I like Lapis as a character, but this conversation does make me wonder how far you can actually push a character's flaws to make them interesting before they stop being sympathetic altogether. Like, how flawed can a non-villainous character be before you just don't want to hang out with them any more?
It's a question that's especially relevant in Steven Universe, because, well, this show doesn't often hold your hand about whether or not you're meant to sympathise with a character. This can lead to some frustrating ambiguous moments where the show keeps giving the time of day to characters you don't feel should even be getting a "sympathetic" portrayal. And it doesn't help in this regard that Steven is, let's face it, way too fucking nice. He's way too eager to see the best in people and give the benefit of a doubt to people who don't really deserve his sympathy. Like that recent time he spends a whole episode trying to get Mayor Dewey re-elected even though Dewey's an incompetent, selfish boob; or how Steven continued to see Lars as a great friend after episode upon episode of Lars being nothing but a total prick to him.
At the end of character development...there's gonna need to be a compromise with their actions so they can be justified.
Probably...pretty vague.
Rules of the Internet 45. Rule 45 is a lie. Check out my art if you notice.Personally I don't even consider Lapis's "offenses" to qualify as such. To me, her actions are not just "understandable", but yes, "justifiable" and "excusable" as well.
She hasn't wavered from being one of my favourite characters.
To contrast with, say, Pearl, my favourite Crystal Gem, she's performed actions which are not justifiable or excusable, but are understandable and I like her, flaws and all.
Shared possessions...priority Lapizuli.
Rules of the Internet 45. Rule 45 is a lie. Check out my art if you notice.![]()
![]()
Taking everything out on Jasper was justifiable?
Now, to be perfectly clear, I’m not referring to Lapis merely keeping Jasper trapped. I’m referring to Lapis punishing Jasper for things that other people had done to her. She didn’t just get revenge for the things that Jasper had done to her. Lapis took *everything* out on Jasper.
Understandable? Yes. But not justifiable. Not excusable.
Kinda...
Nothing they own is in it anymore...
Rules of the Internet 45. Rule 45 is a lie. Check out my art if you notice.Lapis not having faith in the Crystal Gems is entirely understandable; their prospects of defending the Earth are pretty much non-existent if Homeworld returns in force; even during the rebellion era they were hopelessly outnumbered, outmatched, and were being gradually whittled down before Pink Diamond pulled her little stunt.
That's as good a justification as any for Earth's military and security forces not involving themselves in Gem business at all; any experts they asked to come up with a contingency plan for Homeworld gems showing up in force would quickly realize just how hopelessly one-sided such a "conflict" would be (the "7 Hour War" in Half Life 2 comes to mind); there's not really much point in planning for such an eventuality if nothing you can do would alter the outcome, all you can really do is hope it doesn't come to that.
edited 16th Jun '18 2:39:38 PM by CaptainCapsase
I’ve never regarded it as Peridot’s property. I regarded it as Lapis’s property. (Of course, I have unusual ideas about property in general. I’m very anti-capitalism)
I don’t believe Lapis punished Jasper enough for what Jasper, personally, did to her.
edited 16th Jun '18 12:00:26 PM by Sereg
How could it possibly be Lapis' property more than Peridot's? What does being anti-capitalist have to do with this at all?
![]()
True. I think for a lot of people the thing was more that Lapis clearly was going to be miserable on her own, so if it's a choice between that and maybe being safer, or being happy with her friends for something that might not even happen, a lot of people see the latter as a no-brainer. I don't necessarily agree, but I think that's the mindset.
edited 16th Jun '18 12:05:32 PM by LSBK
She didn't "do" anything, she did try to "do" something...
Which is probably just as bad.
Rules of the Internet 45. Rule 45 is a lie. Check out my art if you notice.Imprisoned her, interrogated her, used her against Steven, tried to fore her against Steven, coerced her into a fusion, treated her as property and manhandled her.
…Even following that logic, that conclusion still makes no sense. By the same token Lapis could just go at the Crystal Gems, or anywhere else, for that matter. Lapis is far more mobile and capable of setting up shop somewhere else than Peridot.
Really though, there's probably no real reason to go over stuff like this with you. The whole "bubbling is worse than shattering" thing made it pretty clear you look at these things in a much different way than most other people.
edited 16th Jun '18 12:32:35 PM by LSBK
Considering how Diamonds waste all their resources and all Planets they take over is disposable one time assets as a result (since they essencially die soon after Homeworld take over them and can't produce more Gems), doesn't this mean that Diamonds continuous rule and their Gem empire spreading futher means death to all sentient organic life and planets in the universe (or galaxy at least)?
I know there was spared planet shown in "Jungle Moon", but still if things go rough for the Homeworld because of lack of resources, Diamond would colonize that world too.
edited 16th Jun '18 12:34:24 PM by VeryVileVillian
I'm guessing that not every planet with organic life is suitable for colonization. Otherwise, as you just said, the Diamonds would return to the Jungle Moon and finish this. Peridot said they're currently in a resource crisis.
The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.Putting aside the property thing because that's just you being you
Peridot was the one who imprisoned and interrogated her and Lapis also made the decision to fuse with Jasper specifically to hurt Jasper and take all our her frustrations on her.
The only thing in that list Jasper actually did was manhandle her.
edited 16th Jun '18 12:37:09 PM by LeGarcon
Oh really when?Also, Lapis "needing it more" means that she gets full say in their shared space with things they worked on and made together? Like other people have said, the Peridot and Lapis dynamic was actually pretty toxic, with the brunt of it primarily being on Lapis. Is she not responsible for that as well?
Lapis felt unwelcome with the Crystal Gems. Peridot did not. That was my point.
Fair.
That looks like whitewashing Jasper and absolving her of her responsibility to me. Let’s just say I have a very different interpretation of those events.
I don’t actually consider the brunt of it to have been on Lapis.
EDIT:And:
Also, Lapis "needing it more" means that she gets full say in their shared space with things they worked on and made together?
Yes.
edited 16th Jun '18 1:10:36 PM by Sereg

edited 15th Jun '18 4:13:40 PM by AdvFinny