| blaydcor said: Being a roguish thief was personally my interpration of Locke. And, like I said, I think it's all a matter of perspective which translation was better. And as far as I'm concerned, the original has more personality, and as I explained, I've been used to it forever. Would you turn down an old friend because all of a sudden their was a new friend who was the "correct version" of your friend?
|
Haha that's a pretty poor analogy. I prefer to think of it as this: Say you saw Vincent van Gogh's The Starry Night the first time, and it was painted over with some really cool explosion in the top. You thought, "Wow, that's cool." Then you saw the original years later, with the artist's intentions preserved. I would pick the one with the artist's intentions preserved.
As far as his personality goes, he is certainly a thief, but that doesn't make him a hardened badass by default. He's debonair and eloquent, more along the lines of a Zorro or some other suave outlaw. That's how it was intended. Of course I'm not going to deny you the right to enjoy the first translated version of him more. No one can deny you that right. Just saying, that wasn't the original artist's intention.
