[DomLuka] A pet's perspective

[solacelenity]

Ok, so I have been thinking and thinking on this one: Why is it that I feel somewhat sorry for Dennis, yet the ass Aaron totally makes my skin crawl?

 

Then, it came to me in the two characters we tend to overlook... Valentine and Chey.

 

Valentine is totally devoted to Dennis, just as he is to her. And, it was his affectionate love for her that won me over to his having redemption possibilities... and I believe this is what made Owen rethink Dennis so much as he has.

 

On the other hand, you have Chey who loves Luke, yet despises the very existance of Aaron. Aaron shows the same aggressive behavior as Dennis with Rory (though not in a fighting manner), and he even tries to make up with Chey. But, Chey still does not like him. I think that fact, along with what I see as abusive behavior of Rory, makes me think he will prove to be a true ass in the end, not possessing the redemption qualities I find in Dennis.

 

So, that is my present theory: The animal characters in the stories will prove to be the one's who have the best judgement as to the nature of the other characters. And, in that regard, I believe Dennis will prove to be worth helping while Aaron will turn out to be the backstabbing, manipulative ass that Luke says he is.

 

Love and Peace,

Solace

[Masked Monkey]

Ok, so I have been thinking and thinking on this one:  Why is it that I feel somewhat sorry for Dennis, yet the ass Aaron totally makes my skin crawl?

 

Then, it came to me in the two characters we tend to overlook... Valentine and Chey.

 

Valentine is totally devoted to Dennis, just as he is to her.  And, it was his affectionate love for her that won me over to his having redemption possibilities... and I believe this is what made Owen rethink Dennis so much as he has. 

 

On the other hand, you have Chey who loves Luke, yet despises the very existance of Aaron.  Aaron shows the same aggressive behavior as Dennis with Rory (though not in a fighting manner), and he even tries to make up with Chey.  But, Chey still does not like him.  I think that fact, along with what I see as abusive behavior of Rory, makes me think he will prove to be a true ass in the end, not possessing the redemption qualities I find in Dennis.

 

So, that is my present theory:  The animal characters in the stories will prove to be the one's who have the best judgement as to the nature of the other characters.  And, in that regard, I believe Dennis will prove to be worth helping while Aaron will turn out to be the backstabbing, manipulative ass that Luke says he is.

 

Love and Peace,

Solace

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The only hitch is that Chey is Luke's dog and Valentine is Dennis' dog. I seem to recal that Dom is a "dog" person, and as such understands some of the fundamental personality traits of dogs. If your dog has fully bonded with you as the alpha of their pack, you can beat them day after day after day and they will come back wagging their tail, waiting for more. If you have not properly bonded to your dog, it will still come to you after beatings, but it will be less anxious to do so (often resulting in more beatings). Also, a properly bonded dog will pick up on it's owner's feelings (non-verbal communication) and act accordingly. As an owner of 3 (well 2, now that I had to put "the Queen" to sleep because of gastric torsion ) of the most well adjusted Akitas (to the point that when my postal carrier left, she put down on the info card for the new carrier that I had 3 dogs, but not to worry about them even if they bark, of course because they are Akits, they don't bark), I understand "pack mentality" and "socialization" of dogs.

 

Valenitne's devotion to Dennis could be simply the fact the Valentine is his dog. It is Dennis' devotion to Valentine that I believe is the key to the potential of redemption in Dennis. Likewise, Chey's absolute hatred of Aaron is most likely a manifestation of the household contempt for him. What is key with Chey is his adoration of Rory over Luke . That speaks a lot to Luke's true feelings toward Rory, and Chey being mad that Luke isn't behaving consistent with his feelings.

 

Snow Dog the Danderthal

[solacelenity]

Well, Yeah. The way Dennis acted towards Valentine is exactly what won me to his side.... and though Aaron tries to make up with Chey, her dislike of him makes me distrust him all the more.

 

On the same note, I totally agree with you about Chey and Rory! Chey's ignoring Luke even prompted him to appologize, and then she was fine with Luke again... LOL! So yeah, I think the animals know way more of what is going on than the humans in the story... hehehe!

 

 

Love and Peace,

Solace

[dkstories]

What I want to know is if you're doing this just to beat up on Trebs in your argument?

[JoleChristopher]

What I want to know is if you're doing this just to beat up on Trebs in your argument?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

i dont think so dan. beating up on trebs is vics job

 

good point guys. dogs are a good judge of character i dont know if anyone noticed but with dennis dom set him up to be an ok guy early. remember all of those times that dennis picked on owen and owen said he looked 'scared' ? dennis's brother was mentioned early on as well. amazing how we went from hating him to caring about him.

 

i do not know how i feel about aaron still. chey does not like him so that makes me wonder if he really is a bad guy i did not like him very much but in the last chapter i felt sorry for aaron and i was mad at rory for the way he treated aaron. i think we will have to wait and see but it does not matter if aaron is good or bad because i think dom makes all of his charaters with 'layers'

JC

[Mark Arbour]

I seem to recal that Dom is a "dog" person, and as such understands some of the fundamental personality traits of dogs. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Does that mean Dom doesn't like Pussy (cats) at all?

[solacelenity]

What I want to know is if you're doing this just to beat up on Trebs in your argument?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Never! Trebs is way too sweet to do that to... LOL! And besides, Trebs makes a very good arguement for Aaron, and it has had me thinking exactly why it is that I find Aaron untrusting as a character. So, it kind of came to me when Owen and Aiden picked up Valentine. I just thought I would see what others thought about it... LOL!

 

 

Love and Peace,

Solace

[Masked Monkey]

Well, Yeah.  The way Dennis acted towards Valentine is exactly what won me to his side.... and though Aaron tries to make up with Chey, her dislike of him makes me distrust him all the more.

 

On the same note, I totally agree with you about Chey and Rory!  Chey's ignoring Luke even prompted him to appologize, and then she was fine with Luke again... LOL!  So yeah, I think the animals know way more of what is going on than the humans in the story... hehehe!

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But you have to be warry when you use a relationship of a dog with it's owner to say ANYTHIN about the nature of the owner. Look and Precious and Buffalo Bill in The Silence of the Lambs. The obvious mutual affection between the two is certainly not an indicator of "Bill's" redeaming qualities.

 

Snow Dog the Danderthal

[Conner]

I must admit my first reaction to the concept of PRF (Pet Redemption Factor) was not entirely positive. Then I noticed my avatar. Woof! I'm coming around to the idea.

 

Unfortunately, Chey is the only dog making conscious character choices in any of the stories. Valentine spends her(?) time avoiding Dennis' mother - no one can blame her for that.

 

So, what vibes will Chey pick up from Rory and his feelings and attitudes toward Aaron?

 

It's funny thinking about Dom doing character development on a dog.

 

All I really wanted to say was that this thread is going to the dogs.

 

Hugs,

Conner

[Mark Arbour]

I must admit my first reaction to the concept of PRF (Pet Redemption Factor)  was not entirely positive.  Then I noticed my avatar.  Woof!  I'm coming around to the idea. 

 

Unfortunately, Chey is the only dog making conscious character choices in any of the stories.  Valentine spends her(?) time avoiding Dennis' mother - no one can blame her for that.

 

So, what vibes will Chey pick up from Rory and his feelings and attitudes toward Aaron?   

 

It's funny thinking about Dom doing character development on a dog. 

 

All I really wanted to say was that this thread is going to the dogs. 

 

Hugs,

Conner 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You're right Conner.  It's a bit much when even the dogs have significant characters to be developed.  It is pretty funny that Valentine peed on Mrs. Gordon's new carpet.  If only she'd have peed on Mrs. Gordon!

[Novelty]

I like Chey. Probably the only character I actually think is believable in DD

[Masked Monkey]

So, what vibes will Chey pick up from Rory and his feelings and attitudes toward Aaron?   

 

It's funny thinking about Dom doing character development on a dog. 

 

All I really wanted to say was that this thread is going to the dogs. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Chey hasn't transferred 'loyalty' to Rory, he still is very much Luke's dog and will still behave based on Luke's feelings, not Rory's. All the affection that Chey shows toward Rory is because of Luke's feelings and desires toward Rory (particularly the licking part). Chey's apparent favortism of Rory is because Chey is confused by the dissonance between his master's non-verbal cues, with his behavior. This may be complex character development for a person, but it is simply the nature of a dog. You don't have to do much character development to get a dog's personality IF you really are a 'dog' person and have spent time with your animal(s).

[Conner]

Chey hasn't transferred 'loyalty' to Rory, he still is very much Luke's dog and will still behave based on Luke's feelings, not Rory's.  All the affection that Chey shows toward Rory is because of Luke's feelings and desires toward Rory (particularly the licking part).  Chey's apparent favortism of Rory is because Chey is confused by the dissonance between his master's non-verbal cues, with his behavior.  This may be complex character development for a person, but it is simply the nature of a dog. You don't have to do much character development to get a dog's personality IF you really are a 'dog' person and have spent time with your animal(s).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Now wait just one cotton-pickin' fuzzy dog tail moment there, Snow Dog!

 

I've never taken Dog Psychology 101, but I do believe you're making stuff up here, and gawlllll- eeee, it just happens to coincide with your dog-eared theories.

 

On the one hand, you have Chey happily licking Rory's face or some other body part while on the other you have Chey experiencing some form of cognitive dissonance due to Luke's behaviour. Just doesn't wash.

 

So what's complex for a human is second nature for a dog? Let's face it, dogs are simple. Pavlov proved that years ago. It takes a human to really screw up a situation. Chey likes Rory because Luke likes Rory. Chey doesn't like Aaron because Luke doesn't like Aaron. It need not be any more complicated than that.

 

So, doggy-poop on your cognitive dissonance theory.

 

Suppose Chey had humped Rory's leg. Would he have gotten that from Luke, too? I can just see Luke now, in the privacy of his own bedroom with only Chey to watch, jerking away while repeating Rory's name over and over.

 

Hugs,

Conner

[NaperVic]

Chey likes Rory because Luke likes Rory.

Edited May 23, 2005 by naper_vic

[Mark Arbour]

I'm wondering whether we're not taking this a little too far. I mean, we're psycho-analyzing the frickin' animals in Dom's stories! No wonder the non-Domaholics on this board think we're nuts. I suppose our next issue should be whether to decide whether Chey and Valentine are, in fact, gay dogs?

Edited May 23, 2005 by Mark Arbour

[Masked Monkey]

I'm wondering whether we're not taking this a little too far.  I mean, we're psycho-analyzing the frickin' animals in Dom's stories!  No wonder the non-Domaholics on this board think we're nuts.  I suppose our next issue should be whether to decide whether Chey and Valentine are, in fact, gay dogs?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You will note the specific use of "Danderthal" when referring to myself. Although I like Dom's writing and refuse to even think about "more" or "less" than Dan's writing, I'm just simply not "touch-feely" enough to allow myself to be considered a Domaholic. I don't think doing a character analysis of a dog is "nuts", but then again, most people think I am "nuts" when I talk about my dogs.

 

I can simplify my "dissonance" discription to put it into dog terms.

 

Dogs are pack animals. Luke is the alpha male of Chey's pack. Luke brought Rory into the pack, with strong non-verbal mating overtones. Aaron is not in the pack and visibly hated by the alpha, therefor Chey hates Aaron. Rory is unsure about Aaron, so Chey has to protect Rory from the enemy without incurring the wrath of Rory (hence he doesn't rip Aaron's throat out for coming in the house). Luke attempts to shunn Rory from the pack without legitimate reason (from Chey's viewpoint). Chey defends Rory's right to belong to the pack and informes the alpha that he is not following proper pack behavior.

 

The only question that remains is: if the pack splits because Rory joins with Aaron (and thus asserts his position as a separate alpha male), does Chey stay with Luke or switch and follow Rory?

 

As a writer, it would be easy for Dom to think "Chey is pissed because Luke is acting like a jerk, so he makes his feeling known", but even that is too much thought for a dog.

 

Snow Dog the Danderthal

Edited May 24, 2005 by Snow Dog

[Mark Arbour]

I'm just simply not "touch-feely" enough to allow myself to be considered a Domaholic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not all Domaholics are "touchy-feely". There's just an insipid bunch that carry that badge. That's like observing that Danimals are all mindless drones, and we both know that's not true either. Watch your stereotypes Snow Dog or there'll be flames flying at your ass.

[Masked Monkey]

I'm just simply not "touch-feely" enough to allow myself to be considered a Domaholic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not all Domaholics are "touchy-feely". There's just an insipid bunch that carry that badge. That's like observing that Danimals are all mindless drones, and we both know that's not true either. Watch your stereotypes Snow Dog or there'll be flames flying at your ass.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nice kitty, nice kitty (throws a thorazine laced hunk of raw dead cow)

 

I apologize, I was just extrapolating California Governor Reagan's quote "If you've seen one redwood you've seen them all" to the situation, I guess my head was as far up my ass as his was up his own at the time.

 

But, you do have to admit that their badges are very shiny.

 

Snow Dog the Danderthal

[Mark Arbour]

Snow Dog,

 

You made me laugh so hard I almost puked.

 

Vic, do we need to tone down our badges? Maybe getting rid of the rainbows wasn't enough.

[Conner]

I'm just simply not "touch-feely" enough to allow myself to be considered a Domaholic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not all Domaholics are "touchy-feely". There's just an insipid bunch that carry that badge. That's like observing that Danimals are all mindless drones, and we both know that's not true either. Watch your stereotypes Snow Dog or there'll be flames flying at your ass.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's the touchy-feely people who make this forum work so well. In fact, us romantics are what makes this world go round.

 

For the most part, dogs are touchy-feely. If not, they've either been abused or have had that characteristic bred out of them. I would go as far as to say it's instinctual in dogs. Our Chey is most definitely touchy-feely.

 

Like Chey, romantics are more than capable of discerning between the good and bad of a person or a situation for that matter. Romantics just don't write people off. We believe in redemption. Just look at the majority's reaction to Dennis. The jury is still out on Aaron but even he has a sizable fan club behind him.

 

Romantics 'love to win'. Non-romantics 'hate to lose'.

 

Hugs,

Conner

[Masked Monkey]

Romantics 'love to win'.  Non-romantics 'hate to lose'.

 

Hugs,

Conner 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think you mean: Non-romantics 'love it when others lose'

 

Oh, wait, that's just my own personal brand of cynicism, I keep getting 'myself' mixed up with 'others'

[Mark Arbour]

Touchy-feely: "The meek shall inherit the earth". Of course, that quote comes from a book that says it's an abomination to f**k another man (if you are a man), so draw your own conclusions on accuracy.

 

[Masked Monkey]

Touchy-feely:  "The meek shall inherit the earth".  Of course, that quote comes from a book that says it's an abomination to f**k another man (if you are a man), so draw your own conclusions on accuracy.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Funny, I always thought it was the first line on THE ALBUM (i.e. the one quoted in the sig), just before:

 

"We

Edited May 24, 2005 by Snow Dog

[Conner]

Touchy-feely:  "The meek shall inherit the earth".  Of course, that quote comes from a book that says it's an abomination to f**k another man (if you are a man), so draw your own conclusions on accuracy.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

As is often the case, the person who said the abomination thing was misquoted. It really reads like this: It's an abomination to f**k another man without kissing him first and telling him you'll still respect him in the morning.

 

Score another one for the romantics.

 

Who said romantics are meek? I've never been one to suffer injury with patience. I love to scrap. Make-up sex is great!

 

Hugs,

Conner

[storymonger]

Touchy-feely:  "The meek shall inherit the earth".  Of course, that quote comes from a book that says it's an abomination to f**k another man (if you are a man), so draw your own conclusions on accuracy.

 

I don't think the Book of Psalms mentions homosexuality? It's not mentioned in Matthew, either, IIRC (where the meek shall inherit the Earth is mentioned again).

 

Remember, the Bible is a canonical volume, not a book, per se.

 

Edit: I have a feeling I'm being overly pedantic in what was a light-hearted discussion. If so, I apologize, but I still feel that in this case the splitting of a few hairs is justified for bolstering the case for romantics everywhere.

Edited May 30, 2005 by jontd