Crappy parent = man

[KorvinStarmast]

The Giant

(Haley, whose stable parent died early, is also the most screwed-up, psychologically.) Therefore, the first parent who was given definition in the story became the one that would be more prominent, and thus the one that caused conflict. Which leads us to...

If Haley is more screwed up psychologically than the psychotic murderer named Belkar (whose parents we never even hear of, and who refers only to a grandmother and an Aunt Ruby), then I am not sure what the term "screwed up psychologically" is intended to mean here.

All Haley manifests is a slightly advanced case of drama-queen-itis that was amplified for narrative effect during Book 2 via the loss of her ability to speak.

V is, for m y money, in the running for psychologically screwed up, in terms of having a serious case of tunnel vision, obsession with power, and a distinct lack of empathy (for the first four and a half books ... ).

[Emanick]

If Haley is more screwed up psychologically than the psychotic murderer named Belkar (whose parents we never even hear of, and who refers only to a grandmother and an Aunt Ruby), then I am not sure what the term "screwed up psychologically" is intended to mean here.

All Haley manifests is a slightly advanced case of drama-queen-itis that was amplified for narrative effect during Book 2 via the loss of her ability to speak.

V is, for m y money, in the running for psychologically screwed up, in terms of having a serious case of tunnel vision, obsession with power, and a distinct lack of empathy (for the first four and a half books ... ).

I’m pretty sure The Giant meant that Haley was the most screwed up out of the three human party members - the ones who had defined parental relationships - if you read the full context of the quote.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Also, it's Aunt Judy, likely a reference to Judy Garland in her role as Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz.

[Quizatzhaderac]

If I was to read anything into Rich's choices it would be "Father = plot active parent", which is maybe something Rich would avoid doing no, but (as the quote shows) Eugene, Ian, and Tarquin were all conceived during early days. The same early days where Rich smurfetted the main party.

Apart from the androgynous V, I can't think of any other examples of anyone having one bad parent. Plenty of people have two good parents (i.e. the Katos), one case of two bad parents (O'Chul).

In my head-cannon Shojo counts, but if I have to tell a story it doesn't count

Spoiler: Shojo-Miko

Show

Shojo is explicitly Miko's adoptive father (GDGU). My headcannon is that he treated this as a legal fiction, and basically treated her as a vassal. This would be fine if she was an adult (she was a teenager as of HtPghS), had a family, or was mentally stable.

From what little I can tell, Shojo mostly just fed and equipped her and sent her off into warzones and did almost nothing for her that he wouldn't do for a warhorse. She should have been with Shinjo and Hinjo for New Year's eve dinner instead of spending it alone.

I get that what was going on wasn't quite a "real" adoption, but whatever it is you're taking special responsibility for this person's life.

[Aidan]

If I was to read anything into Rich's choices it would be "Father = plot active parent", which is maybe something Rich would avoid doing no, but (as the quote shows) Eugene, Ian, and Tarquin were all conceived during early days. The same early days where Rich smurfetted the main party.

Apart from the androgynous V, I can't think of any other examples of anyone having one bad parent. Plenty of people have two good parents (i.e. the Katos), one case of two bad parents (O'Chul).

In my head-cannon Shojo counts, but if I have to tell a story it doesn't count

Spoiler: Shojo-Miko

Show

Shojo is explicitly Miko's adoptive father (GDGU). My headcannon is that he treated this as a legal fiction, and basically treated her as a vassal. This would be fine if she was an adult (she was a teenager as of HtPghS), had a family, or was mentally stable.

From what little I can tell, Shojo mostly just fed and equipped her and sent her off into warzones and did almost nothing for her that he wouldn't do for a warhorse. She should have been with Shinjo and Hinjo for New Year's eve dinner instead of spending it alone.

I get that what was going on wasn't quite a "real" adoption, but whatever it is you're taking special responsibility for this person's life.

With regards to the spoilered section

Spoiler

Show

Between faking senility and concerning himself with the affairs of Azure City, I don't think that he consciously neglected Miko. We know from bonus strips in War and XP, that Shojo hid his sanity from Hinjo and encouraged him to not concern himself with spending time with him (Shojo). My head-canon is that Shojo didn't realize how unstable Miko was, and how he should have paid more attention to her until she sliced him open.

P. S.
I think you meant to say head-canon as opposed to head-cannon. Those are two very different things

[hamishspence]

In my head-cannon Shojo counts, but if I have to tell a story it doesn't count

Spoiler: Shojo-Miko

Show

Shojo is explicitly Miko's adoptive father (GDGU). My headcannon is that he treated this as a legal fiction, and basically treated her as a vassal. This would be fine if she was an adult (she was a teenager as of HtPghS), had a family, or was mentally stable.

From what little I can tell, Shojo mostly just fed and equipped her and sent her off into warzones and did almost nothing for her that he wouldn't do for a warhorse. She should have been with Shinjo and Hinjo for New Year's eve dinner instead of spending it alone.

I get that what was going on wasn't quite a "real" adoption, but whatever it is you're taking special responsibility for this person's life.

The Giant on the subject of Miko's adoption:

First, this is not that complicated:

Spoiler: How the Paladin Got His Scar

Show

Miko is not legally Shojo's daughter, but he did "adopt" her in the sense of taking her under his wing and mentoring her. As was mentioned in the main comic, she was only 13 at the time, so she would have been living under his roof rather than being on her own. As a result, both Miko and Hinjo were told to think of each other as cousins. As adults, they no longer see each other in that light, because they are not actually cousins and Miko's general behavior in the interim has already brought strain to that relationship. I'm sure they had a big falling out at some point, but that's not what the story was about so I didn't show it. And to be clear, I don't feel like I need to spell this out in the text just so that everyone can feel like all the dots connect.

The Giant on Shojo's raising of Miko

If anything, I attribute most of her positive traits to the way she was raised by Shojo and her subsequent membership in the Sapphire Guard. Which is not to say that he did a perfect job, but he recognized that she needed discipline in order to function, and gave her life meaning and purpose that it wouldn't have otherwise had. I've always felt that someone who had come to him with less underlying issues (whether due to her inherent personality or the trauma of losing her parents and getting sent to a monastery) could have been raised the same way and not turned out to be like Miko. Likewise, if Miko had never met Shojo, she probably would have left the monastery as an angry unstable loner with no purpose. Shojo's guidance was the tape that was held her together for so long, which is why she went to pieces when it was ripped off.

[Themrys]

I'm betting against Rich writing to cheap gender stereotypes (anymore).

That would mean V was originally intended to be male, but then turned retroactively female when Rich decided to not write cheap gender stereotypes anymore and showed V being a crappy parent.


My theory on V's sex has always been that Rich likely intended V to be male, but that I would like V to be female for various reasons.

(Though I have to say, the sexual harrassment by Belkar makes me less uncomfortable when I imagine V as male. On the other hand, male readers are probably more comfortable with imagining V as female in that particular situation. The fact that V did not murder Belkar in retribution might hint at V being male - after all, if V is female, and we know that Belkar is heterosexual and has a habit of molesting women, it would have been safer to get rid of Belkar. The "Belkar's proto-brain just got confused" theory is more likely to have been thought up by a male. Although it is possible that a woman who grew up in an environment free of sexual harrassment - an idyllic elf village, for example - would not view Belkar as ongoing threat ...)


Regarding Shojos quality as adoptive parent ... he may have given her purpose, and she might have turned out worse without him, but I find it really hard to imagine that he treated her like modern adoption agencies would expect adoptive parents to treat their adopted children.

Her trying to be the hyper-correct paladin comes across as attention-seeking and wanting social approval. While it is not the job of those surrounding her to fix those issues, you would expect an adoptive parent to fix them. Nowadays, at least.

[Peelee]

That would mean V was originally intended to be male, but then turned retroactively female when Rich decided to not write cheap gender stereotypes anymore and showed V being a crappy parent.


My theory on V's sex has always been that Rich likely intended V to be male, but that I would like V to be female for various reasons.

(Though I have to say, the sexual harrassment by Belkar makes me less uncomfortable when I imagine V as male. On the other hand, male readers are probably more comfortable with imagining V as female in that particular situation. The fact that V did not murder Belkar in retribution might hint at V being male - after all, if V is female, and we know that Belkar is heterosexual and has a habit of molesting women, it would have been safer to get rid of Belkar. The "Belkar's proto-brain just got confused" theory is more likely to have been thought up by a male. Although it is possible that a woman who grew up in an environment free of sexual harrassment - an idyllic elf village, for example - would not view Belkar as ongoing threat ...)

I feel compelled to point out that there are options other than "male" and "female."

[Quizatzhaderac]

I think you meant to say head-canon as opposed to head-cannon. Those are two very different things

Nope. Like Miko, I never go back on what I said, no matter how insane.

The Giant on Shojo's raising of Miko

That's not too far outside of my own suppositions. Although maybe I should say "mediocre" instead of "crappy". It's not particularly high bar to be a better parent than absolutely no parent at all. After providing her with food, shelter and enough discipline/structure that she's not actively violent, a father should have been concerned with her complete inability to sympathize or form personal relationships. Also being chaotic, Shojo should have seen doing the right thing only "because it's the rules" as insufficient.

[Themrys]

I feel compelled to point out that there are options other than "male" and "female."

In terms of sex, anyone not being clearly female or male is extremely rare. Rich Burlew having intended to write the character as anything but clearly male or female before he even became aware of the problem with a single token female character is extremely unlikely.

And in terms of gender, V has made it clear on several occasions that V does not have or need a gender identity, and does not even see gender markers in other people. (Roy wearing a mop on his head was clearly recognized by V as Roy wearing a mop on his head, but not recognized as Roy wanting to be read as feminine gendered.)

[Peelee]

In terms of sex, anyone not being clearly female or male is extremely rare.

Rarer than being an elf?

[Ruck]

That would mean V was originally intended to be male, but then turned retroactively female when Rich decided to not write cheap gender stereotypes anymore and showed V being a crappy parent.

No, it doesn't.

[Themrys]

No, it doesn't.

So what do you propose then?

Do you claim that V has been intended to be female from the start?

I can't disprove that. I just find it very unlikely.

[Peelee]

So what do you propose then?

Shot in the dark, but I'd guess Ruck is proposing there are more than two options.

[CriticalFailure]

That would mean V was originally intended to be male, but then turned retroactively female when Rich decided to not write cheap gender stereotypes anymore and showed V being a crappy parent.


My theory on V's sex has always been that Rich likely intended V to be male, but that I would like V to be female for various reasons.

(Though I have to say, the sexual harrassment by Belkar makes me less uncomfortable when I imagine V as male. On the other hand, male readers are probably more comfortable with imagining V as female in that particular situation. The fact that V did not murder Belkar in retribution might hint at V being male - after all, if V is female, and we know that Belkar is heterosexual and has a habit of molesting women, it would have been safer to get rid of Belkar. The "Belkar's proto-brain just got confused" theory is more likely to have been thought up by a male. Although it is possible that a woman who grew up in an environment free of sexual harrassment - an idyllic elf village, for example - would not view Belkar as ongoing threat ...)


Regarding Shojos quality as adoptive parent ... he may have given her purpose, and she might have turned out worse without him, but I find it really hard to imagine that he treated her like modern adoption agencies would expect adoptive parents to treat their adopted children.

Her trying to be the hyper-correct paladin comes across as attention-seeking and wanting social approval. While it is not the job of those surrounding her to fix those issues, you would expect an adoptive parent to fix them. Nowadays, at least.

I think you're spot on with this, especially given Lirian's character design versus elves that were introduced later. I would be very surprised if V was not originally designed to be male. I also like to imagine V as female though.

I also agree about Miko, it doesn't really come across that giving her a purpose did her any favors in the long run because she seemed like she saw being a hypercorrect and scrupulous paladin as the only way in which she could have value to anyone.

[Themrys]

I also agree about Miko, it doesn't really come across that giving her a purpose did her any favors in the long run because she seemed like she saw being a hypercorrect and scrupulous paladin as the only way in which she could have value to anyone.

I suppose it is better than her seeing no way at all to have value to anyone, and at least she didn't become a criminal but just an annoying person, but that's a rather low bar. She clearly wasn't happy.

In fact, her attitude to happiness seems rather like the one Durkon demanded Hilgya have: "Do your duty, especially when it makes you unhappy".

(That could even have been what made her murder the one person who possibly cared about her a bit - it clearly didn't make her happy, and she didn't expect it would, but saw it as her duty.)

A good parent would have gotten her therapy. (Therapists usually don't exist in fantasy worlds, but OotS-verse has lawyers, so ...)

The relationship Shojo-Miko seems to have been rather like the Dumbledore-Harry one in Harry Potter - a distant mentor figure who is admired and loved by the younger person, but is not really approachable ... and never tells the younger person his secrets.

[Riftwolf]

In fact, her attitude to happiness seems rather like the one Durkon demanded Hilgya have: "Do your duty, especially when it makes you unhappy".

Durkon's philosophy in the early comics seems to have evolved a little. Now we've seen a but more of dwarven culture, the lesson his mother was trying to give was 'happiness through selflessness' rather than 'duty over happiness'. It could've been a retcon after the Giant had more time to think about it, or it could be a genuine misunderstanding on Durkon's part about what dwarfhood means, or a skewed rationale to cope with his exile. I'd like to think that it's all three at once.

As for Mikos philosophy, I don't think she even considered happiness, ever, in any circumstances.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Miko doesn't seem to consider anybody's emotional well-being.

[Themrys]

Durkon's philosophy in the early comics seems to have evolved a little. Now we've seen a but more of dwarven culture, the lesson his mother was trying to give was 'happiness through selflessness' rather than 'duty over happiness'. It could've been a retcon after the Giant had more time to think about it, or it could be a genuine misunderstanding on Durkon's part about what dwarfhood means, or a skewed rationale to cope with his exile. I'd like to think that it's all three at once.

It doesn't really matter what Durkon thinks now. My point was that Miko's attitude seems to be that fun is, at best, suspicious and suffering is virtue. Which is pretty close to what Durkon said to Hilgya back then.

In Durkon, it seems to be based on his exile, and exile is the only thing he (somewhat) voluntarily suffers - we see him have fun plenty times otherwise, but most blatantly when he temporarily gets made bandit leader. His mother voluntarily suffering might have reinforced the attitude that suffering was the dwarf thing to do, but he clearly hasn't internalized it to pathological levels. His exile was a legal affair, not something he did to himself.

Miko, on the other hand, voluntarily suffers a lot more, and shows clear signs of having internalized the attitude - see the scene where she wants to make camp in the wilderness rather than staying at a hotel.

So while I wouldn't say Durkon's mother was a bad parent, I would say that Shojo could have dealt with Miko's issues much better than he did.

(Sending her on missions that took her far away from anyone else was a way to manage her like Roy manages Belkar, not exactly how you act towards people you love.)


Miko clearly has some idea of what happiness is. She seemed happy when Roy apologized to her, and she seemed to have a lot more emotional relationship to her horse than Vaarsuvius had with Blackwing in the early comics.

Windstriker was probably the only being who unconditionally loved her. Pretty sad to think about.


Back to topic; Vaarsuvius being (retconned to be) female would fit in with Rich's newer trend of showing that women can be emotionally stunted, too.

V being male would be pretty cliche, as that would make V pretty much the same as Roy's dad.

[Vinyadan]

I also don't think Miko was really adopted by Shojo. As far as I can remember, she never calls him father, and he never calls her daughter. She probably was first raised in the monastery, also without a father, also in a strongly disciplined lawful setting. Then she was ripped out of her dojo around 13 and brought to the castle. There she got a pep talk from Shojo, whom she started to revere, but her education mostly consisted of being passed around among a number of military instructors.

Spoiler: Paladin Scar

Show

When we see her the first time, she is almost mute, takes everything literally, and she is only performs violent acts. She is 16, and has spent three years in the guard. When she finally talks with O-Chul (after he has joined the Guard), she is as blunt as can be, and refers to "means at our disposal", which, in her case, will turn out to be violence.

Maybe monks are more-or-less like that, but that isn't a problem because they don't leave the monastery. Or maybe the problem was mixing up monkish discipline with the paladin code in a child that didn't have any parental figure to complement and nuance what she was taught by instructors. As she becomes more intolerable and avoided, she is increasingly isolated, which probably made a number on her mental health. As she becomes a troublemaker, Shojo starts sending her away, something in which she probably takes pride, but also deprives her even more of the chance of being part of a community.

[Ruck]

Shot in the dark, but I'd guess Ruck is proposing there are more than two options.

Yes; I would have said more but I think you covered all the other relevant points already.

[a_flemish_guy]

Durkon's philosophy in the early comics seems to have evolved a little. Now we've seen a but more of dwarven culture, the lesson his mother was trying to give was 'happiness through selflessness' rather than 'duty over happiness'. It could've been a retcon after the Giant had more time to think about it, or it could be a genuine misunderstanding on Durkon's part about what dwarfhood means, or a skewed rationale to cope with his exile. I'd like to think that it's all three at once.

As for Mikos philosophy, I don't think she even considered happiness, ever, in any circumstances.

I'm not sure if it's a retcon or not but to me the lesson seems to be: "objectively good parents can still teach their children wrong lessons through their subjective life experiences"

at the end durkon is right and his mother is wrong, his pa is in valhalla and wether or not she continued to hold his hand has no real tangible benefit to him, it's entiarly a her thing, I'm not a fan of armchair psychology but I'm willing to bet that durkon's mom suffers from survivor's guilt, like the arm is penance for surviving the

also as for miko: I think she viewed happiness like roy viewed sleep in the beginning, it's a nice thing to have but if somebody has to give it up then it might as well be them, after all they're the only ones who can give it up the correct way

[pearl jam]

Shot in the dark, but I'd guess Ruck is proposing there are more than two options.

Yes; I would have said more but I think you covered all the other relevant points already.

Be that as it may, while it certainly is relevant for characterizations at this point in the development of OOTs, while not guaranteed to be the case, it's certainly not an unreasonable guess, in my opinion, based on Rich's own comments about how he has become more consciously inclusive as he transitioned from one off jokes to a cohesive story with messages intentionally conveyed therein, that his original conception for the main party members likely involved a choice of on of those 2 options for each one.

Personally, before ever visiting the forums, I don't recall how long the gap between first reading the comic and first visiting the forum was, I read V as male and that remains my personal interpretation of the character.

[Schroeswald]

I personally originally read V as female, I believe it was the hair that gave me the impression, which was then reinforced when V got the ponytail.

[Peelee]

Be that as it may, while it certainly is relevant for characterizations at this point in the development of OOTs, while not guaranteed to be the case, it's certainly not an unreasonable guess, in my opinion, based on Rich's own comments about how he has become more consciously inclusive as he transitioned from one off jokes to a cohesive story with messages intentionally conveyed therein, that his original conception for the main party members likely involved a choice of on of those 2 options for each one.

Oh, I don't disagree at all. The original assertion had two parts: A, but now B. I agree with A. I do not agree with "but now B," because that ignores the rest of the alphabet.

[deuterio12]

I got two counterpoints to the OP:

1-Loki's mother.

2-Hel's mother.

We know that gods conveniently follow normal reproduction thanks to Thor having knocked up the goddess of fertility (and then the mighty and righteous Thor left the goddess of fertility to raise the child on their own, but that's a story for another day). So Loki and Hel must have mothers somewhere since they also have divine fathers.

Now Odin is the father of Loki (that with Loki being Thor's bro and Odin's son), and although Odin's kinda senile, he's at least there for his children, which is an auto-win over Loki's mother who never even bother to show up her face during all the god conspiracies, like when her son is screwing over whole mortal races with bets.

And Loki's a father himself, and for all his lies and scheming at least he's still present for Hel and making an effort to give some education to his daughter. Not Hel's mother though. Whoever that goddess is, she just doesn't give a single damn while Hel starves herself to death while trying to destroy the world.

[DaOldeWolf]

Miko and familicide mentions? I have come to the right place. Now we just need alignment to play a big part....

As for my opinion on the subject at hand, its a coincidence. Not everything that happens in the comic has to have a deep and pre-planned reason for existing. Sometimes bad dads exist. Real life has them too.

Parenting is one of the hardest things to do in life and there is no recipe for success. Even people with experience can end up screwing up later. I would argue that Tarquin is truly the only awful parental figures.

Yes, Haley´s father isnt the best listener and he gave his daughter bad advice for life but he truly cared for her. He didnt make those choices because he wanted to see her suffer. And at the end, he accepted her choice even if she didnt agree with him and even encouraged her to follow her resolve. It can be assumed that he got his point of view from his experiences and considering the hell hole they were living in, I have no doubts that he lived as long as he had because of it.

Eugene is a pretty jaded parental figure. The fact that they pampered Roy´s younger sister till she was rotten, meant that they have to feel guilt about the whole situation. Its also difficult for a parent to admit that they played a role in their child´s death. And there is also the fact that there seems to be a pattern of abuse from parental figures in Roy´s family so expecting him to be great, doesnt really hold water. I am not saying with all of these that he couldnt be a better father figure but that isnt far from what a person in his circumstances would be if they became a father. I also think he deserves a few points for paying for Roy´s school even if he didnt agree with the whole thing.

As for Tarquin, I got nothing. Seeing his own kids as objects isnt exactly heartwarming and I dont care about his "acts of affection". Parental figures arent born of niceties, they are born of taking care of their children as best as they could. I would even call his treatment pretty disturbing and psycopathic.

[Ruck]

there is also the fact that there seems to be a pattern of abuse from parental figures in Roy´s family

The *fact*?

[DaOldeWolf]

The *fact*?

Sorry, in my opinion, there seems to be.....

[Aidan]

Nope. Like Miko, I never go back on what I said, no matter how insane.

I was so close to linking that exact comic