Whee, another make out scene … :3
This might be the last one, though (in the entire prequel ;_;). But it looks like it could be up to ten pages … V`(oo)´;V Well, probably less, since I always manage to prune the script as I draw it out.
Speaking of that, the problems I was having with the script for the previous page weren’t about what should happen, but what I should cut out from all the stuff that keeps pouring into my brain. If I’d make a director’s cut of Driftwood, it would probably involve something like 5,000 pages of Willie and Aeron talking with each other (that’s what they do inside my head ALL THE TIME). :3 But in the feature length I guess it’ll have to suffice that it’s mostly implied that they talk a lot with each other …
* * *
Sorry about some down time today – I broke ComicPress, but eventually figured out how to fix it again. For future reference, the comicpress-config backups are in the folder wp-content/themes/comicpress-gn/ … V`(oo)´V
Well, your ‘make-out’ scenes are well done – tactful and sweet. It would be very sad if these two really do have to part for good.
I have never known anyone who can make out and talk politics at the same time though…
Also, good to know Willie is not too loose with her affections. Though that was pretty clear already, insecure thing that she is.
. . . . .
Since when *don’t* anarchists blow things up? I have some strong sympathies for anarchism, but I have found it stretched at times by the insane double-standards they, as much as any other ideologues, seem to possess. But then, there are surely peace-and-life valuing anarchists just like there are freedom-loving socialists. And poor suckers like me too caught up with being even-handed to be accepted by any ideological group…
Depends on the partners, I guess, but the boundaries between talking politics and sweet-talking can be a bit diffuse sometimes … :3
Aww, but there are quite many of us pacifist anarchists, some of the most famous perhaps being Tolstoy, Gandhi, Kropotkin and Thoreau. There are of course many very different streams of anarchism, but unfortunately the ones with the bombs tend to get all the attention. :o/
Well, I hope those two won’t part – or at least, not for long..
I hope you don’t mind me asking here; I’ve been reading “Goldenbird” as well, but the web site seems to be down now?
@Tinet: I’m not sure that Gandhi can sincerely be cast as an anarchist. For sure, he wanted no part in governing the state he helped create, but since when did he advocate a stateless society?
Hans — Heh, I won’t give out spoilers, and at this point I’m really not exactly sure about what’s going to happen and how, anyway …
Yeah, Ainur’s site, including Goldenbird, is down at the moment, but it should be back up soon, hopefully next week. :o/ It will be under the new domain http://www.goldenbird.se (but there’s nothing there yet). If you’re on Facebook you can follow Falco’s page to keep updated: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Falco-Peregrini/253328809326 :o)
Aidan — Well, Gandhi himself claimed to be an anarchist (here’s an online source: http://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/snow.htm ), and he has in any case been very influential in this stream of it.
Hm, according to that article he considered himself a ‘philosophical anarchist’ but a ‘practical socialist’. As you see, there’s always a disparity by the ideals claimed by a person and those they consider it feasible to adhere to. I’d say that Gandhi more than anything else was pacifist and anti-imperialist, and his social ideas were more loosely formed around whatever would bring about social justice in a post-colonial state.
Heh, to nitpick – in the article Snow quotes Gandhi directly on the “philosophical anarchist” part, but then either paraphrases or draws his own conclusion about the “practical socialist” part. ;o)
And Gandhi’s concept of Swaraj is very much anarchist … http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swaraj
I’d say he paraphrases, which makes it no less accurate – it’s just difficult to paraphrase ‘philosophical anarchist’ – it’s a sketchy term already. Sawaraj is anarchist, for certain; but Gandhi himself had to ultimately recognise the necessity of the state in ensuring India’s independence. Not that India is a great success story nowadays, so maybe they *would* have been better odd with Sawaraj… Or maybe not.
I don’t mean to be critical of your beliefs, but I think that one of the greatest reasons anarchism is popular (as opposed to socialism) to the revolutionary streams today is that it has never been able to be discredited through actual practice, at least not on a state-scale (it has been discredited in commune-scale experiments…). Which is not to say that any other socialist styles have fared any better under examination. Just got to keep trying something new, I guess, and eventually we might find a way that works…
There can be a lot of sense in using the state as a means to eventually abolish it. Of course such things are always tricky business, especially if the whole endeavour gets hijacked by people who don’t want to achieve freedom at all … (and who make actual socialists, communists, anarchists etc. look bad in the process).
In any case, I think anarchism and socialism have a lot in common, and should be able to overcome their differences and unite in the struggle for things that are much more important. V^(oo)^V