The Active/Passive Dichotomy

The definitions I use to describe the classes are the definitions Calliope gives us in her expository conversations with Roxy and Dirk. I know some people doubt the veracity of those statements, but the only part of the system I see reason to doubt is Calliope’s statement about gender distributions for Classes, the rationale for which I go into in this post.

There’s good reason to think Calliope is right about the rest of it. Namely because like the Aspects, the way Calliope describes Classes suggests a familiar interplay of complementary existential forces. An interplay we’ve seen in Homestuck before, even outside of the dichotomous pairings of the Aspects.

I really suggest you take the time to watch this, but you don’t gotta.

The Daoist concept of the Yin-Yang. This is a concept far too broad and complex for me to effectively break down completely here — I really suggest watching this video before continuing — but the gist is that Yin and Yang are complementary juxtaposed forces, both of which are necessary in shaping reality.

In Tao philosophy, the Yang force —the White swirl with the black dot— is active, forceful and energetic. The Yin force — the Black swirl with the white dot — is passive, conforming and stable.

In this image, Rose is the Yang force — Actively forcing her needles into an Ogre’s eyes, then turning her threads into a harness and riding it. The Ogre is the Yin force — the Passive entity being stabbed into and then ridden upon.

A perhaps more relatable but less colorful, inspiring, and hilarious way to understand this (God I love Rose) is with a simple game of Catch.

A pitcher throwing a ball is Yang

while the catcher receiving it is Yin.

And the game of Catch cannot exist without both elements present.

If this is starting to sound like the distinction Callie draws between Princes and Bards, well — it should:

Because even the Active/Passive terminology the Classes use seems to be derived from common Yin/Yang terminology.

(NOTE: Interestingly, although Calliope does link Passive classes to femininity and Active classes to masculinity (through Muses and Lords), lining up the ideas as presented in Homestuck with their underlying Yin/Yang interpretations, the +/- distinction is flipped. The Active classes are denoted with -, and the Passive ones with +. No idea what that means, but I thought it worth noting.)

So in terms of how to parse the key verbs, the Active/Passive classes correlate perfectly to the Yin/Yang dichotomy. But that’s not the end of it, since Calliope gives us two definitions for what the Active/Passive distinction means. Her second definition is where she posits that Active classes exploit their aspect to benefit themselves, while passive classes allow their aspect to benefit others.

However, Calliope herself says the distinction means a lot of things, and that this is only a starting point for understanding the dichotomy. Let’s take the time to define what, exactly, a dichotomy is in the context of Homestuck.

A dichotomy is often described as a set of mutually exclusive elements that make up a larger whole. This is true of Yin-Yang, as it is composed of forces that are mutually exclusive and in tension with one another.

And yet, a key feature of Yin-Yang is that each force contains the seed of its complement, and indeed objects that are at one time Yin (such as a hill cast in shadow), will eventually become Yang (such as a hill lit by sunlight) and vice versa.

In other words, Callie is describing a system similar to the Aspect pairs we’re well-acquainted with. The Classes, like the Aspects, are meant to describe an existential dichotomy. And so the Classes, like the Aspects, are hyperflexible and broad enough to incorporate practically any way you can interact with reality imaginable.

This isn’t particularly new information — plenty of people think so about the Aspects, and many do about the Classes as well. But because of this element of duality and juxtaposition, we now have thematic and philosophical grounding for it.

An additional claim I’m building from this is that the Class pairs are grouped not just into Active/Passive pairs, but grouped yet again on top of that with an existentially complementary Key Verb pair.

From now on in this text, when not speaking about a specific class with a specific verb, I’ll use the word “Exploit” to players using their Aspect knowingly, for their own purpose. Conversely, I’ll use “Allow” for any instance of an Aspect acting through the character, as if with a will of it’s own.

For simplicity’s sake, let’s use the dictionary definitions of Exploit and Allow, as well:

So in relation to an Aspect, to Exploit means that a character directly uses their aspect like a resource — the player’s will acts as a Yang force on reality, manifesting itself through the Aspect. This implies conscious thought towards a pre-determined goal, the player premeditating how they want to proceed and then using their Aspect as a tool to accomplish their goal.

To Allow means that a character gives the Aspect permission to act on reality, and as Calliope implies, without necessarily being aware of it. In this case, the Player acts as a Yin force on reality, reacting to the “will of the Aspect” — the Aspect’s will manifesting itself through the Player. In this case, it’s almost as though the Player were the tool employed by the Aspect.

Finally, Callie posits that some classes are more passive or active than others — meaning there is a spectrum ranging from most Active to most Passive.

From all this, we can draw a number of possibilities that can influence how we read any given class’ execution. I am going to make the following claims, which I will provide evidence for across this series:

1. A Passive class may not always act for the benefit of others, nor will an Active class always act for their own benefit. 2. An Active class may at times allow their Aspect to act through them, and a Passive class may at times exploit their Aspect for a known purpose. 3. These two truths are separate and unlinked — that is to say, an Active class may end up allowing their Aspect to benefit themselves in some situations, and conversely a Passive class may exploit their aspect to benefit others.

But if this is true, then the Classes are kind of hopelessly complicated, aren’t they? It’d be literally impossible to determine whether we should read Classes as Active or Passive, because in even the most extreme cases they could seem to be both! The system is broken!

Pictured: The Smug Furry Scholar, with his plans.

But not so fast, dear reader.

My smug furry scholar plans beg to differ.

The first is a way to determine whether a class is primarily Active or Passive.

I believe the Class system describes the terms in which

the Players tend to think about the world, and in this case refers to a particular division:

Selfishness vs. Selflessness.