Home » Tuck Talk » Chapter by Chapter » Tuck #110
Tuck #110 [message #3860] Thu, 14 July 2005 11:58 Go to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
Coming soon... and I just wanted to be the first one to post here for this one. *evil chuckle*


Ellen
nosig
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3861] Thu, 14 July 2005 13:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
So, I will now have a reason to put Harry Potter down every 15 minutes and check my computer. I think *evil chuckle* is particularly appropriate here.
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3862] Thu, 14 July 2005 14:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lurker
Messages: 197
Registered: May 2004
Senior Member
Ellen Hayes wrote on Thu, 14 July 2005 08:58

Coming soon... and I just wanted to be the first one to post here for this one. *evil chuckle*


The Donald may have mastered (so he says) The Art of the Deal, however, you've appeared to master the art of the Tease ... Smile
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3866] Sat, 16 July 2005 10:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
sluggo wrote on Fri, 15 July 2005 20:17

I'm guessing she just wants all of us tied to our computers for the weekend as part of some insidious plot.


Sluggo, you wound me. *sniffle* If I was committing an insidious plot, where could I possibly get minions of some loyalty... except here? So you'd already know about the insidious plot (or at least your part - Need-To-Know applies) that I was committing on the REST of the world.

Either today or tomorrow morning/USA.


Ellen
nosig
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3867] Sat, 16 July 2005 14:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
I'm sure Sluggo was just assuming that you didn't want to tip your hand too early, so you couldn't tell us anything in advance of the orders coming out.

OtherEric, Loyal Minion, anxiously awaiting instructions.
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3870] Sun, 17 July 2005 12:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
Well, gee, since you put it so nicely...

TUCK'S UP!

As of this moment, the zip file is uploading - 2Mb through 56k = very long time - and the rest is up for your perusal.

More comments make writing of next episode go faster, you know...


Ellen
nosig
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3871] Sun, 17 July 2005 13:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
I can see why it took longer to get this one ready, lots of details to co-ordinate. Debbie is such a manipulator! Brian and Sarah have talent at it and Bill and Mike understand the theory but Deb has the skills. Heh.

Mike getting sick has to have a dramatic purpose and I'm wondering just what Ellen will do with it. A good reason to have Mike in the house while somebody shows up?

Brian's maturity advances are very well done and very believable. Believability is one of Ellen's strengths and the reality of this episode is amazing.

Looking forward to 111. Smile

- Erin
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3872] Sun, 17 July 2005 14:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
Erin Halfelven wrote on Sun, 17 July 2005 18:38

Looking forward to 111. Smile


"Gee, Ellen, why do you think people are ungrateful when you put out an episode?"

Less than TWO HOURS after I post ONE...


Ellen
nosig
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3873] Sun, 17 July 2005 14:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
I'm going to need to re-read the last several chapters to try and really comment on this one. There is a definite sense that things are starting to really happen again, after the last few. Which were good, but felt like they were being written for the story as a whole rather than on their own. Absolutlely nothing wrong with that, but it did make them a bit harder to talk about. This was the most satisfying chapter in quite a while. Thank you, Ellen.

Update: I realized upon re-reading this that it sounds like I'm dumping on other recent chapters. That's not what I meant to do. I'll re-read them all and try and and get some more coherent comments going. In some ways, the last several chapters have felt like one enormous chapter, split up into several parts. The newest episode feels like the end of this giant chapter, and that means it works better on it's own- but when I go back, it should also snap the earlier parts into place as parts of the whole story.

[Updated on: Sun, 17 July 2005 14:33]

icon6.gif  Re: Tuck #110 [message #3874] Sun, 17 July 2005 16:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hart
Messages: 16
Registered: October 2004
Location: New Orleans, LA
Junior Member

Not so much ungrateful as anticipatory, I would think. Ahhhh, it was definitely a great read. Debbie definitely is a sneaky wench, quick changes of scene driving the pace.

I particularly liked the germ warfare the Boyz practiced. -g-

-r
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3875] Sun, 17 July 2005 16:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
That IS gratitude. Smile You did such a good job with 110 of course I'm looking forward to 111!

Thanks for posting, If I forgot to say so, I took an hour out of the morning to read it twice and will probably read it twice more this week. I really liked the Brian bits, a *lot*.

- Erin
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3876] Sun, 17 July 2005 22:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Eleen, I'm only part way thru, but I just hit the bit with Brian doing the bike research.

I suspect the source he was checking was *conservative*. I recall reference in an article during Vietname that referred to either 1000 pounds or "one ton" as the load they sometimes managed on those bikes.

I boggled a bit, then I thought about late 40s/early 50s era Schwinn bike I had. And recalled a friends tale of having to bail when his bike hit a patch of gravel on a turn. The bike went over the edge, he didn't. It went down a several hundred foot slope with minimal damage (as in he could ride it home, once he dragged it back up to the road). Those things were so overbuilt it wasn't funny.

I'm looking forward to seeing where Brain (and *Bill*) go with that iodea if they ever do it. It'll *greatly* increase their carrying capacity.
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3877] Sun, 17 July 2005 22:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Ellen Hayes wrote on Sun, 17 July 2005 11:13

Erin Halfelven wrote on Sun, 17 July 2005 18:38

Looking forward to 111. Smile


"Gee, Ellen, why do you think people are ungrateful when you put out an episode?"

Less than TWO HOURS after I post ONE...



Ya gotta make allowances for the cravings of addicts.... Smile
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3879] Mon, 18 July 2005 00:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
Brooke wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 03:43

I suspect the source he was checking was *conservative*. I recall reference in an article during Vietname that referred to either 1000 pounds or "one ton" as the load they sometimes managed on those bikes.


A thousand pounds, on two wheels, on paths which were occasionally dirt trails? Pushed by one under-nourished peasant? Up hills? Either your memory or the source you are quoting is, I believe, exceedingly wrong.

Source: "Secrets Of The Viet Cong" by J.W. McCoy lists a 'standard bicycle porter's load' as 150lbs (and twelve miles per day) on page 56.

Source: "The Bicycle In Wartime: An Illustrated History" by Jim Fitzpatrick, pp.163-188... in particular, p.169: "The weights that the porters pushed were immense, estimates ranging up to 600 pounds. However, the most common weight cited, both by Vietnamese and westerners, is about 200 kilograms, or 440 pounds."

Those are the two I could find quickest in my house...

I can conceive - barely - of a thousand-pound load on a bicycle, and someone being able to push it, but not on a dirt road and not up (or down) a slope and the pusher had best be in good condition. And Ghu help the porter if that monster falls OVER...


Ellen
nosig
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3880] Mon, 18 July 2005 00:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
I suspect the higher loads were slung between a pair of bikes. But consider that they used them to move (broken down into pieces) *artillery* upon at least one occasion. Even a *small* howitzer has some rather heavy pieces.

Yeah, it'd probably take several people. And falling over would be "not good". But dirt, with the old style "balloon" tires will support a fairly heavy load.

Assume a 1" wide by 6" long contact area for each tire. With a pair of biks a couple feet apart, that's 24 square inches. 1000 lbs gives only 42 lbs/sq.in.

When I'm on "tip toe" (ie, just the ball of my foot) on *one* foot the ground loading is quite similar.

So as long as it isn't *too* muddy.

Going up or downhil. I'd want *lots* of ropes and people belaying them. On the flat? The hard parts would be starting and stopping.

Oh yeah, mountain bike tires give good traction if you are pedalling. But for a pushed or pulled load, you want "smoother" tires (like the old balloon tires) because that reduces *friction*. Those "bumps" that constituter the tread get harder to move on even a smooth surface as the load goes higher.
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3881] Mon, 18 July 2005 01:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
sluggo wrote on Sun, 17 July 2005 20:52

The bicycle thing has me a little confused. I can understand Brian thinking about it, what else is he going to think about in math. I can understand Bill and Brian's discussion. It is something cool that goes along with all the other survivalist stuff that they do. My problem with it is why is Bill so into it? I mean if they need to get out of town quickly, they are taking a car. If they do leave town with Tuck in this condition, they aren't going camping. They are going to go to another town with a hospital. Worst case they go to Long Island. Again not a place for a bike. I mean its kinda neat and all, but Tuck dosen't want to be dragged through the neighborhood on a bike when he can bearly move. If they are that worried that Brian will have to move Tuck, teach him to drive Tuck's car. He only needs to get far enough to pickup Mike.


You fail to understand the mindset here.

"Bugging out" isn't just relocating to another city. That's *way* too easy to trace. Ditto for cars. Cars have to use roads, and are *easily* spotted from the air (especially now that even news choppers have FLIR gear).

They "have" to be able to disappear into the *countryside*. To get to a semi-wildreness area (which may involve use of cars) and then disappear for weeks at a time.

This is something they "expect" to be necessary iun the future if things go wrong.

So the bike idea suddenly has them going from "can't haul a sick person" to "can do so, with acceptable difficulty". Dunno what they'd do about oxygen for Tuck, but other than that, they'd be in fairly good shape until either he got better or they ran out of drugs he needed.

Tuck 64 Tucknical Difficulties


"So how long can you stay out?" he asked. "On the trail, I mean.
You said that was a consideration."
"Longest so far is two weeks, but we had to cache some food and
resupply after about eight days. That was, ah," I thought about it.
"Three years ago. I think."
"Good lord," Travis prayed.
"With about two pounds of food a day, plus a bit of things like
soap and toothpaste..." I shrugged. "Forever, in that sense."
Which was, of course, the point.



*That* is the way they think.
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3884] Mon, 18 July 2005 03:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BubbleEntity  is currently offline BubbleEntity
Messages: 28
Registered: August 2004
Junior Member
sluggo wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 15:52


The bicycle thing has me a little confused. I can understand Brian thinking about it, what else is he going to think about in math. I can understand Bill and Brian's discussion. It is something cool that goes along with all the other survivalist stuff that they do. My problem with it is why is Bill so into it? I mean if they need to get out of town quickly, they are taking a car. If they do leave town with Tuck in this condition, they aren't going camping.



um, cars are traceable, they are relitivly easy to get people to look for, and those people don't nessercerly have to know the real reasion why, if you are smart/sneaky enough

*hopefuly* they are overacting ( and i am willing to bet they would agree with that last bit of remark ) but they are not willing to take the chance. The problem is the culture that has developed both in and around McAllen. Nickerson might be blameable for a large part of it, but not all, culture like that spills out of whatever containment the school envronment provides for it ( rather like mould realy ) and unless the local community envroment is either matching or accepting to it, it would get pressure placed on the internal "adjudicators" ( read: staff of the school ) of that culture, to bring it back into line with the "values" of the community in which it is placed, this can be for good or ill of the people within that culture overall.
This means that the Tuckers, are not ruling out a kind of gorrilla war senareo, and i hate to say it, but, " if you can't find me, you can't hit me"

Quote:

They are going to go to another town with a hospital. Worst case they go to Long Island.


um, big no, if you know the channels to go though and the questions to ask, finding someone in a hospital, is even easier than finding a car, if they wanted to leave, they would be wanting to dissapear. full stop.
they might take the car long enough to get out of town and then ditch it and hump out on foot, and then yes, a bicycle ( esp a bicycle modified to carry wounded) would be a very great help

Re: Tuck #110 [message #3885] Mon, 18 July 2005 05:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rachel.greenham  is currently offline rachel.greenham
Messages: 290
Registered: November 2002
Location: Bristol, UK
Senior Member
sluggo wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 07:10

What kind of event would have to happen for them to try something as risky as trying to transport Tuck in his condition overland and into the wilderness? If they were trying to completely hide for a number of days/weeks they don't have enough oxygen with them to last that long. They still would need to come back for it. If they were hiding from someone with the resources to track them in their cars, they would be able to track them whenever they went back to get Tuck a refill. And are they going to just kidnap Dr. Treble? She might enjoy the camping, but this is going over the line. She wouldn't have any part of it.

Or is there some deep dark family secret that we don't know about? Was Sarah the second gunman or something? Is that why they need all this stuff prepared?

While I'm all for being prepared, this seems extreme and/or dangerous to me.




Apocalypse anxiety. They probably all, with the possible exception of Sarah, whose upbringing we don't know enough about, grew up being programmed with a conviction and dread that the world is going to end soon and it's incumbent on them to be prepared to be among the chosen few to survive.

Take the Second Coming and the Last Trump out of that equation and you need a world-ending scenario to replace it or there's a vacuum. NBC (Nuclear/Biological/Chemical) catastrophes fill the void nicely, as do slightly less apocalyptic scenarios like a second US civil war or a breakdown of society due to purely economic catastrophe. All of which can be prepared for to some extent by performing concrete - and therefore comforting - actions. Beats praying.

Their usual state of equilibrium is founded on the secure sense that they can up-sticks at a moment's notice. When one of the family is too ill to move, that paralyses them. Anxiety and vulnerability. As per Bill's overreaction to Cheddar's nocturnal adventures earlier in the chapter.

Brian's idea with the bikes is a comfort. Knowing they can do that gives them a sense of security. Which, I think, is why Bill latches onto it so strongly.

[Updated on: Mon, 18 July 2005 05:32]


Rachel
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3886] Mon, 18 July 2005 08:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sir Lee  is currently offline Sir Lee
Messages: 440
Registered: October 2003
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Senior Member
Um, yeah, Rachel's point kinda hit the money.

Another reasons they might be worried about having to "bail out," beyond end-of-the-world scenarios, might include worry that the situation *could* escalate to a point in which one or more family members (Mike counts as family here, by the way) gets seriously in trouble with the law -- say, by killing one of the aggressors. This family is *NOT* going to quietly let one of its members be arrested and wait for trial in lockup; they will disappear, at least for a time, while non-compromised friendlies (lawyers, the Johanssons, the Trebles...) do the neccessary steps to ensure long-term welfare (anything from ensuring the jeopardized member can at least await trial at home to leaving the country altogether).

The bicycle thing, and the midnight scene with the alarms, are mostly to let us know a bit more about Bill and Brian's current mindset than anything else. At least, I hope so. If they DO ever have real reasons to bail out, it means that this story has changed WAY beyond teenage relationships and school bullying degenerated into beating -- it has gone the way of Columbine and Waco. I don't know about you guys, but I still have hopes the situation has peaked just about now, and should start to improve slowly in the future.

We now have at least two more families (besides the Tuckers, the Johanssons and maybe Dan' and George's) actively concerned about the situation: James' and Kelly's parents. There may be others we don't know about. The pressure group is beginning to gather momentum.

Another interesting situation still developing, that wasn't commented upon, was about the posters. Mike & Co. haven't posted them last night, because they were too tired; but they will probably do it again next night (plus Brian and Jill, minus Tuck and Mike). Sarah is beginning to worry that the propaganda campaign may be getting out of control -- she will probably try to get Debbie and Dan to report to her in the near future.

But the real interesting part is that the cheerleaders (who have already been considered as possible sources of the posters, in the students' grapevine) are considering doing their own posters. Now, this has a LOT of potential for blowing in their faces. For one thing, I doubt they are NEARLY as sneaky as Dan and George; so they will probably get caught spreading their posters, and end up getting blamed for Dan's posters -- in the students' eyes at least, if not by the school.

For another thing, I wonder about the *content* of the posters they will do. Unless there's some good spin-doctor embryo among them, they may go with platitudes like "support your cheerleaders -- they are the school spirit" things. Now, with people already annoyed at them and the jocks in general, after Dan's and Debbie's efforts, this could COMPOUND the annoyance towards them.

Mike's flu could have any number of reasons in Ellen's mind; from just being a normal consequence of overextending himself, to being a way for having Mike at home at some future point, to *not* having Mike doing the night mission thing. One non-obvious consequence: Brian and Jill will do work together -- it will probably the first time they even TALKED to each other beyond "hi". Jill is a character who has been steadily growing closer to Tuck in a number of ways; could this be a first step for her becoming familiar with the rest of the family too?

I'm a little surprised that nobody remembered to tell Rachel about the attack; she may not be that close to the others, but she IS a friend, and a lot of people (Mike, the parentals, Debbie at least) know her and where she lives. Chalk that up to an oversight in times of stress.

Sir Lee


Don't call me Shirley. You will surely make me surly.
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3887] Mon, 18 July 2005 09:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
rachel.greenham wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 10:26

They probably all, with the possible exception of Sarah, whose upbringing we don't know enough about, grew up being programmed with a conviction and dread that the world is going to end soon and it's incumbent on them to be prepared to be among the chosen few to survive.


Actually, it doesn't require this extremity of thinking. All it takes is: 1) admitting the possibility that a catastrophe could happen; 2) realizing what you would need in the event of such a catastrophe; 3) being willing to devote the resources ahead of time to prepare against that catastrophe.
[iterate per catastrophe]

The Tuckers are a heavy thinker family, so 1 & 2 aren't difficult for them; Bill's business has done well enough that they can do a lot in #3 without paying an unacceptable cost in other areas of their life.

In the exceedingly unlikely event that some of the worse scenarios happen, Bill and Sarah do not want to be sitting around going "Gee, if we'd only prepared for this when the world wasn't broken..." and watching their children die.

Anyone who has voluntary (non-legally-required) insurance is thinking similarly, though not to the extent that the Tuckers do.


Ellen
nosig
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3888] Mon, 18 July 2005 12:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rachel.greenham  is currently offline rachel.greenham
Messages: 290
Registered: November 2002
Location: Bristol, UK
Senior Member
Ellen Hayes wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 14:21

rachel.greenham wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 10:26

They probably all, with the possible exception of Sarah, whose upbringing we don't know enough about, grew up being programmed with a conviction and dread that the world is going to end soon and it's incumbent on them to be prepared to be among the chosen few to survive.


Actually, it doesn't require this extremity of thinking. All it takes is: 1) admitting the possibility that a catastrophe could happen; 2) realizing what you would need in the event of such a catastrophe; 3) being willing to devote the resources ahead of time to prepare against that catastrophe.
[iterate per catastrophe]


The lady doth protest too much, methinks. Twisted Evil

I stand by my theory. Wink The pattern's too strong. The size of the financial and emotional investment, the strength of the conditioning laid on the kids, weighed against the realistic likelihood of the catastrophe, tells its own story.

Of course it's rationalisable in logical terms, otherwise they'd question it more themselves. It's proportionate to their level of anxiety, but in actual fact it's a pretty paranoid response. You've already described other characters being somewhat weirded out by it, and let's face it, the Tuckers aren't slow to admit their own paranoia in an ironic tone.

But there's a price to be borne by children brought up to be soldier-homesteaders of a post-catastrophe world. If the catastrophe happens, yes, they'll be the survivors, if there are any, and they'll fulfil that destiny, they'll have their apotheosis; but if the catastrophe doesn't happen... When can they rest? When can they be free of fear?

Can't say I'm comfortable with the rising paramilitarism in the Tuck stories. I agree with Sir Lee:

Sir Lee wrote

If they DO ever have real reasons to bail out, it means that this story has changed WAY beyond teenage relationships and school bullying degenerated into beating -- it has gone the way of Columbine and Waco. I don't know about you guys, but I still have hopes the situation has peaked just about now, and should start to improve slowly in the future.


Quite. To the extent that it adds colour to the characters, ok, but to the extent that it might make them too out-there extreme to be identified with any more, I worry. Smile It's certainly not what keeps me reading.


Rachel
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3889] Mon, 18 July 2005 12:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
rachel.greenham wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 02:26

As per Bill's overreaction to Cheddar's nocturnal adventures earlier in the chapter.


Actually, that *wasn't* an over reaction.

Someone in the family was attacked. It's not at all hard to find out where the family lives. You hear breaking glass in the middle of the night and you taske steps...

Having heard what sounded like someone walking around on the ground floor of the house while I was alone and upstairs, shortly *after* the home had been burgled while we were asleep, I've been there.

In my case, it was also a cat. It's *amazing* how loudly a cat can walk. Smile

Re: Tuck #110 [message #3890] Mon, 18 July 2005 12:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
Besides the strain he's been under, Mike getting sickj *could* involve some feedback from Tuck.

And oh Lord...

It's been *firmly* established in previous chapters that if Mike gets sick, the bug is *nasty*.

It's a respiratory bug, and Tuck is really vulnerable to those right now. And Mike has been in close proximity to Tuck...

Ouch.
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3891] Mon, 18 July 2005 13:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
rachel.greenham wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 09:34

The lady doth protest too much, methinks. Twisted Evil

I stand by my theory. Wink The pattern's too strong. The size of the financial and emotional investment, the strength of the conditioning laid on the kids, weighed against the realistic likelihood of the catastrophe, tells its own story.


Ah. That's where you are making the common "mistake". It's not the "likelihood of the catastrophe" that you measure against. It's also the *consequences* of the catastrophe.

"Dead" is a rather severe consequence, and worth investing some money and effort in avoiding, even if what you are avoiding isn't too likely.

The financial investment *for that family* isn't that big. The emotional investment may not be as big as you think.

rachel.greenham wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 09:34

Of course it's rationalisable in logical terms, otherwise they'd question it more themselves. It's proportionate to their level of anxiety, but in actual fact it's a pretty paranoid response. You've already described other characters being somewhat weirded out by it, and let's face it, the Tuckers aren't slow to admit their own paranoia in an ironic tone.


It's only paranoia if there aren't really people out to get you.

The Tuckers are operating from basic postulates that *differ* from those of most folks.

And one of the primary ones seems to be "the world is a dangerous place". Another is "you can't count on strangers for help".

And that's why *Tuck* thinks other people are weird/stupid so often.

rachel.greenham wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 09:34

But there's a price to be borne by children brought up to be soldier-homesteaders of a post-catastrophe world. If the catastrophe happens, yes, they'll be the survivors, if there are any, and they'll fulfil that destiny, they'll have their apotheosis; but if the catastrophe doesn't happen... When can they rest? When can they be free of fear?


They seem to rest just fine most of the time. And their levels of fear aren't all that higher either. Except when it is *justified*.

That's another reason it's not paranoia. They are *cautious*, not *scared*.

Taking precautions (which is what all that gear and training is about) isn't the same as being scared. Instead it's about being *aware* of potential threats and taking steps to be ready for them.

As Ellen said, it's *not* that different from buying insurance.

rachel.greenham wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 09:34

Can't say I'm comfortable with the rising paramilitarism in the Tuck stories.


I see no evidence of a rise. It's been pretty constant since it first showed up. And it *isn't* "paramilitarism" any more than the Boy Scouts are paramilitry. *Less* so in fact.

Military gear and some military procedures are useful for some things, which is why Tuck & co swipe those parts. But they don't have the hierarchical stuff that goes along with it.

Does the fact I own gear that was made for miltary use make *me* "paramilitary"? Or does it mean that I could get well tested and proven stuff cheaply?

What you are seeing is just the stuff that was either outright stasted or else *implicit* in things that hand been stated being put into use.

Don't confuse the Tuckers with the "survivalist nuts" that were so frequent in the US news years back. Many of those were both paramilitary and paranoid. And frankly, looking for an excuse to be self-important.

The *real* survivalists just quietly make sure they've got their emergency supplies, and if they can afford such and live someplace that could get nasty, make sure the cabin in the country/mountains/whatever is ready.
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3896] Thu, 21 July 2005 07:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Sir Lee wrote on Mon, 18 July 2005 05:33

Mike's flu could have any number of reasons in Ellen's mind; from just being a normal consequence of overextending himself, to being a way for having Mike at home at some future point, to *not* having Mike doing the night mission thing.

...and I can't help thinking that the most likely reason to keep Mike out of Dan's van tonight, storywise, is that they're about to get caught. (With Brian, the lookout, escaping?)

I know Debbie doesn't want people thinking clearly about this. But why would anybody accuse the cheerleaders of putting up misogynist posters?

Eric
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3897] Thu, 21 July 2005 15:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lurker
Messages: 197
Registered: May 2004
Senior Member
Eric wrote on Thu, 21 July 2005 04:00

...and I can't help thinking that the most likely reason to keep Mike out of Dan's van tonight, storywise, is that they're about to get caught. (With Brian, the lookout, escaping?)
Eric

Alternatively, Brian "earns his bones" with Tuck's crew by bailing them out at a precarious moment where they might get caught. He now becomes a fully trusted member...
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3978] Fri, 29 July 2005 05:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
The exchange between Paul Grant and Gina "Sh-something" seemed interesting. Apparently Gina is second degree of separation: she's new at McAllen, so she's presumably somebody's Little Sister, which got her to the Tucker house for support last night even though she doesn't know Tuck.

Since we haven't encountered her before, she may have come with Ginger or Ellen (or with a girlfriend of Book's, if he has one -- not Donna, from the mall -- who's a junior at McAllen) rather than with one of the Pack. Other possibilities, I guess, are that she's a good friend of one of the Pack's Little Sisters (or a platonic friend of Matt or Bob, for that matter), and/or someone who hangs out with the Pack at McAllen at lunchtime.

Anyway, in the present situation, are the Tuckers taking a risk by including someone like Gina on their list of allies at school? Should they be looking for more people like her or trying to avoid them?

Eric
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3980] Fri, 29 July 2005 10:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Amy!  is currently offline Amy!
Messages: 76
Registered: May 2005
Location: RTP NC
Member
Eric wrote on Fri, 29 July 2005 05:13

The exchange between Paul Grant and Gina "Sh-something" seemed interesting. Apparently Gina is second degree of separation: she's new at McAllen, so she's presumably somebody's Little Sister, which got her to the Tucker house for support last night even though she doesn't know Tuck.


I think you're overreading Gina's comments. She was just being cautious.

Quote:

Since we haven't encountered her before, she may have come with Ginger or Ellen (or with a girlfriend of Book's, if he has one -- not Donna, from the mall -- who's a junior at McAllen) rather than with one of the Pack. Other possibilities, I guess, are that she's a good friend of one of the Pack's Little Sisters (or a platonic friend of Matt or Bob, for that matter), and/or someone who hangs out with the Pack at McAllen at lunchtime.


Err, no. Kim. She's Gina Schaeffer (full name given in the thanks at the bottom of tuck 76; mentioned in tuck 83 as well, and later, I think). Kim's little, Gina. Not too many degrees of separation at all.

Quote:

Anyway, in the present situation, are the Tuckers taking a risk by including someone like Gina on their list of allies at school? Should they be looking for more people like her or trying to avoid them?

Eric


Interesting question. They included all the littles. That says something (like, it implies that they assume incoming students are without the taint of original sin? *laugh*). That's a much less well-vetted group than just Da Boyz and The Pack.

Question: what do you mean by "like Gina"? We don't know much about her, although closer reading may show more places where she's shown up.

Amy!
Re: Tuck #110 [message #3986] Sat, 30 July 2005 06:49 Go to previous message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
Oops. Did my word search on the story text as "whole word"; oddly, the only time she's been actually mentioned by name in the narrative is the following:
*** 09:54 24 Aug

..."Gina's really a nice kid, so she wouldn't fit in with that bunch of disease-ridden backstabbing whores anyway," Kim sighed.

...which didn't show up because of the apostrophe-s.

(We know she's not Gina "from my school" that Valerie encountered at Kings Island. We don't know whether she's the Gina who got the news about the cheerleaders' arrest from someone named Melody. Those are the only other references to "Gina" that I've found.)

Anyway, we don't know that Tuck's ever met her -- the comment above was at a Sunday breakfast -- or vice versa; she wasn't on the Field Day team or at Tuck's party.

My question about "people like her" was the same one you mentioned: in trying to protect themselves at school, should they be looking for well-vetted allies, or accept friends of friends, or people whose hearts they think are in the right place but don't know very well?

Eric

[Updated on: Sat, 30 July 2005 06:51]

Previous Topic:Tuck #108
Next Topic:Tuck #111
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Jun 21 18:42:59 EDT 2018

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02553 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 2.7.7.
Copyright ©2001-2007 FUD Forum Bulletin Board Software