Kerbfleet: A Jool Odyssey-CHAPTER 22 pg 2: Yet >another< narrative device!

[Mr. Peabody]

Aww man. Open fire! 

[obney kerman]

oh god no...

[Guest]

Well, so far the readers seem evenly divided between "Whooo light 'em up Kenlie!" and "Noooooo!"

For an author, that's a Good Thing. 

 

[IncongruousGoat]

I have this feeling that Kenlie has a plan that's more imaginative than "point the thingy at the murderers and pull the trigger". He'd better - what's the point of defeating your enemies if you have to become like them to do it?

[Deddly]

Oh meep

Oh meep

Oh meep

 

Best line since the moment the probes said "OUIOUI"

[Angelo Kerman]

I think somebody mulched their pants. Understandable given the situation...

[Geschosskopf]

2 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

Well, so far the readers seem evenly divided between "Whooo light 'em up Kenlie!" and "Noooooo!"

For an author, that's a Good Thing. 

Well, this could all easily end in tears and become social commentary on the need always to be ready to fight because even if you don't want to, eventually you'll certainly meet somebody who does.  But while that's always a good lesson, I think the ending will be more than just that.

 

2 hours ago, IncongruousGoat said:

what's the point of defeating your enemies if you have to become like them to do it?

This turn of phrase always irks me because it's too either-or.  If Kerbfleet shoots back to save itself, it will still be Kerbfleet.  And it still won't be its Evil Twin.  It will just have learned a lesson, and now have a broader perspective.  And maybe some guilt, but that's what PTSD counselling is for  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Geschosskopf said:

This turn of phrase always irks me because it's too either-or.  If Kerbfleet shoots back to save itself, it will still be Kerbfleet.  And it still won't be its Evil Twin.  It will just have learned a lesson, and now have a broader perspective.  And maybe some guilt, but that's what PTSD counselling is for  

I agree completely with this, as far as humans are concerned. There is a huge moral difference between using violence to terrorize and oppress, and using violence to prevent terror and oppression. If I honestly had to maim or kill someone to protect my family, I hope I'd have the skill and courage to do it....and yeah, some good counseling after the fact.

Kerbals in the Kuzzterverse, though, are quite a bit different. I've always thought of them as, essentially, very sophisticated children. These kerbals struggle with the very concept of intentional harm. That innocence, once lost, can't be regained. So yes, if Kerbfleet shoots back to save itself, it will still be Kerbfleet...but will it still be Kerbal? 

[Dman979]

4 hours ago, IncongruousGoat said:

I have this feeling that Kenlie has a plan that's more imaginative than "point the thingy at the murderers and pull the trigger". He'd better - what's the point of defeating your enemies if you have to become like them to do it?

 

[Geschosskopf]

1 hour ago, Kuzzter said:

Kerbals in the Kuzzterverse, though, are quite a bit different. I've always thought of them as, essentially, very sophisticated children. These kerbals struggle with the very concept of intentional harm. That innocence, once lost, can't be regained. So yes, if Kerbfleet shoots back to save itself, it will still be Kerbfleet...but will it still be Kerbal?

It still be Kerbal, just older and wiser Kerbal.  Everybody has to grow up someday, sadly 

FWIW, IMHO childhood is usually the most evil phase of a human's life  Kids are wild animals that have to be housebroken and trained to behave in civilization.  If you don't do this, they remain wild and evil into adulthood and cause all sorts of trouble

 

[Alchemist]

21 minutes ago, Kuzzter said:

These kerbals struggle with the very concept of intentional harm. That innocence, once lost, can't be regained. So yes, if Kerbfleet shoots back to save itself, it will still be Kerbfleet...but will it still be Kerbal? 

To be fair, there may be more levels to that:

• Concept of somebody getting hurt due to some actions (or lack of thereof) involving advanced technology - something they have to understand quite well to avoid unfortunate accidents at this tech level
• Concept of taking intentional actions that are likely to cause harm to others or severe property damage - even if the current generation tends to dismiss the very thought, such a possibility was quite on the table in the backstory... but then they contemplated it and concluded that they have no idea of what can ever come of it other than total destruction
• Concept of getting something you want (or just cleaning your path to that) by intentionally causing harm to others or treating to do so. Unfortunately, submitting to violence can be even more damaging than responding with violence, since only submitting to it creates proof that this kind of action can actually get something done - thus giving at least some people a reason to consider it an option (instead of something that is guaranteed to fire back)

But yes, a society that first creates and mass-produces advanced technologies capable of causing serious destruction and only then starting to consider the possibility and implications of using violence to satisfy ambitions - that's a good concept to explore. And it ought to get different conclusions than people used to low-tech violence (and thus also constantly evaluating militarized application options for any high-tech invention)... although after reaching a certain tech level the conclusions (at least about militarizing particular kinds of cutting-edge tech) seem to start converging to peaceful mode no matter the starting point (but with different amount of... experimental proof necessary, depending on analytical capabilities and acceptance of lower-destructive violence, unfortunately).
And also one of the most hypocritical things - the way some people make a huge difference between an almost certain-kill attacks and semi-randomly spraying projectiles at the opponents with "those who actually get killed - it's their own bad luck"

Maybe it could as well be quite different in our world if children weren't so much allowed (and to some extend even encouraged) to use violence (including psychological - which is most common and most overlooked) on each other as long as they don't cause too much damage or lay their hands on something too destructive.
Yes, just the difference between "any violence is counterproductive and will either backfire or escalate into loss for everybody" and "violence is kind of acceptable as long as you don't overstep a certain threshold" messages (with the latter also leaving the room for "going out with a bang, so that it backfires on them too for once!" solutions)

 

P.S. My own opinion of armed conflicts could be somewhat close to your Kerbals: "Waging war by the rules? If you are civilized enough to agree on rules, why can't you make agreement without violence? No, I don't propose going full-out over any petty squabble, but considering this option is a good argument for not starting the fight at all."

[Just Jim]

4 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

Kerbals in the Kuzzterverse, though, are quite a bit different. I've always thought of them as, essentially, very sophisticated children. These kerbals struggle with the very concept of intentional harm. That innocence, once lost, can't be regained. So yes, if Kerbfleet shoots back to save itself, it will still be Kerbfleet...but will it still be Kerbal? 

Wow... Kerbal Philosophy... 

I suppose my only question would be did they already lose that innocence once they met the murdery Kerbulans?  

2 hours ago, Alchemist said:

"Waging war by the rules?

I don't know why, but this sort of reminds me of Kahn's line to Spock in Star Trek: Into Darkness

"You can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone???"

[Mr. Peabody]

Kenlie will distract the murdery murderers with food. Just like in the Finnish/Russian "Winter War" sausage battle. Food is a powerful motivator.

[0111narwhalz]

Kenlie's going to sacrifice his innocence to preserve that of the kerbals as a whole.

15 minutes ago, The Dunatian said:

Kenlie will distract the murdery murderers with food. Just like in the Finnish/Russian "Winter War" sausage battle. Food is a powerful motivator.

Careful or you'll get Molotov Bread Baskets and "a drink to go with the food." 

[boccelounge]

11 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

Well, so far the readers seem evenly divided between "Whooo light 'em up Kenlie!" and "Noooooo!"

For an author, that's a Good Thing. 

That may be so, but put me in the "NO KENLIE!" camp, all the same.

Thanks as always for keeping this going, Colonel.

[greenTurtle1134]

I'm saying he should hold the gun at the Kerbulans and monologue about how he doesn't want to use it but is willing to defend his friends, and then kill the Kerbulans in a gruesome but utterly karmariffic way. Making them charge into a not pressurized section, for example, or shooting enough holes to let the air out.

[Guest]

17 hours ago, Alchemist said:

P.S. My own opinion of armed conflicts could be somewhat close to your Kerbals: "Waging war by the rules? If you are civilized enough to agree on rules, why can't you make agreement without violence? No, I don't propose going full-out over any petty squabble, but considering this option is a good argument for not starting the fight at all."

@Alchemist thanks for this very insightful post, I wish I could like it harder.  You're right--in the Zweischenspiel backstory we learned that in the "year before year zero", arguments between the different corporations were tending towards acts of harm. Paradoxically, it was the arrival of a Kerbulan (Wernher) that made Kerbal history go in a different direction. Kerfleet was formed, an era of peaceful space exploration began, and the question of whether or not Kerbals could resort to violence was put off...

...until now.

 

[Dman979]

You idiots! You've shot their stunt doubles!

[Just Jim]

Yes... YES!!!!  

[Geschosskopf]

LOL, let's hope there's no hull breach in that area any time soon  

Oh, and "Fire indiscriminately!" is a great line.  I wish I'd thought of it

 

Edited December 31, 2017 by Geschosskopf

[Sorabh]

Oh thank God! No one killed or died! I knew I could count on you, Kuzzter!

Honestly ever since the "Cuteness/Ability" poll, I have been dreading a R.R.Martin-esque scenario...

Also, oddly, I am also waiting for Nimzo to scream the war cry 'Kowabunga!!!!'

Edited December 31, 2017 by Sorabh

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Dman979 said:

You idiots! You've shot their stunt doubles!

That line is more apropos than you might realize...if you look carefully at Kurt (or is it Not-Kurt?) in the last panel you can see a bit of minty greenscreen in his visor. (whoops!)

24 minutes ago, Just Jim said:

Yes... YES!!!!  

Half the Forum: "Yes... YES!!!"
Other half: " No...NO!!!"
@Geschosskopf: "Eh bien, ce qui sera, sera..."

14 minutes ago, Geschosskopf said:

LOL, let's hope there's no hull breach in that area any time soon  

Yeah...did we ever decide whether Kerbulan submachinegun rounds would penetrate the hull? *rolls dice* *waves hands*

[Dman979]

13 minutes ago, Kuzzter said:

Yeah...did we ever decide whether Kerbulan submachinegun rounds would penetrate the hull? *rolls dice* *waves hands*

The hulls are made of pure Plotonioum.

[Just Jim]

3 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

Half the Forum: "Yes... YES!!!"
Other half: " No...NO!!!"
@Geschosskopf: "Eh bien, ce qui sera, sera..."

Saying this more as a fan and reader, and not a fellow writer, you got us right where you want us... well done, my friend!!!  

3 hours ago, Geschosskopf said:

Oh, and "Fire indiscriminately!" is a great line.  I wish I'd thought of it

Agreed! I'm not sure which I liked more, that line, or the three pairs of eyes peaking out over the couch!  

[Geschosskopf]

6 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

That line is more apropos than you might realize...if you look carefully at Kurt (or is it Not-Kurt?) in the last panel you can see a bit of minty greenscreen in his visor. (whoops!)

Just a trick of the light.  All that smoke is causing strange refractions.

 

6 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

Half the Forum: "Yes... YES!!!"
Other half: " No...NO!!!"
@Geschosskopf: "Eh bien, ce qui sera, sera..."

Bon mot!  Mais vraiment, j'ai très excité!

 

6 hours ago, Kuzzter said:

Yeah...did we ever decide whether Kerbulan submachinegun rounds would penetrate the hull? *rolls dice* *waves hands*

It doesn't matter what causes the breach, it's that these 3 no longer have serviceable space suits