Professor Randolph Lyall (
professorwolf) wrote in
synopsychic2018-03-02 04:55 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Entry tags:
[A few days into liminal space] Judged Conversations
Pardon, everyone, it's Lyall again. But I thought people might like to hear about my conversation with Judgment, our current Jaunt winner. They were kind enough to bring me into their conversation space for a little while, though I am not sure they will do it again. They weren't particularly pleased with me, by the end.
I asked about the conditions for winning, first, and about why Fool considered her dangerous to leave intruding Travelers with. The first answer was fairly straight-forward: there weren't enough "new beginnings", and everyone moved on with what they learned rather than change things up, I suppose. Their exact words were that the various crises "were resolved within the bounds available, rather than forged into new beginnings."
They were less forthcoming about the dangerous part. I believe they did not consider themselves dangerous, they said they would merely "dismiss" Thorne and Matthew, but they... hesitated in a rather human sort of way before answering. I'm fairly sure that didn't mean they were lying... but they could have been reluctant to reply, or uncertain of a proper response, or else dancing about the truth a bit. Said they would just "dismiss" Thorne and Matthew, but not the method they would have used. They are apparently concerned with us staying in our roles, because "taking action" beyond our roles and "exploiting" our roles, is what killed Fortuna and Hoshiko-- Fortune and Star, I believe, yes?
I know there have been discussions about their deaths, but I had been under the impression that it had been less an issue of anything we did and more an issue of their particular idioms waning too much to sustain them. Am I remembering it wrong, was there some sort of action on our part that was taken to bring about their deaths?
I'm willing to share the memory of the conversation, if anyone wants it. It was a bit frustrating. Like they wanted me to understand them without them ever actually explaining themselves.
I asked about the conditions for winning, first, and about why Fool considered her dangerous to leave intruding Travelers with. The first answer was fairly straight-forward: there weren't enough "new beginnings", and everyone moved on with what they learned rather than change things up, I suppose. Their exact words were that the various crises "were resolved within the bounds available, rather than forged into new beginnings."
They were less forthcoming about the dangerous part. I believe they did not consider themselves dangerous, they said they would merely "dismiss" Thorne and Matthew, but they... hesitated in a rather human sort of way before answering. I'm fairly sure that didn't mean they were lying... but they could have been reluctant to reply, or uncertain of a proper response, or else dancing about the truth a bit. Said they would just "dismiss" Thorne and Matthew, but not the method they would have used. They are apparently concerned with us staying in our roles, because "taking action" beyond our roles and "exploiting" our roles, is what killed Fortuna and Hoshiko-- Fortune and Star, I believe, yes?
I know there have been discussions about their deaths, but I had been under the impression that it had been less an issue of anything we did and more an issue of their particular idioms waning too much to sustain them. Am I remembering it wrong, was there some sort of action on our part that was taken to bring about their deaths?
I'm willing to share the memory of the conversation, if anyone wants it. It was a bit frustrating. Like they wanted me to understand them without them ever actually explaining themselves.
no subject
Emperor Emperor did directly blame the Travelers for Star's death, but it sounds like Judgement is blowing everything out of proportion.
no subject
no subject
Maybe it has something to do with how they're defining our 'role'? I mean, half these guys get pissy when we figure out new Liminal tricks, and it definitely sounds like Penuel is one of those guys. And there's the stuff about literally everyone just fucking off the jaunt before Moebius, which is why Moebius was set up the way it was, so... maybe they just expect us to sit back and be good little jaunt-solving pawns.
no subject
[He sounds a little disappointed by that.]
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I think it's more likely they just don't realize how little we really know, and how certain conclusions require more details than we have.
no subject
It sounds like they have a poor understanding of people as a whole.
no subject
But you're right in that I don't think they really understand people very well.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
[That sounds so tedious, though, ugh.]
no subject
[That's not an ability she's picked up yet. Sorry, Lyall. ]
no subject
[Ryo does not understand.]
no subject
no subject
[This much seems obvious to Ryo.]
That was a new beginning for them with new friends, wasn't it?
no subject
no subject
[But Ryo's biased.]
And Arcana were very mean with the boos...
no subject
no subject
no subject
So I'm not surprised Fool doesn't want her alone with Travelers...
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
And do you still think she'd be a good candidate for winning this thing?
no subject
[If Matthew even cares.]
And I still think the idiom is a good choice to win. I never said I thought Penuel themselves was a good choice. Whether the idiom can be divorced from their personality is another matter that I, again, don't have enough data to know yet.
no subject
[Considering that he’s someone who regularly switches from singular to plural pronouns, with little to no care about which one to go with...no, he probably doesn’t find it as important as others might. But he doesn’t argue against it]
Fine. They. But we find the chance of their idiom being ‘divorced’ from their personality unlikely. They're not just someone who puts on a Judgement hat and goes to clock in her 8 hours of being an Arcana. They are their idiom. They are the same.
no subject
no subject
The fact that four of them are dead, and all of the ideas they are made of continue to exist just fine without them is proof of that.
no subject
[He sounds thoughtful, now.]
Penuel did tell me specifically to show and stand for the ideals that they do not, right now-- the forgiveness and renewal parts. Which makes me wonder how much they are aware that they are stuck in this extremely judging, rules-bound mindset, whether focusing on telling me everything I ought to stand for was instinctive or intentional.
no subject
[coming from a person who regards himself and the telephone angels that share his body as 'the same'...well, possibly Matthew has a somewhat different interpretation of that phrase]
Whatever the reasons are: we will not stand for them winning the the World as long as they are 'extremely judging', as you put it. You only need to look at this liminal to see the kind of world they might choose to create; one where we are always watched, and judged. No one needs that kind of universe.