Op-Eds for August 2019

Hello SCP Wiki and welcome to the SCP Zine Editorials where we ask you your opinion on something within the community, be it in-universe or meta, and publicize your thoughts for all to see! A new topic is issued monthly, and users can weigh in with their opinion by directly PM'ing Uncle NicoliniUncle Nicolini with their thoughts on the topic. Discussion in the comments is always welcome. This is, after all, a forum!

This month's topic is:

Object classes.

Let's get to your thoughts.


From: The Great Hippo

Outside of Item #, Object Class is the least interesting part of an SCP article.

SCP-173's use of "Object Class: Euclid" was never intended as anything more than a way to stimulate the dark recesses of the imagination. "What does it mean?" — "What makes it 'Euclid'?" — "What sort of organization uses terms like this?!" — these are not questions SCP-173 sought to answer. They're questions SCP-173 sought to inspire. If SCP-173 explained what "Euclid" meant, it wouldn't have had the same creepy charm.

Over the next decade, authors have expended literally millions of words to expand and justify arbitrary design elements in a piece of flash-fiction that's less than 250 words long. We have created an expanded lore surrounding a poopy murder statue, and we're absurdly neurotic about ensuring every piece of fiction we write here conforms to the precise dimensions of that lore.

Let me ask you something: How does a werewolf die? Silver bullets? Removal of its heart? Shot by the person it loves?

No. A werewolf dies however the hell you want it to die. Because werewolves aren't real.

Object Class is whatever you want it to be. It's whatever serves your purposes best. It's whatever the person reading it decides it is. It is quite possibly the least important decision you'll make when writing your article.

You want to know what made SCP-173 "Object Class: Euclid"? Here's your answer:

"It sounded spooky."

You're welcome.


From: aismallard

There's been a lot of discussion about how to properly classify scips, as well as new ways of categorizing other attributes of articles. While there is obviously valuable conversations to be had regarding this, I feel it's important to not lose sight of what they are ultimately for.

Object classes are for narrative effect.

Sometimes the effect doesn't matter that much. It's Safe, just keep it in a locker. It's Euclid, which is about as vague as object classes get. But the object class / other designations exist to set the reader's expectations coming in, maybe suggesting it's harmless, something big is about to happen, or "helpful" like Thaumiel. Any additional warnings or designations you apply on the article contribute to this effect, and as the author you have the obligation to take this and fulfill or subvert it. This is most clear with -EX scips, since from their very listing the reader expects that everything will be revealed as non-anomalous, but will still match the stakes of a typical mainlist article.

In my opinion, the relevant aspect of the object class is to be part of the introduction, to tell the reader what sort of article this will be. Object classes, threat levels, the anomaly bar, and the choice of picture / caption all contribute to the initial feel of a piece.


From: Vezaz

CLASSES ARE DICKS STOP PUTTING MADE UP NON-ENGLISH WORDS IN YOUR ARTICLES
Thanks.


Want to be featured in next month's op-ed? Take a look at the topic and formulate some thoughts.

The topic for September is…

Where do you draw the line on suspension of disbelief in an SCP article?

Remember to keep it under 250 words and send a pm to Uncle NicoliniUncle Nicolini to submit your thoughts, and don't forget to discuss in the comments if you'd like.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License