Difference between revisions of "Talk:1424: En Garde"
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
To clarify, 'Touch' is the term used to indicate that a fencer has scored a valid hit on their opponent. 'Right-of-way' indicates who is awarded the point when both fencers score valid contact during the same unit of 'fencing time' (the length of time between a typical action or reaction in a match, determined by the individual tempo of a bout). I think that covers all of the jargon in this one. | To clarify, 'Touch' is the term used to indicate that a fencer has scored a valid hit on their opponent. 'Right-of-way' indicates who is awarded the point when both fencers score valid contact during the same unit of 'fencing time' (the length of time between a typical action or reaction in a match, determined by the individual tempo of a bout). I think that covers all of the jargon in this one. | ||
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.215|173.245.52.215]] 18:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC) | [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.215|173.245.52.215]] 18:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | Looks like most of the fenching is explained, but the explanation is lacking a description of the dual conversation and most importantly; why is it funny? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.209|199.27.128.209]] 06:16, 23 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 06:16, 23 September 2014
So, what's up. I expected an explanation for this. WHERE IS IT? 108.162.216.53 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- Remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~).
- The explanation will be up when it's up. 108.162.216.72 04:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- Someone, somewhere on Earth, has to be awake, see the comic, come to this page, and write something. Automatic explanations are a long way out of our technological reach. 108.162.216.169 05:21, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
This reminds me of Honest. Cheeselover724 (talk) 05:37, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
I've seen it. :)
For me it describes how in a relationship one person (Fencer 1) wants to engage ("What are you thinking?") but the other person (Fencer 2) sees it as an attack and is guarded and unwilling to engage (hence they never raise their foil). As Fencer 2 says 'No matter how long we know each other', I'd guess that this pattern of behaviour is often repeated and that they are destined to continue, because neither are willing to change their 'engagement' strategy; i.e. Fencer 2's defensiveness and Fencer 1's direct approach. Perhaps they should play chess? :)
The 'Touch!' is Fencer 1 saying "well, if you don't play, I've won!", but it is hollow and 'Nope, I sighed and stared...' reminds me of how some people use silence / brevity of response to avoid talking: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alogia (specifically "People can revert to alogia as a way of reverse psychology, or avoiding questions.").
It's a beautiful cartoon, so melancholic and kinda sad.
The4thv (talk) 06:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Isn't it 'touché' rather than 'touch' in the title-text? 173.245.62.108 14:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
"Touché" is an acknowledgement by the person who has received a hit, not an assertion by his/her opponent. A literal translation of "touché" is "touched" rather than "touch" so perhaps the use of English "touch!" is purposeful, a suggestion that the pair stop fencing and use physical touch to re-establish an open relationship. In that sense, the second person declines to drop his/her defenses and "trumps" the call for intimacy with a passive-aggressive emotional gesture, and a meta-comment pointing out to the first person (and incidentally to us readers) that the gesture occurred and that it has "priority." Taibhse (talk) 16:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
To clarify, 'Touch' is the term used to indicate that a fencer has scored a valid hit on their opponent. 'Right-of-way' indicates who is awarded the point when both fencers score valid contact during the same unit of 'fencing time' (the length of time between a typical action or reaction in a match, determined by the individual tempo of a bout). I think that covers all of the jargon in this one. 173.245.52.215 18:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Looks like most of the fenching is explained, but the explanation is lacking a description of the dual conversation and most importantly; why is it funny? 199.27.128.209 06:16, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
