<s>Is High Charity even in Halo 4</s> What is that trope were a vulnerable important part is just out in the open instead of in many layers of lead barriers? - It is called AttackItsWeakPoint - imagine having a multi-billion dollar spaceship that is the length of the diameter of the moon, but if you shoot one specific part of it, the projectile will go in a straight line to its core, destroying said spaceship. I think that phenomenon occurred in ''Halo 4''; in parts if the game the Forerunners or whoever could have had the vulnerable spots of their stuff covered with metal. This also happened throughout the entire Halo series, for example, scarabs: just walk inside the huge vehicle and shoot its vulnerable spot which is wide out in the open. And Hunters (a lekgolo formation): shouldn't they have had ALL of their organs/tissues/squishy-worms-that-collectively-form-an-intelligence covered with armour? (Just look at it - http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Lekgolo#Gallery)
to:
<s>Is High Charity even in Halo 4</s> What is that trope were a vulnerable important part is just out in the open instead of in many layers of lead barriers? - It is called AttackItsWeakPoint - imagine having a multi-billion dollar spaceship that is the length of the diameter of the moon, but if you shoot one specific part of it, the projectile will go in a straight line to its core, destroying said spaceship. I think that phenomenon occurred in \'\'Halo 4\'\'; in parts if the game the Forerunners or whoever could have had the vulnerable spots of their stuff covered with metal. This also happened throughout the entire Halo series, for example, scarabs: just walk inside the huge vehicle and shoot its vulnerable spot which is wide out in the open. And Hunters (a lekgolo formation): shouldn\'t they have had ALL of their organs/tissues/squishy-worms-that-collectively-form-an-intelligence covered with armour? (Just look at it - [http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Lekgolo#Gallery halo.wikia.com/wiki/Lekgolo#Gallery])
<s>Is High Charity even in Halo 4</s> What is that trope were a vulnerable important part is just out in the open instead of in many layers of lead barriers? - It is called AttackItsWeakPoint - imagine having a multi-billion dollar spaceship that is the length of the diameter of the moon, but if you shoot one specific part of it, the projectile will go in a straight line to its core, destroying said spaceship. I think that phenomenon occurred in ''Halo 4''; in parts if the game the Forerunners or whoever could have had the vulnerable spots of their stuff covered with metal. This also happened throughout the entire Halo series, for example, scarabs: just walk inside the huge vehicle and shoot its vulnerable spot which is wide out in the open. And Hunters (a lekgolo formation): shouldn't they have had ALL of their organs/tissues/squishy-worms-that-collectively-form-an-intelligence covered with armour?
to:
<s>Is High Charity even in Halo 4</s> What is that trope were a vulnerable important part is just out in the open instead of in many layers of lead barriers? - It is called AttackItsWeakPoint - imagine having a multi-billion dollar spaceship that is the length of the diameter of the moon, but if you shoot one specific part of it, the projectile will go in a straight line to its core, destroying said spaceship. I think that phenomenon occurred in \'\'Halo 4\'\'; in parts if the game the Forerunners or whoever could have had the vulnerable spots of their stuff covered with metal. This also happened throughout the entire Halo series, for example, scarabs: just walk inside the huge vehicle and shoot its vulnerable spot which is wide out in the open. And Hunters (a lekgolo formation): shouldn\'t they have had ALL of their organs/tissues/squishy-worms-that-collectively-form-an-intelligence covered with armour? (Just look at it - http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Lekgolo#Gallery)
<s>Is High Charity even in Halo 4</s> What is that trope were a vulnerable important part is just out in the open instead of in many layers of lead barriers? Its AttackItsWeakPoint imagine having a multi-billion dollar spaceship that is the size of the moon, but if you shoot one specific part of hit the projectile will go into a straight line to its core, destroying said spaceship.
to:
<s>Is High Charity even in Halo 4</s> What is that trope were a vulnerable important part is just out in the open instead of in many layers of lead barriers? - It is called AttackItsWeakPoint - imagine having a multi-billion dollar spaceship that is the length of the diameter of the moon, but if you shoot one specific part of it, the projectile will go in a straight line to its core, destroying said spaceship. I think that phenomenon occurred in \'\'Halo 4\'\'; in parts if the game the Forerunners or whoever could have had the vulnerable spots of their stuff covered with metal. This also happened throughout the entire Halo series, for example, scarabs: just walk inside the huge vehicle and shoot its vulnerable spot which is wide out in the open. And Hunters (a lekgolo formation): shouldn\'t they have had ALL of their organs/tissues/squishy-worms-that-collectively-form-an-intelligence covered with armour?
<s>Is High Charity even in Halo 4</s> What is that trope were a vulnerable important part is just out in the open instead of in many layers of lead barriers?
to:
<s>Is High Charity even in Halo 4</s> What is that trope were a vulnerable important part is just out in the open instead of in many layers of lead barriers? Its AttackItsWeakPoint imagine having a multi-billion dollar spaceship that is the size of the moon, but if you shoot one specific part of hit the projectile will go into a straight line to its core, destroying said spaceship.
As I said: the fact that the association doesn't stand up to rigorous, step-by-step analysis doesn't necessarily mean that it couldn't have been intentional on the author's part. Plenty of authors use slightly simplified versions of history for the sake of thematic motifs, since fiction is--by definition--a simplified version of reality that adheres to the rules of drama in ways that real life doesn't.
to:
As I said: the fact that the association doesn\'t stand up to rigorous, step-by-step analysis doesn\'t necessarily mean that it couldn\'t have been intentional on the author\'s part. Plenty of authors use slightly simplified versions of history for the sake of thematic motifs, since fiction is--by definition--a simplified version of reality that adheres to the rules of drama in ways that real life doesn\'t.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
I'm perfectly aware that there ''have'' historically been Welsh rebellions, and that there's far more to Scotland than their historic independence movements. But the fact remains that Scotland is still far more associated with independence '''in the popular imagination''', which suggests that the author ''might'' have had that on her mind when she made the conscious artistic decision to establish Rowena Ravenclaw as a native Scot.
to:
I\'m perfectly aware that there \'\'have\'\' historically been Welsh rebellions, and that there\'s far more to Scotland than their historic independence movements. But the fact remains that Scotland is still far more associated with independence \'\'\'in the popular imagination\'\'\', which suggests that the author \'\'might\'\' have had that on her mind when she made the conscious artistic decision to establish Rowena Ravenclaw as a native Scot.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
Likewise, I'm perfectly aware that not all Gryffindors are rich, while plenty of Slytherins are. But the fact remains that the author chose to use the color motif of gold (which tends to suggest wealth and prosperity) in connection with Gryffindor, which is the only one of the four houses explicitly said to be founded by a Hufflepuff.
to:
Likewise, I\'m perfectly aware that not all Gryffindors are rich, while plenty of Slytherins are. But the fact remains that the author chose to use the color motif of gold (which tends to suggest wealth and prosperity) in connection with Gryffindor, which is the only one of the four houses explicitly said to be founded by an Englishman.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
And I'm perfectly aware that Ireland is considered an independent sovereign nation today (Northern Ireland notwithstanding), but the fact remains that Britain and Ireland are still regularly referred to as
to:
And I\'m perfectly aware that Ireland is considered an independent sovereign nation today (Northern Ireland notwithstanding), but the fact remains that Britain and Ireland are still regularly referred to as \"The British Isles\" (note the plural) in the popular imagination, and that the modern United Kingdom is composed of four constituent nations--not three.
Considering Rowling went to the trouble to write a whole poem that included mentions of the Founders\' birthplaces (\'\'\"Bold Gryffindor from wild moor, sweet Ravenclaw from glen, sweet Hufflepuff from valley broad, shrewd Slytherin from fen\"\'\') and to outright establish three of them through WordOfGod, it seems pretty clear that she considered their nationalities to be part of their characterization; otherwise, she could have just left the fans to assume that all four of them were English.
I don\'t mean to suggest that their entire characterizations all spring from their national origins, just that they add another layer to some of the details of each House. For example: since the Scottish-born Rowena Ravenclaw was known to place more value on learning and intelligence than any of the founders, it\'s probably not an accident that Hogwarts is located in Scotland.
It\'s important to remember: a core theme of the series is that even House placement doesn\'t define \'\'everything\'\' about a person, it just provides a way to sort people into convenient groups, and it provides a paradigm that each person can be compared to. As the series shows us time and time again: there are plenty of cowardly Gryffindors, and at least a few snobbish Hufflepuffs and stupid Ravenclaws.
By your logic, one could also say that Rowling\'s use of the FourElementEnsemble doesn\'t hold up either, just because Harry (a Gryffindor) is most comfortable when \'\'flying\'\' (associating him with the element of Air) despite Gryffindor\'s element being Fire. And because Neville Longbottom (also a Gryffindor) is repeatedly shown to be an expert herbologist (associating him with the element of Earth). And because Crabbe and Goyle (both Slytherins) meet their demises in a climactic scene where they conjure monsters made from flame (associating them with the element of Fire), despite Slytherin\'s element being Water.
But in spite of all that, Rowling still took the time to establish Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, Hufflepuff and Slytherin as being associated with the elements of Fire, Air, Earth and Water through WordOfGod--because it made for an interesting motif. She also took the time to establish that Gryffindor was founded by an Englishman, Ravenclaw was founded by a Scotswoman, and Hufflepuff was founded by a Welshwoman--probably because it \'\'also\'\' made for an interesting motif. And she gave Salazar Slytherin at least three major qualities that seem to invite associations with popular imaginings of Ireland, establishing him as a man who wore green, came from swampy fenlands, and had the power to speak to snakes. I think all that suggests that she intended the four nations as a deliberate motif, just as the four classical elements were a deliberate motif.
Lastly: as for the perceived UnfortunateImplications in associating Slytherin with Ireland, I think Rowling has made it abundantly clear that Slytherin is \'\'not\'\' a \"House of Evil\". If you still genuinely believe that all Slytherins are evil--and that all evil people are Slytherins--after reading all seven books, that probably says more about you than it does about me.
As I said: the fact that the association doesn't stand up to rigorous, step-by-step analysis doesn't necessarily mean that it couldn't have been intentional on the author's part. Plenty of authors use slightly simplified versions of history for the sake of thematic motifs, since fiction is--by definition--a simplified version of reality that adheres to the rules of drama in ways that real life doesn't.
to:
As I said: the fact that the association doesn\'t stand up to rigorous, step-by-step analysis doesn\'t necessarily mean that it couldn\'t have been intentional on the author\'s part. Plenty of authors use slightly simplified versions of history for the sake of thematic motifs, since fiction is--by definition--a simplified version of reality that adheres to the rules of drama in ways that real life doesn\'t.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
I'm perfectly aware that there ''have'' historically been Welsh rebellions, and that there's far more to Scotland than their historic independence movements. But the fact remains that Scotland is still far more associated with independence '''in the popular imagination''', which suggests that the author ''might'' have that on her mind when she made the artistic decision to establish Rowena Ravenclaw as a native Scot.
to:
I\'m perfectly aware that there \'\'have\'\' historically been Welsh rebellions, and that there\'s far more to Scotland than their historic independence movements. But the fact remains that Scotland is still far more associated with independence \'\'\'in the popular imagination\'\'\', which suggests that the author \'\'might\'\' have had that on her mind when she made the conscious artistic decision to establish Rowena Ravenclaw as a native Scot.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
Likewise, I'm perfectly aware that not all Gryffindors are rich, while plenty of Slytherins are. But the fact remains that the author chose to use the color motif of gold (which tends to suggest wealth and prosperity) in connection with Gryffindor, which is the only one of the four houses explicitly said to be founded by a Hufflepuff.
to:
Likewise, I\'m perfectly aware that not all Gryffindors are rich, while plenty of Slytherins are. But the fact remains that the author chose to use the color motif of gold (which tends to suggest wealth and prosperity) in connection with Gryffindor, which is the only one of the four houses explicitly said to be founded by a Hufflepuff.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
And I'm perfectly aware that Ireland is considered an independent sovereign nation today (Northern Ireland notwithstanding), but the fact remains that Britain and Ireland are still regularly referred to as
to:
And I\'m perfectly aware that Ireland is considered an independent sovereign nation today (Northern Ireland notwithstanding), but the fact remains that Britain and Ireland are still regularly referred to as \"The British Isles\" (note the plural) in the popular imagination, and that the modern United Kingdom is composed of four constituent nations--not three.
Considering Rowling went to the trouble to write a whole poem that included mentions of the Founders\' birthplaces (\'\'\"Bold Gryffindor from wild moor, sweet Ravenclaw from glen, sweet Hufflepuff from valley broad, shrewd Slytherin from fen\"\'\') and to outright establish three of them through WordOfGod, it seems pretty clear that she considered their nationalities to be part of their characterization; otherwise, she could have just left the fans to assume that all four of them were English.
I don\'t mean to suggest that their entire characterizations all spring from their national origins, just that they add another layer to some of the details of each House. For example: since the Scottish-born Rowena Ravenclaw was known to place more value on learning and intelligence than any of the founders, it\'s probably not an accident that Hogwarts is located in Scotland.
It\'s important to remember: a core theme of the series is that even House placement doesn\'t define \'\'everything\'\' about a person, it just provides a way to sort people into convenient groups, and it provides a paradigm that each person can be compared to. As the series shows us time and time again: there are plenty of cowardly Gryffindors, and at least a few snobbish Hufflepuffs and stupid Ravenclaws.
By your logic, one could also say that Rowling\'s use of the FourElementEnsemble doesn\'t hold up either, just because Harry (a Gryffindor) is most comfortable when \'\'flying\'\' (associating him with the element of Air) despite Gryffindor\'s element being Fire. And because Neville Longbottom (also a Gryffindor) is repeatedly shown to be an expert herbologist (associating him with the element of Earth). And because Crabbe and Goyle (both Slytherins) meet their demises in a climactic scene where they conjure monsters made from flame (associating them with the element of Fire), despite Slytherin\'s element being Water.
But in spite of all that, Rowling still took the time to establish Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, Hufflepuff and Slytherin as being associated with the elements of Fire, Air, Earth and Water through WordOfGod--because it made for an interesting motif. She also took the time to establish that Gryffindor was founded by an Englishman, Ravenclaw was founded by a Scotswoman, and Hufflepuff was founded by a Welshwoman--probably because it \'\'also\'\' made for an interesting motif. And she gave Salazar Slytherin at least three major qualities that seem to invite associations with popular imaginings of Ireland, establishing him as a man who wore green, came from swampy fenlands, and had the power to speak to snakes. I think all that suggests that she intended the four nations as a deliberate motif, just as the four classical elements were a deliberate motif.
Lastly: as for the perceived UnfortunateImplications in associating Slytherin with Ireland, I think Rowling has made it abundantly clear that Slytherin is \'\'not\'\' a \"House of Evil\". If you still genuinely believe that all Slytherins are evil--and that all evil people are Slytherins--after reading all seven books, that probably says more about you than it does about me.
