princeofdoom (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
princeofdoom) wrote2019-05-01 11:30 am
princeofdoom) wrote2019-05-01 11:30 am
Entry tags:
Classpect in Homestuck and describing the self
I am a fan of Homestuck, as might be apparent from my username here and elsewhere. Or it might not be, if someone reading this has completely avoided the thing. But Prince of Doom is the heroic title that I feel drawn to from The Game that makes up a large part of the beginning of the webcomic. In The Game (called SBURB by the humans and SGRUB by the trolls), the class Prince is one of active destruction. The Prince uses his aspect to destroy, but also actively destroys his aspect. Doom is the aspect of rules, systems, death and fate. Death and fate have always had a draw for me, and while I work best with rules and systems (I naturally gain understanding of things through these), I also have to say that I have utter disregard for rules or systems that are corrupt or don't actually do what they should.
I know that just like most ways that people choose to explain themselves, the "classpect" system is more or less descriptive (and self descriptive at that) and prone to some error. But I do think that the systems we use for self description says as much about us as what we are in that framework. I think that choosing to identify oneself with a classpect, as opposed to a Hogwarts house or an MBTI type, says something about the person. (And yes it might just be that you're the type of person who would read homestuck but not get into Harry Potter, and don't like technical psych stuff like Myers-Briggs typology, but maybe there's more than that.) The classpect or house or personality type within those systems adds more details, but you had to get to a point that you'd say "Yes, I think this is a valid system for grouping types of people that exist in the world, at least to a small extent."
I know that just like most ways that people choose to explain themselves, the "classpect" system is more or less descriptive (and self descriptive at that) and prone to some error. But I do think that the systems we use for self description says as much about us as what we are in that framework. I think that choosing to identify oneself with a classpect, as opposed to a Hogwarts house or an MBTI type, says something about the person. (And yes it might just be that you're the type of person who would read homestuck but not get into Harry Potter, and don't like technical psych stuff like Myers-Briggs typology, but maybe there's more than that.) The classpect or house or personality type within those systems adds more details, but you had to get to a point that you'd say "Yes, I think this is a valid system for grouping types of people that exist in the world, at least to a small extent."