What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Withe reason Edge Runners works as a tragedy is because the characters dig their own graves without alienating themselves totally from the audience. That's hard to do. If you make your characters mistakes too obvious, the audience can't empathize anymore (lots of B slasher films fail this test.) If the consequences seem too arbitrary, the audience loses interest because it's just capricious fate.
Kiwi believes in being a heartless mercenary, but when the time comes to actually do it, she realizes it's not what she wanted after all, way too late. Tragedy. We don't really get much characterization of Dorio, but her attachment to Maine does her in.
She spends the rest of the show being as reckless as possible until she finally pushes her luck too far. She also gets huge cybernetic hands, echoing her brother's style. She's loyal to David against all reason.
One change that might have made it better? Make the mecha suit cooler? Remove 'Choom' from the script? Drop the school subplot, that felt kinda pointless? I can't think of any major flaws in the execution of the themes. They could have gotten away with not killing off Rebecca (go slightly lighter) or having Lucy remove her helmet on the moon (to go way darker.)
To make it worse is easy. David could have lived. They could have had the power of love conquer Cyberpsychosis. They could have failed to foreshadow everything so well. They could have added tons of gratuitous sexual peril. They could have shown the entire thing as some other kid watching a BD of David's life and ended it with a stupid comment. They could have done Lucy's arc without the moon thing.
Reading this made me tear up. Perhaps I've an overly sensitive emotional system which would explain my philosophical view of things is so bleak as to allow me to not feel anything most of the time.
I was waiting for it to happen. The way she gives a defeated little arm raise in the sun... I really thought that was going to be it. But they ended it on a hopeful note; David may have died for nothing, but Lucy still has her second chance.
I wasn't. Women aren't like that. They don't kill themselves on a whim.
She'd wanted to get out of Brazil, go to the Moon, and she got there.
I presume netrunners can easily find legitimate employment.
And a sad, very intelligent and attractive woman working in some tech company would have an easy time finding some solid partner and fulfilling her biological imperative.
Fictional character
It wasn't a whim; I assumed she went to the moon specifically for that purpose.
On a tour bus. It's not implied that she can stay and even if she could life on the moon is, in reality, bleak.
Not when Arasaka wants you dead.
I think that the authors of the show have a more nuanced view of what that means.
Is the Moon ran by Arasaka ?
We don't know what megacorp runs the moon, but she's not staying there anyway. The vehicle she's riding in clearly says 'tours' and iirc the ad David watches also mentions tours.
That doesn't mean she's not staying. E.g. if you've just moved to the Moon and have money, you'd take a tour to see things around.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link