Board Thread:General Grimm Discussion/@comment-26235944-20150608025717/@comment-24399666-20151105223647

Syscrash53 wrote: We have already seen Diana do the rapid aging. We see Diana in season four finale at least two to three years old. This after only one season. Before Diana was born in the womb she was aware.

While in the womb she had enough awareness to know how to create an illusion that would get miesner to bring wood for a fire because her mother was cold.

At the mansion she staked the blocks with a level of intricacy far beyond what a three year old could do. The stacking of the blocks could just be that she has a natural genius for that, which is uncommon, but doesn't stretch credulity. :)

The thing when she got Meisner to bring wood for the fire (when she was a baby, not in the womb, btw) was creepy, for precisely that reason. She somehow surmised, at the age of, like, a day, that the reason she was cold was that there was no fire and to get a fire, they needed wood, and the way to get more wood was to get Meisner, who was out of the cabin, to bring more wood on the way back, and a good way to get him to bring more wood was to make him believe that the wood was her.

That was not a level of reasoning that a day-old infant should be capable of, and the fact that Diana seemed capable of it was intensely creepy (and innocent at the same time... after all, she was just cold and wanted to be warm).

But still... that's reasoning, not knowledge. It's creepy, but it doesn't strain credulity.

Now, if Diana aged to 11 overnight, that, in and of itself, wouldn't strain credulity given the universe that the writers are presenting to us. But if she aged to 11 overnight at the chronological age of 1 year, and understood the rules of living (don't take from the cookie jar, don't jump on your brother's head, don't put your hand on a hot stove, etc.), understood right from wrong, understood human interaction and friendships, knew how to talk as well as an 11-year-old, knew how to tie her shoes without anyone ever having taught her, knew how to feed herself, knew how to understand and identify emotions that she is feeling and communicate them without just screaming and crying, knew how to do math... all without anybody teaching her any of those things or even having the time to learn them through experience... that is where I draw the line between what I can suspend disbelief about, and what I can't.

And I'm good at suspending disbelief. Really, really good at it. Too good, many would say. If there's a way to believe it within the context of the world the writers present, I will find it. But not here.

That's why I HATE rapid aging arcs. Hate them. Hate them, hate them, hate them. Not because they're bad in and of themselves, but because writers never, ever seem to consider the logical implications of them. If they did... that could be an interesting angle, actually. But they never do.