss Oathbringer with me. But I only had a few comments for starters, and now I’m worried I won’t bring enough to this conversation to even partly justify your efforts!

        But that’s before my coffee, let’s give me a chance! I’ll email my blog comment to you for ease of reference and we can discuss here or in email, but as Hatboy says, he really would like the traffic on here ;P

        Even if he has to cover his eyes and scroll past it all, doing the visual equivalent of “nah nah nah can’t hear you”

      • brknwntr says:

        Batboy is holding his own multiverse in his head. I’m pretty sure there isnt enough room for the cosmere as well.

      • brknwntr says:

        although it would be hilarious for Çrom to turn up with a black sword that hates evil.

      • stchucky says:

        The Levelled Blade?

      • brknwntr says:

        Well Jatboy wanted the traffic so I’m posting here. due to various BS I’m only about halfway through Oathbringer, probably wont finish it till the end of the week. Too much other stuff going on. However, I can address the issue of Taravangian. His diagram is flawed. How and why isnt exactly clear, but he has been updating and reinterpreting it all along. He originally sent Szeth to kill Dalinar, but when that failed decided to join him to reevaluate. Thays sort of end of book 2 beginning of book 3. As is my info about him rewriting and reinterpreting the diagram, that’s all endish of book 2. And we have to keep in mind, every interpretation of the Diagram, has come on a day when he was not as intelligent as the day he wrote it, so every interpretation must be assumed to be inferior. Taravangian decides about halfway through Oathbringer to “destroy” Dalinar. Dalinar is not hard enough to make the choices Taravangian feels need made. That’s evidenced when they discuss the parable from The Way of Kings. (Chapter 28)

        I think the attitude he displays here really influences the decisions I remember him making at the end of the book. He is trying to save whatever he can. He started with the world, but by the end of Oathbringer hes settling for the residents of his city. It would be interesting to get confirmation that his Diagram is influenced by a servant of Odium, but we know that it IS influenced. His diagram is the result of his boon from the Nightwatcher, and she is a child of Cultivation. Dalinar’s boon and curse were….different then they appeared at first, and that is what allowed him to directly overcome the influence of the Thrill and resist becoming Odium’s champion himself. So i view it as….let’s call it highly likely…. that the Diagram is similarly serving a purpose other than what it appears to be on the surface. Catboy, if you read thisfar, be ashamed, and go finish the damn book.

        Also, I understood Odium to simply be referring to having killed Honor. I dont think Dalinar has BECOME Honor, I think Odium is simply failing against the fact that even though he killed Honor, Honor is still resisting him, if only through proxies and post-mortemly. Honor knew he couldn’t win, not in the form the conflict was taking place and not through the methods he had currently at his disposal. The death of Honor, the “betrayal” of the Knights Radiant, these reset the board. things are different this time around. and while its approaching a seeming endgame, Honor did his best to give the residents of Roshar a fighting chance. Towards the beginning of Oathbringer, the Stormfather is discussing Odiums nature with Dalinar. He states that to Odium, time is a meaningless construct. This effects how Odium perceived the conflict, but I suspect it also effects how he perceives humanity, the Parshendi, and the entities like spren. He has difficulty adapting to a changing environment, because he cannot understand time, and thus change. This is pure supposition, and I’m sure I’ll be wrong on most if not all of it. but that’s where I’m at now.

      • Thanks for the reply! There was more in my post that I’m assuming you haven’t gotten to in your reread, and I won’t reiterate that now. And damn, that was fast! You’re really dedicating yourself to this reread. I’m afraid I have no new points to offer, so if you do….

        So you’re saying in book 3, “destroy Dalinar” didn’t mean kill but just take him down so that someone stronger can replace him? That’s kind of what I came to think, but for the longest time I thought it meant kill. And about Odium’s influence, am I remembering correctly that one of Taravingian’s people turned out to work for Odium? That’s why I’m suspicious of Odium showing up now.

        But you make a great point about Cultivation, who might actually be behind the diagram, or the influence upon it at least. And we don’t know what she wants or how she works, so this gets really interesting.

        So Odium was just shouting out in anger about Honor as he was faced down by Dalinar…makes sense to me. But you know, don’t be surprised if it turns out Dalinar is bringing Honor back in some way. I mean, he’s bringing honor back…. Sorry, LOL. Also the concept of time and Odium is interesting.

        I did have more to say about humans and Parshendi, Honor and Odium, and that black dagger used at the end of book 3, but I’ll just mention those and not restate them. I think it’s really interesting how O came with us, and H was here with the P, but we switched to H and the P apparently switched to O.

        Seems he needs to write a book about this past stuff.

      • brknwntr says:

        yeah, I haven’t gotten back up to those sections yet, but I didn’t want you to think I’d forgotten. I dont remember one of his people working for Odium, but like I said, I’m only about 1/3 of the way through. Taravangian is dead set on HIMSELF being the one to save the world. So once his efforts to kill Dalinar failed, he commenced to sabotage and replacing him. That’s where I think Cultivation is going to step in. Either allowing him to continue forming an alliance and then betraying him back under Dalinars leadership. or, this is a step to allow Dalinar to lead the Radiants and nothing else. Which he is kind of perfect for.

      • brknwntr says:

        yeah, I haven’t gotten back up to those sections yet, but I didn’t want you to think I’d forgotten. I dont remember one of his people working for Odium, but like I said, I’m only about 1/3 of the way through. Taravangian is dead set on HIMSELF being the one to save the world. So once his efforts to kill Dalinar failed, he commenced to sabotage and replacing him. That’s where I think Cultivation is going to step in. Either allowing him to continue forming an alliance and then betraying him back under Dalinars leadership. Or, alternatively, this is a step to allow Dalinar to lead the Knights Radiant WITHOUT being involved in the politics, that’s really what he is better suited for anyway.

      • Yeah, once again this sounds right to me. But Taravingian being the political leader is a bit of a problem since he’s only intelligent part of the time. I mean, imagine if a President was mostly stupid…heh…that obviously wouldn’t work out well. Hypothetically.

      • brknwntr says:

        he, he he *nervous laugther*

      • Oh look, a unicorn!

        *whew* That was a close one.

      • stchucky says:

        Sir, I would like to vote for your unicorn.

        *solemnly pulls votes out of wallet like Homer paying for Lisa’s tiger-repelling rock*

      • aaronthepatriot says:

        Given its massive rise in popularity over the past 24 hours, this unicorn is now running for President of the US in 2020. Please divert said payment into a campaign donation, por favor.

      • stchucky says:

        Will the unicorn agree to give 70% of every rainbow poop it does per year, after its ten millionth rainbow poop, to the government for redistribution to vital things like fairycare for all and free elfucation?

      • The Rainbow Unicorn for President’s entire staff was initially so offended by your ask for redistribution of poop that the candidate was tempted to suggest you sit on her horn and spin. But upon further reflection, and consideration for the lack of entry port, she has requested that I (as her chief of horn) inform you that we have hired Nyan Nyan Cat as Minister of Rainbow Poop (pending election). She will be held up and slowly rotated throughout Rainbow Unicorn’s term(s) of service to shower all with a constant stream of Rainbow Crap ™.

  4. ohilya says:

    Not sure why where you’re from matters. It’s kind of not about you at all.

  5. ohilya says:

    I was making that comment for a reason. Spring chicken? I didn’t get what the relevance there was about.

    • stchucky says:

      So first of all, the superbowl conversation emerged from the racist mascot conversation. I happened to find it interesting in principle even if sport itself really doesn’t excite me that much. Especially when it was revealed to be a coping mechanism for cultural alienation like my man BRKN was saying, that really struck a chord.

      Even so, I didn’t have much to say but I still put some positivity out there. If you can’t do that, it’s easier to say nothing than to shit on someone else’s conversation. Isn’t it?

      Second, we’re talking about the built-in racism and negativity that comes from (for example) Liam Neeson’s cultural context, ie. Northern Ireland in the 60s and 70s. Since we didn’t any of us live in Northern Ireland in the 60s and 70s, it seems logical to also discuss our own cultural biases that come from where and when we live and grew up. And the US’s south is a seething hotbed of chunky racism to this day, and was even worse when Aaron was younger (which brings “angrier” and “more ignorant” as part of the package, which is why I imagine he mentioned his age in a vague sense), so what’s hard to understand?

  6. ohilya says:

    Chicken is hard to understand. Why chicken?

    • stchucky says:

      My regular commenters usually make more sense than the spam bots, Ilya.

    • stchucky says:

      “I’m no spring chicken” is a very, very common expression meaning that someone is saying they’re not exactly young anymore.

    • aaronthepatriot says:

      So now we’re pretending the chicken part is what you didn’t understand when you specifically said you didn’t understand how “where you’re from” matters. That would be the “South” part, not the “chicken” part. You didn’t ASK about the chicken bit in your smarmy response.

      This is just a mess, I can’t be bothered.

  7. JonathanBloom says:

    The Neeson thing was really disheartening. The original interview is very clear that this guy has a lot on his heart, and it just came out. You can even read the part where he catches himself and tries to change subject. I doubt he had any full plan of using this particular film to talk about these things. So what does The Internet do? Beat him down for being honest about change over, what, four, five decades? I hate people.

    • stchucky says:

      Right, exactly. Anything I have to say about a forty-year-old rape case (like “I hope the victim was alright and found some sort of justice or closure or happiness”) just seemed so hollow, and anything one might say about the hatred and instinctive violence that a friend would feel, in the context of Northern Ireland in the ’60s or ’70s … I mean oh my fucking God, how do any of us even start to do anything with that except share in the shame? Sit around the edges of the pit and hope something good crawls out of it?

  8. oh COME ON! I crafted that unicorn followup post, and nothing? I spent minutes of my life on that! Minutes!

  9. *staves…although I was referring to the other type of staff, not sure how you pluralize that one unless it’s “staffs”. Many senators’ staffs….?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s