OOTS #1121 - The Discussion Thread

[Fyraltari]

My point is only that if there had been only one possibility, Durkula (and, indeed, everyone on the forum) could have immediately made the correct conclusion. It isn't just Durkula that the Giant has to fool; it's us, the audience. He may be giving us hints, but without seeming to.

Alright.

That's a lot of grammatical disjunctions to unpack. I can't tell where you intend to separate your clauses.

Are you saying

(insisting on paying back gifts from friends despite being a one-armed (probably) jobless single mother living in near destitution) / (giving away considerable wealth because she thought she could not in good conscience enjoy said money) is not "doing your duty even if it makes you miserable"

or*

Sigdi is enjoying the ()/() above

?
*This is an inclusive "or".
In any case, I'm not suggesting that my theory is the only explanation for "do your duty, even if it makes you miserable." I'm saying it is consistent with it. That is all. There may be other explanations.

And I consider her excuse just that: an excuse. Someone observed that Sigdi didn't look proud, and perhaps we should ask whether there is some truth in it. You apparently accept her justification without further question. I don't.

I tend to assume that people that when character give information that is consistent with everything else and we are not given reasons to doubt their word (considering how Durkon turned out to be, I think it is safe to say that Sigdi's education did not emphatize deceitas much as honesty) they are telling the truth.

I feel there is much greater narrative power in having Sigdi be the person with the secret double life. For one thing, Durkon thinks he knows her; for another, Durkon can talk to her. It puts the Tenrin-Sigdi relationship and the Durkon-Hilgya relationship on precisely the same footing and makes Kudzu a proxy for Durkon's own upbringing: Cleric of Loki mother, absent father. It makes Durkon re-visit his opinion of Hilgya, for whom he now has someone to use as a comparator. Also, it allows Sigdi to embody Durkon's central philosophy and that of his god's mortal enemy simultaneously, while honoring his own chosen deity that his mother specifically hand-raised him to follow. In my view, there's a lot more story meat on those bones.

I disagree. Remember that this memory already happened by the time of Dorukan's Dungeon, whatever revelation we are about to see, he already knew when he spurned Hilgya. So it would be inconsistent for this revelation to be that Thor and Loki's teachings can cohabit in a single person.
If say, the story was that Tenrin and Sigdi discovering her pregnancy had a severe argument about their relationship and the way Durkon was to be raised and that argument was somehow partially responsible for Tenrin's death (feeling rejected by Sigdi he threw himself into unnecessary danger, for example) then this memory, combined with Kudzu's existence would prompt Durkon to re-evaluate his treatment of Hilgya (in a "don't repeat the error of his parents" way).

What do we get from a revelation about Durkon's father? "Son, the man you never knew isn't the man you never knew. You remember all those stories you were never meant to hear because I told people not to tell you? It's time to tell you about them." "Oh no! You lied to me and kept secrets from me, which I already knew, because you were already keeping secrets from me." It's not terribly dramatic by comparison. It takes the dramatic tension on Tenrin, who cannot be present for the reveal, and places it on Sigdi in the form of hearsay.

Dead parents are often a major influence on their kids. It is so easy to idealize someone who isn't there. Also Durkon's line of "it be interesting" coupled with Sigdi's name on the wall would indicate that he would initiate the conversation.

The urgency that Durkon is home outweighs the urgency of a hundred-year-old secret.

What urgency? This is a memory we are talking about, Durkon has known this since before the comic started.

Durkon has no reason to ask "Hey, are you willing to tell me about Dad now?" because nothing has changed. It doesn't put Hilgya in a sympathetic light. It doesn't draw the same parallels; in fact, it suggests that Durkon should take the child away from Hilgya and raise it himself, to guarantee Kudzu follows in Thor's path, because that's how his own mother raised him.

See above.

Of course, the Giant is quite capable of writing a good story, in whichever direction he chooses to take it, and I'm confident he would do well no matter where the story is headed. I can't rule out anything about Tenrin Thundershield, and I'm not saying it's impossible for that story to be good. I personally see more potential the other way.

Seconded but the other way around.

I wouldn't phrase it that way, no. I would phrase it "Tenrin would have wanted his son to follow in his footsteps, and Sigdi loved him, so she vowed to raise Durkon in that way regardless of the personal cost."

The thing is I really don't see anything that would suggest Sigdi is only pretending to be the second-best dwarf to ever dwarf even if for her son's and late husband's sakes. Then again maybe it's just that I don't like the reveals of "absolutely everything you knew about that character was a lie". It just destroys all emotionnal involvment you had with them

But if you want to reduce it to that, sure, have it your way. I suppose it won't be long before we see what's really going on.

Wait and see.

As for "something wrong with the story of Tenrin's death," I agree: we haven't been told everything, but I don't see how the gaps in story specifically prove or disprove any theory about Sigdi or Tenrin. They're missing facts, not dispositive ones.

Oh they don't (dis)prove anything this is just sterile speculation, but what else could we do waiting for the next comic An archive binge?
And should your theory turn out tobe the right one I trust the Giant to pull it out with maestria.
I am just, respectfully, pointing out why Idon't believe it will.