Why Good Doggies Are Also Bad Doggies
(And What That Means For MyHouse.wad)
There are two dogs in MyHouse.wad. One's a sweet, harmless puppy, and the other's a relentless, deadly hellhound. Both of these dogs reside in what's commonly known as the Brutalist house, a vast concrete structure that shifts in size from small to large as you explore it.
The smaller dog, quite naturally, provides little in the way of an obstacle, and indeed its presence is surprisingly uplifting in such a bleak, sad game. It's the big, two-headed brute, the "Bad Doggy", that aims to prevent your progres; it's swift, deals a lot of damage, and takes a lot of firepower to subdue. It rules the space it resides in with an iron jaw, and will not take no for an answer. Your only options are to avoid it, or to kill it.
But there's a catch - kill the Bad Doggy, and the Good Doggy also dies. And while this does open up a loophole to allow you to deal with the Bad Doggy with no risk - killing the Good Doggy yourself - the fact remains that an innocent creature's life has to end for your journey to become easier.
Of course, you know this, and likely opted to "spare" the Bad Doggy so that the Good Doggy could join you on the beach at the end. And yes, the sight of our canine friend napping by the waves does help to complete the sense of a "good" ending - or at least, a "peaceful" one.
But... have you ever stopped to consider what this actually means? How, rather than being a throwaway device to make you feel sad, or a lazy reference to Tom's fear of dogs, this "Good Doggy"/"Bad Doggy" actually serves to reinforce the core message of MyHouse.wad?
Consider these dogs again... or rather, consider this dog. Singular.
There is one dog in MyHouse.wad. Sometimes it is a Good Doggy, playful and diligent and affirming to our wellbeing. Other times, it is a Bad Doggy, aggressive and domineering and striking fear into our hearts. Kill one, the other dies. You cannot separate the two. Where the Good Doggy goes, the Bad Doggy must inevitably follow.
How do you stop a Bad Doggy from being a Bad Doggy? You can't, not entirely. A Bad Doggy is bad only in the context of its owner's view of it. A doggy that shreds the furniture, is overly-aggressive in its interactions with its owners, jealously guards spaces and important objects, is deemed bad because of its actions. When it exhibits behaviours that are more paletable to the humans that care for it, it becomes a Good Doggy.
As a child, Tom was scared of his family's pet dog. Viewed through the lens of a terrified young boy, a dog that might be only the most loving and attentive creature, excited to play with someone similar to it in size, may appear vicious and unrelenting, causing fear and injury with its exuberent actions and disregard for its own strength. These experiences, whatever form they might have taken, left a visceral impact on Tom, as we see in his sketchbook containing the multiple-headed hellhound.
What happened to that dog? Was it ever rehabilitated? Did its status as a Good Doggy outweigh the trauma it potentially inflicted upon Tom's psyche? Or... did something else happen to it? Were its actions deemed too harmful, too Bad, to continue living with its owners?
We can only speculate on these points, but they do serve to provide an answer to the above question on how to stop Bad Doggies - you get rid of them. Give them away, abandon them, put them to sleep. Problem solved. But that doesn't just remove the Bad Doggy from the picture - it also eliminiates the Good Doggy that can provide comfort and companionship, as well as any potential future joy that same doggy could bring to its owners.
Which brings us back to the beach, and our Good Doggy having a nice nap there. Of course, I'm sure you've realised, it's also the Bad Doggy.
But what exactly does that mean for our "perfect", "happy", "peaceful" ending? Are we going to be savaged on the beach the moment we let our guard down, having fought so hard for the happiness we were so desparate to recover? Of ocurse not. But consider what its potential presence means for the future.
The Good and Bad Doggy are inexorably linked. To have the potential for joy and companionship and love, you must also accept the possibility of pain, conflict and loss. For better or worse, the bad has to come with the good - either you have both, or you have nothing at all. That's why there's no dog at the fake beach - that ending represents attempting to escape bad things altogether, but the world that results is unsatisfying and devoid of meaning. The reason things hurt so much is precisely because of the joy that came before it. Denying pain and sorrow is no better than giving up on life.
To live a meaningful life, we sometimes have to accept people as they come, warts and all.
Happiness, as Steve opines at the end of his journal, has to be fought for. But the fight doesn't stop just because you won once. Having resolved to come to terms with the world as it is, the world where your dearest friend has died, you therefore choose to re-enact that battle every single day. Some days it's easier. Some days, it's torture. That's what being alive is all about. That's what makes the moments of peace, the moments when Good Doggies really are Good Doggies and nothing more, all worth it in the end.
Thank you for reading :)
669 notes
·
View notes
With all due respect, I don’t think using non-canon makeup looks and official art proves your point very well when the initial observations are about his canon makeup. Makeup-inspired looks are going to take artistic liberties in order to look interesting, and what works well as makeup doesn’t always look good as art and vice versa. Not to mention I don’t think the purpose of commissioning fanartists should be to force them to be as close to canon as possible, but rather to showcase their own creative takes on the character.
Color picks from BTS photos:
Keep in mind I was color picking from the greenest-looking areas, and they still all primarily show up under the brownish or yellowish spectrum. I know color theory can get weird but even to the naked eye I truly don’t see how these colors don’t appear greenish, yellowish brown as opposed to straight up green.
The youtooz design is actually green but with unmistakeably yellow highlights as well.
Ignoreitforever’s art (the person who now collaborates with Joan, and who presumably did not approach this project as a previous fanartist, so I’m inclined to take their artistic rendering the most to heart in terms of ‘canoninity’) is greener but still in the muddy yellowish and brownish green territory.
I honestly wasn’t trying to start an argument by pointing out that green, brown, and yellow have always been the shades used for Janus’s makeup in episodes. That’s simply true. In fact, the brown used in the grwm video is more of a greenish brown. As I said previously, it’s not easy to get the same exact shade match and same exact look every time you do makeup the way it is when you do fanart. From my observations, it also seems like Quil separates the colors more by using the yellow to highlight, the green to contour, and the greenish-brown to blend (probably why the youtooz was green with yellow highlights), where as Talyn applied the different colors in patches and blended them together more. As a result, the new makeup look may appear more yellow because the yellow shade is on the high points of the face and not being dulled as much by the darker colors. Nothing wrong with personally disliking that stylistic choice (I have mixed feelings about it as it suits his color motif better but also makes his scales look more faded), but I do think it’s overkill to act like they’re just going willy-nilly and pulling random colors out of their ass with no regard for consistency.
Perhaps we can put aside our differences and simply agree that the flesh-toned to black mouthline is a major downgrade?
I posted this on my Instagram, but I am so upset that I need to share
*Edit: Why is his mouth line just black eyeliner???
59 notes
·
View notes