[Mail Call] 2017/03/17 – On Definitions (and MURICA)

Zero has landed in the US, and hopefully he’ll have a lot of fun wandering around the country.

Yes, that is 2016.

Anyways, today’s update is a bit of an unusual one. It’s largely out of universe since I thought it makes more sense to think about it from our perspective rather than in-universe, but let’s just say that it’s a problem that everyone has to think about in the Pacific-verse.

“Considering how the last update talked about “paper ships”, can we assume they aren’t technically paper ships anymore? Getting a bit philosophical here, but given the fact that they did “exist” in an alternate universe where “Japan” existed before the Abyssal assault on their planet, they are very much “real” in a material sense, just not from the perspective of the current universe, i.e.”

For all intent and purposes a “paper ship”‘s reference frame is to our own world. Since Pacific’s development follows real life history up to 1950, they would call it the same thing as we do.

There is no way to prove that a “paper” shipgirl is who she is, however. It’s not like she can open up a portal to her world and prove that the ship actually existed. Opinions are split as to whether the fairy projections would have been “historical” or “not,” but whether or not they’re real is irrelevant. She exists. She makes claims to some unbuilt battleship (in this world) and that’s sufficient.

“Current universe (in-verse perspective)
Paper ship > never built > does not exist > not real

Current universe (an outside observer’s and probably the Abyssal’s perspective)
Paper ship > was built (alternate universe) > actual ship > does exist > real”

Yeah, that’s one way of looking at it. I’d be a little more specific but overall it’s pretty accurate.

“And how controversial is this idea to the people in that came from the current Pacific-verse?”

I don’t know, man. This is a world with giant teleporting fish monsters and young women who can hand-lift tanks and doesn’t afraid of anything. You tell me. 🙂

(On a more serious note, I think the shipgirl agencies as a whole are mostly open to these ideas of interpretation. The parallel/multiple worlds thing is going to take proof, but they treat it with due rigor like any other field of study.)

“I already seen a response from Hiei, so I can tell that it can get quite heated, but is her response part of a minority or a majority of not just ship girls, but all who is related?”

On matters such as these each shipgirl have their own opinions. I tend to not speak in broad swaths about the shipgirls – doctrine and policy are different.

“And does it vary among different agencies?”

Sort of? STEC benefits from having MERLIN who basically can confirm that the shipgirls are shipgirls and not Abyssals. So in that sense I think the Japanese are right to be wary. After all, again, nobody really understands shipgirls very well just yet.

“Like how the NKT might be a more zealous bunch and are more likely to reject ship girls like Zao and other paper ships. So what of STEC? What of RN-STEC? etc. etc.”

For all intent and purposes nobody knows Zao is around yet. She’s content to just sit around and, to borrow a term Sune recently learned, trololo about the countryside.

STEC I’ve answered. The only other additional note is that for some reason a lot more “paper” girls have appeared in Japan, so they’ll be keeping an eye on this matter quite closely.

The NKT is fragmented. Some don’t care – a shipgirl is a shipgirl. Others are thinking more from Japan’s operational security and worry (rightfully) that these shipgirls aren’t what they seem. In that sense of course the xenophobia would play a very significant role in how they interact with the shipgirls.

RN-STEC, at least at the time of that “interview,” have its own internal structural problems of who’s commanding what. That, and there aren’t really any British “paper” shipgirls that appeared as of now, so that’s not what they have to be concerned about.

Hope that helps and see you next time. 🙂