Talk:Lotionman
From Homestar Runner Wiki
[edit] Pseudocharacter?
So, is he a pseudocharacter? he's given a name and everything. If even Carol, who's only been "spoken to" to imply pseudocharacterness, then I think Lotionman should ge gives pseudocharacter status. I won't shed any tears if he's just an item, though. Dr. Clash 02:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Carol is spoken to as though "she" can hear and understand Marzipan, and she even responds with a scale at one point. The Denzel at least has a face, although I could see an argument for it not being considered a pseudocharacter and more like just a teddy bear. This, however, is a cap. The email says they gave it a name, but that's it. At no point does it look, act, or speak like a character, and at no point do we see anyone treating it as such. It is therefore just an item. — It's dot com 02:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree — on this basis I think that neither Lotionman nor The Denzel should be considered a pseudocharacter (see also here).
Trey56 02:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, oh, oooooooh. I didn't notice the "it". Now I see what all the fuss is about. I guess he's just an item, then.
Dr. Clash 02:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC) (oh, and what happend to edit conflicts, anyway?)
- While I agree that The Denzel should not be a pseudocharacter, I think Lotionman should. The commentary refers to him as "he", not "it", implying that he is not simply an object. (And interestingly, I just found out that The Denzel's wiki page was created by a user named Lotionman. So... that's pretty great.)
Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 18:58, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- There's a good point made on The Denzel's Talk Page where it is considered more of a teddy-bear rather than an actual character, which I believe could also be applied to this hat. And while Homestar does refer to the hat by "he", it's most likely because he misinterprets the "man" at the end of it to consider it a man. And also, the only evidence is via a commentary, which isn't really a valid resource for this type of addition since it's sort-of-non-canon. -
Catjaz63 20:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
- Mike and Jonathan also say "he", not just Homestar. And we mention "Hal" on the Homestar Runner page, even though Missy Palmer made it up in a commentary. This seems much more "canon" than that. They even say he should be on the poster. Gfdgsgxgzgdrc 23:10, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
- Mike and Jonathan also say "he", not just Homestar. And we mention "Hal" on the Homestar Runner page, even though Missy Palmer made it up in a commentary. This seems much more "canon" than that. They even say he should be on the poster.
- There's a good point made on The Denzel's Talk Page where it is considered more of a teddy-bear rather than an actual character, which I believe could also be applied to this hat. And while Homestar does refer to the hat by "he", it's most likely because he misinterprets the "man" at the end of it to consider it a man. And also, the only evidence is via a commentary, which isn't really a valid resource for this type of addition since it's sort-of-non-canon. -
- While I agree that The Denzel should not be a pseudocharacter, I think Lotionman should. The commentary refers to him as "he", not "it", implying that he is not simply an object. (And interestingly, I just found out that The Denzel's wiki page was created by a user named Lotionman. So... that's pretty great.)
- I agree — on this basis I think that neither Lotionman nor The Denzel should be considered a pseudocharacter (see also here).
[edit] A rapper?
The name 'Lotionman' strikes me as a parody of the nickname of the rapper/hip-hop artist 'MotionMan'.
Such may or may not be the case, but I find it too strong a resemblance to ignore.
- MotionMan? Come on. It's clearly...
