Interesting. But I think Road Runner does have his bliss—and I’d also distinguish it from “purposelessness”: he lives to run. Running is his bliss. He is “agenda-less”, his purpose is to run. Does he care about Coyote getting crushed, etc.? I doubt it—it’s good that Coyote fails, because he doesn’t get eaten and therefore he can keep running.
I always felt Wyle E. Coyote’s destiny was a great injustice, and as a kid I definitely rooted for him in a way I never rooted for Elmer Fudd or Yosemite Sam. Tom was also often unjustly treated and Jerry, frankly, was largely a jerk. Also Tom’s literal job as ordered by his owners (negligent animal abusing owners, may I add) was to ‘get that mouse’, so his motivation isn’t quite the same as Elmer, who presumably hunts for sport because that’s just something men do, or Coyote who is presumably just hungry.
But yeah, I totally understand that rich guy who supposedly commissioned a final episode where Coyote wins. I wish I could see it.
ahh yeah was going to mention that tom’s motivation being complicated by indentured servitude lol
yes great point about Elmer hunting for sport as opposed to the others, perhaps he’s an excellent example of the banality of evil in that respect, it also makes sense why Bugs Bunny is perhaps the most popular character, because whereas the roadrunner vs. wile e. coyote is somewhat morally ambiguous, Bugs vs. the Hunters is perhaps a true moral subversion as the hunters bring human morality into it by “killing for fun”
Yes absolutely. Bugs for me is always the good guy because he is the underdog that still manages to win. Coyote and Tom are both underdogs who keep getting kicked while they’re down.
Looney Tunes is a great example of complex morality. Yes, the predators are "wrong", but it's ultimately their nature. The prey can be little shits as well.
"Speed and divine luck." Love that. He's the ignorant trickster, but instead of bliss, he gets to win every time.
Interesting. But I think Road Runner does have his bliss—and I’d also distinguish it from “purposelessness”: he lives to run. Running is his bliss. He is “agenda-less”, his purpose is to run. Does he care about Coyote getting crushed, etc.? I doubt it—it’s good that Coyote fails, because he doesn’t get eaten and therefore he can keep running.
(And maybe I am just projecting here!)
I can’t wait until someone breaks down the anti-Blackness in the Bugs Bunny repertoire. And also its queerness.
think this is a case of “be the change you wanna see!” Robert!
😅
I always felt Wyle E. Coyote’s destiny was a great injustice, and as a kid I definitely rooted for him in a way I never rooted for Elmer Fudd or Yosemite Sam. Tom was also often unjustly treated and Jerry, frankly, was largely a jerk. Also Tom’s literal job as ordered by his owners (negligent animal abusing owners, may I add) was to ‘get that mouse’, so his motivation isn’t quite the same as Elmer, who presumably hunts for sport because that’s just something men do, or Coyote who is presumably just hungry.
But yeah, I totally understand that rich guy who supposedly commissioned a final episode where Coyote wins. I wish I could see it.
ahh yeah was going to mention that tom’s motivation being complicated by indentured servitude lol
yes great point about Elmer hunting for sport as opposed to the others, perhaps he’s an excellent example of the banality of evil in that respect, it also makes sense why Bugs Bunny is perhaps the most popular character, because whereas the roadrunner vs. wile e. coyote is somewhat morally ambiguous, Bugs vs. the Hunters is perhaps a true moral subversion as the hunters bring human morality into it by “killing for fun”
Yes absolutely. Bugs for me is always the good guy because he is the underdog that still manages to win. Coyote and Tom are both underdogs who keep getting kicked while they’re down.
Looney Tunes is a great example of complex morality. Yes, the predators are "wrong", but it's ultimately their nature. The prey can be little shits as well.