the turtles Zodiac/personalities

[Karpo_007]

Every dog owner will tell you that animals indeed do have personalities. Im actually pretty scared how my dog resembles me...

[ForSquirtleMyNurtle]

I go away for two days and I come back to a lively discussion of Freud and turtles. This will be a rather long post because this actually raises many valid points, and others that must be refuted.

As far as animals having personalities: yes, animals have different kinds of personalities, distinct from human types, but they still behave in different ways and can still be treated psychologically. Witness the behavior of an abused animal, for instance. This is obviously a personality. Is it a mind? Or a consciousness? Frankly, we cannot answer that question. I'd have to agree that the turtles probably only became self-aware after the mutation, but just because they aren't aware of their feelings doesn't mean they aren't experiencing them.

Now, on to Sigmund and his relevance, and I will claim that he is very much relevant. We must first distinguish between performing psychology on actual human patients and performing it on fictional characters. Freud's relevance even in the real world is quite underrated by all the freud haters out there, and there is simply no disputing that the whole edifice of modern psychology (not psychiatry, since psychiatry relies on medicine and biochemical models of behavior) is built on Freud's massive body of work. However, it is true that reducing him to simplistic terms and projecting that on people is not a very good plan. HOWEVER, in the realm of literary theory and criticism (and, although Eastman and Laird are NOT Joyce and Faulkner, we must still include them in the realm of literature) the only acceptable form of psychological interpretation is psychoanlaytic, particularly Freudian and Lacanian versions of that. We are not analyzing real people with real personalities, but characters who represent whole bundles of ideas and things from the authors' minds. My references to Oepius are, therefore, absolutely valid and on-target. the Oedipus myth, along with the christ-myth, are the most commonly told tales in literature and almost all literature finds resonances with those stories (well, Western literature at least). The turtles DO exhibit Freudian behaviors, along with many other things, so I'm not trying simply to reduce Raphael's behavior to castration-anxiety, although I think the reading is open and appropriate. I certainly think it is more interesting than trying to find out their zodiac signs, since freudian analysis doesn't rely on birthdays.

NOw as for the homosexuality issue: I thought I'd get more angry responses to this and only one person mentioned incest so I'm a little happily surprised. Obviously on TV they won't show sex stuff, and I'm not suggesting that turtles become porno, but I think it's an interesting thought-experiment. Also, someone mentioned that thinking of them as homo is "projection." But anthropological evidence regarding male-exclusive institutions and homosexuality is too broad and powerful to be refuted. From the priesthood to pirates to prisons, when men are denied the comfort of women they will seek the comfort of other men. And yes, they're brothers, but who cares? They have no other turtles to love and besides they can't have little babies anyway.

And if the turtles learned their social roles from "television" they'd have an awfully skewed version of their role in society.

I won't even touch splinter, since I am of the school that always thought it made more sense to have him be a human first (as in the first cartoon version). But let's suffice to say that a mutated rat does not a masculine role model make.

[MW8979]

Splinter is fine as a role model. He was a human before, and as such, can teach the turtles perfectly well how to behave by example and lesson. On top of that, you also have overlaying factors such as their own personalities and the mounds of TV they watch. Put all that together, and you get the ninja turtles as we know them.

[Pizza Face]

Once again, forsquirtlemynurtle blows my mind away. The turtles vision of their roles in society is totally skewed. The only explanation is tv watching. Why else would they see themselves as these heroe, protectors of a city in which they are hated. Oh, how noble of the turtles. They even wear bastardized ninja masks, so no onw will see their identity. Come on. I mean, if they were really living in the sewers, protecting people, but the people hate them, over time the turtles would begin to resent humans. It would be only a matter of time before they realize "Hey. I live in the sewers of all places. I train my body and mind daily and nightly and for what? To save these bourgious turtle haters and all we get is a disease infested hole to live in and we are pursecuted all the time? No, we must revolt!" And that is exactly as they would do. They already have their own cell created and with their ninja abilities and don's know how, they would make a dirty bomb and new yorkers would have mutant babies. So, the only answer is that the gender roles specifically, and their societal roles in general are all projections of Eastman and Lairds minds. (Have you ever seen any interviews with these two. Totally gay boys. Again, PROJECTION)

Also, I agree that the whole story only makes sense if splinter was Hamato Yoshi first. If he was a rat first, then it doesnt make sense. I dont care if you guys decided that he was some kind of mutant first. Although, with Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuked to hell, maybe he could be mutated. But, even so, there is no way for him to learn to be a ninja. The best he could hope for is to mimick movements. He would have no idea how to harness his Ki, and he wouldnt know how to turn invisible and hold his breath for four hours, or slow his heartbeat to once a minute. Lets have some realism here folks.

[Brinatello]

There's a line Leo says in one of the red sky episodes that is used in Lisardo's quote. It goes something like this: ""Look I'm not gonna stop doing what's right just because it's not appreciated." Apparently, under the guidance of Splinter, the TMNT will never revolt against humans because they were taught to protect them. But, I swear there have been times where I could not blame them going against us because of how they're treated.

We look to them a lot because we see ourselves in them. They're like the kids in school that always got picked on by bullies and made fun of. Rarely, those kids come back and shoot up everyone because their feelings were hurt. In the Turtles case, they only go after the people who are life-threatening to others, not so much the bullies. I think if Raph the most would kill a human if provoked to. Actually, I haven't kept track, but I'm pretty sure they've all killed humans, but only out of self defense. With Splinter gone, the teacher who told them to protect and respect humans, let's see where the ball rolls in Mirage now.

*wonders if this is going off-topic again*

[Pizza Face]

But what I dont get is how come they just keep taking the abuse. They have the power to fight back.

[ForSquirtleMyNurtle]

Pizza Face: thanks for the compliments my friend. However, you are wrong to say that they would automatically revolt. The oppressed masses of America have not revolted yet. We just keep voting for George W. even as he continues to destory our jobs and kill the babies of foreign proletarians in Iraq. Often times, victims of oppression learn to accept that they deserve this. "I am a mutant, so I don't deserve to be a full member of society,b ut society deserves protection." This is especially true because Splinter is a Japanese pet rat. As both a pet and a product of a culture that values society over the individual, he would almost certainly train the turtles to be submissive to the will of their oppressors. And yes, I agree this is way off topic but not sure it can be salvaged any longer.

[heretic888]

Yeah, I have to say that despite the fact that Freud made significant and fundamental changes/contributions to the science of psychology, his theories aren't accepted in practice anymore, just in theory. That's why psychiatrists don't practice psychoanalysis, and haven't since the 50's - it's just too broad and general and incorrect to classify people's behavious based on a few events in their early development. In fact, there is a lot more going on than just a few complexes. So the TMNT can't be classified using this approach either.

*nods*

Animals DO have personalities, to a degree. Maybe not as complex as a humans, but they do act differently from one another. Not all dogs act the same, not all cats act the same, not all horses act the same, etc.

There's something in them that makes them individuals, a sort of "personality". They have preferences and get annoyed and upset. Not saying they have human-like mental/emotional wiring, but they aren't automatons.

*nods* I never said they were. But what you described are NOT personalities. Sure, animals are different and respond differently to the same stimuli, but that does not constitute what human beings regard as personalities.

The development of an individual "personality" implies the development of a sense of an individual separate "self" in the first place. Animals do not possess this. Even humans do not possess this separate self-sense to any articulated fashion during the first year or so of their lives. Sorry, but that is just the way things are ---- animals by and large do not differentiate themselves from the world around them, which is why they do indeed believe the world "revolves around them".

Thus, there is no "self" to have a personality in the first place. Animals are prepersonal creatures.

Every dog owner will tell you that animals indeed do have personalities. Im actually pretty scared how my dog resembles me...

That is nothing more than anthropomorphism: projecting human emotions, qualities, and sentiments onto things that do not possess them. The fact that you believe your dog "really loves me" is not an objective observation of "personality". That is simply your own projections.

I too own a dog. A cat, too. I appreciate them for what they are and don't try and make them conform to some pre-established system of what animals are "supposed" to be like. I don't try and pretend either of them can feel to the same complexity that I do, or that either actually experiences themselves as unique "selves" in the sense that I do. And, that's perfectly okay; there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. That's just the way they are.

As far as animals having personalities: yes, animals have different kinds of personalities, distinct from human types, but they still behave in different ways and can still be treated psychologically. Witness the behavior of an abused animal, for instance. This is obviously a personality. Is it a mind? Or a consciousness? Frankly, we cannot answer that question. I'd have to agree that the turtles probably only became self-aware after the mutation, but just because they aren't aware of their feelings doesn't mean they aren't experiencing them.

I have already disproven the notion that animals have human-like "personalities" or "selves", do I don't have to go into it again.

Now, on to Sigmund and his relevance, and I will claim that he is very much relevant. We must first distinguish between performing psychology on actual human patients and performing it on fictional characters. Freud's relevance even in the real world is quite underrated by all the freud haters out there, and there is simply no disputing that the whole edifice of modern psychology (not psychiatry, since psychiatry relies on medicine and biochemical models of behavior) is built on Freud's massive body of work. However, it is true that reducing him to simplistic terms and projecting that on people is not a very good plan.

*nods* I agree completely, but the modern works and discoveries have far surpasses what Freud was talking about in his day and age. Hell, even his "protege" Carl Jung surpassed Freud in many significant ways.

HOWEVER, in the realm of literary theory and criticism (and, although Eastman and Laird are NOT Joyce and Faulkner, we must still include them in the realm of literature) the only acceptable form of psychological interpretation is psychoanlaytic, particularly Freudian and Lacanian versions of that.

The above statement is complete and total poppycock. The notion that psychoanalysis is the only acceptable form of psychological interpretation of art in general, and literature in particular, could not be farther from the truth.

The turtles DO exhibit Freudian behaviors, along with many other things, so I'm not trying simply to reduce Raphael's behavior to castration-anxiety, although I think the reading is open and appropriate.

Actually, no, they don't. This is more projectionism on your part.

Also, someone mentioned that thinking of them as homo is "projection." But anthropological evidence regarding male-exclusive institutions and homosexuality is too broad and powerful to be refuted.

Yes, and there are cultures where homosexuality does not exist at all. That doesn't tell us anything about the TMNT.

From the priesthood to pirates to prisons, when men are denied the comfort of women they will seek the comfort of other men. And yes, they're brothers, but who cares? They have no other turtles to love and besides they can't have little babies anyway.

This is simply more projectionism. For every example of an individual being "denied women" that turns to homosexuality, there are just as many (if not more) that do not embrace same-sex relations.

And if the turtles learned their social roles from "television" they'd have an awfully skewed version of their role in society.

No, their major source of learning and education was from Splinter. They have a very "Japanese-American" view of the world.

But let's suffice to say that a mutated rat does not a masculine role model make.

Ummm.... why not??

Once again, forsquirtlemynurtle blows my mind away. The turtles vision of their roles in society is totally skewed. The only explanation is tv watching. Why else would they see themselves as these heroe, protectors of a city in which they are hated. Oh, how noble of the turtles.

In every version but the made-for-children cartoon, the TMNT in fact do not see themselves as "heroes" or "protectors". They see themselves as a family trying to survive in the world. Nothing more, nothing less.

Come on. I mean, if they were really living in the sewers, protecting people, but the people hate them, over time the turtles would begin to resent humans. It would be only a matter of time before they realize "Hey. I live in the sewers of all places. I train my body and mind daily and nightly and for what? To save these bourgious turtle haters and all we get is a disease infested hole to live in and we are pursecuted all the time? No, we must revolt!" And that is exactly as they would do. They already have their own cell created and with their ninja abilities and don's know how, they would make a dirty bomb and new yorkers would have mutant babies.

This makes a lot of assumptions that are most definitely not substantiated. If the turtles truly were indoctrinated into the higher teachings of Ninpo, then the situation you described would indeed not appeal to them.

So, the only answer is that the gender roles specifically, and their societal roles in general are all projections of Eastman and Lairds minds. (Have you ever seen any interviews with these two. Totally gay boys. Again, PROJECTION)

Well, someone's projecting something here, and something tells me it isn't the two successful, well-adapted adults you're talking about.

Also, I agree that the whole story only makes sense if splinter was Hamato Yoshi first. If he was a rat first, then it doesnt make sense. I dont care if you guys decided that he was some kind of mutant first. Although, with Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuked to hell, maybe he could be mutated. But, even so, there is no way for him to learn to be a ninja. The best he could hope for is to mimick movements. He would have no idea how to harness his Ki, and he wouldnt know how to turn invisible and hold his breath for four hours, or slow his heartbeat to once a minute. Lets have some realism here folks.

I find it comedic you talk about realism when you obviously don't know anything about Ninpo. *chuckles* Hold breath for four hours... yeah right. *chuckles*

But what I dont get is how come they just keep taking the abuse. They have the power to fight back.

What abuse?? In most TMNT series, the population doesn't even know the turtles exist.

Pizza Face: thanks for the compliments my friend. However, you are wrong to say that they would automatically revolt. The oppressed masses of America have not revolted yet. We just keep voting for George W. even as he continues to destory our jobs and kill the babies of foreign proletarians in Iraq. Often times, victims of oppression learn to accept that they deserve this. "I am a mutant, so I don't deserve to be a full member of society,b ut society deserves protection." This is especially true because Splinter is a Japanese pet rat. As both a pet and a product of a culture that values society over the individual, he would almost certainly train the turtles to be submissive to the will of their oppressors. And yes, I agree this is way off topic but not sure it can be salvaged any longer.

*shakes head* Talk about pseudo-psychobabble.

The very fact that you think Dubya is some great Dictator oppressing the masses of America (who, oddly enough, are much better off than the vast majority of people in the world right now) and try and "prove" this with a skewed neo-Freudian interpretation is the height of hilarity.

Try and actually *research* psychological research a bit before accepting commonly disproven and erroneous notions. *chuckles*