Yeah, and that's ALL you can say: that the subject of Misty hadn't come up. Given that Ash and Brock are guys, and hadn't traveled with Misty recently, I don't find that surprising. Ash especially is a focus-on-the-now kind of guy...unless Dawn actually asked them to "tell me about all your other friends!" or they encounter a situation in which a previous situation required retelling, I can't see Ash bringing it up.
Proves nothing. It wasn't concerned with the plot of the episode, and Misty doesn't live in Pallet. If I live in Houston, and a friend of mine lives in Dallas, and I don't see him/her when I come back from California just before heading off to Florida, why should I be surprised they're not there to see me? (If they are there, it's a surprise, albeit a good one.) That doesn't mean I never call/write/email my friend in Dallas, btw.
I can agree with that. This IS Ash we're talking about. He seems to talk not just about Pokemon more than people, but about the present and the future, and not so much about the past. He's always looking forward, rarely looking back.
Um...hello! That's because he usually calls Professor Oak to discuss the current situation of the episode with him. We see Ash call Oak because it concerns the plot.
We don't see him call Delia that often, either. Are you gonna tell me a nice boy like Ash hardly ever calls his mother, just because we don't usually see it?
I didn't think so. ;-)
Okay. I'm not saying this is proof Ash calls Misty. Far from it. All I'm saying is that it's NOT proof that he DOESN'T call Misty.
Things we don't see in canon are like Schrodinger's cat. Until we actually see them, events lurk in a kind of limbo, neither happening nor not-happening, until the Powers That Be choose to open the box, collapse the wave function, and show us what went on.
You prefer to think of Ash as not talking to Misty; I prefer to think of him as talking to her (or emailing her, or something) every now and then. The beauty of things is that, until the show proves one of our hypotheses correct and the other wrong, they are both equally valid.
I love a win-win situation. :-D
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Okay, I saw another post and had to say something....
I agree totally. Comparing "amount of emotion" is silly, anyway, because different people show emotion in different ways.
Now, wait just a Pokéball-pickin' minute!
First off, I am a Pokeshipper, thank you very much...and I would never say anything as foolish as that Misty has "more emotion" than May or Dawn. It makes no sense; emotion isn't like power levels; it's not something you can quantify. And even if you could, I've seen plenty of emotion in all three girls; no one here is lacking in personality.
Second, and most importantly: defending Dawn and May does NOT mean you have to trash Misty!
And if you're going to try, you'll have to do better than that.
"Deceptive...?" That word isn't in her dictionary. Misty is so straightforward that if she were a Pokemon, she'd probably be Linoone. Come on, "blunt" is her middle name; she's gotten more tactful as the show went on, but she's still terrible at hiding what she thinks and feels.
I suppose you could call Misty a "shrew"...in the same way you could call May a "wimpy crybaby," or Dawn a "self-obsessed, shallow little Prima Donna."
All THREE remarks are taking one (and only one) trait that each girl has (a negative trait, of course)...and then describing it in the most insulting, hurtful way possible.
Is that fair?
In reality, Misty is impatient and bad-tempered...but she's also feisty, loyal, protective, caring and determined.
May is insecure and easily hurt...but she's also adventurous, kind, considerate, sensible and brave.
And Dawn is a little vain about her looks and enjoys winning...but she's also enthusiastic, courageous, honorable, irrepressible, and good-hearted.
Now, isn't that a better way to talk about the characters than slamming them?
Last edited:
