This topic has 8 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 8 months ago by 
.
-
Posts
-
-
So now that I think everyone who’s gotten the Tension book has had time to look over it, there’s one thing that I keep going back to. We know the OSDM got final approval on the book, and they were not afraid to make redactions on certain information. One thing that’s been turning over in my mind is regarding Noah Sinclair and Michelle. Or as the book has informed us, Levi Petree and Mary Somers. If they want us to believe that Noah and his “System” are real, or that Michelle is a threat of some kind (or a bringer of truth as she seems to see herself), why wouldn’t the OSDM redact these names? Which is their real name? Who is the alter ego?
This leaves us with a few possibilities. None of them are really all that pleasant to consider. For order I’ll just go from what I consider least terrifying to most.
1) They just outright forgot to redact this info. Not very possible, but it would show they have some missteps that could potentially be exploited.
2) Their plans for us are not impacted whatsoever by us knowing their names, or knowing they are just characters. The events we’ve seen with them so far could very easily be a diversion from their true goals.
3) The book has it backwards. It’s not Mary playing Michelle, but rather Michelle playing Mary. The persona of “Levi” and “Mary” were created to make it appear what Noah and Michelle are doing isn’t real. To lure us into a false sense of control. To make us think what they are doing is just part of an act. This would allow them to keep doing horrible things and many of us would likely just sit back and watch, thinking it’s just a show. This has some very worrying consequences because then it’s not just an oversight. If this is the case, they WANT us to know these names. Then putting their “real” names in the book becomes a conscious decision.
4) Something we haven’t even considered, which of course is always the scariest option. That we have zero sense of what is actually happening. That something completely unforeseen is coming. And as they say, nothing creates fear quite like the unknown.
So Noah/Levi, Michelle/Mary, the ball is in your court now.
-
@nothenrygale: We were screwed around so hard during the course of Tension and Ascension that I’ve learned better to assume anything as a hard fact, because the moment I do I can be certain the rug will be pulled out from under me. You say your name is Brad so I’ll call you Brad but when I learn it’s really Steve, I won’t even bat an eye… just an example of my state of mind here. I’m no doubt less trusting and more cynical these days.
-
@electrichippo Just wait until you find out my name really IS Henry Gale!
-
-
This is definitely something I’ve been grappling with for a long time, @nothenrygale. From the time Addison began “using her real name” it’s been very hard to reconcile exactly how far we’re supposed to take it. Sabrina Kern was under the persuasion of the helmet. We also heard talk in other places within the compound that other people were using the helmet. From this, should we infer that everyone there who now has a “real” name was also under the control of the helmet? I thought so during my second go in Ascension but don’t any more. So then we’re left with all of the other actors willingly performing this “show” for Darren and the OSDM. From there we can safely acknowledge that during The End these actors wore makeup to appear dead to illicit a reaction from all of us and Sabrina as part of Michelle’s sick unveiling. But as you say, Michelle isn’t just Michelle, she’s Mary. And Suit Guy who then became Noah is also Levi. It gets even more complicated when you think of the character Samson, who was tied directly to Michelle in the final days and seemed to be someone who would leave Ascension to become part of the larger Michelle/Clockmakers conspiracy, only to be shanked by Michelle at the last minute. And we all saw Aaron Akins at the book signing looking on just as surprised as the rest of the cast. So if everything that transpired between Michelle and Samson was part of the OSDM lie of Ascension, then what of Michelle and the Clockmakers is “real?” Now we have Michelle and Noah interacting with Darren and Clint and although we’re holding a book that credits their performers we are to understand that the “show” has ended and react to them at face value. Anyone, please correct me if I got any of this wrong.
I love your theory that Noah and Michelle are their true selves and that Mary and Levi are the fabrications meant as covers for their dealings. This would be a beautiful way to subvert what came before while still acknowledging all the baggage that comes with it. Considering how many Tension threads are still tangled up with the beginning of Lust, it seems impossible we’re supposed to simply reset our perception of identity back to the simple days when we thought Addison was a runaway aspiring actress and Tom Barrow was her worried father. They must be playing a larger game, so to speak. And we’re playing right into their hands.
-
Levi and Mary are yet more biblical names showing up around this thing.
A different version of number 2 is that they WANT us to know they are full of shit. That Noah isn’t who he says he is. That he’s a fraud. As mentioned in a different thread, if Clint and Damien were the fall guys for Tension, maybe Noah is the same here. He’s getting this story off the ground, appears to be running it (setting up Bryan and Lia) and will be the one who takes the fall in the end when the true game is revealed.
Alright, that’s enough speculation post 1am for me.
-
Isn’t 1 AM speculation the best?
I’m not 100% on the “Noah is the fall guy” line of thought though. They’ve said Noah is their brand. You don’t tie someone up to the your brand if you’re planning on putting the blame on him. Then the brand looks bad and all the work creating it goes to waste.
I def like the point that even the actors (if they even ARE actors…) names are also biblical characters.
-
1AM speculation is the best. Absolutely. Especially after 3 cocktails.
I’m not entirely convinced either.But I would argue that a “brand” is just a cover, in a way. There’s always something behind it. Unless the “company” IS the brand, the brand is expendable. Especially with some of the bigger companies that have their hands in a lot of pies. they advertise individual brands or products, not the company as a whole. If one of the Brands has a scandal or goes down, the company is ok and can rely on other things.
For example, you see ads for Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and KFC, but never for YUM! Brands, INC.
-
-
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
