Just as you can be, Tyrande does specifically specify the Horde afterward ... but how do you know Shandris' implications? Perhaps Tyrande is only responding to what she believes Shandris is talking about? That's the problem, you see that your view is the only correct view ... I don't. Unless something is stated point blank, I don't take it as 100% fact ... you seem to take any opinion you have as 100% fact.
Me this argument: We don't know for sure.It could be, but as we have seen Sylvanas pretty much just does evil things. But you should now be complaining that Blizzard hasn't spelled out what would happen if Sylvanas dies, just as they didn't spell out all the reasons Tyrande is going after Sylvanas.
You: You want it spelled out! it is clear because anyone who views the story differently than me is wrong!
This argument isn't about Anduin, this topic isn't about Anduin, why the frick would I be ranting about Anduin in a topic on Tyrande?Anduin's quest for peace is also driven by emotion, same as his desire to trust the horde, but I don't see you screaming about him acting irrationally. Anduin intentionally prolonged the war by withdrawing the troops from the troll city because he didn't want to be like Sylvanas, another "irrational" decision to you. Most things people do are driven by emotion, but that doesn't mean they are all irrational.
Yes, Anduin does things irrationally, but he is what? 19? I kind of expect irrationality from a child.
If the reason you do something is because of emotion, it is irrational. Just because you can attempt to rationalize it doesn't make it rational.
For example, "I don't want to become like Sylvanas" is a bit more complex ... was it emotional? Or did he reason out that defeating her by acting like her doesn't solve the problem and continues further violence overall? However, in the case you list, regardless of it's rationality, Anduin's actions against holding the city were naive at best. Holding the city wouldn't make him like Sylvanas in anyway, because Sylvanas would have razed the city.
Even then, Anduin for his existence has done things irrationally ... that is what he has done. He is naive, he has hope, etc ... I expect his irrationality. Also, most things people do are also irrational on some level so the fact people do things for emotion is meaningless even to mention.
Last edited by Darththeo; 2019-10-10 at 02:28 AM.
Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
–The Sith Code
You can interpret it anyway you want, it does not mean you are correct about it when the context of her line is made clear in the second part of her line as well as Tyrande's follow up. Mostly you are just being emotional about this so you are going to keep doubling down on pretending Shandris was saying "sylvanas is a lack of a threat", because you're not really explaining why she is saying that here so there isn't much of a point in discussing it further.
You've said many times that Blizzard needs to put in a line to imply Tyrande views her as a threat.
Yes, that is spelling it out, it's also unnecessary, there is just nothing to imply she doesn't view her as a threat, the audience already knows Sylvanas is a threat, a revelation would be is if Tyrande said she doesn't view Sylvanas as a threat, which would be irrational.
Actually you made it about emotions in general being irrational. Why would Tyrande listen to two people acting emotionally? Yes Anduin and Shandris are both emotionally charged here as well, but for peace. In this case there is no outcome where Tyrande wouldn't be acting irrationally to you. It's either listen to herself or listen to Anduin acting emotionally (Irrationally to you), both are "irrational" decisions. The entire peace is driven by emotion and trust, which is irrational to you.
And this entire argument is the same for you part. You are assuming, but you are treating your assumption as a fact rather than your viewpoint.
I know, it is totally crazy to expect a person who believes someone is a threat to mention or imply that in a conversation about threats ... totally unrealistic expectations here.You've said many times that Blizzard needs to put in a line to imply Tyrande views her as a threat.
You and I have very different definitions of spelling it out. What the audience knows is not equal to what a character knows. We could know Sylvanas is a threat, but that means literally nothing to what Tyrande knows. That again is you taking your interpretation of events and treating how you view it as a fact. Even though there are other completely valid ways of viewing it.Yes, that is spelling it out, it's also unnecessary, there is just nothing to imply she doesn't view her as a threat, the audience already knows Sylvanas is a threat, a revelation would be is if Tyrande said she doesn't view Sylvanas as a threat, which would be irrational.
Look at your argument, you argue that your way is the only way to interpret the facts. And any other way is wrong.
When Anduin made his statement on Hope, that was an irrational reason to ask Tyrande to stand down. When Shandris appeal to her feelings for Tyrande to get her to stop, that was an irrational argument. When they were mentioning the change in leadership of the Horde and how the Horde will not be led by a Warchief and the fact Sylvanas was removed, isn't an irrational argument. They are using facts to justify their emotions ... which is want to do.Actually you made it about emotions in general being irrational. Why would Tyrande listen to two people acting emotionally? Yes Anduin and Shandris are both emotionally charged here as well, but for peace. In this case there is no outcome where Tyrande wouldn't be acting irrationally to you. It's either listen to herself or listen to Anduin acting emotionally (Irrationally to you), both are "irrational" decisions. The entire peace is driven by emotion and trust, which is irrational to you.
Seriously, you need to stop with your strawman. I am going to spell everything out for you now because you can't be bothered.
1) Tyrande is acting irrational because her actions are coming across purely motivated by revenge. As revenge is emotional, therefor isn't rational.
2) It is possible to write an irrational character good, but you have to show the character is acting to themselves rationally. They are failing to do with Tyrande, but they did this okay with other characters. You have to show their thought process. We got a calm Tyrande to an irrational with nothing shown in between what rational she did. While Anduin has always done irrational things because he has hope, he believe in a better future. Anduin's irrational, while still not written well, appears true to the character traits. Blizzard has a problem when they start to alter characters for stories which is sad because of how Arthas was handled. Garrosh's decent into pure villainy was handled like shit and it just got worse for the most part since then.
3) With characters know focused more on N'Zoth, those characters focused on N'Zoth view Sylvanas as a DIMINISHED threat in comparison. You got hung up on "lack of threat" meaning no threat. If I have a lack of funds, it doesn't mean I have no money. If I have a lack of food, it doesn't mean I have no food. Lacking something doesn't mean you have nothing of what you lack.
You have literally done nothing but strawman me and claim it was my argument. You literally expected me to rant about Anduin in this topic because he is driven by hope. Seriously, you are the worst person I have ever debated with, and I once had a debate with VenomFangX through Youtube's message service.
Last edited by Darththeo; 2019-10-10 at 10:33 AM.
Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
–The Sith Code
It's an assumption based on her history, assuming she doesn't view Sylvanas as a threat is a baseless assumption. The audience knows Sylvanas is a threat so it's safe to assume everyone else sees her as one, not seeing her as a threat would be noteworthy.
Anduin is purely making an emotional appeal to Tyrande to trust the horde. Shandris says the leadership has change, but Tyrande responses to that with If "the wolf is rabid, it matters not who rides it [leads it]. Sooner or later, the beast will bare its fangs". She is correct in assuming this logically. A majority of the horde supported Garrosh, they cheered when the sentinels were skinned alive, they cheered when Theramore was nuke. A majority of the horde supported Sylvanas before, during and after the genocide of the night elves. Logically Tyrande should not trust the horde or believe that anything has changed unless she sees differently. Anduin even admits to Genn he is being irrational.
The argument that Shandris believes the horde changed because the people at the top changed hands again is also not logical, because there needs to be a huge cultural change within the horde since they have thrown a majority of their support behind evil tyrants. Also yes, if you are calling Tyrande irrational because she doesn't trust the horde and wants Sylvanas dead, you also have to call both Shandris and Anduin irrational because their arguments aren't based on anything other than a hope. Tyrande's fears are more real, in addition to the people who suffer the most when the horde decides to attack ARE the night elves. It would be illogical for Tyrande to trust or believe the horde changed until she sees a huge cultural shift as the problem is much deeper than who is in charge.
Also about the N'zoth thing, that is not brought up to Tyrande in these exchanges, so really just like your "tyrande needs to say sylvanas is a threat", why isn't Anduin bringing that up to her? How do we know they didn't keep that a secret from her? Are you just going to ASSUME they told her? Uh oh.
But to remind you, it was you who wanted to attack people for acting emotionally. Everyone here is acting emotionally and basing their ideas on nothing but their feelings, Tyrande has history to back her position, Anduin has his hope.
Well, it might have to do with the fact that Tyrande raises a very valid point. The Horde keeps following people like Garrosh and Sylvanas when they shout "For the Horde" loud enough. It always takes a giant wake-up call to get them to question the shit they are doing in the name of their chief. When the next genocidal maniac finds his way into a position of power it will happen again unless something drastically changes about the whole structure of the Horde. That council idea might work or it could fail spectacularly.
I cannot blame Tyrande for feeling this way. Plus, her transformation seems to have been more then a power-up, she truely is the embodiment of Elune's vengeance, so letting go of vengeance is gonna be hard. The question is: Will Malfurion support her or stop her?
IMO it's too close to what Sylvanas was preaching to Saurfang about peace not lasting.
IMO the council idea would have worked better if they didn't seem to be trying to write off every horde leader and leave just a group that seem about as comically naive as Anduin for no reason beyond they were written as the 'good' ones.
There's several posters on this forum that need things explicitly stated or it doesn't count, which is ridiculous for things that should be simply understood. For example, we don't see game/movie/book characters going to the toilet, but none of them say anything like "Excuse me, I must go to evacuate my bowels, as is normal for us." Why not? Because it should be understood without explicit statement.
Why no, people don't just like Sylvie for T&A: https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...ery-Cinematic/
There's still literally nothing supporting your idea that Night Elven presence in Ghostlands was "an accident" like you claim, no matter how many times you repeat the flimsy defense of "just because it's not explicitly stated doesn't mean it doesn't count". Burden of proof is a thing.
It isn't baseless merely because you disagree with it. It can only be baseless if you believe characters views cannot be changed, which you don't. The lines allow a reader to assume that Tyrande views Sylvanas as a current and present threat, as not a threat or even as still a potential threat. Just because you view one as superior based on your view doesn't mean you are right.
No, Tyrande is rational in not trusting the Horde. She is irrational elsewhere. She has seen the Horde time and time again "raise their fangs." She is not speaking on vengeance on the Horde, she seems right now to care solely for Sylvanas and will worry about the Horde later. I am just annoyed they show more about how Tyrande views the Horde than her views on Sylvanas ... it is pretty piss poor comparison.Anduin is purely making an emotional appeal to Tyrande to trust the horde. Shandris says the leadership has change, but Tyrande responses to that with If "the wolf is rabid, it matters not who rides it [leads it]. Sooner or later, the beast will bare its fangs". She is correct in assuming this logically. A majority of the horde supported Garrosh, they cheered when the sentinels were skinned alive, they cheered when Theramore was nuke. A majority of the horde supported Sylvanas before, during and after the genocide of the night elves. Logically Tyrande should not trust the horde or believe that anything has changed unless she sees differently. Anduin even admits to Genn he is being irrational.
The argument that Shandris believes the horde changed because the people at the top changed hands again is also not logical, because there needs to be a huge cultural change within the horde since they have thrown a majority of their support behind evil tyrants. Also yes, if you are calling Tyrande irrational because she doesn't trust the horde and wants Sylvanas dead, you also have to call both Shandris and Anduin irrational because their arguments aren't based on anything other than a hope. Tyrande's fears are more real, in addition to the people who suffer the most when the horde decides to attack ARE the night elves. It would be illogical for Tyrande to trust or believe the horde changed until she sees a huge cultural shift as the problem is much deeper than who is in charge.
Also about the N'zoth thing, that is not brought up to Tyrande in these exchanges, so really just like your "tyrande needs to say sylvanas is a threat", why isn't Anduin bringing that up to her? How do we know they didn't keep that a secret from her? Are you just going to ASSUME they told her? Uh oh.
But to remind you, it was you who wanted to attack people for acting emotionally. Everyone here is acting emotionally and basing their ideas on nothing but their feelings, Tyrande has history to back her position, Anduin has his hope.
The Horde has the bulk of the forces that remain to Sylvanas and those that attacked Darkshore. Those same Horde have constantly fought her people. She isn't blinded by Vengeance by continuing to choose to attack them and shows she is even willing to sign a treaty so long as it is in Banshee blood. Tyrande has also never trusted the Horde in the first place, so it is also consistent with her character. I wouldn't expect her or Genn to put that aside because a 19 year old boy told her to.
Sylvanas' actions against her were when she was Warchief of the Horde, had the full might of the Horde's military, etc ... Sylvanas literally doesn't have that any more even if she has a "bunch of followers." If she addressed Sylvanas as a threat as opposed to vengeance on her, it would make her actions more rational. But in a context of threats, which is what is being talked about with characters that we know the threat of N'Zoth (I am not assuming Tyrande necessary even has been told, my point is true regardless). Anduin knows of N'Zoth, Genn knows of N'Zoth, Shandris knows of N'Zoth ... they are trying to get her off her path for the moment. Whether or not they told Tyrande is irrelevant ... so she doesn't know, they are trying to get her to move on from her vendetta for the moment. Yeah, that wasn't as much as a "gotcha" moment as you thought.
I also never stated that "acting emotionally is always wrong." I have even argued there are good ways to have an character act irrationally. So I ask again, have you actually ever read what I wrote?
Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
–The Sith Code
It's baseless because there has never been anything indicating that Tyrande doesn't view Sylvanas as a threat, you are not basing that assumption on anything.
Tyrande is using history though to back up her position, Anduin is using his hope, as I've explained. Anduin's position is even more irrational than Tyrande's because he is asking someone who has constantly been attacked by the horde to trust them because this time it will be different, just like the last time when she gave the horde Azshara in the hopes that they wouldn't attack her people again (it's as if Anduin has no concept of the past). That move turned out to be devastating for her people. There is zero reason for her to sign the treaty, if she was provided evidence the horde made some kind of large cultural change (leadership change is not that) then maybe she can consider it, but expecting her to sign the treaty (which is what is being asked here) is extremely irrational.
About N'zoth, everyone knows he's a threat, just like everyone knows Sylvanas is a threat, that doesn't mean Tyrande not stating that means she doesn't believe it. It's a stupid position to take to pretend she doesn't view Sylvanas as a threat when it's entirely based on nothing.
You're trying to argue emotions = irrational, essentially everything people do is driven by emotion even saving your own life is just based on emotions, survival instincts and fear. But then you have to craft your argument around a mix of emotions and evidence. Tyrande not signing the treaty isn't irrational, Tyrande not trusting the horde isn't irrational, Tyrande wanting to get rid of Sylvanas isn't irrational. The only thing you take issue with is vengeance that is based on her experiences, while anduin is blinded by hope with nothing to back up his own position. Everyone is acting emotional here, that doesn't mean Tyrande is even the most irrational person here because she is actually basing her views on her experiences, Shandris and Anduin are basing their position on what they hope the future will hold.
Last edited by Every Pwny; 2019-10-10 at 10:01 PM.
Go back and read, seriously. This is all you declaring it baseless because you can't see it.
And I don't deny that. But Anduin has a history of irrational actions and we understand why he does what he does. Tyrande's decent into irrationality we don't see. We see her before and after, we don't see her during. She was acting very rationally before Tel'drissil burned and even immediately after. Then Blizzard decided, nope need Tyrande crazy now. They don't attempt to have her justify her irrationality with literally anything.Tyrande is using history though to back up her position, Anduin is using his hope, as I've explained. Anduin's position is even more irrational than Tyrande's because he is asking someone who has constantly been attacked by the horde to trust them because this time it will be different, just like the last time when she gave the horde Azshara in the hopes that they wouldn't attack her people again (it's as if Anduin has no concept of the past). That move turned out to be devastating for her people. There is zero reason for her to sign the treaty, if she was provided evidence the horde made some kind of large cultural change (leadership change is not that) then maybe she can consider it, but expecting her to sign the treaty (which is what is being asked here) is extremely irrational.
It is just "I WILL HAVE VENGEANCE!"
Again that is more because you can't understand it rather than it actually being possible. Again, I am not arguing she doesn't, but it is possible she does. This concept seems to have escaped you.About N'zoth, everyone knows he's a threat, just like everyone knows Sylvanas is a threat, that doesn't mean Tyrande not stating that means she doesn't believe it. It's a stupid position to take to pretend she doesn't view Sylvanas as a threat when it's entirely based on nothing.
I am not saying Tyrande is being irrational everywhere. And responding emotionally is being irrational, period. You can't justify as rational just because you agree with the outcome. I never claim she is acting "the most irrationally." I have stated she is acting irrationally and stupid. Honestly, it is hard to beat Anduin's actions this expansion. Release an enemy combatant on the hopes he is going to go after another target is perhaps the worst decision a character made ... but it was fully in line with Anduin's character.You're trying to argue emotions = irrational, essentially everything people do is driven by emotion even saving your own life is just based on emotions, survival instincts and fear. But then you have to craft your argument around a mix of emotions and evidence. Tyrande not signing the treaty isn't irrational, Tyrande not trusting the horde isn't irrational, Tyrande wanting to get rid of Sylvanas isn't irrational. The only thing you take issue with is vengeance that is based on her experiences, while anduin is blinded by hope with nothing to back up his own position. Everyone is acting emotional here, that doesn't mean Tyrande is even the most irrational person here because she is actually basing her views on her experiences, Shandris and Anduin are basing their position on what they hope the future will hold.
Also, saving your own life isn't always based on "emotion." That is a terrible comparison. People want to live (for the most part). There doesn't have to be emotion there. This is my problem with you, you argue like your opinion on something is a fact and anyone who doesn't view it exactly as you do is wrong and baseless. You make me wish I was arguing with a flat earther right now, seriously.
Tyrande wanting to get rid of Sylvanas to fill her desire for vengeance is irrational. Tyrande didn't seek vengeance on Azshara when Azshara's actions lead to the sundering. Tyrande didn't seek vengeance on the Horde after prior atrocities. She in the past always look to building a future for her people. She snapped and we didn't get to see that snap. We didn't see how she rationalized her way into the position she is in. A well written irrational character has rationalized to themselves why they hold the position they do. A character consumed by vengeance is never a rational one. It would be asking for a married bachelor, it can't happen. A rational character can act on vengeance, but that act itself isn't rational.
Let's look at Jaina for a second. Jaina prior to Mists was very pro-peace with the Horde. Garrosh attack Theramore killing many of her friends and people she trusted. She was betrayed by members of an order she was an on and off again member of. We got to see that from her perspective and we saw the moments where she realized her mistakes. It wasn't written well, but we at least got to see the events through her eyes.
Now what do we get with Tyrande? We see the events as an outsider to her (if at all). We don't get her thoughts, we don't see how she is acting. She literally one day appears to go from "I will not divide the Alliance's forces." to "I must retake my home" to "DIE BANSHEE DIE!" It is poor writing and not how you write a character's decent into irrationality. You seem bother by the idea that she is acting irrationally for literal no reason beside you wanted to argue with me.
Wanting to eliminate a threat CAN be rational, doesn't mean it is. Anduin is acting with character traits that have been established. Shandris is acting with character traits that have been established. Genn is acting with character traits that have been established. Tyrande has acted with character traits that have not been shown why they changed to the extreme they did. It is because she is going crazy, is it because of the Night Warrior powers, etc ... Blizzard has shown little with Tyrande and apparently be actually asking they show us stuff is a bad thing to you.
Anyway, I am done with this argument. I can't take you not actually paying attention to this argument. If you want the last word, fine. But I am out.
Last edited by Darththeo; 2019-10-10 at 10:59 PM.
Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
–The Sith Code
It's entirely based on nothing and you haven't pointed to anything that would indicate Tyrande no longer views Sylvanas as a threat. There is nothing to read because you've never posted any evidence, that is why your claim is baseless.
We see Tyrande get effected by the genocide of her people in Wot as well as the novellas about that, again in the beginning of 8.1. If you don't think the genocide of her people changed everything, you are the only one not analyzing the situation rationally. There is literally nothing crazy about her actions or decisions, they are based on what the horde has done, both now and in the past even with changes in leadership. We've know since WC3 Tyrande cares a lot about her people, so obviously when the horde commits genocide against them, she is going to be mad, thinking that wouldn't effect someone is being truly idiotic.
The possibility exists for anything in wow, but you aren't basing it on any evidence is the problem. Maybe Anduin is Sylvanas in disguise! You can make up any wacky theory, but if it's not backed up by anything it's baseless, as in based on nothing.
I know what you're saying:
She is not irrational everywhere else, this whole conversation revolves around trying to get her to trust the horde because they changed leadership again. There is no reason for her to trust the horde, we don't even know if they have Ashenvale and Darkshore back. If there was never Cata and MoP, getting her to trust the horde because they just had a bad leader this one time would be easier, but she already trusted the horde and it cost her people pretty much everything. Everyone here is going off emotions, Tyrande is basing her emotions on past events and interactions with the horde, which always seem to fuck over her people, Anduin is disregarding the history of his own allies in favor of again trying to give the horde the benefit of the doubt. You are also claiming she is stupid for not just listening to Anduin and Shandris about trusting the horde because Anduin decided to make a treaty behind the other leaders backs, she's of course skeptical and there is no reason for her to trust the horde at this point unless there is a huge cultural shift.
It's emotional to want to live, wanting to live is a desire and that is emotional. Emotions are good and what keep you alive and striving, if you were just an unfeeling robot that did things without emotion there wouldn't be a point in saving your own life. Trying to analyze human situations without taking into account emotions (which most people have) it's not rational because you are intentionally omitting a piece of the problem.
No it's completely rational, wanting to get rid of someone who has pretty much wiped out her people, her vengeance is pretty focused on Sylvanas, not even all of the horde. Tyrande also never forgave Azshara and has always been fighting her, and in SoO Varian convinced her to make peace with the horde after their atrocities there, not only that, Garrosh was captured, Sylvanas is free and Sylvanas is far more powerful as an entity than Garrosh ever was. People can also be multilayered, they can do things for vengeance that is based on rational reasons, getting rid of a powerful and evil and super powerful entity like Sylvanas is rational, even if Tyrande is COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED in her anger towards her.
WoW writing is always extremely poor, we don't know what Tyrande did between 8.1 and 8.3 when she appears again, we don't know if the night elves took darkshore or Ashenvale back, we don't even know if there was anything in the treaty to make the horde leave those areas. Just because Anduin is acting in character means nothing, this is really the first time Tyrande has acting like her WC3 self, where she killed wardens to free Illidan and ignored Malfurion's demands to not free him. Tyrande has always been very passionate about protecting her people, and now that the horde has killed most of them, targeting civilians as well, she is understandably angry.
But for you Tyrande couldn't win because to you emotions = irrational, so if she does what she did she is being irrational, if she listens to Anduin, who is also acting purely emotional with even less to back up his position, she would be acting irrationally as well because both options here are emotional ones, and to you both options are irrational. Just resetting her character and pretending she should be okay with the horde or sylvanas out there is idiotic and horrible writing, trying to say "she is stupid unless she says sylvanas is a threat" is also idiotic. There is nothing crazy in Tyrande's action and she is actually pretty focused on who she is blaming. I want to see more from Tyrande and the night elves, but Blizzard won't show that, but pretending like she was being "crazy "irrational" "stupid" here is just an emotional reaction from you, and therefore irrational, as she is basing her position on past events that aren't even that old, while Anduin only has a hope.
I know the majority of wow's fanbase has a hateboner for Tyrande but Jesus Christ I never knew it was this bad.
In broad strokes I don't really see much wrong with Tyrande's characterization in BfA, to be honest. I might nitpick a few specific things here and there - like her inability to kill Nathanos when she encountered him prior to the Warfront at Darkshore, but that has less to do with her characterization and more to do with plot contrivance insofar as I'm concerned. Tyrande's had a pretty understandable arc of descent in this expansion.
"We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." ― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Somehow people have managed to hate both, totally reasonable positions.
Tyrande: We can't trust the Horde, and we can't just leave Sylvanas out there to do more villainy. (true)
Shandris: The Horde isn't immediately a problem, and try not to piss off our allies while we're still bunking in their cities. Pissing off both factions is you wind up as a raid boss, Tyrande.
Tyrande is hotheaded and impulsive, Shandris is level-headed and more sympathetic to the rest of the Alliance. At the least, no one can complain they're out of character.
"We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." ― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead