Ryudo Issei (
unknownrival) wrote2012-07-02 05:50 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
(no subject)
If no one minds, I'm just venting a little and proposing a theory. Feel free to skip this.
The implications of having a 'canon' extend far beyond the strangeness of being fictional in another world. The community often adheres to the canon in various ways.
For example, when something is 'meant to happen' and the community blocks worldhop access, it never does so when someone is past the events in their canon, or the event doesn't occur within it. If I was threatened by a community member, as I have been in the past, I would be perfectly able to get outside aid, because this is a foreign threat. If I were still going through the story, and my death was told there, the likelihood is that no one could fix it.
Another comment is that when people lose access, they often lose their memories - more than that, they lose their memories to a certain point, and that point is somewhere within the canon. If they've been here for years and grown, the next time they come here they'll be young again. Things like 'Akako Koizumi and Hakuba Saguru are not dating' and 'Issei Ryudo is a human being' can change back even if memories aren't lost. It's as if all changes are necessarily reset.
Finally, when Stein lost his memories of William, he was still in the same place. If William had lost his memories - he would have disappeared entirely, because he was in the wrong place. If Diarmuid loses his access and his memories he will disappear as well, and the next time we find a Diarmuid to grace our community with his presence, he will be in a time point during the war.
For all that it is chaotic in nature, the community can also stick tightly to what is called our fates. People always begin here from a predetermined point, and without interference, in any universe they will end at a determined point as well.
I despise fate. I would rather my life and death not be something I uselessly rail against.
The implications of having a 'canon' extend far beyond the strangeness of being fictional in another world. The community often adheres to the canon in various ways.
For example, when something is 'meant to happen' and the community blocks worldhop access, it never does so when someone is past the events in their canon, or the event doesn't occur within it. If I was threatened by a community member, as I have been in the past, I would be perfectly able to get outside aid, because this is a foreign threat. If I were still going through the story, and my death was told there, the likelihood is that no one could fix it.
Another comment is that when people lose access, they often lose their memories - more than that, they lose their memories to a certain point, and that point is somewhere within the canon. If they've been here for years and grown, the next time they come here they'll be young again. Things like 'Akako Koizumi and Hakuba Saguru are not dating' and 'Issei Ryudo is a human being' can change back even if memories aren't lost. It's as if all changes are necessarily reset.
Finally, when Stein lost his memories of William, he was still in the same place. If William had lost his memories - he would have disappeared entirely, because he was in the wrong place. If Diarmuid loses his access and his memories he will disappear as well, and the next time we find a Diarmuid to grace our community with his presence, he will be in a time point during the war.
For all that it is chaotic in nature, the community can also stick tightly to what is called our fates. People always begin here from a predetermined point, and without interference, in any universe they will end at a determined point as well.
I despise fate. I would rather my life and death not be something I uselessly rail against.
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action; 1/2]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
[action]
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
no subject
I don't... that is, I don't think I can believe that fate exists.
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Though, all that being said, I'd like to propose an alternative theory, if I may.
no subject
no subject
Of course, that said, that theory's not entirely watertight... doesn't take into account the disappearances, for a start. It's possible we're both barking up the wrong tree.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
It is interesting, though.
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[Lock]
[video]
How would you define "interference"?
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
[video]
no subject
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
no subject
The term carries certain connotations with it, wouldn't you agree?
As if things happened in spite of an individual's actions, rather than because of them.
no subject
no subject
It's only just and fair that it should fail.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Fate's not something above this place. Even yer not useless against it.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Basically I'm saying your hypothesis is right so far as I've seen.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)