A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
Related communities:
Sonic was designed to be recognized. He's a blue anthropomorphic hedgehog who works in a primarily visual medium.
While Shakespeare excelled with the written word, I doubt he could crouch down and rotate his body more than a few dozen RPM without getting dizzy and needing a lie down or whatever British people do when they get overwhelmed.
This might come as a shock to you, but I don't know what Michelangelo looks like and I don't think I would recognize him. I can however name all the most prolific furry artists of our time.
This might come as a shock to you, but I don't know what Michelangelo looks like and I don't think I would recognize him
He's the one with the orange mask and the nunchucks
As there are exactly zero images of Shakespeare that can be considered genuine, it would be a miracle if anyone would recognize him. Some people might recognize the one or other portrait with debatable relation to him, that's it.
The post is probably referring to his works.
This is "Mario is more recognisable than Mickey Mouse" all over again lol
I remember when the same was said about millenials except the comparison was between Ronald Mcdonald and Jesus/George Washington.
Y'all in here doing your best to defend the shitty education you got.
Why?
Its not really about education. I am fully aware of who Shakespeare is and how he is commonly depicted.
But a blue hedgehog that also happens to be the mascot of a bit multimedia company is simply way more recognisable.
I bet this guy didn't even learn to recognise 李白 in school.
Well, Shakespeare is known for his writing. Do you know every face of every writer you like? Sonic is a character, not a writer. Weird comparison.
Glad I'm not the only one. I was just thinking, "I have no idea what Shakespeare looks like," other than the caricature of him they do in TV shows.
The only author whose face I would reliably recognise would be Rowling, and that's because she's constantly in the news for being a hateful Terf. I haven't read any of her books.
I'd probably recognise Pratchett as well.
But yes, I'm not sure what you'd expect.
Not sure I'd recognize Rowling outside of context, but I'd definitely recognize George R. R. Martin, despite never having read or watched anything he's made. He's got a very distinct look.
You'd probably recognize Steven King also, but yeah the list is extremely small for everyone
You never know for sure if its King or Koontz tho.
I think my first memories of seeing Shakespeare's face was on a credit card hologram? The only image I can find is this:
But maybe it's a false memory.
“The younger generation recognizes 100+ Pokémon but almost no domestic bird. “
Yeah, most birds don’t spout their own name constantly though. Imagine a dove yelling “Dove! Dove!” while shitting on your head.
The humble cuckoo:
& Uhu, Zilpzalp and a couple of other exceptions do exist.
However, they can’t hold a Litwick to Lampent.
Pretty much every native NZ bird is named after the sound it makes.
First (& very common) bird I looked up seems to be the exception?
Fantail / pīwakawaka Known for its friendly ‘cheet cheet’ call and energetic flying antics, the fantail is one of the most common and widely distributed native birds on the New Zealand mainland.
Yeah but they have a tail which looks like a fan. Not the same but also quite a descriptive name.
I think the majority of animals have descriptive names. However the discussion isn’t even in the vicinity of whether the names are descriptive.
In addition to all the other comments on how this is just Gen A hating on Gen A+1, it's pretty easy to miss possibly the biggest reason Sonic stands out: he's fucking BLUE
Is this purely a visual comparison of appearance or also work like “to be or not to be”
Or did they simply ask. “Do you know who x is” and take peoples word for it if they say yes.
If you dug up shakespeare, I wouldn't recognize him either and I'm a millennial.
We have a handful of portraits of one, and hours of animated material of the other. Who do you think gets looked at more? If that survey was actually conducted that was a huge waste of time.
*quits phd*
So funny when they try to present something expected as "see how the new generations are".
We only have one portrait which is likely to be of Shakespeare. It's fairly common on books and articles, but I wouldn't expect a casual theatre fan to immediately recognize it.
But I would expect a casual gaming fan to immediately recognize Sonic, even if they've never played any of the games.
I can't remember there was a Shakespeare videogame. But I played Sonic The Hedgehog from it's first releases.
I guess I haven't missed something.
Holy shit, people are more aware of things relevant to the time they live in and the things they actively take part in than things from literally hundreds of years ago that are difficult to establish as relevant in a modern society because it has no tangible relevance to the current era?! THE CHILDREN ARE DAMNED!
Seriously, is there anything more to these lines of thought than a fear of being outdated?
Realistically, is that a bad thing? Who cares what he looked like. Plenty of people don’t recognize people like Socrates, DaVinci, etc. does it matter if people can recognize them?
DaVinci
That's a weird way of spelling Dewinky.
