Tsundere pet.
#2: Feb 1st 2012 at 8:01:21 PM
Purity Personified is a person who is perfectly pure. Incorruptible Pure Pureness is a person who stays perfectly pure, despite corrupting influences. I think the Shelob example is a misuse.
I'd say Pure Is Not Good covers any degree of not-goodness.
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.
MarqFJA
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
from Deserts of the Middle East
(Before Recorded History)
Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
#3: Feb 1st 2012 at 8:16:35 PM
So, Shelob would be better described as simply Purity Personified running on Pure Is Not Good? Then what would be a case of Incorruptible Pure Pureness that runs on Pure Is Not Good? Melkor after he completely falls from grace and becomes Morgoth?
edited 1st Feb '12 8:18:30 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Total posts: 3
Can someone clear out for me the differences between Purity Personified and Incorruptible Pure Pureness? I'm not sure whether I am just confused about the distinctions between them, or whether other tropers are using the latter when the former would be more appropiate.
Case in point: In The Lord of the Rings character sheet, Shelob has the following entry:
Problem: Incorruptible Pure Pureness is explicitly defined in its article as the Good kind of Purity Personified, with Pure Is Not Good being its Evil Counterpart.
Another confusing issue: Is Pure Is Not Good only concerned with being "pure explicit evil", or can also include "pure not-necessarily-evil-in-itself", like "pure rage" (e.g. The Dragon Ball Super Saiyan entry in Pure Is Not Good)?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.