curiousher: (Upside down)
+ ALICE + ([personal profile] curiousher) wrote2010-03-05 01:04 am
Entry tags:

M e s s a g e 1 0

This is all terribly confusing! There's something very fishy here, and it's not any kind of fish I ever saw. It's a confusing fish of a different name altogether. Like Bruce, or Isabelle, or Marzipan. Those aren't names for fishes at all!

Who are you all? Are you who you've been saying you've been being? Are you all some kind of fishes that have been walking about on land? Well, you're going to get everything all wet if you keep doing that! What kind of fish are you anyway?

Maybe I'm not even Alice! Maybe I've been a fish all this time!

Excuse me, could one of you fishes tell me what sorts of sounds I'm supposed to be making? I don't think I've ever heard a fish. Is it a glub-glub sort of noise?

[identity profile] alwaysaboom.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 06:11 am (UTC)(link)
Don't tell me we're going to drown this time...

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 06:15 am (UTC)(link)
Now how on Earth would a fish drown? That's just silly!

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 06:27 am (UTC)(link)
But that's not drowning, is it? That's something else, isn't it? Like suffomacation or something. Either way, you could just go back in the water, you know. I'm sure if you've made it this long without water, you can go another few feet to the ocean. Or the fountain. Or the pool, perhaps.

[identity profile] alwaysaboom.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 06:29 am (UTC)(link)
Oh, well that makes things a lot better.

... Any chance that you'll cough up a straight answer?

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 06:31 am (UTC)(link)
I can't imagine what you mean. Are my answers curved, or zig-zagged? If they're a dotted line you could just connect them, I suppose.

[identity profile] alwaysaboom.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 06:37 am (UTC)(link)
[sigh]

Eff, wrong Poland account!

[identity profile] reckless-eagle.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 10:06 am (UTC)(link)
...Dude? Have you like, been drinking? I'm totes not a fish.
Edited 2010-03-05 10:06 (UTC)

To be fair, it was an awesome account name. <3

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 12:51 pm (UTC)(link)
I've had plenty of tea, but I don't see how that makes a difference. Are fish not supposed to have tea?

And well, how should I know? You could be a fish. Fish are very sneaky like that.

Thank you bb <3

[identity profile] reckless-eagle.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 02:55 pm (UTC)(link)
[Just... wonders what she's been making the tea out of. The mushrooms you're not supposed to eat, possibly.]

I'm like, 450. I totes don't think I could go that long and not notice I was a fish. Wait, why are we even talking about this?

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 03:38 pm (UTC)(link)
[Well, this is Wonderland. It's entirely possible.]

You could! I'm pretty old myself, so I would know. But maybe there's some kind of cut-off mark, like 200, or 365, or something.

Well, why not?

[identity profile] reckless-eagle.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 03:44 pm (UTC)(link)
Well, I like, don't even have that much coastline! I mean, a bit, but I don't go there that much, and I don't think a fish would be very happy on a plain, y'know?

...Um, because I'm not a fish? And if you were, you wouldn't be talking to me about it?

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 03:59 pm (UTC)(link)
It would have to be some kind of land-fish then!

You still could be one, but I suppose that second part's true. A real fish would probably deny their fishy-ness. But if I start saying I'm not a fish, then I'm denying it! Oh, this is all so terribly confusing!

[identity profile] reckless-eagle.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 04:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Wait, but like, if you're not denying it and I am, wouldn't that make me fishier than you? Except I'm totally not one, so--Ohmigod, my head hurts. What the Hell?

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 04:35 pm (UTC)(link)
It would, so you are, aren't you? Or maybe you're not and I am? I don't know anymore. I told you this was confusing!

[identity profile] reckless-eagle.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 05:45 pm (UTC)(link)
I totally don't get it.

[identity profile] helena-campbell.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 10:31 am (UTC)(link)
...Parrot fish look really nice. [Totally just playing along.]

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 01:03 pm (UTC)(link)
[] They do, don't they! I wonder if they like crackers? You know, like "Polly want a cracker?". Or if they caw like one?

I like clownfish, even if they don't look very much like clowns. That happens with a lot of fish, doesn't it?

[identity profile] helena-campbell.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 01:23 pm (UTC)(link)
Or maybe they know how to talk, like parrots. Maybe they just talk when we're not looking.

Yes, it does. Like how lionfish don't look anything like lions at all. Except maybe if you squint at them and imagine really hard.

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 01:42 pm (UTC)(link)
Perhaps! Or maybe they all talk all the time, and we just don't hear them. They could be trying to tell us something!

No, they don't really. It takes quite a lot of imagine for them! Or even goldfish. They're not really gold at all! Most of them are orange, but even the ones that aren't still aren't the right color!

[identity profile] helena-campbell.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 02:15 pm (UTC)(link)
What would fish have to say, I wonder? It could be really important.

That's true. Why would anyone call them gold in the first place? But I suppose orangefish doesn't sound as nice. I bet the fish wouldn't like it. Gold is much more dignified.

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 03:56 pm (UTC)(link)
It could be terribly important, something they really want us to know! Maybe we could learn to speak fish somehow, but that seems awfully difficult.

No, it doesn't sound so good, does it? Gold is almost...regal, I think. For King and Queen fishes, and the royal fish of the fishy courts. I doubt they'd settle for anything less than gold.

[identity profile] helena-campbell.livejournal.com 2010-03-06 09:06 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, I doubt there'd be dictionaries or things like that to help us.

All the silver fish must be really disappointed. Like tuna. Imagine being second place all the time, to a little goldfish! It's not even really gold to begin with. [Okay, Helena is starting to falter because the conversation has completely left logic behind.]

ooc

[identity profile] talks-to-fish.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 12:42 pm (UTC)(link)
- Will they notice that they are in the wrong body?
- Will they remember themselves (as another person?)
- Is it necessary that the person has been at the mansion at one point, or can it be someone form their canon?

Re: ooc

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 01:18 pm (UTC)(link)
- Nope! They'll think they've always looked like that, even if it goes against what their hated person looks like.

- Yes, for the most part. It would lead to questions like "well, what would "you" look like (as another person)" though, and I think there's a lot of room for creative leeway there, since character relations are going to get so messed up this weekend anyway. Like, maybe they can't quite remember what they looked like, or maybe they looked like someone else all together.

- Nope, it can be someone from their canon, whether they've been to the mansion or not. Similarly, it could be someone in the mansion that isn't from their canon, if they've come to hate them that much.

I hope that helps? I just rolled out of bed, so I feel like I might be a little incoherent. ;;;

Re: ooc

[identity profile] talks-to-fish.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 01:43 pm (UTC)(link)
No, thanks, it's good!

- Would they have the knowledge of the person that they hate? Because Jeb knows almost all the things that Angels wants to find out about... so... is it possible to have them leak that knowledge out to someone else, so other people can tell them about it afterwards?

Re: ooc

[identity profile] curiousher.livejournal.com 2010-03-05 02:05 pm (UTC)(link)
- I'm going to say no on that one. I understand the reasoning behind it, and for people whose hated person isn't in the mansion it would be fine, but if we said it was okay for everyone, I think that would probably count as godmodding, which is generally considered not good. We can't really give the characters information they don't already have. It will probably wind up more like your character's impression of the person the hate. It also works out for characters that hate some one but don't know the "real" side of them. They won't magically know that information, they'll just be acting like how they would assume they would act. Does that make sense?