Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (6480.61)
    I imagine Luke will follow through with the argument that they're all already guilty of the worst crime imaginable; The world being in the state that it's currently in. They're all are guilty of that. Would executing them for revenge be justified? Luke is easy to single out because, well, he's an asshole. Are we all going to run towards the rush of revenge if the normals find out what they're guilty of? I doubt it.
    • CommentAuthorGilgurth
    • CommentTimeAug 1st 2009
     (6480.62)
    Luke's moral question is rather insidious. If you do something, but can make it so that it 'never happened', did it? Of course it did, but to the people involved, it didn't. And he can defy you to prove it. It is a truly evil argument. No physical or mental evidence.

    If you shot someone, killed them and then had the power to not only bring them back to life in the same shape, but to wipe the memory of any and all (I guess with the exception of those with the package), can you be charged with murder? The person is still alive, in no worse condition than before.

    Outside of religious/moralistic reasoning, which they truly do not seem to have, why not? They do think of themselves above the laws of man, only their own. Executing prisoners, torture, mind rape, and more I'm sure we could document if we look closely. The argument isn't if we agree (in our 'safe' world with food and shelter and police), the one I see is how can they act like that and then get moralistic? What is their moral compass? What is the moral code for a bunch of god like 20 somethings who destroyed the world half by accident half in anger in their late teens?
    •  
      CommentAuthorWaxPoetic
    • CommentTimeAug 1st 2009
     (6480.63)
    Thank you, all!
    Just got to it, and was made happy.
    • CommentAuthorDee_Noir
    • CommentTimeAug 1st 2009
     (6480.64)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    Whatever happens at the FA trial by night, Luke will wipe the floor with the others arguments. He's just a great debator and persuasive in an argument. They'll find it difficult to accuse him with anything when he, like an Evil Atticus Finch, destroys their logic and manipulates their words.
    • CommentAuthorcalcaneus
    • CommentTimeAug 1st 2009
     (6480.65)
    If Luke's definition of 'living richly' means having non-consensual sex with mind-enemaed zombie chicks, then what he wants is power and control and the ability to debase other people.

    Eventually, he'll want to have that power over another Freakangel, or his plans will become larger and less manageable in another way.

    It doesn't matter whether his abstract logic is sound - the circumstances of his capture suggest that the other Freakangels would be much safer had Kirk's aim been different. Next week, hopefully?
    •  
      CommentAuthormister hex
    • CommentTimeAug 1st 2009
     (6480.66)
    Warren really writes the hell out of an interrogation scene.

    And the artwork is note-perfect.

    from what I've heard (and read), bullets are hot when they penetrate your flesh. A nice detail. Well done.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjohnjones
    • CommentTimeAug 1st 2009
     (6480.67)
    If Luke's definition of 'living richly' means having non-consensual sex with mind-enemaed zombie chicks, then what he wants is power and control and the ability to debase other people.


    Well, I don't know if he defines "living richly" that specifically, but I think power and control is secondary to indulgence and "respect." It's fairly obvious to me that Luke envies Sirkka's situation. It's also pretty obvious that Luke will draw attention to Sirkka's "harem" as related to his own conduct. Is it reasonable to believe that all the people in Sirkka's cult would be acting and living as they without her intervention? And what kind of intervention is worse, an isolated case of "Package-assisted sex" or the manipulation of dozens of people for the sake of "redefining the human relationship?"
    • CommentAuthorcalcaneus
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.68)
    @johnjones I don't think Luke explicitly defines 'living richly,' but I don't think power and control are at all secondary for him. Right when he gets into Janine's mind, he says "I should have done this years ago." The control is a means of getting whatever he wants out of people, and it's something he has no qualms about using. A different sort of person wouldn't want affection that isn't freely given - like Sirkka, unless there's a darker side to her that we haven't been shown yet. Always a possibility ;).

    And what kind of intervention is worse, an isolated case of "Package-assisted sex" or the manipulation of dozens of people for the sake of "redefining the human relationship?"

    I think there's a significant difference between mind-control and joining Sirkka's harem. While making people feel good does seem to be part of her package, not all the Whitechapel citizens are in her harem, and I get the sense that those who are choose to be. What Sirkka does has the potential to benefit all of its participants and seems to be voluntary, although who knows what could be revealed in later weeks...
    •  
      CommentAuthorcurb
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.69)
    I don't imagine Sirkka would get any pleasure from using her powers to influence her relationship with the harem, and I get the impression all participants have chosen their level of involvement. However, I'd argue that regardless of whether she's using them, if she hasn't told her parters about her powers then she's withheld information that allows them to make an informed choice about their participation in the relationship. "Hey baby, I can control minds" doesn't strike me as something you can casually slip in to pillow talk. I'm not sure it's equivalent to Luke's actions, but I do think it undermines her moral authority to judge him.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjohnjones
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009 edited
     (6480.70)
    I think there's a significant difference between mind-control and joining Sirkka's harem. While making people feel good does seem to be part of her package, not all the Whitechapel citizens are in her harem, and I get the sense that those who are choose to be. What Sirkka does has the potential to benefit all of its participants and seems to be voluntary, although who knows what could be revealed in later weeks...


    The key phrase there is "making people feel good." Making them. Sirkka doesn't have a problem with removing negative experiences from people. Do you really think she has a problem inducing positive experiences? Don't you think that during sex she uses her abilities to greatly enhance the pleasure people feel? And wouldn't something like that be addictive over time? And wouldn't a person "addicted to love" like that be willing to do anything to please the provider of that love?

    Sirkka talks casually of "teaching the boys tricks" and "riding them like ponies" which doesn't exactly fit the mold of "do no harm." Now, fine, she's probably kidding. However, there is an argument to be made that Sirkka is effectively creating an army of "minions" just like Mark was. She's just using a more insidious method. Luke can't really prove his "innocence." However, he can make the argument that his behavior is really no worse than what Sirkka does and is, if anything, more "honest." And that if the 'angels are going to punish him, they'll have to punish her as well. It's only "fair."
    •  
      CommentAuthorcurb
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.71)
    Sirkka talks casually of "teaching the boys tricks" and "riding them like ponies" which doesn't exactly fit the mold of "do no harm." Now, fine, she's probably kidding.


    I don't think she's kidding - it's been pretty heavily implied that she likes kinky sex, and there's a definate D/s vibe to her relationships. In that context, there's a good chance that her playmates wouldn't feel they were being harmed so much as having the time of their lives. Dunno whether they'd enjoy the experience quite as much if they knew she had powers, though.
    •  
      CommentAuthorstsparky
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.72)
    Wouldn't the other angels suss out Sirkka using her power over her harem? Therefore, it is most likely not happening. Comfort is insidious though.
    • CommentAuthorSarahK
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.73)
    (hi all, just discovered FreakAngels on Wednesday and have since read the entire thing start to finish about three times. Loving every minute.)

    I completely agree with the general take that Luke is a bastard and needs immediate dealing with (and am myself kind of disappointed that the second gunshot does appear to have been to his other thigh). But is anyone else wondering what might have happened had Kirk said something to the effect of "For godsake, HERE, take some damn bread, NOW fuck off" way back in Ep 9?

    If he hadn't had to crawl back to Janine and get humiliatingly (and publicly, if anyone happened to have been passing by) rejected again, I wonder if the switch would have flipped in his head.

    I am really looking forward to more of his backstory. I wonder how he wound up where -- and who -- he is.
  2.  (6480.74)
    Beautifully tense interrogation scene, sharply written and exquisitely drawn as always - can't wait til next week to see what they do with Luke.
    • CommentAuthorergogrrl
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.75)
    This is a bit of a tangent, but the debate over Luke's use of mind control vs. Sirkka's rape care makes me think of surgery.

    Most of us (hopefully) have grown up with the understanding that it is inappropriate for one person to deliberately stick a knife into another person. Bad manners, if you will. The most obvious exception to this rule is surgery: where the surgeon is not only allowed to stick a knife in a person, s/he is encouraged or even compelled to do so, given the circumstances.

    It's my understanding (and I could be wrong), that most people who want to be surgeons aren't just looking for a legal way to justify their lifelong desire to stab people. Everyone knows it takes an incredible amount of education and training to become a doctor, but I imagine that it takes a great deal of effort for training surgeons to overcome the natural abhorrence to cutting into a human body. Even then, there's still an understanding and respect for this act, and more importantly, restraint: most surgeons don't just go around cutting people regardless of whether they're in an operating room or not.

    Which brings me back to Luke and Sirkka. Sirkka's rape care seems more like surgery to me: she's undertaking an act that would be immoral in most circumstances, but arguably appropriate in a few. And Sirkka seems to be acting more like a surgeon: she doesn't just go around erasing everybody's unpleasant memories like a panhandler with a brain squeegee. Luke, on the other hand, acts like someone who just likes cutting people. I feel like he previously refrained from "cutting" not because his gut told him it was wrong, but because the FA "society" said it was wrong and he wanted to avoid discomfort. Once he thought there was just as much discomfort in obedience as disobedience, he felt free to indulge.

    Which isn't to say that Luke couldn't become an effective mind surgeon. Some people join the army so they can kill legally, sociopaths excel in certain career fields, and there probably are surgeons who went into the field because they really don't have any problem cutting people, training or not. The question is, whether you want someone like that to be your doctor.

    This is just me blathering on the internet, please don't kill me or reach for the arse eels.
    •  
      CommentAuthorcurb
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.76)
    That's interesting. What if Luke doesn't get his bastadry reduced, but instead just pointed in a more useful direction? The black ops Freakangel doing the jobs too mean and downright sneaky for even the likes of Kait?
    • CommentAuthorQuixotess
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.77)
    @ergogrrl: When you started that analogy, I thought you were going to say "surgery is something done for our benefit, but it is still not acceptable to perform surgery on someone against their will."

    ...Which is where I would take that analogy.
  3.  (6480.78)
    Look back at the beginning.

    Sirkka's no saint helping victims. the Freakangels are not a happy family. And Luke only escapes a FA death sentence because Arkady saw the future and stopped him. Granted a week has past, but Warren did give us some serious foreshadowing to consider.
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeAug 2nd 2009
     (6480.79)
    > it is still not acceptable to perform surgery on someone against their will

    There's no evidence at all that it's against their will (although most people are assuming that it's without informed consent).
  4.  (6480.80)
    @Curb:

    An attractive young woman, especially one of the de facto ruling class, looking for willing sexual partners is only going to sleep alone when she wants to.

    Honestly, ever BDSM, D/s event I've been to has at least a handful of women like Sirkka with little crowds of boys and girls flitting about, buying the drinks, soaking up the attention. No need for special powers beside good old human desire.