Oops
↓ Transcript
TODD: OKAY, Sweetie. That's enough silly stories.
AMANDA: Can we work
in the woodshop
some more?
THEO: Absolutely! Mind the jewelry though, you'll want to stash that lovely barrette.
AMANDA: Uuuuhhh I can't. It's medical.
THEO: A... medical barrette?
AMANDA: YEP!
THEO: Todd! Get over here.
AMANDA: Can we work
in the woodshop
some more?
THEO: Absolutely! Mind the jewelry though, you'll want to stash that lovely barrette.
AMANDA: Uuuuhhh I can't. It's medical.
THEO: A... medical barrette?
AMANDA: YEP!
THEO: Todd! Get over here.
Today's edition of the Secret Commentary is empty, because Dave failed to come up with something for it.
Uh Oh.
Power incontinence in 3…2…1…
((small question: can Amanda or Selkie’s Echo powers be used in woodwork context?))
I’m laughing out loud XD
I’m trying to figure out how a barrette would be dangerous? It’s in her hair, which is already going to be held out of the way. I mean, if anything, it would be helping prevent her hair from hanging dangerously in front of her face.
I’m assuming it’s because it’s hard, and thus could snag on something. More importantly: it’s dangerous because the guy running the workshop says it’s dangerous. Clarifications or explanations can wait until after the session’s over. 🙂
Wouldn’t it be better at this stage to actually get into why rather than after the session is over? It isn’t like they are pressed for time or holding a whole group of people back, and it would be worthwhile for Selkie to know why too. Trust is an important thing, and if the guy running the workshop doesn’t feel that it is worthwhile to take the time explaining why it is dangerous to you, it can hurt the relationship between the two. Explaining why something is a safe practice should always trump doing the activity, unless the direct safety issue requires immediate action without debate. Say if the reason is that it could snag on something is the explanation. Other things, such as clothes, hair (even if tied back), etc. could still snag on something and cause problems. Not warning her about snagging and just about jewelry/barrettes could make her careless about the potential for other things to snag. You don’t want her to just assume that she is fine if she conflates the issue with jewelry rather than snagging. It would be like telling someone you meet while casually walking to avoid a particular path without telling them why, and the reason is that you thought you saw a critter walking around that had rabies. Sure if they avoid the path they might not run into the infected creature, but they don’t know that there’s an infected creature in the area or that others could possibly be infected. It just leaves them open to unnecessary danger. On the other hand, if someone is running at you and telling you to run away too, that is when it’s better to comply first and ask questions later.
It isn’t, in any capacity. Both of them should probably have their hair tied up as the length looks like it goes past their ears, but I doubt the barrette is any danger at all.
It’s being used as a narrative device to move the story.
Could be he’s worried about it falling off and getting damaged, thus upsetting his granddaughter, as he does call it a ‘lovely barrette’.
It may be that the barette is in danger, if it gets dirty or sometjing?
My guess is, any flying bits of wood could snag onto it, and hurt her. Even if she’s wearing eyewear. Or it could get in the way of said eyewear, too.
If you are worried about flying wood chips snagging into it and hurting her, my concern would be less about the barrette and more about the flying wood chips that can so easily hurt someone. As someone who wears glasses everyday, barrettes don’t get in the way of wearing glasses. Though putting on or removing glasses can mess up the barrette due to pulling on hair.
I take it as just a general policy, ‘no open toed shoes, shorts/dresses, or jewelry in the workshop’
maybe he wasn’t thinking about how this specific case could be an exception, or maybe he did think of that, but wanted to use it as an example to teach the more general rule.
I’m thinking it was probably this combined with not wanting it to get lost or accidentally damaged. Even if you were doing something as benign as painting or staining he might have recommended to remove it just to keep it safe. It would be like wearing a beautiful pure white dress to a spaghetti dinner. Nothing might happen but it just seems like it is begging for something to fall on it and stain it.
I think it’s it’s not really about it being there. It’s just that it is insufficient as method to hold hair completely safely in the workshop, so the standard practice would be to take it out and instead use an elastic band to put the hair in a ponytail.
Amanda done goofed. There will be teasing later.
Considering how she feels without it on and the issue with her mother taking it before, I would say that feeling panic when someone says she should take it off again to be quite a reasonable response. The only way panic wouldn’t have been a response is if they had hard core practice for a good length of time so that she could be familiar with the response and dealing with combative people.
I absolutely detest Theo’s hair. It reminds me of a clown. That little piece up front he’s unwilling to separate with, ugh.
I think it’s a great character design, though. Distinctive.
hey, if you don’t got much, you want to hang on to it.
That’s completely true, but the tuft looks absurd. When my hair started to take a vacation on my head, that’s when I started shaving it and focusing on my beard.
There comes a point when every hair is so precious it has its own name — at least to some of us.
I was close.
Grandpa is on the scent.
Does Grandpa know what Selkie’s barrette did?
More and more I’m hoping that the girls get to spend time sculpting with Pohl’s wife. Grandpa’s already drilled them on shop safety, Pohl will be nearby to help with Echo use, and Andi can chat with a fellow artist.
If they can tone it down, it might make for some lovely woodburning projects!