This post marks my two week hiatus from Q10. Lets see if the distraction-free environment effects my writing.
So. Giants?
Let me disregard cultural elements of giants and humans and return to the physicality of it all (write the word one more time and I’ll not be certain of it’s definition any more). I suspect that I’ll not be able to separate such things much longer, but I’d like to build from what I feel is the easy part.
Currently, I’m operating from an all else remains the same perspective. Trees, dogs, cows, rivers, grass, lakes, ocean waves, whales, lions, icebergs, rain, rocks, and elephants all stay the same size. Giants are just bigger humans, not lumbering, not stupid, not less in any way. This makes things odd.
Giants won’t necessarily feel dwarfed by a tree. Won’t find forests daunting for their size. I think a giant would react similarly to how humans react to bushes and bushwhacking. They’d find them annoyingly in their faces and frustrating to traverse. As a building material wood might not be a first choice.
Dogs are going to be cute, but not appealing or useful as companions. Same with cats—not that they are useful. Imagine not having a pet or no one you know having a pet. A panting id with no ego you could guiltlessly confide in.
Humans rely heavily on cows and cattle for food, but how would a giant feel about them? Their really more snack sized than meal sized. Probably giants would have a relationship similar to ours with chicken. But what fills the spot for cows? Buffalo aren’t big enough. Hippo, rhino, and elephant have got to be tough. Maybe giants wouldn’t have killed off mastadons?
I doubt many rivers and no smaller streams would give a giant much pause. This seems to be one of the things that would diminish exponentially in terms of perception rather than linearly with my 4x rule. Sure large rivers would be difficult to traverse, but I doubt many would be impossible. Many rivers commonly twarting human progress would be jumpable or trod without getting one’s shirt wet if you were 25 feet tall.
The weekly growtrh of grass wouldn’t even register in a giant’s world. Even most tall grass would be ignorable or amusing. Lawn care in general takes on a bonsai tree sort of feel.
Lakes. Here I think we have an easily scalable geographic feature. Most interactions with lakes would be nearly identical to our own. I’ll have to think about boating though. Tying logs together to create a raft might not be somehting a giant would redily consider. Would you be willing to ride a raft made of broomstick handles?
As a young teen I recall getting swept under a Pacific wave and being ground into the sand. Not having ever been to the ocean it terrified me. Most waves would be inconsiderable to a giants. I suppose this relationship would be like that of lakes. I think it would be less equivalent though.
Shit I didn’t initially mean to turn that list into a working list.
Whales might be an excellent source of food or even companionship for a coastal tribe of giants. While dolphins would be food.
What would even be able to successfully predate a giant? A pack of lions could take a lone giant down but I don’t know if they’d bother. Would lions be the same as cats are to humans. I doubt they domesticate well. There’s more to explore regarding predation though. What’s it like to really really be at the top of that chain?
Icebergs would be the same. Exact same.
Rain would be 4x less annoying. It might even qualify for exponentially less annoying. Though I can see it being an equivalency as well. Rain gets as close to tempurature as I put on the list. I wonder if a giant—made of the same materials—would react any different to tempurature differences. Seems like they would be happier in the cold because of their need to dissapate heat from their core. Their skin though wouldn’t be impervious to changes though since it’s just skin.
Screw rocks. They scale.
Aside from whales elephants would be the only animal to match well with a giant’s scale. Since whale swim I think there would still be useful mysteries that keep them at a distance, but not elephants. I think elephants might even successfully replace dogs as companions. Or food.
That was fun and will become my longest post ever I imagine.
Rarely do you or I eat all or even most of a cow in a sitting. If your giant were 4x larger than a normal human (I am including myself in this category with a smile) he would simply be able to eat the cow four times as fast, but probably not all in one sitting. I would think cattle could still be a fine source of food unless your giant wanted to buy a bunch of meat at one time and fill up a 4x freezer.
And many trees would still be taller than a 24 foot person (at least here in Illinois). Most street trees top out at 20-30 feet. Maples and Oaks are larger, among others, often reaching 60 feet.
Sure a a cow at 4x consumption provides plenty of resources. I underestimated a bit there. They scale more like deer for a ratio than chickens.
As for the trees I realize that plenty of trees exceed 30 feet. But plenty of bushes and shrubs exceed my height as well. I wouldn't call them majestic or worthy of awe. Which is more what I was going for. As a human, I look at a 30 footer from well below the lowest branches and think, “That's a thing!” An 8 foot bush in my back yard or in my trail with branches starting at my knees makes me think, “That's a thing in my way!” instead.
These giants would dig the Pacific NW.