Turbotastic Theory: Why Does Patrick Star (SpongeBob’s Best Friend) Act the Way He Does?

Disclaimers: 1) Yes, I know that there are many things that I could be writing at this moment.  One of these is my long-awaited Disney’s Beauty and the Beast review.  To be honest, it’s been more than two months since I first saw that film and I might need to see it again just to be sure that I am getting all of the main plot points correctly.  Another thing I could be writing about is my journey through the Holy Land on my Juniors Abroad trip.  My excuse for not writing about that just yet is that my journal is still with my professor and she is in the process of mailing it back to me.  Once I receive it, then yes, I will do an electronic writeup for you all. 2) A couple considered titles for this post were “The Turbotastic Asian Reviews ‘I’m With Stupid’: A SpongeBob Episode”; or “Turbotastic Theory:Who is The True Villain(s) in The SpongeBob Episode, ‘I’m With Stupid’?”  I was thinking about these titles, but then decided that my theory was going to be more extensive than just the one episode.  3) Obviously, I do not own any of the media in this post.  The videos belong to TheMysteriousMrEnter, Pieguyrulz, and ChannelFrederator on YouTube.  These guys are big inspirations to me.  The clips featured in the videos belong to Nickelodeon.  Alright, on with the theory.

Hey guys, Turbotastic Asian here back after a long hiatus, with another Turbotastic Theory.  So, this might be an unpopular opinion, but my favorite character from the whole SpongeBob SquarePants franchise is Patrick Star, the little, yellow fry-cook’s adorable sea star best friend and pink partner in crime.  The way Patrick became my favorite character on the show is actually a tragic one.  Up until the age of 13, Squidward was always my favorite one, due to his lovable, hilarious grouchiness (in fact, my first personal character-shipping was Squidward/Grumpy (Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs) but I digress).  However, my older brother passed away right before I turned 14, and his name happened to be Patrick.  Therefore, in his honor, my favorite character switched from the cephalopod to my brother’s ectodermic namesake.

This fact is why I am often saddened by YouTubers complaining about how much they hate Patrick and how much of a jerk, bully, and even psychopath, he is.  Here is a small list of videos from YouTube for those of you who might not know about these complaints:

These arguments do make sense, and I can see why people think Patrick is a horrible person and a horrible role model for children.  However, I also think that there might be another side of Patrick’s story that people do not seem to get.  What’s more, I think I have found that side of his story, which I will get to momentarily.

First, let me make it clear that like Pieguyrulz, I am in no way defending Patrick’s actions nor am I saying that those who hate him are wrong.  If you dislike this guy, that is totally cool.  I don’t like half the characters my friends like.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  I admit that sometimes, Patrick’s actions are pretty stupid, immature, malicious, whatever name you want to give them.  My purpose of writing this theory is only to give you my idea of why Patrick acts the way he does.  The truth shall now be revealed!

Like I said, Patrick is not a very popular character among YouTubers.  The episode that they commonly gravitate toward to prove his jerkiness is the pre-first-movie SpongeBob episode, “I’m With Stupid”.  For those of you who are unfamiliar, this is the episode where SpongeBob acts stupid in front of Patrick’s “parents” to make Patrick look smart by comparison.  TheMysteriousMrEnter commentates on this episode in the first video listed above (3:35-6:25).  Unfortunately, I can’t find the full episode anywhere, so you guys will just have to take me at my word.

This is often cited as the first, true “Patrick’s a Jerk” episode.  All the episodes that came before it show him as just a playful, lovable, not-too-bright kid who, when he did mess things up or came across as inconsiderate, only did so out of ignorance.  This is the first episode where his darker side is revealed.  Now, this is a very controversial episode in that there’s an equal amount of people who enjoy it (Pieguyrulz) as people who don’t (obviously TheMysteriousMrEnter). The people who enjoy it, do so for the comedy and the awesome but kind of creepy twist ending, whereas the people who do not enjoy it dislike it for Patrick’s maliciousness and hypocrisy and for the lack of transition between Patrick’s amusement at SpongeBob’s feigned stupidity and Patrick’s taking advantage of SpongeBob’s feigned stupidity.  Where do I stand?  I’d probably give it a MEH-.  I don’t find it particularly funny (with the exception of the adult jokes) and can see how people could take offense at Patrick’s actions.  However, I don’t think that it is the worst P.-F.-M. SpongeBob episode in existence either.

Furthermore, I would like to point out a problem have with the episode, despite no one ever bringing it up.  This problem is hinted at right from the very beginning of the episode, when Patrick is freaking out and trying to get things ready for his parents’ visit.  When SpongeBob asks what’s wrong, Patrick shows him the letter from his parents, stating that they are coming over to celebrate Starfish Day.  The letter ends with a comment to “please try to remember but not too hard or you’ll hurt yourself like last time.”  What kind of parents would write something like that to their own son?  I mean, at this point, it is unclear if they meant it that way or not, but one can clearly see what kind of impact this comment has on Patrick.  As you saw in the aforementioned video, poor Patrick is in tears; he’s really hurt and upset!  Patrick sobs, “SpongeBob, my parents think I’m dumber than a sack of diapers! :'(“.  As soon as his parents show up, they continue to treat him like an idiot up until SpongeBob shows up and then they start condescending him right along with Patrick!

If you haven’t guessed by now, I have reason to believe that Patrick himself is a victim of psychological abuse.  This could be the reason for both his stupidity and his jerkiness.  In terms of his stupidity, my theory is that Patrick might have started off being really smart, but then his parents abused him over something minor and made him feel like he was stupid.  Because he was told he was stupid at a young age, Patrick started believing that he was stupid and therefore began acting stupid.

Notice how I said he acts stupid and believes himself to be stupid.  I do not believe he actually is stupid.  Apparently, neither do the people on YouTube.  They agree that Patrick is definitely smarter than he acts, which makes his actions all the more jarring.  This point is made clear in the post-first-movie episode, “The Card”, the episode TheMysteriousMrEnter credited as being the worst episode of Patrick being a jerk/idiot.  Again, for those of you unfamiliar, “The Card” is the episode where Patrick buys a Mermaid Man and Barnacle Boy trading card that SpongeBob really wanted.  Patrick promises to give SpongeBob the card at the end of the day, but until then, he completely mistreats the card and drives SpongeBob crazy.  Once, when he walks straight into Goo Lagoon with it and SpongeBob saves him from drowning, SpongeBob questions Patrick about his mistreatment of the card.  Without missing a beat, Patrick matter-of-fact-ly states, “Well SpongeBob, you can’t always expect my usual brand of stupidity.  I like to mix it up; keep you on your toes!”

To summarize TheMysteriousMrEnter’s thoughts on this, the reason why this is seen as the most infamous Patrick episode is because that one little quote suggests that every single stupid thing Patrick had done in the series up to this point had been completely on purpose.  And if you’ve a huge SpongeBob buff like I am, you know that that is a lot of stupid antics.  All of the antics that Pieguyrulz listed in the second video are only a handful and they are from the pre-first-movie era only!  Basically, in this line, Patrick is saying that he himself is aware that he is stupid.  But then, if one knows that they are stupid, are they even that stupid at all?

I have always been taught that a few little words, especially to a young child, can dramatically influence their lives, sometimes for the better, but also sometimes for the worse, which is what might have happened to Patrick.  Another piece of evidence for Patrick’s psychological abuse can be found in the episode “The Bully”, where it is revealed that Patrick was college friends with Flats the Flounder, the new kid at boating school, set on kicking SpongeBob’s butt.  We don’t know exactly what Flats’ story is, other than his dad is terrified of him (child neglect?).  Therefore, I might be stretching this a bit, but sometimes the reason bullies gang together is that they can identify with each other more than they can anyone else.  This might even suggest that Patrick is better/closer friends with Flats than he is with SpongeBob, whose parents have been totally loving on and encouraging him from the start.  Now, this could be explained away by the friendship montage featured in “The Secret Box” that display SpongeBob and Patrick hanging out together as babies/young children, but it could be possible that they went to different colleges and Patrick formed a friendship with Flats then.

An even better piece of evidence can be found in the episode “Valentine’s Day”.  This is the episode that I remember absolutely hating as a kid, maybe even more than “I’m With Stupid”.  If “I’m With Stupid” just bored me, “Valentine’s Day” totally infuriated me.  In this episode, Patrick acts like a selfish, spoiled, self-entitled, little brat just because he thinks his best friend didn’t get him a Valentine’s Day present.  I mean, Patrick didn’t get SpongeBob anything either.  At least SpongeBob actually tried!  But I’m getting ahead of myself here.  The line of dialogue that ties into my overall theory was the line right before Patrick snaps and tries to destroy the amusement park:


When I was a kid, I just thought that Patrick was just being an overdramatic crybaby at this point.  As ChannelFrederator states, this line of dialogue could suggest that Patrick is a psychopath, as one symptom of psychopathy is egocentrism and the perpetual desire to be the center of attention.  However, to further support my theory, Patrick might have actually feel unloved at this point because his parents never truly loved or appreciated him for anything.  Usually, children, or even adults who have suffered abuse of whatever kind, grow up having a very warped idea of love and no matter what their friends do, say, or give to them, they still suffer with feelings of not being loved or appreciated.  Furthermore, when their friends fail them, as Patrick thought SpongeBob had, this feeling is made even more prominent.  This could also explain why Patrick was so upset about not being able to create anything in “The Googly Artist” but then sold some shoddy thing to the first person who asked for it: he had finally found someone who did appreciate his efforts, no matter how small.

The lack of love and appreciation from his parents pretty much explains Patrick’s “stupidity”.  It could partly explain his “jerkiness”, but again, that might only be part of it.  Like I said before, when Patrick turns on SpongeBob in “I’m With Stupid”, his parents do too.  They had always been laughing at SpongeBob ever since he arrived at Patrick’s house, but when Patrick starts taking it seriously, like he actually thinks SpongeBob’s the dummy, his parents just go along with it.  If those were my parents and I was doing that to my best friend, they would have immediately scolded me and had me apologize.  I mean, if you and your friend are joking around, and your friend is acting stupid on purpose with the intention of making you laugh, which is similar to what SpongeBob was doing at the beginning, that’s one thing; but actually making fun of how your friend is dressed or other personal details is another thing altogether.  This shows that Patrick’s parents do not know a thing about discipline and actually teaching their son how to treat those around him.  Also, they themselves act just as idiotic as Patrick, if not more so.  Therefore, one cannot blame Patrick for being a hypocrite in this episode without blaming his parents.

Lastly, I want to talk about that loophole some of you might have concerning this theory.  Some of you might be skeptical about this theory and ask, “But Turbotastic Asian, wasn’t it revealed that the two sea stars in the episode weren’t even Patrick’s parents at all?”  I am going to say that, yes, you are correct.  When fashioning this theory, I did hit this little loophole and almost had to scrap it.  However, the letter that Patrick received before the episode started, was, undoubtedly, written and sent to him by his real parents.  Also, notice how when his fake parents show up and start treating him like a moron, he doesn’t even question their identity.  At first, I passed this off as just his stupidity.  However, the more interesting reason why Patrick doesn’t question them may be that they treat him just like his real parents treat him, so he naturally assumes that they are his real parents.

So there you go.  This is my theory as to the story behind Patrick’s abnormal, sometimes irritant actions.  Let me know if I’m onto something or if there is just not enough substantial evidence to support this idea and I am spewing some random nonsense.  Do you think that Patrick was/is a psychologically abused child?  If not, what do you think is the reason Patrick, best friend of SpongeBob, behaves the way he does?

This is the Turbotastic Asian, and I’m signing out!

Parting Words

This post is going to be a little shorter than my usual posts and I am not going to do my usual salutation or outr0, as this is an additional post and not my actual weekly post.  Plus, you are probably tired of hearing it by now and I have already used it in last night’s post, so it would feel annoying doing it a second time in the same week.

Anyways, like I said in my last post, I have really enjoyed reading your posts and sharing mine with you.  I feel like I’ve learned a lot about all of you and hope that you have learned more about me.

Speaking of which, you might be wondering why so many of my posts are either reviews or fan theories and very few about my actual life. Some of you might even have the crazy conspiracy theory that I am really a filming major disguised as an English major (Haha JK!).  But nope! I am, still, very much an English major.  The main reason why I write more about TV and movies than I do about my true life events is that TV and movies are generally easier for me to remember and write a well-organized analysis of.  With real life, I can’t do that, with some exceptions, such as my Halloween costume blog post.  It’s not like in Harry Potter, where I can re-watch my memories so as to remember word for word, what happened.  Usually, I can only remember the most important bits and pieces of something after some thought, and most of those memories would not be long enough to reach the word minimum.  TV and movies, on the other hand, are easier to automatically think of something long enough, or in my case, more than long enough, and then write about it in almost one sitting.

The reason I bring this up is because I plan to continue writing on this blog after this course and I would very much appreciate it if at least a couple of you could continue reading and commenting on it.   You don’t have to if you don’t want to, but if it is a Sunday night in the middle of June and you have nothing to do, why not look me up?  My blog is not dependent on audience participation, but it is much more fun to have some give and take interaction with my audience.  Now,of course this is a two-way street; I will continue reading and commenting on your blogs as well. Just note that if I do continue writing, I’ll probably do what I’ve been doing all semester: Mostly reviews and fan theories with a few RL stories here and there.

Preview: Speaking of fan theories, I actually have a new one, though I’m probably not going to post it for another ten months.  It’s going to be about the characters from Groovie Goolies, specifically the Mummy, and why he’s not as central a character in the show, despite being one of the four main monsters in the media.  Again, it’s not going to be up until next October, when it will be more relevant.  Plus, ten months will give you more than enough time to familiarize yourselves with the show.  If I were to write it and post it up now, chances are you guys will have little to no idea what I’m talking about.  Therefore, stay tuned for that one!

With that, I bid you all farewell, happy finals week and of course, a very merry Christmas!

The Turbotastic Asian’s Christmas Profile

Hey guys, Turbotastic Asian here with my almost final blog post of 2016 and for this class. I do have one more post to really wrap things up, which will be up sometime tomorrow.  I do not know if I’ll have any more courses that will require me to write on this blog, but I certainly hope I do.  It has been turbotastic sharing my writings with you guys, getting your feedback, and giving you feedback on your own writings!

Anyways, here, I am going to write a Christmas profile for myself in the style of how one might write a profile on FaceBook, with categories and all of my favorites from each of these categories.  In the comments, I will ask you, if you feel so inclined, to give me your own Christmas profile, though it will not have to be as extensive.  You can pretty much answer it however you want, using whatever categories you desire.  I just thought this would be a great way to ring in the Christmas season as well as give some kind of finality to my writing for this course.  So, let’s begin!

Favorite Christmas traditions: 1) Having the whole family over for Christmas Eve dinner and then going to the “Candles and Carols” service at our church; 2) Going skiing with my dad, brothers, and cousins and aunt and uncle; and 3) Watching holiday movies.

Traditional Christmas carols: 3) “We Three Kings” (Love the analysis and symbolism of the three gifts and wonder if the wise men really knew what they meant), 2) “O Come, O Come, Emmanuel” (Love its hauntingly, almost gothically beautiful melody), and 1) “Hark! The Herald Angels Sing” (Particularly love the Amy Grant version, where some of the stanzas are in a different order from the original version of the song; I just think that it is a nice change of tradition).

Contemporary Christmas songs: 1) “His Favorite Christmas Story” (Just heard it for the first time last night at chapel), 2) “Christmas Shoes”, and 3) “Where’s the Line to See Jesus?” (Not on iTunes yet, but you can search for it on YouTube).

Christmas movie: Jim Carey’s “Christmas Carol”, although “Elf” comes in close second. What’s funny is that all three of us, my mom, my dad, and myself have favorite holiday movies that have the word “Christmas” as the first word in the title: My dad’s favorite is “Christmas Vacation”, my mom’s favorite is “Christmas Story”, and my favorite is “Christmas Carol”.

Christmas book: (Besides Charles Dickens’ Christmas CarolCosmic Christmas by Max Lucado; it retells the Nativity story, only it is told from Heaven’s point of view, with Gabriel as the narrator.

Gifts that I have received: Snowy owl pillow pet who goes by the name Count Von Count (Big surprise); received him my Senior year of high school; poster of Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” my Freshman year of college; and English translation of Dante’s “Divine Comedy” trilogy last Christmas (my favorite of the three being “Inferno”).

Gifts that I have given: Hand-drawn pictures of my family members’ namesakes, as a majority of my family members have biblical names.  Last Christmas, I gave my mom a drawing of Deborah the judge and my uncle a drawing of the Doubting Thomas scene.  For a special touch, I try my best to make the bible character bear some resemblance to his or her corresponding family member, just to make it more meaningful and personal to that family member.

Gifts that I hope to receive this year: 1) Ravenclaw house pride scarf, 2) John Milton’s “Paradise Lost”, 3) nice wrist-watch, 4) Alton Brown cookbook, and 5) Count Von Count Funko-Pop (Funko-Pops are collectable figures, like bobble heads, only instead of bobbling, you just turn their heads around; I already have Severus Snape and Commander Spock).

Food/seasonal treats: Starbucks’ peppermint hot chocolate, although, I look forward to trying their new snickerdoodle flavor; my dad’s prime rib for Christmas Eve dinner; and my grandparents’ homemade fudge and divinity

Santa Clause(?): I am going to say that yes, I do still believe in him, technically.  However, I do not believe in him in quite the same way that I believed in him as a child.  I actually wrote my long-feature article on him, recently.

So, there you go.  If you so choose to do something like this in the comments section (which, again, is totally up to you), you can add other categories and you can leave some out.  This is just my own personal Christmas profile.  I look forward to reading some of your responses.

This is the Turbotastic Asian, and I’m signing out!

The Turbotastic Asian Reviews: “Dr. Strange”

What is up guys?  Turbotastic Asian here, bringing to you my “Dr. Strange” review.  Before I begin, I have to say that there are going to be spoilers for those of you who have yet to see this film.  Therefore, please read at your discretion.

Summary: “Dr. Strange” is a Marvel’s film centered around the origin of super/anti-hero Dr. Strange.  True to his name, Dr. Steven Strange is/was, in fact, a doctor and not just any doctor: a surgeon.  One night, when talking on the phone, with a co-worker about their next operation, while driving, he gets into a car accident.  This accident damages the nerves in his hands so that they are perpetually shaky and unstable, leading him to quit his job, much to his devastation.  One day, a friend refers Strange to a band of sorcerers in Napal who can help him.  Rather than healing him, the sorcerers teach him magical powers such as the ability to manipulate time and space.  They are also in a battle against dark sorcerers, led by sorcerer Kaecilius, who have stolen a book containing magical, ancient texts.


Plot: 4/5

The plot to this film is simple yet engaging.  Like I said, it is an origin/character development story about a famous hero.  The story is easy enough to follow and I can pinpoint all of the important details, but it’s not boring either.  I do have to comment, though, that it does not have as many Christian values as I had been told (more on this later).  There are definitely some, such as the theme of there being more to the universe than the natural world and the obvious “good overcoming evil” theme.  Other than those two, however, there wasn’t anything else I could find that pointed to a Christian message.  And I’m usually the one who can easily find Christian messages in secular media.  Maybe in the comments, you guys could offer some that you found.  Also, the movie had me asking a few questions.  For example, once Strange finds that he can manipulate time, why didn’t he just go back in time and prevent himself from getting into the accident that caused all of his problems?  Now, I know that that would have made the whole movie kind of pointless, but still!

Action/Humor: 5/5

Outside of those complaints, the movie has great action and even some decent humor.  Granted, it’s not a comedy, but there were more jokes than I thought there were going to be.  I like the joke about Strange’s name and the back-and-forth dialogue between him and Kaecilius. I like all of hilariously freaked-out reactions that Strange’s co-worker and ex-lover Christine has to all of this.  There are other humorous moments in the film, but these are the two that first come to mind.

As for the action, it is just as epic as any other Marvel movie.  It also contained the average amount of violence and blood for its kind, which was a little off-putting, but to be expected.  Not much to say about the action.

Characters/Acting: 3.5/5

The casting and acting of the characters is pretty good too.  Benedict Cumberbatch makes the perfect Strange and the fact that the actress who plays the Ancient One is Tilda Swinton, the same actress who played the White Witch from the Chronicles of Narnia, is really cool.  I hesitate to draw a comparison between Strange and Christ however, as unlike Christ, Strange is stubborn, prideful, and constantly doubting himself and his team.  Personally, I possess a love/hate relationship with Strange as a character.  Although I did like how, at the 3/4 marker, after the dark sorcerers have destroyed Hong Kong, Strange goes and reasons with their “god”, Domammu, in a similar way as Christ is said to have descended into Hell to reckon with the Devil for the righteous souls.  Also, it is never clear whether the Ancient One is supposed to be good or evil as she confesses to feeding off the power of the dark sorcerers.

Special effects: 5/5

Holy count, the special effects in this film are TURBOTASTIC!  I cannot sing enough praise for the computer generators who put them together.  If you don’t know, I probably have the worst eyesight in the whole class, therefore, 3D does not have as much of an effect on me.  However, I still found enjoyment in the visual effects, and I would bet that some of you with better eyesight would find it an even more thrilling experience.   Some of my favorite scenes are when the Ancient One tries to prove her powers to Strange by sending him through the universe and even through different dimensions, with thousands of tiny hands fondling his face and other odd, unnatural phenomena; and the showdown scene with Strange and Dommamu, where it shows him going back two seconds to tell the leader that he had come to bargain, in order to annoy him and make him leave earth.  The setting around them is amazing with smoky, hazy, fiery colors and the rest of it is dark.  Appropriately enough, it looks like what a very watered down picture of Hell would look like.  If I were younger, it would probably have scared the crap out of me.  I am giving this element a 5/5, but I think even THAT might be an understatement!

Overall, I would give this film a 9/10.  Definitely a very GOOD film, with only a few elements that disappointed/confused me.  You might be wondering why this film’s rating is out of 10 and “Groovie Goolies” was only out of 5, and the honest truth is because the former is a live-action film and the latter is only a cartoon.  The former just gives me more to work with than the latter.

This is the Turbotastic Asian, and I’m signing out!


Turbotastic Theory: Underrated Characters And Why I Care So Much About Them

What is up guys?  Turbotastic Asian here with another Turbotastic Theory. So, why is it that I, for the most part, am so fascinated and intrigued by the underdogs of media?   Forget Elmo and Cookie Monster! Give me Count Von Count!  In love with Peter and Edmund?  I’ve been fauning (pun intended) over Tumnus for the past 14 years! Wolfie, Frankie, and Drac?  Meh, they’re alright, but the Mummy’s my Goolie guy!  What do these three characters have in common?  They are all characters that other people might overlook or regard as unimportant compared to other characters in their respective show or movie, yet are very dear to my heart.  You might be wondering why this is.

First of all, we must establish what constitutes an underrated character.  A character might be destined to be underrated for a variety of different reasons.  It could be, perhaps, that he or she does not have a recognizable personality outside of one or two characteristics.  For instance, consider the Count.  Some might analyze the Count as kind of a boring character. He’s more predictable and static than the other Sesame Street characters: just a vampire who loves to count; not that fascinating for a kid’s show.

The second reason for a character being underrated could be that he or she is not as visually interesting as the other characters in the show/movie.  This is especially true in animated media.  This time, take the Mummy from “The Groovie Goolies” as an example.  While Wolfie, Frankie, and Drac are all brightly colored and intricately designed, Mummy is little more than an anthropomorphic cocoon of plain white bandages with yellow eyes and a slightly pudgy tummy; cute but not much to look at compared to his friends. To be fair, though, drawing the same pattern of bandages over and over again couldn’t have been easy.

The third reason, and perhaps the most common reason, is that an underrated character is not in the story as long or as often as other characters.  Now, when I say story, I mean the plot of the story.  You might be asking, “But Turbotastic Asian, don’t the Count and the Mummy appear in all of the episodes of their respective shows?”.  In answering, I would say that’s true; however, their roles in their shows are, for the most part, arbitrary: the Count needs to be in every episode of Sesame Street because he’s the “math teacher” on the show and his part mostly consists of the number of the day segment, and the Mummy needs to be in every episode of Groovie Goolies simply because of how the show’s formatted (more on this in my original review).  Rarely are these characters the focal point in the “plots” of the episodes.  Similarly, Tumnus and Moaning Myrtle, though important to the plots of their stories, only appear a couple times each: Tumnus appears at the beginning of his story and then again around the 3/4 mark, whereas Myrtle only appears in Chamber of Secrets and Goblet of Fire.

By now, you’re probably asking why I do admire these characters so much.  Well, I have several different reasons for this.

1) This is a little thing, but sometimes, underrated characters have more distinctive, memorable voices than the main characters.  Tumnus’ voice is nice, soft, and almost shy-sounding; Myrtle’s is high-pitched, whiny, and someway flirty; the Count obviously has the stereotypical Transylvanian accent; and the Mummy has an Ed Wynnian accent (yes, that is an accent in my book).  As someone who also possesses a rather distinctive, unconventional voice and enjoys experimenting with different voice impressions, I tend to identify the most with these kinds of characters.

2)  Underrated characters are more interesting to discuss.  With the more important characters, there’s not much to discuss because most of the things one would want to know about them is already made evident.  Contrariwise, we don’t know as much about the less important characters, leading us to ask more questions about them.  Does Myrtle ever find love?  Who was the Mummy before he died?  Is he the Egyptian priest Imhotep, as portrayed in the 1932 movie, The Mummy, in the same way that Frankie and Drac are implied to be the real Frankenstein and Dracula?  Or is he a different mummy altogether?  Has the Count always been a vampire or was he cursed somewhere down the road in a similar fashion as Barnabas Colin?  The questions are endless!

3) Because these characters do not show up as often as some of the other characters in the show do, it is all the more special to see them all the times they do show up (outside of their arbitrary roles).  For instance, in The Groovie Goolies, whenever someone has a problem or gets hurt, it’s nice to see the sweet little Mummy rush onto the scene with his first aid kit and try to help them. When this happens, you start to wonder, “Is he actually going to fix things, or just flub up like he usually does?”.  The same  is true about the Count; even though he just counts things, he’s at least mildly amusing to watch and is a good change of focus from what was previously going on.   Also, there’s a bit more variation to his character when he is the focal point of the episode.

4) Many of my favorite underrated characters are characters who are easier for me to identify with than the more primary characters. Like the Count, I consider myself very intelligent, but I have the habit of monopolizing a conversation; like the Mummy, I have a very nurturing, caring heart and a desire to help my friends, but sometimes don’t know how; and like Myrtle, the helpful aspect again comes into play, but I can also be rather dramatic at times and have even been accused of being whiny.  As for Tumnus, I wish I could say that I have as contrite, apologetic of a spirit as he, but regrettably, that is not entirely true.  I suppose Tumnus can be thought of as an example to me in that respect.  I do not like to draw comparisons between myself and the main characters as much because that’s a little too clique for my liking.

5) Probably the most important reason for this admiration is that it just reflects my overall character.  Yes, that sounds rather superficial, but in reality, I have always been the one loving on and associating with those who people would look right through or not make as much of an effort to get to know.  This becomes apparent in the way I watch television characters.  I don’t mean to sound boastful; I think it’s something we all should work on.  It’s what Jesus did, after all.

My question for you this week is “What are some of your favorite underrated characters in the media and why?”.

This is The Turbotastic Asian, and I’m signing out!

Turbotastic Theory: Hogwarts Houses=Four Gospels?

What is up guys?  Turbotastic Asian here, bringing to you another Turbotastic Theory!

So, those of you who know me well, or at least have read my other blog posts, know that I am an avid Harry Potter fan.  Now, I know that Harry Potter is not a Christian series by any definition of the word.  However, there are definitely some Christian themes and values woven throughout the story.  Such themes include sacrificial love, the importance of friendship, and of course, good overcoming evil, with Harry as the Christ figure and Lord Voldemort as the Devil figure, as is especially the case in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.

Within the last month or so, I have been thinking back to the series, regarding the four houses of Hogwarts: Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, Hufflepuff, and Slytherin.  Because of the number of houses (four), and the fact that numbers are an essential part of scripture, I started pondering the significance of there being four houses.  The answer that I came up with was surprising: Four is also the number of New Testament gospels!  Could it be that J. K. Rowling unconsciously based her four Hogwarts houses on the four accounts of Jesus Christ?

Below, I am going to correlate all four houses to all four gospels to the best of my ability.   Keep in mind that I am not implying that Rowling set up the houses this way.  This is just a half-baked theory for the purpose of analysis and enjoyment of my readers and myself.  Lastly, you may notice that the order of the four gospels are in backwards order. This was done in order of most popular to least popular of the Hogwarts houses.  I thought that this would make the post flow best.  So, let the sorting ceremony commence!


No surprise here.  The gospel of John is said to be the most famous/popular of the four gospels and possibly of the New Testament books in general.  After all, it is where the ever-famous “gospel-in-a-nutshell” verse (John 3:16) comes from.  Similarly, Gryffindor is the most-loved Hogwarts house among Potterheads.  Everyone wants to be sorted into this house when they take the Pottermore quiz or other quizzes related to the series.  Harry Potter himself, as well as his friends and many important characters in the series were sorted into Gryffindor.


Fun fact: When I took my Pottermore test, Ravenclaw was the house I was sorted into!  This fact makes a perfect springboard into the explanation of this pairing.  Luke is the one out of the four who focuses the most on the role of women in the life of Christ.  Such women include Mary the mother of Jesus, Elizabeth the mother of John the Baptist, Anna the priestess, and Mary and Martha of Bethany.  In the same way, many of the Ravenclaw students who contribute the most to the story are female: Moaning Myrtle, the Gray Lady, Cho Chang, and of course, Luna Lovegood.  Hermione Granger and Minerva McGonagall were almost placed in Ravenclaw before being sorted into Gryffindor. Besides that, Luke seems to be the most intelligent of the four gospel writers, as he was a doctor and he gives the most detail about Christ in his gospel. The Ravenclaw statement is “Wit beyond measure is man’s greatest treasure”.


This one was actually the hardest gospel to pair with a house.  Luke and John were obvious, Matthew was a little trickier but not by very much, so these two were paired up merely by the process of elimination.  Or were they?  Perhaps it is because of this difficulty that I feel confident with this pairing.  This shows that Mark and Hufflepuff are both very underrated and nearly nondescript compared with their fellow houses/gospels.  This similarity alone is pretty notable.  Another detail is that in the Hufflepuff statement, the Sorting Hat claims that those in Hufflepuff “are not afraid of toil”.  Therefore, the Hufflepuffs are the hardworking ones of the four houses.  They are always on their feet; they get the job done.  In the same way, Christ, in Mark’s account, is always on the go.  Mark moves like a road trip: Jesus goes somewhere, holds a teaching session or performs a miracle, and then moves somewhere else and does something.  The only other thing to say about this one is that the writer John Mark was an especially big help to the apostle Paul in his travels.  The helpful aspect goes along with the hard work ethic common among Hufflepuffs.


Now this might shock a lot of you.  Why would I suggest the book in the bible that kicks off the story of our Lord and Savior can be represented by the most hated and supposedly evil house in Hogwarts?  Well, for a few reasons, actually: 1) The Slytherin house is known for its high status; most of the students in Slytherin come from prestigious families.  Matthew is known as the royal gospel; it’s central theme is the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven and how Jesus is the promised, long-awaited Messiah.  2) Matthew, the gospel writer, was very selective in what kind of audience he wanted to write for: primarily the Jews.  He makes it clear that Jesus came first to His own people and  when they rejected Him, then He moved on to the other nations.  Slytherin is known for primarily housing the pureblooded wizards/witches.  3) You remember what Matthew’s occupation was before he met Jesus?  A tax collector!  Tax collectors had the reputation for being a sly, conniving bunch who sought mostly after their own, personal gain, much like how the Slytherin students are often thought of as.  However, Matthew got his redemption upon becoming Jesus’ disciple.  Which Slytherin do we know of who also turned out to be good, despite his shady past?  That’s right: Severus Snape!  Before his job as a Hogwarts professor, Snape worked for Voldemort as a death eater, much like Matthew worked for the Roman government.  However, Snape got his redemption by obeying Dumbledore and protecting Harry.  Therefore, the redemption of a specific character motif is evident in both the gospel of Matthew and the Slytherin house, if only in that one character.

My questions for you this week are 1) Do you think that Rowling unwittingly based her four Hogwarts houses on the four gospels, and 2) Which house are you sorted in?  Here is a link to the Pottermore website to help you find out!


This is the Turbotastic Asian, and I’m signing out!

Turbotastic Theory: Is Count Von Count (Or Anyone Else On Sesame Street) Aware Of His Vampirish Identity?

Hey guys, Turbotastic Asian here and welcome back to another Turbotastic Theory.  So, now that the 31st has come and gone, I have one more Halloween-themed post.  It was originally going to be last week’s post, but I decided to review “The Groovie Goolies Show” instead.  If I had reviewed it after Halloween, I’d feel like I’d ripped you off by suggesting a Halloween-themed show to watch after the holiday had passed.  Anyways, on with the theory!

Those of you who have read my “Top Ten Most Underrated Characters in the Media” know that Count Von Count is my favorite of all of the characters on the list and possibly of all time.  I’ve already gushed over him enough in that post, so I’ll just cut to the chase: Does Count Von Count, the beloved, purple vampire who goes batty over numbers, know that he’s a vampire at all?  For that matter, does anyone on the show know this?

Now, one might suppose that he does, as the other monsters on the show (Elmo, Zoe, Telly, etc.) are aware of their own monstrous identities.  However, the difference is they actually use the term “monster” when referring to themselves and each other.  No one ever uses the term “vampire” when discussing the Count nor does he use the term himself.

Contrary to belief, Sesame Street has used the word on the show at least once before.  In a classical animated sketch, when discussing the letter V, the word “vampire” is included (0:48):

Therefore, it’s not that they never use the word.  If they didn’t, that would answer the question.  However, they do; they just don’t use it when referring to the Count.  Why do you think that is?

Is it because the show wants one to draw his or her own conclusion about him by judging from the way he looks and acts?  I find this argument unlikely for the reason I give in my Top 10 post: Sesame Street is a show that teaches children acceptance and non-judgmentality and not to label people.  If this were the case, that would encourage children to label all people with jagged teeth, European accents, and/or affinity for arithmetic as vampires.

Perhaps it could be that any time the word “vampire” is used on the show, or any other time for that matter, it’s usually in a negative context, as is the case with the video above.  Since the Count is portrayed as a nice guy (for the most part), calling him a vampire might confuse the children.  But, to be fair, the same could be said about the word “monster”, and like I said before, the show has no problem calling the other characters that word.  What’s the difference?  Similarly, since the vampire is a specific breed of monster, why doesn’t Sesame Street just classify the Count as one of the monsters?

As for whether or not the Count himself knows his true identity, I actually have some  explanation, though a bit complicated. My theory is that the Count was once aware of the fact when he first debuted; gradually forgot as he began to take on a more cutesy, friendly personality common among Sesame Street characters; and might only now be slowly regaining this consciousness.

As I mentioned in my Top 10 list, his first interaction with the other characters is a rather awkward and unfriendly one to say the least: he flat-out hypnotizes Bert and Ernie!  Hypnotism is a common practice among vampires in the media, including Barnabas Colin and the original Dracula.  After hypnotizing the duo, the Count just goes about his counting business as if nothing happened.  If he hadn’t known that he was a vampire, wouldn’t he have been like, “Vait, Vhat just happened?” and had  been perplexed or at the very least apologetic about what he had done?  I can only assume that he had hypnotized  before, and therefore was used to the practice.  How could he not know that he was a vampire?  What other famous monsters have the ability to hypnotize?  Some might argue that this could be said about the way that he is often referencing his bats, organ, and childhood in Transylvania.  However, the difference is that anyone can admire bats and organ music and grow up in Eastern Europe.  No (typical) human being has the power to literally hypnotize other people into doing his or her bidding.  Manipulate maybe, but not hypnotize.

Here is the first video that indicates the possibility of the Count’s forgetting his identity.  Notice what he says to his mirror at 0:25.

Absence of a reflection is another characteristic that sets vampires apart from other monsters.  In saying this, the Count thinks that there is a defect in his mirror, preventing it from reflecting his image. He wouldn’t have believed this if he had remembered his identity and would have known that it was normal for his kind.

All of the Count scenes that follow portray the Count as super friendly, cute, and able to eat/sleep (although these instances are rare).  He also likes the sun and can walk around in it for hours on end, whereas a normal vampire would avoid it entirely.  Essentially, he has become like one of the “kids” on the Street, like Big Bird, Elmo, and Grover; maybe a little more mature, like an older brother/crazy uncle.  It seems like Sesame Street has done everything in its power to get viewers to forget that the Count is a vampire, going so far as to make even him forget.

Even today, the Count’s identity consciousness comes off as ambiguous.  For instance, while being interviewed by Don Lemon of CNN Tonight, the question came up as to why he looked so youthful, despite being on Sesame street for over 45 years.  That would have been an opportune time to make a reference to the fact that vampires don’t age; however, the Count credits his youthful looks to counting and his hair-coloring shampoo (2:45):

On the other hand, when Yvonne of MomsLA interviews him and his Sesame Street friends about their LA plans, the Count told her that he was “going to stay inside, out of the sun” (1:05):

Could this be a sign that he is slowly becoming wise to the fact that he is a vampire and that he shouldn’t spend so much time in the sun?  If it is, I am holding out for a Sesame Street episode in which the truth is revealed!  Really, what is at stake here?  It’s pretty  obvious that the Count is a vampire, and he’s a character that many children have known and loved for decades (even though they love Elmo and Cookie Monster more now).  At this point, if Sesame Street did let out his secret, the chances of him or the show as a whole losing popularity would be relatively slim in my opinion.

My questions for you this week are: 1) Do you think the Count knows that he is a vampire, and 2) Why hasn’t he officially been called one on the show?

This is the Turbotastic Asian, and I’m signing out!