This whole sequence really reminds me of why webcomics are great. Digger makes a pretty good print comic, and I’m very proud of our print collects, but there’s just something about putting things on the web and having people invested for weeks at a time–instead of for the time it takes to turn a page–that’s just so awesome for a creator to see. Much as I look forward to finishing Digger, I admit, I’ll miss that immediacy.
Speaking of print volumes, SIGNED COPIES of Digger 4 are on-sale tomorrow (Wednesday.) It’s a very limited quantity–as usual, I was plied with alcohol at a convention and signed a box worth–and they tend to sell out really quick, so order now!
You know, this comic is TERRIBLE for being at work on time.
Yay shadowchild! As Ed says, goodness is not rational while evil can always justify itself. One must accept that no good deed goes unpunished and then do it anyway. Just because you want to.
@Marrock: The quote is “Stay good, stay good!”, actually.
But yeah. Shadowchild, stay good!
EveryZig: Thank you for that Castlevania: Symphony of the Night paraphrase. 😀 That is one of my favorite lines from Dracula at the beginning. Great stuff. And eloquently translatable into Digger, at that.
Demented Kitsune: It’s very possible. After all, different people have different capabilities. But it is also possible that the Shadow-Eating ability is intrinsic to ALL demons/shadowchildren. After all, SC is more of a brute force kind of “demon”, while SGV is more of a manipulator. Do “demons” have to eat, and if so, what? (that’s rhetorical, btw. 🙂 )
And just because SC looks and acts like a child DOESN”T mean he can’t or won’t lash out at SGV if he grows tired of SGV trying to talk him out of his morality. Innocence doesn’t always stem a child’s anger–especially if that child is a ShadowChild, who is being questioned about everything he’s known since his birth. And I’m sure everyone remembers last when SC had to defend himself…
Go Shadow Child!
You’re taking path 2, then: Our Heroine’s Amazing Moral Speeches gives the Shadowchild enough moral fiber to oppose something that broke the bonds of a god’s love, and that opposition wakes up Our Heroine, who either makes the Infinitely Corrupting Force flee to hide itself (acceptable, if a bit mystifying) or happens to be so utterly Pure And Perfect that she can’t be corrupted by it.
I’m guessing Murais moment of destiny is almost at hand.. I’m still awaiting some sort of connection between her and Sweetgrass Voice. Though that might only be me. 🙂
go shadowchild! fight back!!
Warning, paradigm-jarring imminent: Suddenly, during the last several comments, Sweetgrass Voice as Trogdor burst through my consciousness. Eeeewww …
@EveryZig the chatter on the old site when Grim Eyes first tried to eat Digger was soon full of people posting lines they would most like to yell to henchmen… That would have fitted right in.
and to everyone else, Yes. English does need a gender Neutral Pronoun other than it. I favor “Ou” as it has some usage in Old English in a capacity close to that of a gender Neutral pronoun and so does not require inventing a totally new word with no Anglo-Saxon root. or we could just steal one from another language. that works. and on the subject the word “leak” has always annoyed me as it doesn’t not specify if the fluid or powder is leaking “out” of something or “into” something; Latin manages to have two words for leak to specify, why don’t we?
I think Shadowchild could handle Sweetgrass Voice as they are now, remember that Voice is “stretched out a long way” and not at full-strength.
What I like about this is that, despite the grandiose debates about morality and nature, the question isn’t resolved as a matter of morality at all: Shadowchild just doesn’t want to eat anyone it likes.
Good for Digger and co., certainly, but not “good” per se.
Yes! A moral code of practical* selfishness saves the day!
BunnyRock, I salute you for your crusade for less obscure communication in English, and the way with puns that paradoxically exists within the same mind.
*As in the opposite of impractical
@JET73L: Thank you. Any truly complete language ought to be able of either utter ambiguity or utter clarity, dependant on the wishes of the speaker. If you like puns or sayings and idioms with entertaining double or triple meanings it doesn’t mean you have to dislike clear, unambiguous communication when that is needed. What I hate is “duckspeak” to use the word coined by Orwell, usage of language that is meaningless for communication and serves only as a knee-jerk reaction to social cues or a means to hide your true intent with impenetrable prose. Jargon I’m fine with so long as everyone present understands said jargon, and being dyslexic I have near-bottomless compassion for those who find communication genuinely difficult, it’s when people are obtuse for the sake of it that gets to me.
Interestingly and upsettingly, A friend of mine who is good with computers and I once set out to write a program called “Duckspeak” that randomly generated internal memo’s disguised to look like those for big corporations, the NHS, or official welsh-assembly/cabinet/parliament/QUANGO press-releases. We planned to slip them into official communications as a student joke to see how long it took anyone to notice. However before we got round to it he mentioned the joke to others and we were soon depressed to learn from a faculty member at the Cardiff school of computing that the same thing had been done, also, bizarrely, under the program name of “Duckspeak” (I guess people with my sense of humour tend to have read 1984) and that computer-science students did successfully get these into local government communiqués back in1984, and to the best of the computing lectures knowledge, some of them never did get correctly identified as the gibberish they were by the authorities.