Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Varied / Student Guy26/Male/United States Groups :iconmanlyburger: manlyburger
the optimum unit of man
Recent Activity
Deviant for 7 Years
Needs Core Membership
Statistics 568 Deviations 863 Comments 25,365 Pageviews
×

Newest Deviations

Favourites

Groups

Friends

Activity


Andrew Hussie: How to Completely Screw the Pooch




Partway through Act 6, in the midst of fermenting turmoil within the community on the relation of social issues with Homestuck, Andrew Hussie said that his main 8 characters are aracial. He made the mistake of believing you can be clever and outwit internet agitators. You can't do that, you can either reject them or allow them into your community.

This is something you acquaint yourself with when you have experience with these bloggers, but questions about "representation" are actually an entry-level statement. It sounds inoffensive to want art from a variety of ethnic backgrounds, and for hostile bloggers, it serves as a tool to prod internet figureheads to start accepting 'reasonable' criticism. Once this is done, it opens up to condemnation of all the off-color content in your art and demands for canon gay relationships.

Andrew Hussie, himself, is incapable of ethnic characters. Unlike many people accused of racism, he does not have a black friend. He has very little true understanding of what non-white life is like. Originally recognizing this, he limited racial content to sometimes racist jokes.

The idea that the characters in his comic could be "non-racial" is a joke because they're all clearly based on Andrew Hussie. They so strongly have his voice, or at least did originally, that no one could confuse them with the work of someone who is not a white man. The people who did largely took their understanding of the characters from fanfics and memes.

This concession marks the turning point where Andrew Hussie lost control of, what is at this point, his life's work. Perhaps he'll consider making a new one that does not make these mistakes and retains its vision the whole way through.

Andrew Hussie, on viewing the swirling mass of his gigantic fanbase, was confused by the most superficial aspects of these internet people. Bloggers do not actually care about representation. When have you ever seen an internet agitator bring up Princess and the Frog? Never. It's an euphemism for getting what you want without being direct about it, like when Deviantart people pretend to be friendly before asking for requests.

The real person they want to be represented is themselves, and they do this by making completely phony criticisms and demanding the work and community be more open to people like them. Oh no, Meenah talks black! Who legitimately gives a crap? At least she stayed fun through the mess and in an indirect way provides the ethnic representation they were shoving around on sticks.

During the hiatuses, he tried to transform his whole comic to orient to them, and the actual way he views these people clearly bleeds through. They're weak. They can't accomplish anything. They're constantly whining. These are a few of the ways most normal adults would perceive some of the awful complainers he was trying to please.

Causing a ruckus in the fanbase before moving on to Steven Universe, they proceeded to try to destroy fanartists' lives because they already learned that a work that panders (Homestuck) and is open to (Steven Universe) them can't cure their severe mental problems. Feferi could be fat! Wait wait, it doesn't work. A fanartist didn't draw Rose Quartz fat, perhaps punishing will work.

In the 'transition' Hussie tried to reconcile his former mode of creation with the massive part of his fanbase that reblogs internet activism. He did this through things like trying to separate the 'bad social justice people' from the 'good social justice people.' In reality, they're all the the same. Some simply promote their stated ideals in a mild way, and are criticized by the others for a lack of extremism.

Never believe that anybody who is serious about this stuff has any real problems in their lives. They do not speak from the education that life experience provides. Their 'receipts' amount to imagined conflicts in ordinary situations and people not dropping everything to accomodate their predispositions.

In the Meenah walkaround updates, Hussie made all the other ancestors caricatures of tumblr. This had a dull reaction from the activist portion. These people aren't too good at abstract thought, because they've forsaken it to make nonsense out of their feelings. They didn't receive much of any message from this.

Old Hussie's Last Stand: In the Trickster arc, Jane originally says that due to the effects of the juju, she is caucasian. This marks Hussie's last period of pushback, dropping a bomb of mockery on the idea that a character's canon race could be so important you're terrified of learning what it really is.

Hussie walked it back with a farcical statement that people were using it as ammo against justice bloggers. Like people couldn't use "I am not a homosexual" in the same way against John gay shippers. Evidence of this grievous abuse that could be more than minor irritation was never provided. And let's be frank, what could they possibly do that's worse than all these really serious, really irrational social justice bloggers seeing "Caucasian" in the comic? He replaced it with a nonsensical alteration that changed the word to peachy. (The first time he failed to consider what people reading this for the first time would find it, I think.)

After this, Hussie could no longer mount any defense. No longer divvying the good bloggers and the bad bloggers, and no longer willing to use his old style of critical humor, he simply gave up and no longer addressed these individuals directly. Certain artists are brought in to make exceptionally unappealing calendar images. By the time of Vriskagram, simply posting obese art of your characters on your website is normal. Vriska's long, slow death as the true fat one. What happened to Hussie's personality?

The Creation of the End: Eventually, Hussie is lost in truly grueling hiatuses. Rarely broken up by painful to read updates. His video game is stolen. The pants are dead. First off, he finishes the cliffhanger with a very strange update.

The characters all just get psychotic and kill each other in a way you never see in a work of fiction ever. They all just rush and do this with sometimes failing art. There are observations to be made here. Did Hussie think killing his characters to please his big fanbase section was needed?

Secondly, there is no apparent reason for the first, very large hiatus, the Gigapause, aside from to finish some follow-up to Game Over. Quickly the post-game over timeline is finished and John gets to the retcon. The proceeding updates are incredibly long, and there's no way he could finish them in like a year without jumping down an extreme slope so the radical moves will remove this burden from his mortal coil.

There's an obvious observation to be made. Hussie did not originally plan this. In fact, he may not have planned Game Over. He may have simply been waiting for the final couple ending flashes and a little set-up to them, and something that extreme was that. The last flash was made by another artist, and would have taken some time. A year was reasonable.

In the retcon, it's doubtful it was originally planned to be like this. It's so obvious, it's commented on regularly. Here you have a character who can do just about anything, and all he does is listen to some random girl's personal bullshit and then hang it up. How this amounts to a "retcon" is mysterious, especially with all the stupid hands.

And after that, came updates so awful they're pushed out of my mind. Horrible updates. And the children never stop streaming their awful words. Grotesque and torture on innocent souls. The man behind them needed to be taken down. This is my first step. My passion is endless.

Thus is how you ruin what could be the internet's first creation on the level of Harry Potter or the Hunger Games, or even better than that.

its not actually only seven, but these are some of the most common ones, and 7 is holy

1. The generic atheist. This is just the person who brings up all the classic arguments like “why does evil exist” “where do disasters come from” “why would god let the world turn out like this” etc.

You can respect this one for sticking to the arguments. Although many will turn out to become quite noxious when you do respond to their first statements.

Aside from brushing up on defenses to the common claims, you need to take note of the wider context. In discussions, an extremely unrealistic portrait is often painted, where the problem of evil is a desperate struggle against devastating flaws, or the problem of evil causes tons of issues with (usually always) Christianity, when really there’s just a few topics like why the Earth is the way it is.

The true problem unfolds when you respond to the generic atheists and some of the other combatants come into play...

A response: List responses to common arguments and link to articles for more information.

2. “What about all the REALLY bad things, like this happening to them and this happening to him....” The plight cataloger. 

One of the very common combatants, when it’s clear that there are people willing to answer the argument in the abstract, will seemingly intend to blow up the conversation by bringing up something that is considered a particularly bad malady. Brutal diseases, desperate survivors, ruthless felons. In reality, this makes it clear that there are many people in the pool unwilling to do rational discussion.

There are actually good explanations for these things, and a number of defenses that will cover them all. But this one wants to slam an emotional button and leave it at that. Really, though, it puts them in an awkward position. There’s a whole bunch of counters to this poor rhetoric, I like the ones where they end up sputtering about whatever they yelled about.

A response: Point out that your arguments did not rely on the things in contention being only minorly bad, and arguments that could only refute mild badness would be pretty weak sauce anyway

3. “Where is it, God?” The one who thinks we’d have better living in a world where Christianity is real. The divine buffeter.

Another topic frequently brought into discussions of the problem of evil is the idea that there’s a better, more Christian world that could potentially exist. It’s frequently brought into question why this hypothetical world doesn’t exist, how it could be real, why God doesn’t just make this better world, etc.

This doesn't make sense from the outset. The main two ideas presented about the world in Christianity are: 1, the original world God created was perfect, 2, humans sinned and created a new fallen world. Therefore, it’s hard to suggest that this world is one inappropriate for us since it literally exists only because of our actions, if you’re properly oriented within Christianity.

Furthermore, never is there any model of a Christian-real reality presented. This combatant constantly asks us to use our imagination to think about the better world that is referred to, which is solipsistic and presumptive, the latter because many Christians wouldn’t see there being a more believable world.

A response: Remind them that, in the Bible, 'good living' correlates highly with drastic falls. Point out that a world closer to the ideals of Christians would be incredibly Churchy, and thus rather rude to non-Christians.

4. “My daughter/son/wife/beloved better imaginary friend/etc. died and now EXPLAIN THAT!” The tragedy bludgeoner.

This is something you get towards good problem of evil arguments where the standard “hmmm, there’s crime in the world, huh?” doesn’t apply. A couple people will aggressively bring up a personal loss they had. They seem to have some sort of cultural expectation that they will have no intellectual replies aside from “we can’t say why things happen” and be constantly apologized to for their grief. In reality, anyone who would sincerely pull this move is a bizarre jackass and a good illustration of why great sin can exist even in the most personal and severe of tragedies.

A response: Remind them that their loved one would rather prefer that God is real so they still exist. Politely or impolitely, they're the one who threw a corpse in your face after all.

5. The therapist solicitor. The guy who asks you if you can personally console everyone who ever had something really bad happen to them.

This is a common comment on just any post that attempts to refute common arguments for the problem of evil. Seeing that the usual arguments are cast aside, they will (seemingly disingenuously!) ask if your post can bring personal comfort to anyone who had “evil” happen to them and salve all their wounds.

This is a pretty baffling question, though, because why would you ever expect that? The poster isn’t a pastor and isn’t trying to uplift spirits, they’re trying to abstractly refute a problem for theology. They seem to expect it to be some rhetorical blow they’ll win with, all intellectual problems aside for both the ploy and their case for the problem of evil.

A response: 1, make sure to question whether they are personally capable of answering your arguments. 2, reject the idea that defenders should be constantly on the lookout for emotional wounds. It’s like trying to run a kitchen with leaking gas canisters lying around.

6. "How dare you God!" The one who makes some personal judge to God's character. Earth's arbiter. Alternatively, the Mini Fries.

One person who starts going into his routine when the topic of the problem of evil is broached is the one who affects moral outrage towards the divine and starts going into how unacceptable the superhuman figure is for allowing these great evils. This is a really common statement on atheist forums. Some will even pose themselves as the superior figure to stand over God, the porcelain tyrants.

But really, 5 paragraph long screeds aside, how could anyone possibly judge what a "good" world would be like? It is a mystery. With the vast myriad of factors involved merely within human cognition, the combatant could not possibly know the alternative "good" world. What would it smell like? Taste like? What would the people there be like? Are they happy?

I think it's no coincidence that their rants are so long. This form of combat is merely an expression of the ego, unwilling to let just 2 or 3 sentences stand. The combatant must press himself on the conversation, and, indeed frequently, place himself on the field as the one, true creator of the good world. What could a Christian ever draw from that?

A response: Job 38-41

7. "Oh, there's nothing we can do to this. let's all sit down and think of Father Jacobs' daughter's terrible career luck..." The Christian who immediately gives up and lends support to atheists when the topic is broached. The shirking doubter.

Ah, the most truly annoying combatant of all. This is the Christian who says there is no answer to the problem of evil, and something we must all grapple with in our faith. Despite that there are other Christians and theorists in the discussion who have no problem disposing of the common formulation, even if they can't deal with all the other combatants and their smaller hangers-on at the same time.

Truly, the discussion would be easier if they were willing to apply themself, and either find the fields of responses to the Problem of Evil, or acknowledge their lack of information. Indeed, they're almost aggressive in their lack of will to find even several threads of logic that could be used in a response. Almost as if they want to please the atheists and divorce themselves from the logical foundation of Christianity.

Don't expect any sort of response from the defenders to find movement in their breast. If they play any role in the discussion, it's to constantly insist that it can't be solved, even if, admittedly, free will is important to Christianity. With more of these people the sense grows that you're not just trying to convince atheists and believers who are losing their faith.

Later, these people deconvert or join a Universalist church.

A response: Remind them that Christ never called on anyone to dissuade others from solving the world's greatest challenges, and that intellectual rigor is a virtue.

www.patreon.com/dril

please support dril
Retrovsocial #1
I started a webcomic on tumblr. I'll be posting there

retrovsocial.tumblr.com

Im going to come up with some ideas
Loading...
www.patreon.com/dril

please support dril

Donate

artofguy has started a donation pool!
50 / 960
balla

You must be logged in to donate.

deviantID

artofguy's Profile Picture
artofguy
Guy
Artist | Student | Varied
United States
I am cool.

Twitter: Manlyburger
Steam: Manlyburger
Skype: Manlyburger
Tumblr: Manlyburger
Interests

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconalexandtrevorcomic:
alexandtrevorcomic Featured By Owner Sep 9, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Happy Birthday, Guy!
Reply
:icontelohs:
telohs Featured By Owner Sep 9, 2014
woa! happy birthday!
Reply
:iconkatyamlie:
KatyAmlie Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014  Professional General Artist
hello :3
thanks for the visit ^^
watched
Reply
:iconasteroidz:
asteroidz Featured By Owner Feb 1, 2014
stop that
Reply
:iconartofguy:
artofguy Featured By Owner Feb 2, 2014  Student General Artist
no
Reply
:iconasteroidz:
asteroidz Featured By Owner Feb 2, 2014
i see what you did there
Reply
:iconasteroidz:
asteroidz Featured By Owner Jan 29, 2014
ur a fagit and you dont even know it yet
Reply
:iconartofguy:
artofguy Featured By Owner Jan 30, 2014  Student General Artist
no
Reply
:iconasteroidz:
asteroidz Featured By Owner Jan 30, 2014
so totaly fagit like srs
Reply
:iconasteroidz:
asteroidz Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2013
how do i tell if something is edible or not
Reply
:iconartofguy:
artofguy Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2013  Student General Artist
ive never eaten anything edible before
Reply
:iconasteroidz:
asteroidz Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2013
are you a wizard
Reply
:iconasteroidz:
asteroidz Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2013
omg
how did you lived
Reply
:iconartofguy:
artofguy Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2013  Student General Artist
i only eat bad things
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconasteroidz:
asteroidz Featured By Owner Oct 30, 2013
hi hello
Reply
:iconclovis-thecutestcat:
Clovis-thecutestcat Featured By Owner Oct 17, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
 :iconbummy1::iconbummy2::iconbummy3::iconbummy1::iconbummy2:
:iconbummy3:
:wave: Welcome! Thank you so much for joining :iconallartworld::squee:
Hope you have an awesome time with us! :heart:
If you have any questions, queries or issues feel free to talk to any of the admins at our group, we are happy to assist you. 
Do you want more comments, watches, llamas, love? Want people to know you and get famous? Then :iconidjpanda: is the place to go! 

Kind Regards
Contributor of the awesomeness group ever: %AllArtWorld
Reply
:iconbeelzebestfriend4lyf:
beelzebestfriend4lyf Featured By Owner Apr 15, 2013  Student General Artist
youre great oh man
Reply
:iconimjustjoking:
imjustjoking Featured By Owner Mar 9, 2013  Professional Artist
swaggie
Reply
:icongreencatninja66:
Greencatninja66 Featured By Owner Dec 25, 2012
you are an amazing person and i congradulate you on being so awesome
Reply
:iconbeeskull:
beeskull Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2012
wtfman
Reply
:iconbenbrookdover:
BenBrookDover Featured By Owner Sep 12, 2012   Digital Artist
Don't you think I know that?
Reply
Add a Comment: