Jump to content
  • entries
    594
  • comments
    5,378
  • views
    131,840

Ego Contest


cags//cunninghat/2x2b

1,292 views

Too bad I canna use the word I wanted to.

 

Just as silly as the last time they did it, but probably will have worse MOCs.

 

Need something less humanoid-oriented and more System-oriented, since most of the people who make good MOCs are the ones who use System. Durned rare to see a good MOC that's pure Bionicle(actually I can't think of one that's not like ancient when the world was new).

 

This entry = massive POV. Expect comment editing for humourous effect if I decide to not be lazy.(I know, I know, that probably just scared you off.)

33 Comments


Recommended Comments



Maybe it's just a conflict of our different understandings of the term character or something. I wouldn't define Fanglyfuss or the rose as characterful, they're "just"(not the right word but I can't think of it right now) MOCs that have some absolutely great parts usage and thematic consistency.

 

Not entirely sure how I'd explain my definiton of character, but I've noticed that most MOCs I would consider as fitting my definition have what I would refer to as dynamic posing. Ends up having the effect of making the viewer understand what the MOC is supposed to do, how it would move, etc...

 

Which through some unnecessarily convoluted thought proces brings me to ask;

 

Which of my MOCs would you consider the most "characterful"?

Well, I feel that if I talk too much about character I'm going to pull a Cleanth Brooks or something and start spouting New Criticism, which I don't even adhere to (I mean, seriously? Intentional fallacy? C'mon guys), but suffice to say it is a difficult trait to define, as it is paradoxically quantitative and aphysical. It's like a photon: it's a wave and a particle at the same time? The heck? 'Character' is much like aesthetics in that it's often derivative of very subjective appeal...but I feel it has its grounds in a more universal, primal connection and it more graspable and understandable that general aesthetics. 'Character' brings something alive, gives a vibrancy even to something inanimate. Something full of character doesn't need to be posed dynamically; it has this trait whether it's in motion or at rest. It's inherent. A sleek fighter jet is better than a rickety old biplane, but the biplane has more character. A trippy, tricked-out 'flower power' hippie van has more character than a normal van. It's much more fun!

 

I'd have to sift through all your MOCs in order to produce a definitive answer to your inquiry, and sadly I don't know your brickshelf name or flickr name without being linked to it. : (

 

About mine and CF's MOCs being better than Cags'... I don't agree, no offense, CF. Cags' skillful greebling is amazing. But I really really really wish they would stop being white and grey. >_>

 

But I'm pretty sure Cags has way more technical skill than me (as do many other folks out there).

 

Technical skill is very good, but character is better. Does Choco make perfect MOCS? Most certainly not, but a bunchof them are really fun. I never realized this until I saw his stuff last week at BrickFair! Some of it was just run-of-the-mill, but some of it was really neat.

 

Jinzo's stuff is usually a great example of something that is technically great and also has tons of character. I like Jinz's MOCs

Link to comment
Maybe it's just a conflict of our different understandings of the term character or something. I wouldn't define Fanglyfuss or the rose as characterful, they're "just"(not the right word but I can't think of it right now) MOCs that have some absolutely great parts usage and thematic consistency.

 

Not entirely sure how I'd explain my definiton of character, but I've noticed that most MOCs I would consider as fitting my definition have what I would refer to as dynamic posing. Ends up having the effect of making the viewer understand what the MOC is supposed to do, how it would move, etc...

 

Which through some unnecessarily convoluted thought proces brings me to ask;

 

Which of my MOCs would you consider the most "characterful"?

Well, I feel that if I talk too much about character I'm going to pull a Cleanth Brooks or something and start spouting New Criticism, which I don't even adhere to (I mean, seriously? Intentional fallacy? C'mon guys), but suffice to say it is a difficult trait to define, as it is paradoxically quantitative and aphysical. It's like a photon: it's a wave and a particle at the same time? The heck? 'Character' is much like aesthetics in that it's often derivative of very subjective appeal...but I feel it has its grounds in a more universal, primal connection and it more graspable and understandable that general aesthetics. 'Character' brings something alive, gives a vibrancy even to something inanimate. Something full of character doesn't need to be posed dynamically; it has this trait whether it's in motion or at rest. It's inherent. A sleek fighter jet is better than a rickety old biplane, but the biplane has more character. A trippy, tricked-out 'flower power' hippie van has more character than a normal van. It's much more fun!

 

I'd have to sift through all your MOCs in order to produce a definitive answer to your inquiry, and sadly I don't know your brickshelf name or flickr name without being linked to it. : (

Okay what I am confuse now.

 

Our definitions are fairly similar, as I seem to have used "dynamic posing" incorrectly earlier.

 

also it almost sounds like you're saying ugly = character, but I doubt that's what you meant

 

brickshelf, flickr. Plenty of overlap, Flickr has "better" stuff.

Link to comment

I think the only problem is that Smeag sees character coming from vintage, flowery, 60s stuff, and Cags sees it coming from sci-fi, robot, mechanical sturf.

 

I guess (unfortunately?) I share the later view also.

 

Well, vintage stuff is in it's own sense awesome, and maybe that's why Steam Punk appeals so much.

Link to comment
I think the only problem is that Smeag sees character coming from vintage, flowery, 60s stuff, and Cags sees it coming from sci-fi, robot, mechanical sturf.

 

I guess (unfortunately?) I share the later view also.

 

Well, vintage stuff is in it's own sense awesome, and maybe that's why Steam Punk appeals so much.

Exactly.

 

I'm just not yet at the point where I can translate the character I see in various pieces of concept art into Lego.

 

xvbattlesuit.jpg

Link to comment
playing with toy blocks sure is fun.

 

Reminds me of leaving the sandpit with the front pocked of my dress full of sand.

It is entirely too late(or early) for me to be hearing such things.

 

Now snort/laughing uncontrollably and banging my head against a desk.

 

thank you i seriously did not need that mental image oh god why me what the catfish GET OUT

 

*bang*

Link to comment

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...