Q: In Strip #X, why didn't character Y take action Z? If they had done so, they could have avoided a whole lot of trouble.
A: You just answered your own question. The strip is ABOUT the trouble these characters get in; if a tactic would result in an effortless solution to their latest problem, there would be little point in showing it, see?
A: You just answered your own question. The strip is ABOUT the trouble these characters get in; if a tactic would result in an effortless solution to their latest problem, there would be little point in showing it, see?
Tarquin: You're a bard, right? How many stories have you heard in which a single hero vanquishes a wicked empire?
Elan: I dunno... dozens, I guess?
Tarquin: What is the one thing they all have in common? The one fact they all share?
Elan: The hero always wins!
Tarquin: Arguable. No, the one thing they all have in common is this: the wicked empire exists. It has existed for some time, and it will continue to exist if no heroes intervene. Don't you see, Elan? The rules of drama to which you subscribe as a bard tell us that such tyrannies can exist—indeed, MUST exist—and persist long enough that no one realistically thinks they can be defeated. Else, where's the drama in a hero opposing them? And if such kingdoms are necessary, why shouldn't I rule one?
Elan: I dunno... dozens, I guess?
Tarquin: What is the one thing they all have in common? The one fact they all share?
Elan: The hero always wins!
Tarquin: Arguable. No, the one thing they all have in common is this: the wicked empire exists. It has existed for some time, and it will continue to exist if no heroes intervene. Don't you see, Elan? The rules of drama to which you subscribe as a bard tell us that such tyrannies can exist—indeed, MUST exist—and persist long enough that no one realistically thinks they can be defeated. Else, where's the drama in a hero opposing them? And if such kingdoms are necessary, why shouldn't I rule one?
The sheriff's intervention comes under the heading of what we have discussed many times before: “Why don’t they go to the police?” I’ve always replied, "They don't go to the police because it's dull."
I realise that it might be unrealistic for Hermione's parents to let her keep going back to Hogwarts. But that's what the plot demands...
— Author's note, The Arithmancer
And there it might have ended. In fact it did end there, in millions of universes. Edward d'Eath grew older and obsession turned to a sort of bookish insanity of the gloves-with-the-fingers-cut-out and carpet slippers variety, and became an expert on royalty although no one ever knew this because he seldom left his room. Corporal Carrot became Sergeant Carrot and, in the fullness of time, died in uniform aged seventy in an unlikely accident involving an anteater.
In a million universes, Lance-Constables Cuddy and Detritus didn't fall through the hole. In a million universes, Vimes didn't find the pipes. (In one strange but theoretically possible universe the Watch House was redecorated in pastel colors by a freak whirlwind, which also repaired the door latch and did a few other odd jobs around the place.) In a million universes, the Watch failed.
In a million universes, this was a very short book.
In a million universes, Lance-Constables Cuddy and Detritus didn't fall through the hole. In a million universes, Vimes didn't find the pipes. (In one strange but theoretically possible universe the Watch House was redecorated in pastel colors by a freak whirlwind, which also repaired the door latch and did a few other odd jobs around the place.) In a million universes, the Watch failed.
In a million universes, this was a very short book.
But here's the breakthrough I had when watching the episode this time. Yes, the drug loophole is stupid. But the curse was already stupid[...]But in short, building a loophole into a punishment for an evil being that turns them evil again and then not telling them that is not a smart plan, and got Uncle Gypsy stereotype and Ms. Calendar killed for how poorly thought out it was to begin with. But all of us fans ultimately let that go. And why is that? (Cue montage of some of the most emotional moments of Season 2). The truth of it is, Angelus was never interesting in Buffy's second season for his character[...]Angelus was interesting for what he revealed about Buffy[...]We're all watching to make an emotional connection, and it's something Whedon acknowledged. He'd gladly sacrifice plotting to get to an emotional truth. And when he did in "Innocence", we promptly moved past Uncle's stupidity.
You need to save at least 1 secret. You're right, it makes NO sense, but you have to have something for the bugs to steal, or there would be no game.
— Clockwords Act 1
