"His name is Lark, he sees in the dark."

August started to rise but a small hand pulled him down again. "Why are your eyes like that?"

He glanced up at Lady Kirikyan who simply raised one arched brow. What harm in answering, then?

"I had my eyes replaced. My new ones can see in the dark." They could also see infrared and in wavelengths beyond the visual. "They're supposed to look natural so that people aren't made nervous by them."

Lark wrinkled his nose and peered very closely at one eye and then the other. "They look silvery," he announced. "They don't make me nervous. Seeing in the dark is fun."

"He's got a pair of toy goggles," his mother explained. "Time to let the Enforcer go back to work, Lark."

Comments

Zeborah said…

I just realised, very belatedly - "Seeing in the dark is fun" sounds too much like it might mean only "Seeing in the dark sounds like/would be fun / is fun when I daydream/dream about doing it / read about fictional characters do it". I don't know if a kid actually *would* be that sloppy about language, but I make the assumption that he is more easily than I make the assumption that he's seeing in the dark.

OTOH "I like seeing in the dark" would be unambiguous.

2:03 AM

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it. This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice. If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

Some times some people.

What Cancel Culture is NOT

Maybe we should talk about what cancel culture isn't. It's not a boycott. It's not deciding to no longer go to a business. It's not giving a bad review for bad service. It generally involves two things. First, the offense is a matter of opinion. Second, secondary or even tertiary targets are threatened. Cancellation does not need to be successful, and often with very famous and wealthy people it is not successful. But it serves as a warning to vulnerable people who are not in a position to weather that kind of attack. The goal is terroristic in that it's about forcing social behavior in people who are not currently the subject of the attack. The message is always, this could happen to you. And the tactic invariably includes seeking out vulnerable people to threaten in order to put pressure on businesses or on the target of the attack. So it works like this: JK Rowling is invulnerable. But they can try, right? So what they do is they find out who works for the pub...

Synova

Search This Blog