Why So Inconsistent With Cutie Marks?
Added 2020-08-07 02:13:03 +0000 UTCWe have been asked in the past why we are so inconsistent on drawing cutie marks. Sometimes we show them, sometimes we don't. Why is that?
First lets share something with you. None of us call them 'cutie marks.' There is a deep seeded dislike to the term 'cutie mark' among us. So we call the 'CM's.' So sometimes we draw a CM and sometimes not. Why?
Well, it depends who is drawing. But it also has to do with our continued fighting back and forth if we even want the "Adorkable" characters to have CM's. By having the CM's it ties them closer to the MLP series, but if we get rid of the CM's it sort of breaks that association more. There has been talk that we feel the CM's sometimes make the series seem more juvenile upon first time readers who just see it as a knockoff of the MLP cartoon. Possibly removing them would move the series 'upmarket' a tad for more people to read it. There is also talk that since the CM's mean nothing in the Adorkable universe (We never have them serve any purpose) that they are un-needed. They seem like tattoos and nothing else.
Then of course the main reason is it depends who is drawing. One might like to keep CM's on at times while someone else doesn't care. We all are mixed in our thoughts and how we do things. That also explains why some episodes have backgrounds or look different than other episodes.
So did I answer your question.... not really. I kind of made more questions. If you have a question below, I will try to answer it just as confusingly.
Next time we will talk about why original characters always have 'normal' names like Greg, Paul, or Bob. That will be interesting.
