|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 4:20 pm
This here is a little topic to discuss the formation of State and Province OC's. They're fun to create, but how exactly do we go about making them and what do we base their personalities on? This is a funfun topic to talk about the histories and logic behind their development into exciting noncannon RP characters.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 5:11 pm
All right, I think when building up personifications of Original Characters when states or something, I think the biggest thing to account for is their history and their culture. How do both of these intertwine with each other? Personally, when it comes to seeing OCs as male or female, it really shouldn't matter as long as you give them the reasons of why they act the way they do.
In my opinion, when designing a state-tan, you must mix both it's past and present to make a successful design to play since they're both weaved together. In that sense, as long as long as you keep it in the level of reality? (Aka no unicorn horns, angel wings, and sparkling or something along those lines...) take considerations of how they present themselves socially, and their history... There's no real 'wrong' way to do a state. However, there should be some universal consistencies to each personification that is different to whether you're doing it right or not if you take in account both their present and history correctly.
Example: I often think it should be a given like how Massachusetts should almost always be an intellectual on some level. Or how Texas should be fiercely independent to it being a character strength and flaw. Just because of their cultures and their histories.
I'm not sure if this makes sense, but I think I got the point across.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:13 pm
I agree that state-tans should be based largely on their histories and cultures. I've come to realize that it's impossible to properly base a state-tan on its stereotype because pretty much ALL American stereotypes either lump them in the category of redneck, hippy or a*****e. I think stereotypes should get some consideration but they aren't as nicely defined as those of countries. They seem to be more regional rather than state specific and, more often than not, outdated. (It still boggles my mind that there are some people who think entire states in the south and midwest don't have electricity or running water... Like they're trapped in a magic bubble that cuts them off from the rest of the country and time.) Kitty Chicken Example: I often think it should be a given like how Massachusetts should almost always be an intellectual on some level. Or how Texas should be fiercely independent to it being a character strength and flaw. Just because of their cultures and their histories. Heck yeah! Nothing makes me sadder than when I see a Massachusetts OC who is passive and, well, stupid. Historically, Massachusetts is pretty hardcore and one of the most rebellious states ever. One time I saw someone describe their MA OC as "docile and obedient" and I wanted to die. Hartford convention, people. Hartford Convention. Google it and see that Massachusetts was pretty much the first state to instigate a threat of secession after joining the Union, not South Carolina. There is nothing passive about Massachusetts!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:37 pm
Yeah, pretty much: It doesn't help most stereotypes of the midwest and the south are seen as pretty much backward hicks when this is not always necessarily the case. Mind you, I'm not saying that they can't be living out in the country side or not be a farmer? But to portray them as that so they come off as something less to more 'sensible' states is kind of a huge insult. This is not saying they can't have flaws: they should very well have actual real flaws whether it be arrogance, refusal of help, or something like that. I also noticed another common problem when people create or roleplay states, they often put that character they create and the state on a pedestal of sorts that they possibly can't do wrong or make the wrong decision. I think they should be sympathetic, but you also can realize the actions they do at times are not perfect, they can be in the wrong, and you can't really excuse them. But you should be able to understand them. It's a pretty fine line, if that makes sense. I have even criticisms in writing in fan-fiction that i see a lot, with state-tans OCs too, but I'll continue that in a bit. lol Armelle of the Forest Kitty Chicken Example: I often think it should be a given like how Massachusetts should almost always be an intellectual on some level. Or how Texas should be fiercely independent to it being a character strength and flaw. Just because of their cultures and their histories. Heck yeah! Nothing makes me sadder than when I see a Massachusetts OC who is passive and, well, stupid. Historically, Massachusetts is pretty hardcore and one of the most rebellious states ever. One time I saw someone describe their MA OC as "docile and obedient" and I wanted to die. Hartford convention, people. Hartford Convention. Google it and see that Massachusetts was pretty much the first state to instigate a threat of secession after joining the Union, not South Carolina. There is nothing passive about Massachusetts! I can't see Massachusetts as docile or obedient, throughout the entire history of Massachusetts, they were rebelling or taking responsibility in some shape or form. I honestly think if they're not a degree of being ambitious or bossy, they are not paying attention to the state's history or it's culture for that matter. ( I get similar reactions with Wisconsin if they miss huge details about it's history or it's passive aggressive but still very ambitious justice seeking nature. )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:24 pm
Something I struggle with in the flaws department for making OCs is intelligence. I'm sorry, but there seriously are some states who are historically and culturally notorious for either making bad/comically ridiculous decisions or just not being a shinning beacon of intellect... That doesn't mean they don't have other great qualities, it's just that being a smarty-smart pants isn't always one of them. Sometimes I see people make OCs of these states in particular who appear to be trying TOO HARD to make it seem like they're smarter than/as smart as anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:57 pm
Armelle of the Forest Something I struggle with in the flaws department for making OCs is intelligence. I'm sorry, but there seriously are some states who are historically and culturally notorious for either making bad/comically ridiculous decisions or just not being a shinning beacon of intellect... That doesn't mean they don't have other great qualities, it's just that being a smarty-smart pants isn't always one of them. Sometimes I see people make OCs of these states in particular who appear to be trying TOO HARD to make it seem like they're smarter than/as smart as anyone. Oh yes, I think honestly think not all states are smart as others for the most part. But there are way too many people that make their characters too smart and intelligent, to the point that they're smarter than everyone else in existence. And just because a character is smart, does not mean they're necessarily going to make the right decision always, under all circumstances. However there are many states that fall in the line that do brilliant things then do something absolutely stupid only to do something brilliant again - personally this was a hard thing for me to do when designing Wisconsin because it a has a history of doing that but I looked deeper - it was often manipulated in ways to do those certain decision. So it becomes a case of: intelligent but overly emotional and lacks common sense so it's easily manipulated. Add that in with a mix of it wanting to seek out proper justice and unwillingness to admit they're wrong ... this is a horrible flaw to have. I personally think people should not push the fact they're so smart/beautiful/great in general, it's plain amazing, and Alfred should listen to them, and you bet he does because this is one of his favorite states ever! That ... kind of just makes me not follow the story anymore. Or their rebellious nature actually doesn't get them into trouble or leads them into being questioned in some shape or form. Because let's face it - it's rebellion. lol They're not going to be seen in awe with everyone loving it, especially the person they're rebelling from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:54 pm
Kitty Chicken However there are many states that fall in the line that do brilliant things then do something absolutely stupid only to do something brilliant again - personally this was a hard thing for me to do when designing Wisconsin because it a has a history of doing that but I looked deeper - it was often manipulated in ways to do those certain decision. So it becomes a case of: intelligent but overly emotional and lacks common sense so it's easily manipulated. Add that in with a mix of it wanting to seek out proper justice and unwillingness to admit they're wrong ... this is a horrible flaw to have. I have similar problems with my Tennessee OC. There are so many moments where I think Tennessee is following a set pattern and then suddenly it'll do something that makes no sense at all. Like the whole deal with President Polk... Tennessee didn't vote for him even though he was a Tennessean who ran on a platform which followed EXACTLY what Tennessee wanted to do (which mainly focused on bringing Texas into the Union) and yet the state voted for Henry Clay who was wishy washy on the issues Tennessee wanted. You can search forever and ever but you'll never find a better explanation other than "Tennessee thought Polk was boring and tuned him out. Before he ran for President he'd failed at getting governorship 2-3 times just because his opponent was funny." <-- NO JOKE. I head-desked over this. So I came to the conclusion that Tennessee just randomly does crap for no logical reason. Where other states will sit there and be like "I feel this way because politics/economics/logic" Tennessee will be like "Well, my legislator's mama told him to vote this way... I think I'd better do what she says so he doesn't get in trouble with her." <-- 19th Amendment story. Look it up. It made me a little sad and amused to come to the conclusion that politically Tennessee is a little on the derpy side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:25 pm
Armelle of the Forest Kitty Chicken However there are many states that fall in the line that do brilliant things then do something absolutely stupid only to do something brilliant again - personally this was a hard thing for me to do when designing Wisconsin because it a has a history of doing that but I looked deeper - it was often manipulated in ways to do those certain decision. So it becomes a case of: intelligent but overly emotional and lacks common sense so it's easily manipulated. Add that in with a mix of it wanting to seek out proper justice and unwillingness to admit they're wrong ... this is a horrible flaw to have. I have similar problems with my Tennessee OC. There are so many moments where I think Tennessee is following a set pattern and then suddenly it'll do something that makes no sense at all. Like the whole deal with President Polk... Tennessee didn't vote for him even though he was a Tennessean who ran on a platform which followed EXACTLY what Tennessee wanted to do (which mainly focused on bringing Texas into the Union) and yet the state voted for Henry Clay who was wishy washy on the issues Tennessee wanted. You can search forever and ever but you'll never find a better explanation other than "Tennessee thought Polk was boring and tuned him out. Before he ran for President he'd failed at getting governorship 2-3 times just because his opponent was funny." <-- NO JOKE. I head-desked over this. So I came to the conclusion that Tennessee just randomly does crap for no logical reason. Where other states will sit there and be like "I feel this way because politics/economics/logic" Tennessee will be like "Well, my legislator's mama told him to vote this way... I think I'd better do what she says so he doesn't get in trouble with her." <-- 19th Amendment story. Look it up. It made me a little sad and amused to come to the conclusion that politically Tennessee is a little on the derpy side. Oh yeah, I can honestly believe Tennessee is probably more driven perhaps by whims than actual logic, or whatever it's feeling at the time. Wisconsin I mostly figured out feels this way is intelligent just extremely passionate and borderline fanaticism from statehood and only got 'worse' in neuroticism from there. A reason why I believe this turned out the way it is, is because Wisconsin had a mix when it became a state: first the Yankees who wanted to make the perfect state who were basically radicals, and the Revolution of 1848. So what ultimately happened, was a state came in and was pretty much insulting every slave state and starting fights. I mean ... The Declaration of Defiance, saying the WIsconsin Supreme Court was superior than the U.S. Supreme Court because it did not want to acknowledge the Fugitive Slave Act basically implying - if there is no real justice in the highest court we will uphold it? In addition the John Fox Potter and the Roger Pryor Duel - that never happened but: Quote: ... On April 5, 1860, tensions were mounting as the nation approached civil war. During a heated exchange on the House floor about slavery, Virginia congressman Roger Pryor felt so offended that he challenged Potter to a duel. The Wisconsin lawmaker accepted, and, as the person challenged, had the right to name the weapons and conditions. He specified bowie knives in a closed room. He later explained, "I felt it was a national matter — not any private quarrel — and I was willing to make sacrifices." Pryor's second, however, refused the selection of weapons as "vulgar, barbarous, and inhuman." Potter's second replied that the custom of dueling itself was "barbarous and inhuman." The District of Columbia police arrested both men to keep the peace, and the duel never occurred. Plus Wisconsin was threatening to secede too if Lincoln wasn't elected president. So it's like: for the right reasons, but basically saying they would secede and leave the country, having an actual militia if justice wasn't properly served? Yeah. We got someone well meaning, just ... terribly passionate. And this is just the beginning few examples. These are just the times the state was right - now in the future ... there are many where it's wrong. Very. Very. Wrong. (Hello Red Scare.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:45 am
Kitty Chicken A reason why I believe this turned out the way it is, is because Wisconsin had a mix when it became a state: first the Yankees who wanted to make the perfect state who were basically radicals, and the Revolution of 1848. So what ultimately happened, was a state came in and was pretty much insulting every slave state and starting fights. That sounds almost exactly like colonial Massachusetts' problem. He was founded by Puritans for Puritans to protect the interests of Puritans. They wished to create an ideal, religion based colony that would blend the laws of church and state. The laws were designed to ensure a pure, uncorrupted community by rooting out civil and religious transgressors for punishment. Thus, they created a monster who viewed other religions as a threat to his people and openly persecuted non-conformists in a manner similar to what had caused the Puritans to flee England. Massachusetts was super scary and intense back in the day all because the Puritans thought they were making something so ideal and perfect. It's really ironic that today Massachusetts is one of the most open minded states in the U.S. He goes through a LOT of character development throughout history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 9:50 am
Just to place in my input...I always thought that Hawaii would be a reasonable state to have a personification. Not only does it have a vastly different culture than that of the United States, but it used to be its own country before annexation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:25 am
Armelle of the Forest Kitty Chicken A reason why I believe this turned out the way it is, is because Wisconsin had a mix when it became a state: first the Yankees who wanted to make the perfect state who were basically radicals, and the Revolution of 1848. So what ultimately happened, was a state came in and was pretty much insulting every slave state and starting fights. That sounds almost exactly like colonial Massachusetts' problem. He was founded by Puritans for Puritans to protect the interests of Puritans. They wished to create an ideal, religion based colony that would blend the laws of church and state. The laws were designed to ensure a pure, uncorrupted community by rooting out civil and religious transgressors for punishment. Thus, they created a monster who viewed other religions as a threat to his people and openly persecuted non-conformists in a manner similar to what had caused the Puritans to flee England. Massachusetts was super scary and intense back in the day all because the Puritans thought they were making something so ideal and perfect. It's really ironic that today Massachusetts is one of the most open minded states in the U.S. He goes through a LOT of character development throughout history. Oh yeah, I remember definitely reading about that, when they were trying to make a perfect society like that in a way. Wisconsin and Kansas in particular were brought up in trying to make a perfect society and civilization ... well, it did a number on them in various ways. Aka Wisconsin striving for perfection and being at the top of everything, Kansas being extremely religious and possibly seeing things from a more black and white perspective and self righteousness. Wisconsin's major character development 'happened' with La Follette who is the person who really changed the state for the better. (It was pretty much a hellhole after the Civil War to La Follette) However, the tragedy of the situation is Wisconsin no longer sees him as a constructive statesman who strived for law, order, justice, and for a more democratic social order that he wanted to give rights to everyone. But instead, a messiah like figure who was seen more of a force and perfect in every shape and form. So many try to invoke the 'ghost' of La Follette, to manipulate the state to do what they want. ( I won't get into the delusional point of view that Wisconsin was so convinced he'd win the presidency when it just turned out in 1924 ... yep. Guess which was the only state. ) Mitsuki Horenake Just to place in my input...I always thought that Hawaii would be a reasonable state to have a personification. Not only does it have a vastly different culture than that of the United States, but it used to be its own country before annexation. I'm always pretty much believing that Hawaii definitely had a personification for years since it was it's own country as you stated, and it likely still has one now. I don't know if a younger Hawaii took it's place or not though, or if they are still the same personification just under U.S. Jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:43 am
Kitty Chicken Mitsuki Horenake Just to place in my input...I always thought that Hawaii would be a reasonable state to have a personification. Not only does it have a vastly different culture than that of the United States, but it used to be its own country before annexation. I'm always pretty much believing that Hawaii definitely had a personification for years since it was it's own country as you stated, and it likely still has one now. I don't know if a younger Hawaii took it's place or not though, or if they are still the same personification just under U.S. Jurisdiction. I say that it's the same personification, because the US promoted the Hawaiian culture even when it was taken over. I say it's a woman.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:52 pm
Mitsuki Horenake Kitty Chicken Mitsuki Horenake Just to place in my input...I always thought that Hawaii would be a reasonable state to have a personification. Not only does it have a vastly different culture than that of the United States, but it used to be its own country before annexation. I'm always pretty much believing that Hawaii definitely had a personification for years since it was it's own country as you stated, and it likely still has one now. I don't know if a younger Hawaii took it's place or not though, or if they are still the same personification just under U.S. Jurisdiction. I say that it's the same personification, because the US promoted the Hawaiian culture even when it was taken over. I say it's a woman. Yeah, I'm in this camp about Hawaii myself. I think it would be the same personification through out. Which might actually make Hawaii older than America know next to nothing about Hawaii.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
