Page 4 of 6

Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 8:06 pm
by cougartiger
They could have just TALKED to Raine since she is capable of understanding. It's what I would've done.
Not in this world. At least in the time this page is set, it doesn't matter that dogs are anthro, and obviously sentient. They're still widely considered by humanity in general to be animals.

And in Raine's case, property.
Well, I get that. It's just that my brain works more logically than DCS's.

Which is why the last year of O&M was so painfull to me. But I won't go into that. It's gotten me into trouble bfore. :smile:

Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 11:54 pm
by Æron
[img]
Toooo far

I prefer to be able to browse this forum in public. :?

Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 1:18 am
by Rasputin42x69
Call me a prude all you want, this comic is not the kind of thing I actually want to look at.
This seems to be why you're so miffed at Dana; You're the admin of these forums, where there are a considerable number of people who like this comic (myself included,) or, at the very least, like to poke fun at it, which seems to put you in an awkward position. Amirite?

Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 1:32 am
by Dr. Sticks
I think he mainly doesn't like the fact that this particular page is purposefully unpleasant.

Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 6:24 pm
by nickspoon
This seems to be why you're so miffed at Dana; You're the admin of these forums, where there are a considerable number of people who like this comic (myself included,) or, at the very least, like to poke fun at it, which seems to put you in an awkward position. Amirite?
It's nothing as political as that. You're all quite welcome to like the comic; I have no intention of removing the Raine Dog forum. I don't see how this puts me in an 'awkward position'. I am personally not fond of Raine Dog, but as we are not really a Raine Dog forum I don't think that's necessary.

Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 6:40 pm
by Ibun
I'll put you in an awkward position babby.

Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 3:16 am
by AvestheFox
The link to these forums were removed from O&M for some reason.. I had to google Define Cynical to find my way back =P

I do wonder why the link was removed though...

Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 3:20 am
by Segovia
Check the site forum Simpson got rid of us.

Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 5:51 am
by Chris
May 6, 2009: Update

New comics to come soon. More art, even sooner. Do stay tuned.

Also, since people were bound to notice and ask me about it, yes, I've taken down the link to the old fan forum. I don't blame the moderators, but the atmosphere there had gotten, as will happen on internet forums sometimes, extremely toxic, and I can no longer endorse the place.
He just can't take our critism about his Raine Dog comic. Also, what toxic atmosphere? DC never changed since i first joined here.. Image

We love and miss Ozy and Millie...But not Raine Dog Image

Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 2:08 pm
by Dr. Sticks
DC has changed so much since you joined Chris rofl

Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 12:05 am
by Chris
I've noticed that too, DCS changed waay to much when i joined here.

It's like i'm a curse! Sweet! Image

Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 12:08 am
by Segovia
Join the Unintended Curse club!

Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 12:29 am
by Æron
From Raine Dog's news section.
Also, have recent developments in this story startled you?

You're not alone, of course. And, anyway, they were kind of supposed to; that's kind of the point.

Nearly everyone who's actually written to me has had positive things to say about it; the response, actually, has been extremely gratifying. As I've said, it's a story that's been percolating in my brain for years and I've been working hard at getting it right.

I did warn you it would be darker than my previous work. And, a lot less funny. More complicated, I would say.

As much as it makes me roll my eyes to even have to say this, though, there is one notion I feel like I should respond to.

One person writes:

> There's been some controversy over your most recent storyline, in particular the
> relationship between the protagonists. A lot of people are labelling the strips as
> an advocation for beastiality, and are particularly shocked as this is coming from
> a long-time creator of a more wholesome comic.

I actually have my doubts that "a lot of people" actually hold that opinion, because it seems transparently silly to me. I suspect anyone saying that is the sort of person who, for whatever reason, doesn't like me and feels compelled to "take me down a peg." I've certainly gotten my share of that, and at this point it's little more than background droning to which I pay little attention.

But if anyone actually does honestly worry that I might be "advocating bestiality," let me set your mind at ease: No. I am not doing that.

If anyone really does think that, I have to ask: do you read Nabokov's Lolita and think he's advocating pedophilia? Do you read Dickens's Oliver Twist and think he's advocating selling children on the street, or picking pockets? Do you read Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights and think she's advocating necrophilia? Do you read Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and think she's advocating legalized rape?

In other words, do you go through life constantly assuming that anything that's presented in fiction is a full-throated endorsement of that behavior in real life? I very much doubt you do.

For that matter, since, sadly, not enough people actually read books...do you watch "Family Guy" and think that, because Brian the dog regularly dates, and sleeps with, human women, Seth McFarlane is therefore "advocating bestiality"? Yes, it's "just a cartoon." So is this.

Besides, Jeff and Princess didn't even sleep together, they just kissed. (Well, they technically "slept" together in the literal sense of the word, but that's it.) I thought that was fairly clear. I also thought it was pretty obviously not a good idea for them.

My goal with all this is to explore, more seriously and in more detail than one generally sees, what it would really be like if that old cartoon trope of humans owning sentient talking pets were actually true, because it always struck me that there was something fundamentally disturbing about that. (Could Shaggy have Scooby put down? If so, isn't that sort of...wrong?) In doing so, I'm trying also to explore what makes someone a "person," and what ramifications that has.

So, it's partly metaphor, partly an exploration of a strange cartoon tradition (like what "Watchmen" or "The Incredibles" did with the inherent weirdness of superheroes). What would that world be like, and what does that say about the world we really live in?

Whether I succeed in this, and whether the exercise is worthwhile in the first place, is for the reader to determine, not me. But, to leave out the obvious tension that would exist for an adolescent boy owning an opposite-sex sentient animal, who was also his best friend, would have been to leave an important dimension unexplored.

Later, the notion of animal suffrage will play a role in the plot, and somehow I'm not expecting a flood of letters demanding to know if I actually advocate letting dogs vote.

Frankly, if some people don't get it, that's more than fine with me, because art that absolutely everyone understands tends to be pretty boring and pointless. Something really challenging is always going to inspire anger from some and mockery from others. It actually makes me feel like I'm doing a decent job.

I'm abnormal. I'm a freak. Not only am I willing to acknowledge that, I'm proud of it, and you should be glad I am. Life would be a lot worse if everybody fit the parameters we generally think of as "normal." "Normal" people cause 99% of the trouble in the world and produce 1% of the good ideas and good art, because us freaks are the ones who look at society from enough of a remove to come up with something new. All of us stand on the shoulders of brilliant freaks.

So, here's to my fellow freaks, and here's to everyone who's written me and everyone who's getting something out of this story. Wave your freak flag high.
--
"Normal" people cause 99% of the trouble in the world and produce 1% of the good ideas and good art, because us freaks are the ones who look at society from enough of a remove to come up with something new.
While I agree with the general idea, I think this is a bit of an awkward exaggeration.

Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 12:37 am
by Segovia
I'm speechless, but then again I'm not one of the people that need to be.

Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 12:56 am
by Dr. Sticks
DCS is way too verbose. She tries so pantsless hard to defend herself when she doesn't have to at all. I mean, look at how long her mention on the website about her transexualism is, twice, when the very first thing she says in the mentioning is "I don't think it's really even worth mentioning".

"I told you it wouldn't be happy-go-lucky like OM. And no, those that are bugging me, I'm not 'advocating bestiality.' it's a comic. christ."

that's all she had to say -_-

you'd think that DCS would have learned by now that a bunch of /b/tards really don't care if she explains to them why they're incorrect in acting like they think DCS is saying things she isn't