THE DIRKCOURSE THREAD

[Daz]

Again, they didn't even bother to give him an arc.

People don't have arcs, dummy.

[Rob]

I...think you're kind of missing the point? The point is that Dirk making that decision is not something he would normally do. That belief is also not all that consistent with his characterization in the comic proper. Dirk 'having no qualms about doing what he knows will be read as terrible things' is literally the antithesis to who he was in the comic proper. His whole goddamn THING was how he was trying desperately to not do terrible things, to make mistakes, to hurt people intentionally or unintentionally. In order to make the decision to do the things Dirk did for literally ANY reason, it inherently means that he stopped caring about being good and stopped caring about the feelings of the people he loves, and literally became the thing he was previously terrified of becoming, the thing he was terrified that he already was. Thus, he SUCCUMBED.

Sure, but the characterization and motivations of multiple characters changed between Act 7 and the Epilogues as a natural consequence of time passing and Hussie wanting to tell a new story. Continuing to live in the fanon universe of Candy was tantamount to death for Dirk, the suicide was a formality. While self-preservation is always going to trump commitments to others I strongly suspect he views the Candy universe as a type of death for his friends as well and this is not just a self-centric enterprise.

Also, just because a bad guy has reasons for doing a thing doesn't make them not bad? Just because they're INTENTIONALLY being bad and may even have good intentions doesn't make them not still bad! In fact, that kind of makes it worse. I don't think that was the point you were trying to make but I'm honestly just kind of not sure how anyone can think "oh, he didn't suddenly become bad, he just suddenly started intentionally doing bad things for reasons" makes any sense at all?

`Good` and `bad` aren't objective states of the world, they depend on context and viewpoint. For a story to happen there must be conflict: events that the reader will take as bad and need solving have to happen. From the viewpoint of a character of the story (especially one that is cognizant of their place in that story) those events are necessary for their and their friends continued existence. It's this, the preservation of the people he loves, that what makes the acts worth doing.

[Joyfulldreams]

Sure, but the characterization and motivations of multiple characters changed between Act 7 and the Epilogues as a natural consequence of time passing and Hussie wanting to tell a new story. Continuing to live in the fanon universe of Candy was tantamount to death for Dirk, the suicide was a formality. While self-preservation is always going to trump commitments to others I strongly suspect he views the Candy universe as a type of death for his friends as well and this is not just a self-centric enterprise.

The entire idea that Dirk would ever value self-preservation over his commitment and responsibility to his loved ones is completely inconsistent with his character as we saw it in canon. Using a seven-year timeskip as an excuse to completely alter a character's characterization without having to offer a single real explanation for the changes, or at least a throughput of understanding how we got from point A to point B, is lazy and bad writing. There's leaving things for interpretation and speculation and then there's just not fucking bothering to write something you should because you don't give a shit about narrative consistency. If Hussie wanted to write a new story, maybe write something other than homestuck??? Or don't make it a direct sequel to the last story which you masquerade as the conclusion to the last story.

Also it's pretty disturbing that Dirk's gratuitously graphic and disturbing suicide is being treated so flippantly by both the story and the fandom. But okay, whatever. All of everything that is inconsistent about Dirk's character is totally okay and nobody should complain because he MAYBE thinks he's trying to help his friends in some twisted way. Possibly. We don't actually know!

`Good` and `bad` aren't objective states of the world, they depend on context and viewpoint. For a story to happen there must be conflict: events that the reader will take as bad and need solving have to happen. From the viewpoint of a character of the story (especially one that is cognizant of their place in that story) those events are necessary for their and their friends continued existence. It's this, the preservation of the people he loves, that what makes the acts worth doing.

First of all, we are talking about good and bad as per Dirk's own morality and perceptions, and to him, bad is anything that leads to his friends and loved ones being hurt, ESPECIALLY by him. In the past, Dirk has expressed that he literally is not able to bring himself to intentionally and meaningfully hurt the people he cares about, EVEN if it would for their own benefit in the long run. He may accidentally hurt them anyway unintentionally, but he beats himself up about that enough to know he wouldn't want that if he could prevent it. If you're going to have a character's morals just completely flip on their head, maybe that's an important goddamn detail that deserves at least a smidgen of narrative focus. Or not.

Also. NO. Stories DON'T have to have conflict, at least not in the form of 'events that the reader will take as bad'. And moreover, stories don't need to have villains to have conflict!! My god! Lots of stories do have conflict, they are the most simple and common way of creating engagement in a narrative, and villains are the most simple and common way of achieving that, but they aren't the ONLY way for a story to keep being written. That's just goddamn ridiculous, not to mention reductive???

[calamityCons]

Also. NO. Stories DON'T have to have conflict, at least not in the form of 'events that the reader will take as bad'. And moreover, stories don't need to have villains to have conflict!! My god! Lots of stories do have conflict, they are the most simple and common way of creating engagement in a narrative, and villains are the most simple and common way of achieving that, but they aren't the ONLY way for a story to keep being written. That's just goddamn ridiculous, not to mention reductive???

Strong agree with you there, Joyfull. One of the most misunderstood genres is Slice of Life stories, which are incredibly difficult for many people to get interested in because of its "lack of conflict" as we understand it. Stories that lead from point A to point B can have things in the way, but they don't always have to be villainous forces or a direct antagonist. A story can be a hilarious romp about trying to get some stupid kids onto a schoolbus and it can be the most engaging and fulfilling piece of writing you'd encountered that day. A story can be a really dramatic tragedy about a doomed expedition to an eldritch island and be the most boring heap of shit you've ever seen.

[Rob]

Dirkcourse

Hmm, I think what I find compelling about Dirk in the Epilogues (the direct claim on narrative authorship in service of his goal) is in direct conflict with what you find compelling about Dirk in HS. I don't disagree with your read on him from HS, I just find Epilogue Dirk vastly more interesting.

Also. NO. Stories DON'T have to have conflict, at least not in the form of 'events that the reader will take as bad'. And moreover, stories don't need to have villains to have conflict!! My god! Lots of stories do have conflict, they are the most simple and common way of creating engagement in a narrative, and villains are the most simple and common way of achieving that, but they aren't the ONLY way for a story to keep being written. That's just goddamn ridiculous, not to mention reductive???

I agree that the statement you've constructed is ridiculous and reductive. It's also not a statement I was making. Since we are discussing a work in which a meta-fictionally aware character assumed the role of conflict-driver and villain, why the author did that is an interesting avenue of discussion to me and something more than bad writing.

[TH4NK YOU B3N]

Sorry for not writing the last post I made all the way through. I had to go to the last college class of the semester before the final. Now all school is done. I don't remember what I was going to say, though.

Strong agree with you there, Joyfull. One of the most misunderstood genres is Slice of Life stories, which are incredibly difficult for many people to get interested in because of its "lack of conflict" as we understand it.

Yes, I know what Seinfeld is. I can enjoy that, but that's also never what Homestuck has been. It's started out as a video game that ends the world, and it's only escalated from there. Homestuck has had moments of levity, but that's just because it's a good and funny story that knows when it needs to take a breather.

It has now become clear to me from reading this thread and considering the points made, that Dirk is probably the least consistent character, or, put another way, too many disparate and completely different characters arbitrarily have the same name.

I wanted to say that you get it, but Joyfull said the same thing. So I think there isn't as much of a shared understanding as I'd like to think.

But they DIDN'T write it. They SKIPPED it.

They didn't skip it. It hasn't been written yet. You know about SU criticals? They're like "Why haven't you addressed X yet? Don't they realize that Rose Quartz did a problematic?" and then later Steven Universe does. In another episode. You sound like that.

Dirkcourse

Hmm, I think what I find compelling about Dirk in the Epilogues (the direct claim on narrative authorship in service of his goal) is in direct conflict with what you find compelling about Dirk in HS. I don't disagree with your read on him from HS, I just find Epilogue Dirk vastly more interesting.

Agreed. He's just so full of himself. He thinks he sees his own potential, but what he really sees is all that he has been before, unable to conceptualize how he could be. One thing that's consistent about this Dirk is his fixed mindset. He thinks he's just too smart to be happy. He thinks he's a bad person because of his big depression. You are going to be a stunted, miserable tool forever.

He wishes he could change, but he only wants to make stupid changes to things like his sexuality. He wants to make everyone happy, but he'll end up having to hurt someone in the process because he's gay and monogamous. No, that's not why. He'll end up having to hurt someone because everything has its price. Karkat and Jane are both running for president. They can't both win. The policies they want to enact are contradictory.

So, fuck it. If everything about the way you navigate the world, with schemes and machinations, is problematic, you might as well embrace being evil. He can't turn off his brain, so he can't get rid of the guilt, but at least that way he can survive.

But, actually, Dirk is written as the (anti) hero of Meat. He's the protagonist and Calliope is the antagonist. Dirk plants thoughts in other people's heads, which is kinda scary, but the way he does this is not as big of a violation of autonomy as he thinks it is. Calliope is the lime blooded cherub, considered Good, and cherubs don't think it's a big deal to taking full control over someone else's body because they grew up doing that all the time. But that's shitty! Pretty much anyone who cares about Jade in any regard thinks this is really shitty and very disrespectful to her character. Really, it's telling that the dead cherub Calliope lacks a discourse thread. The story tells that she is good, so other people don't look closer at what it shows? You got a character who says a young adult killed himself because he's manipulative? Consolidate his power?

This is such obvious cartoon villainy that I can't even deal with it. I'm honestly doubting that she's as unpalatable as I think she is. There's nuance to this that I can't see.

People need to decide if Dirk acting like he did in the epilogues was Actually How He Was All Along, or if he is acting differently from how he normally would because of his various splinters merging with him or because meta bullshit or literally any other outside influence. It can't actually be both. Or, it can, but that is bullshit and a copout and renders the idea of consistent characterization literally meaningless and shouldn't be lauded as literally any form of good writing just because it's Meta.

Well, remember when you were trying to justify 13 year old Dirk's thing with the robot? And you also seem to think AR is Super Evil and 16 year old Dirk is Super Good? I'm pretty sure that happened before Dirk made a glasses clone, so his actions then are consistent with the characterization of both AR and 16 year old Dirk. Like, what's more consistent than acting in the exact same way as the exact same person because you hadn't splintered yet? You rationalize the behavior you condemn.

So I have to wonder, is it Dirk that's inconsistent, or you?

[TH4NK YOU B3N]

https://www.homestuck.com/epilogues/candy/14

Yours is a singularity of narcissism—an endlessly recursive existence so dense that it has no choice but to sprawl out much further than the boundaries of its person in any given universe or timeline. Once cut off from that, you become unbearably dispensable. From a purely utilitarian perspective, killing yourself is the greatest gift you could give to this dying world. A valorous sacrifice the likes of which this place will never experience again. If your severed head could speak, it might say, “You’re welcome.” But even then, maybe it wouldn’t. It might not care enough to do this shallow realm even that basic courtesy. We may never know.

https://www.homestuck.com/epilogues/meat/35

I guess it’s tragic, though maybe not in the conventional sense. My view is, the real tragedy with you, John, is that you never mattered all that much. To those on the level of the cherubs, and now my level as well, you were never all that special, despite the critical role you played.

https://www.homestuck.com/epilogues/meat/26

YOUR name is Jade Harley. YOU decide, right now, that you do not want to die. You resist the pull of the black hole with all your might. What would killing yourself accomplish? Sure, most of your friends are dead. But John is still looking for you. Do you want to let him down? Do you want to crush his soul? Do you have any appreciation for what he’s going through, Jade? He can take you home. To your new home, Earth C. The home I made for you, Jade. Your friends are all there, alive and well. Rose, Dave, Karkat, slutty adult Jade, Jane, Jake, Roxy, me.

i am so mad and sad about this. suicide? this is practically murder. she killed him.

[Cyber-Fan]

https://www.homestuck.com/epilogues/candy/14

Yours is a singularity of narcissism—an endlessly recursive existence so dense that it has no choice but to sprawl out much further than the boundaries of its person in any given universe or timeline. Once cut off from that, you become unbearably dispensable. From a purely utilitarian perspective, killing yourself is the greatest gift you could give to this dying world. A valorous sacrifice the likes of which this place will never experience again. If your severed head could speak, it might say, “You’re welcome.” But even then, maybe it wouldn’t. It might not care enough to do this shallow realm even that basic courtesy. We may never know.

I thought Dirk was narrating here, and that Callie takes over the narration after he dies.

[TH4NK YOU B3N]

The narration switches off as soon as John chooses meat or candy. Meat is narrated in second person and third person, but Candy is only narrated in second person once. I think Dirk believes that second person narration is more persuasive than third person narration.

Plus, the narration says Dirk isn't speaking. How could he narrate if he's not speaking?

[Joyfulldreams]

I wanted to say that you get it, but Joyfull said the same thing. So I think there isn't as much of a shared understanding as I'd like to think.

I'm sorry, but what the hell is this supposed to mean?

They didn't skip it. It hasn't been written yet. You know about SU criticals? They're like "Why haven't you addressed X yet? Don't they realize that Rose Quartz did a problematic?" and then later Steven Universe does. In another episode. You sound like that.

This...does not make sense? This comparison does not even remotely track, whatsoever. The entirety of Steven Universe is predicated on the fact that Rose Quartz is dead, and that we can never learn anything about her from her own perspective, and can only grow to further understand her out of order and through the many biased memories of the people that once knew her. Steven Universe is also locked into the POV of Steven, as the main character, and we follow HIS journey through understanding who his mother was and what that means for him. Dirk is literally the most POV a character can fucking get, especially in the epilogues. He is a main character who has a regular character arc and who we got the opportunity to know very well already.

Also, Steven Universe is a serialized TV show, which had a longer and obviously incomplete storyline while airing. The epilogues all dropped at once, and are supposed to at once be their own separate story, but then also not be complete? You aren't allowed to judge the epilogues as a conclusion to homestuck's story, even though they are literally called epilogues, because they're supposed to be a "new story" and "their own thing". But you can't judge the epilogues on their own merits, either, because they're intentionally left without any sort of satisfying conclusion??? Well jesus fucking christ, I guess the epilogues can just do whatever the fuck they want and no criticism ever levied against them can ever be valid! Aint that CONVENIENT.

This has a more direct comparison though. Guess what, Steven universe ended, just like homestuck, and now has an epilogue series currently beginning to air called Steven Universe Future, after the movie, which also serves as a sort of epilogue prologue type...thing. This is also after a decently significant timeskip of three years. A major plot point thus far with Steven Universe Future, as an epilogue, is showing Steven--who is normally extremely kind and compassionate to a fault--going through the struggles of processing various traumas, and how it manifests as him slowly becoming more violent, and confrontational, and potentially unstable. How he ends up hurting the people he cares about more often. Isn't that amazing, how they are making it a part of the fucking story, the arc of this character changing in this fundamental way? Wouldn't it be goddamn insane if Steven Universe The Movie or Steven Universe Future just started right out the gate with Steven going completely batshit without any buildup, and without addressing the drastic character shift whatsoever? Sure, it might be where he would have obviously ended up anyway, but that would be FUCKING RIDICULOUS. And imagine if Steven Universe Future ends, not as any proper conclusion, but on some bullshit cliffhanger that addresses none of those issues, on the promise of MAYBE some other continuation will happen someday to potentially address this stuff. Even if that other continuation did end up happening, Steven Universe Future would STILL BE BAD.

*THAT* is what the Homestuck epilogues did. It's BAD!

Well, remember when you were trying to justify 13 year old Dirk's thing with the robot? And you also seem to think AR is Super Evil and 16 year old Dirk is Super Good? I'm pretty sure that happened before Dirk made a glasses clone, so his actions then are consistent with the characterization of both AR and 16 year old Dirk. Like, what's more consistent than acting in the exact same way as the exact same person because you hadn't splintered yet? You rationalize the behavior you condemn.

So I have to wonder, is it Dirk that's inconsistent, or you?

I don't think AR is Super Evil, and I also don't think Dirk is Super Good in whatever hyperbolic sense you're thinking? I believe Dirk is a child, in canon, and you can't judge the actions and beliefs of children in the same ways you can an adult. Additionally, I think the AR has totally compelling reasons for acting the way he does. He WAS a child who was already pretty lacking in personal autonomy, further stripped of that autonomy, further isolated, and had the relationships with his friends and the connections he had with them ripped away from him or usurped. Of course he lashes out! Of course he's bitter, and angry! Also--the whole benefit of the supercomputer thing does change things, at least to some degree. Either way. It doesn't excuse any of his more heinous actions, but like. I am genuinely glad he was able to reach a state where he could be more happy. Even if that involved...fusing with equius, I guess. And then the whole...lord english thing...guh.

Also--you're correct in saying that the AR had not yet been made when Dirk sent Jake the brobot. However, I was not trying to excuse Dirk's actions. The brobot is something Dirk regrets, to a certain extent, and I don't deny that mistakes were made in it's creation. But it was...a mistake, made by a 13-year-old. You can't have that hold the same weight as some sort of deliberate attempt at manipulation an adult might perpetrate. In fact, the mere idea that the brobot could somehow be some bizarre molester-bot despite the fact that it was made by a 13-year-old boy, like. It's ridiculous? In what universe are 13-year-old boys molesters, now??? Why are we deciding that 13-year-old boys are lecherous weirdos??? AT AGE 13??? Like fuck that's weird even with EQUIUS, okay???

Lastly, the important difference to make here is the fact that the main split-off point for Dirk and the AR is not his age, but his circumstances. Dirk, at age 13, in the log we see him in, is still plenty kind and considerate in ways that AR CLEARLY is not, especially towards Jake. Just comparing the ways in which they speak, it's damn obvious. The difference is that the AR is what would happen to 13-year-old Dirk **IF** he was thrust into the horrible circumstances the AR was thrust into. Not that this is some natural, inevitable evolution of his character.


Also in conclusion you're starting to sound super patronizing towards me, personally, and I don't appreciate it. Quit it with the "are YOU the inconsistent one" and "you sound like a dumb SU critical lol" bullshit please. Immediately.

[SbIUsedToKnow]

But they DIDN'T write it. They SKIPPED it.

They didn't skip it. It hasn't been written yet. You know about SU criticals? They're like "Why haven't you addressed X yet? Don't they realize that Rose Quartz did a problematic?" and then later Steven Universe does. In another episode. You sound like that.

"It hasn't been written yet" seems like an extremely silly way of attempting to dodge criticism.

First of all, the Epilogues are a finished work of text. Whey were all dropped in one piece, with no indication there would be sequel/prequel. Hs2 or pesterquest probably weren't even in the works yet, and remember, hs2 AND pesterquest have different writing teams working on them (atleast 3 people worked on all of them, but they weren't leads in the Epilogues), despite claiming to be sequels. Also, the writers themselves answered asks on Twitter asking "will there be more? It can't end on a cliffhanger!" with "I think the epilogues say a complete story". Considering HS2 isn't even hosted on Homestuck.com, and as such is not even required reading... There is nothing to hold our breath for.

Some random person taking the time of their day to write a fix-it fic on AO3...doesn't make the creative choices and writing of the epilogues good? I know it's possible to to just. Fill in the parts the authors skipped. But such thinking requires way too much good faith from the readership, that I personally, simply do not have anymore of it towards anything epilogues related.

Second of all, a piece of fiction is to be criticized on it own merits and has to be able to stand as it is. If the SU crew made a movie, called it SU: the alternative fuck-off storylines, in which Steven is 10 years older, hates the gems suddenly and is abusive towards his dad, Connie has 3 children she got teen pregnant for, and is now a passive mom instead of the fighter we remember, the gems suddenly question their gender and it's a big deal for them, and Greg is an alcoholic on top of it all, yeah.
I guess if we all sat down a did a big think we could imagine all the ways things could have gone for these characters to end up like this... But fuck all, this is a terrible movie.

[TH4NK YOU B3N]

I'm sorry, but what the hell is this supposed to mean?

Do you think we're agreeing on things, that we have similar viewpoints, contrary to what I believe? Your reaction tells me otherwise. I am not having a shared understanding. I am not reading the atmosphere all that well, and I don't think you're actually sorry. Please don't do that. Please don't give fake apologies with curse words in them it's disorienting.

[Dream Muttman]

Here's my contribution to Dirkcourse and my hottest take all in one:

If Dirk is supposed to be an asshole because his Ultimate Self includes Lord English through the connection he has to the demon through ARquius being a component in his creation, does that mean Dave and Rose' Ultimate Selves share the same connection because Dirk is a component in their creation? Can Dave and Rose' Ultimate Selves be distinct from Dirk's? Does Roxy also have the same Ultimate Self because she's connected to Dirk's through their ectobiological offspring? Is the same true for all of the trolls if they share genetics with Gamzee? Does Calliope share a Ultimate Self with Caliborn? Does Caliborn share a Ultimate Self with all the Striders, Lalondes and Trolls? What about all the ectobio offspring created during the Credits to populate Earth C?

tl;dr how is ectobiology any different from the process that combines ARquius with the other parts of Lord English? Why is it not treated as a cause for conjoined Ultimate Selves? It certainly seems to connect Doc Scratch to Lord English through Lil Cal in the ectobio/alchemy that creates the FG.

[calamityCons]

It’s almost like Dirk becoming a villain through becoming his Ultimate Self is... stupid???? I kid, but the more this current narrative direction of homestuck goes on the less sense it makes. :/

[Crpal]

Ultimate Self as described in the comic is the ability see and somehow connect the other versions of yourself across the multiverse to the Ultimate Self. For instance, Davepete has access to all their collective memories as Dave and Nepetas, but, not to other individuals that aren't a component the individuals that make up Davepeta: Dave, The Crow, and Nepetas. That's as far as their limitations go as an ultimate self. They don't draw from individuals that are biologically related to them like Roxy or Meulin. AR and to a much lesser extent Lord English are about the limits of Dirk's Ultimate Self due to AR essentially being a cloned version of Dirk's soul. So components of LE that contain a part of AR don't count because they don't originally have that copy of AR's soul when sucked into Lil' Cal, so Gamzee, any version of Equius before he became Arquius, and Caliborn would be a part of Dirk's Ultimate self due to not being directly a part of Dirk's soul pre-fusion. Similarly you can't argue biological offspring like Dave and Rose count due to the fact that they are directly a part of Dirk's soul.



I probably made a ton of mistakes.

[Joyfulldreams]

I'm sorry, but what the hell is this supposed to mean?

Do you think we're agreeing on things, that we have similar viewpoints, contrary to what I believe? Your reaction tells me otherwise. I am not having a shared understanding. I am not reading the atmosphere all that well, and I don't think you're actually sorry. Please don't do that. Please don't give fake apologies with curse words in them it's disorienting.

Dude...what? Do you not understand sarcasm? The I'm sorry was clearly sarcastic. Because I am not, in fact, sorry. I'm irritated by how often your arguments are turning to Ad Hominem. Meaning, you're talking and directing way too many points towards my integrity and ability to argue, instead of just focusing on the arguments themselves. You implied that somebody else's argument couldn't be valid just because it seemed similar to something I said. Which implies that anything I say must be invalid. Or, at least, that you can't possibly come to an agreement with anyone who agrees with anything I've said, which sounds like some kind of personal vendetta against me specifically. And that's bullshit, and insulting. So I asked you for clarification, and used sarcasm to make it clear you said something that was potentially insulting. In the same way someone might say "I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you, could you repeat that" I asked "I'm sorry, the thing you just said sounded an awful lot like an insult directed towards me. Please repeat what you said with more clarity, because if you meant to insult me, I am going to be Angry."

That's about as crystal clear as I can make it, dude.

[TH4NK YOU B3N]

"You get it!" you said.
"You get it!" I almost said.

We're not going to mean the same thing even though we agree with the same statement. It's not ad hominem to describe that there's something lost in translation. I have no ill intention towards you.

If we're both told to imagine a flower and draw it, I'm not going to think you're stupid if your flower looks different from mine. The person telling us to draw flowers shouldn't be disappointed when the flowers we drew aren't the same as the flower in their own mind's eye.

Calm down and do not beef.

***

I think the issue with discoursing about DirkJake in the Dirkcourse thread is that I'm actually Jakecoursing. I don't like Jake English so I think shipping him with Dirk unironically is an insult to Dirk's character. That's not the sort of thing you signed up for by posting in the Dirkcourse thread. I'll make a thread about Jake if I ever want to come back to that sort of topic again.

[Dream Muttman]

Ultimate Self as described in the comic is the ability see and somehow connect the other versions of yourself across the multiverse to the Ultimate Self. For instance, Davepete has access to all their collective memories as Dave and Nepetas, but, not to other individuals that aren't a component the individuals that make up Davepeta: Dave, The Crow, and Nepetas. That's as far as their limitations go as an ultimate self.

The problem I have with this is that it doesn't seem to be consistent in its implications. Shouldn't this mean that Davepeta becomes a nexus between Dave and Nepeta that functionally gives them the exact same Ultimate Self? Since having all of Davepeta's memories means having all of Nepeta's for Dave and having all of Dave's for Nepeta?

As for ectobiology making these connections, my evidence is Doc Scratch's connection to Lord English, which is not direct. The souls in Lil Cal are not used in his creation, but instead copied through ectobiology.

[calamityCons]

Then why has Dirk made such a huge 180 in characterization?

[Joyfulldreams]

Then why has Dirk made such a huge 180 in characterization?

I'm going to guess a few things.

A. Hussie and/or whomever wrote the epilogues either didn't give much of a shit about Dirk's characterization in the comic, or Hussie somehow genuinely intended to write Dirk as some sort of amoral manipulator from the start. And either didn't realize how spectacularly he failed to actually do that, or somehow thought he could just recoup the failure in the epilogues, I guess.

B. The epilogues as a rule seem to take almost every possible opportunity to spit in the face of anything going good for anyone or anyone actually improving on themselves. If your whole story is about how everything is always horrible, happy endings are stupid and unattainable, and good intentions are naivety that will end in inevitable failure, making the one character who struggled the most to be actually, genuinely good not only fail spectacularly, but basically stop trying altogether, works thematically. I fucking guess.

Even if it's....STILL a bad writing choice even for THAT, as I've mentioned before you don't just write a tragedy by having tragic things happen constantly with no real buildup or explanation! But whatever! 8D Dirk isn't even the only one they do this to, he's just the worst case!

Mod Edit: Try not to violate GC #6. I know the epilogues stir Big Feelings, but if you can't talk about it without needing to try and attack the writing team for it, then you need to know to take yourself out of the conversation.