Where does the idea come from that the Masterpiece is "gone" and not just something that takes place in the future?

Ah god I could write so much about this and honestly I’m pretty burnt out on Homestuck meta right now and I’m starting to feel overwhelmed with the need to back up my opinions.

So I might tackle the handling of the Masterpiece at some point here, really, and really dig into it. For now, here’s the short version.

There are three potential readings of Homestuck’s ending:

1. The characters, having defeated all relevant bosses, beat the game by making a frog and entering a new universe.

2. The characters, somehow, have become Unstuck from the power of the narrative and they are escaping to a life where they have true free will.

3. The characters, about to achieve their Ultimate Reward and become gods of the new universe, abruptly cease to exist as Calliope’s black hole devours them, as well as all Paradox Space.

Those are the only three ways you can interpret what went down in the broad strokes. Here’s how the Masterpiece relates to each of them.

1. The characters have no reason to think that Lord English remains a threat. They knew that Vriska was going after him, and Vriska, ultimately, succeeds. In an ending where the characters have defeated all bosses and obtained their reward, what reason do they have to go after Lord English? Why go back and risk fucking up so much crucial timeline – remember that John’s powers REWRITE history and how careful he had to be with them! – to fight a boss that, as far as they know, has already been handled? Either they’re stupid, or Lord English has done something to require going after, which means… Vriska failed? He’s still loose? They learn something new? All of this is part of the main plot! So if this happened, the story has ended before the main plot has concluded. Bad storytelling.

2. The characters are free of the narrative. They have broken out of the confines of the story and are free to go and make their own lives. In this case, going back INTO the narrative – in fact, going back to the very ground zero day one origin story of the narrative – flies in the face of all logic. If their greatest fight with the narrative is yet to come, why end the story where it ended? It wasn’t finished yet, and omitting the most crucial element of the main characters interacting with the narrative as a whole right before it happens undoes all the catharsis of the characters being “free” at the end of Act 7. They’re not free. Their greatest challenge is yet to come. So… bad storytelling.

3. The characters are all dead and no longer exist so they can’t do the Masterpiece.

Ultimately the reason to assume the Masterpiece has somehow been retconned is because not having it as a part of the main narrative leaves the main narrative unfinished, which is bad storytelling. And either way, the fact that a core cast member’s big moment that he’s been leading up to all comic happens offscreen, after the ending, in a way that we have to infer from zero evidence when and where and how it happened, AFTER we’ve spent SO MUCH TIME on how fucking miserable he is, is bad storytelling.

geez louise that is the short version