svtfoefan1976-blog

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

They had even made a word pun on Wand to Wand!

Marco: Don't you think you have enough ships in a bottle? Star: Enough? I don't even know you.

Do you think the starcrew knows about the ship wars? Did they ever comment about it?

Oh they absolutely know, and I’m sure they talk about it among themselves. Not in public, though. They made some jokes about it on Twitter, sometimes, or some comments about the fandom’s reactions to a specific episode, but nothing much. They’ve always been very quiet about it, compare to other crews.

A recent example of Brian H. Kim, show’s composer, poking fun at the ships in the form of a limerick

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

We are “cult” and proud!

Alive and Kicking

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

Nice answer.

Next!

I forgot Star can turn people into objects. Why didn’t she just turn Meteora into an apple or something?

Dragonball taught us decades ago why one shouldn’t do that.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

“Without imperfection neither you nor I would exist.”

With this quote from Stephen Hawking is how I hope to deepen the Evil, not evil theme. Specially this season, waves of hatred from the fandom hit the main characters of Star vs the Forces of Evil. Specially because their behaviour was, well..., far from perfect. And created such a story for the villain that we could almost feel pity on her.

Almost...

But imperfection and flaws in every good character was something that was clear since season 1. But on season 3 we had layers on moral dillemmas that made the main characters less likeable.

Daron took the risk and, for me, I got a payback. A late one. Anyway, having guts to conduct a show with a story line that is, in general, well driven, and a gray morality presented on Disney? Just loving it!

Of course, like its characters, season 3 had some flaws. But let’s understand if we should demand characters perfection, when we live in such an imperfect world..., in which we want everyone, including ourselves, to reach perfection.

But we would never be here if it weren’t for a series of imperfections. And how a season that got a huge payback in the end was made of such imperfect and criticized episodes.

Let’s start from the very, very beginning.

I will use two videos to illustrate my explanation.

The first one will be Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking - The Story of Everything.

The second one is Origin of Life - How Life Started on Earth from Cosmology Today.

Well, as both are somehow lengthy, I will try my best to guide the minutes in the video to show the extracts in which I based my text. I tried my best to put HTML that worked to show only the extract, but in the end I failed miserably. Sorry...

The Big Bang - “Fortunately there was a bit more matter than antimatter...”

(From Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking - The Story of Everything - from 8:32 to 12:43)

The Big Bang? Aren’t you going a bit too far away for this explanation?

Humm... I would like to expose how imperfection molded us from the very beginning.

So, I started from scratch. Real scratch.

And as seen, matter and its opposite counterpart came as result of a big explosion. But matter and antimatter annihilate each other while shocking generating energy and radiation. 

Theoretically, there should have been the same amount of matter and antimatter on the creation of the universe. Therefore, nothing should ever exist, but energy and radiation. Neither this text.

But somehow, there was a bit more matter than antimatter. A billionth part. Something within margin of error. And the universe is made of this small residue. This is the most accepted theory by now, as far as I know.

And this leaves us to our second lucky strike.

Gravity - “Let there be light...”

And there was light. If it were that easy, light would exist since time started to tickle. But it took around 200 million years to the universe become bright. Here is a pearl of wisdom taken from The Lion King.

Pumbaa: Timon?

Timon: Yeah? 

Pumbaa: Ever wonder what those sparkly dots are up there? 

Timon: Pumbaa. I don't wonder; I know. 

Pumbaa: Oh. What are they? 

Timon: They're fireflies. Fireflies that uh... got stuck up on that big... bluish-black... thing. 

Pumbaa: Oh. Gee. I always thought that they were balls of gas burning billions of miles away. 

Timon: Pumbaa, wit' you, everything's gas.

Happens that the “pig” is right... But how this happened?

(From Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking - The Story of Everything - from 13:41 to 19:47)

Gravity grouped matter in clouds of gas, which later ignited the star.

And now, there is light!

But if all matter was evenly distributed across the universe, again, gravity would not be enough to make matter collapse into stars and make them burn. They would, in fact, do nothing. A slight difference in matter distribution allowed it to become stars. Atom by atom.

Again, a slight difference, another margin of error, led stars to shine.

Earth - from star to rock

This explains the creation of stars but, and the planets?

This is a far longer process, that will only happen at least in a second generation of stars.

What?

Let’s understand how a star works first, so we can understand how planets are born later.

From here

Not you, Star Butterfly. A common star. Later, we’ll come back about the show. Believe me.

From here

(From Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking - The Story of Everything - from 24:00 to 29:43) 

So gravity compressed the clouds of gas, composed only of hydrogen, until it was hot enough for nuclear fusion. In this process, hydrogen becomes helium and light and radiation resulted from the process.

So the same process that led stars to shine, also created the first element different from hydrogen, which was the matter created from the Big Bang.

Most of the elements from the periodic table are created by nuclear fusion, as they are heavier than hydrogen and tend sink into the nucleus. Lithium, carbon, oxygen, neon, nitrogen, silicon will be created in the process just by repeating itself again and again.

Until comes iron.

Because iron doesn’t create energy when it fuses, gravity will collapse the star until explodes. Heavier chemical elements, like gold, silver, platinum or lead will be made in this process.

This is the end of a star. A supernova. Luckily, the star not massive enough to become a black hole, by imploding itself, and start to suck matter around it.

And now what?

(From Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking - The Story of Everything - from 38:10 to 42:45)

Applying this theory to our solar system, and old supernova has exploded. Now its material is spread throughout space and gravity starts its work again. A cloud of dust is formed and some of its debris will become planets. At its center the star creation process restarts.

Here comes the Sun.

And in another strike of cosmic luck, Earth is just inside the “goldilocks zone” where the amount of light reaching the planet is too close our Sun or too far from it to handle liquid water, which is essential for life to come, according to present theories.

From here

Yes, when we speak about Goldilocks, it’s that Goldilocks, the juvenile delinquent that broke into a bear family house. A girl with some moral flaws...

Anyway, the parallel with the story is what makes Earth perfect for the next step.

Life - “We are made of star dust”

(From Origin of Life - How Life Started on Earth - from 15:31 to 17:22)

It looks like after Earth formation, it would take a long time for it to cool, handle liquid water and begin to form life.

It is a matter of point of view. Human species (Homo sapiens) exists for around 300 thousand years. Planet Earth, for 4,5 billion years.

There are signs of water at least from 4,3 billion years ago.

A long time compared to the time we, humans, are in Earth. Too soon if  compared to Earth’s existence.

(From Origin of Life - How Life Started on Earth - from 17:51 to 22:19)

Life probably started in a warm soup heated, as Darwin thought and later Miller and Urey’s experiment proved that a part of it to be possible. This warm soup could be heated by the sun, as first thought, 

People started fearing a “Frankenstein” test tube, creating life.

(From Origin of Life - How Life Started on Earth - from 22:54 to 26:22)

And there could be life, even in the absence of the Sun light, heated by thermal energy, like a volcano, but under water. With the help of early Earth minerals.

But there is still the DNA formation, the most essential component of life. It looks like a first step of its formation may have happened in space.

Yes, in outer space.

If weren’t enough the planets and its components being made of star dust themselves, some of the main building materials (like DNA components - nucleotides) may have come from chemical that happened in outer space / supernova conditions.

OK. This is the end, my friend. Of this part.

Imperfection - Back to Evil, not evil

And why the hell you needed to do all this entire explanation, link to more than 2 hours of video material, link to a NASA experiment to explain some concept from your mind of Star vs the Forces of Evil?

ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND? HAVE YOU GONE MAD?

If you mean mad as “very enthusiastic about someone or something”, you’re right. I had already gone mad about this show.

(If you mean mad as “mentally ill”, like having some sort of psychiatric disorder, you may be right too, but this doesn’t matter for this text.)

About Season 3 of our show we could say it was, at least, imperfect.

Rushed pacing, a boastful character, and a slut. We had a lot of reaction (overreaction, in my opinion) this season.

The Evil, not evil concept was kept up to limit for Eclipsa. Even after the season finale, it’s not totally clear if her objective was just to rebuild her family or if there is still some hidden agenda.

From here

And the show once again stretched the limits by fulfilling Starco on a cheating on Booth Buddies...

From here

Anyway, it seems Tom reacted well after knowing it in Conquer...

From here

Brian (Tom’s life coach in past seasons) would give a medal for that kind of reaction...

Episode by episode, things feel very weird. Only in the end things came up to some sort of a solution. Which still has lots of loose points.

Imperfection brought us to here.

Yes, like in our universe, in the show’s universe were their flaws, their imperfections, that carried the plot up to here. As it has always been.

The concept of imperfection, flawful characters, and evil not being really evil when we come closer or having justifications for them permeates the whole show. This concept I called as Evil, not evil in this link.

Remember I based the Evil, not evil concept in the seven deadly sins (cardinal sins)? God is based in what the religion feels as perfection. Curiously, the Universe and Life seem to be based not as a result of a perfect labour, but of imperfection and hazard.

In every of those steps listed above there was danger of not reaching to life as it came on Earth. Not a result of design perfection, but a imperfect design - I would dare to say no design at all.

And in season 3, it seamed every episode that the team was a step closer of losing the pace of the show. But the payoff came. At least for me.

But the show, well, it has a design in which we can discuss how good or bad it is in our opinions. Its imperfect design had a start and is coming to an end, which seems to be on season 4.

About the Universe, well, it has some billions of years ahead. But don’t worry, some billion years before that happens we may be fried, evaporated or frozen in the process. Unless we find a new home, as Marco did.

Way later this show ends.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

Why do I like such long posts?

Because they try to deepen and explain things seeing all the aspects and evolution. I couldn’t have written better.

If you have a couple of hours to read, go for it.

Heart Vs The Forces of Mind

Star, Marco, and Tom (and Starco) in Season 3 

Mobile Friendly PDF version here

I’m going to keep the introduction short, since the post is already going to be huge enough as it is. The third season of Star Vs The Forces Of Evil hit us with unprecedented levels of romance drama, unexpected events, and kids not knowing how to handle the full extent of their feelings. In the next several thousands words I’m going to try to put some order through what went through the minds (and hearts) of the characters, episode by episode, what motivations and feelings drove them, and what recurring themes relate to the way the show handles relationships. The point of this work is absolutely not to try and praise or condemn Star, Marco, or Tom’s as morally good or bad, as many character decisions were squarely in a grey area, but rather to take an even-handed approach to things from the perspectives of each character, to better understand them, and from the point of view of the narrative, to see where the show is leading us, beyond the temporary detours along the way. Some assumptions are going to be made, since the show is heavy on its “show don’t tell” approach and rarely spells us out everything for us, especially when it comes to the characters’ inner machinations, but I feel confident in saying that the show itself is more biased in favor of Starco than most shippers are: it’s not evident in almost any individual episode, and it’s far from being the only thing the series cares about, but it’s still the ultimate direction and goal most events seem to lead to, and the last episodes in this season confirmed it. Also I’m going to repeat the same concepts over and over and over, to drive home the point of how important or recurrent some of them are.

Huge thanks to @ngame989, who proofread and corrected this post, gave me tons of useful suggestions and prompts, and wasted several hours chatting about a dumb cartoon with me throughout the months, generating enough material, ideas and interpretations to fill three other analyses like this on.

HUGE POST BELOW THE READ MORE

Continuar lendo

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

Taking that Daron herself voices Starfan13, I’ll take this as canon, until proven wrong.

You know, the fact that analysises and theories about the show exist, and it's not treated dumbly, only proves the work and afford Daron and her crew had put in the show.

Remember that on of Daron’s favorite theories was that Starfan13 was the puppeteer controlling Toffee.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

Globgore. “O Romeo, Romeo! Wherefore art thou Romeo?”, “Quixotic” and other points revisited.

Now, after Divide and Conquer it is the hiatus. Which we don’t know yet how long it will be.

Time to stop and rethink over the facts. Specially now that we know there will be a new player at the table on Season 4.

From here

Glossaryck: Globgore

Star: Yes, Glossaryck, we know

Glossaryck: No, no, no, Eclipsa’s monster love Globgore! She’s going off to be with him, I’ve been trying to tell you for months! Anyway, see you around!

[Marco falls]

Star: Is his voice different?

Off topic: Yes, it is different.

And now, the new player: Globgore. Eclipsa’s monster love.

From here

Joining 400+ year spoilers: the Romance symbol to the foundation work of Modern Romance

I wrote about some elements of Romeo and Juliet before, but in another scenario, without thinking on Eclipsa’s Monster Love. Why?

Because I simply forgot that he could also be alive.

Because I’m stupid on not thinking of such an obvious scenario.

All reasons above and any other the readers can include.

Surely, Eclipsa and Globgore symbolize much better the concept of rival families in Romeo and Juliet than any other couple in Star vs the Forces of Evil.

And just like I wrote about Star, they pass through the same themes of the romance:

Fate - Cristalized because of her love being considered “unnatural”.

Chance - Eclipsa only got free by chance, because of a deal Queen Moon decided to do with her to kill Toffee.

Duality - Besides we’ve seen her the whole season 3, we can’t still state if Eclipsa is good or bad. She is at least a rule bender. Globgore’s behavior and Eclipsa’s reaction to it will determine at which shade she can be stated.

Time - 300 years cristalized may be very symbolical

Rivalry - The clear rivalry between Mewmen and Monsters.

Love - “Well, when a queen and a monster love each other very much...”

And for Star, with Queen Moon disappeared, she may need to deal with the hard reality of being (acting) Queen - assuming this will be her role when Season 4 starts. Like what happens in Part 2 of Don Quixote de La Mancha. In fact, she needs to face even internal threats...

From here

Star: Sir Muscleton?

Sir Muscleton: What’s up baby girl?

Star: What did you... what did you call me?

Sir Muscleton: I think I called youuuuuuu... baby girl.

[Star fires at Sir Muscleton, immediately after he finishes this sentence.]

Star: Yes, Sir Dashing of Muscleton isn’t gonna be able to help us. Marco? What have you got?

In a similar way Quixote faced, as the whole adventure in part 2 was an idea to mock him and Sancho Panza all the time. Curiously, on Don Quixote, the squire / knight hierarchy evolves to a strong friendship, as shown in the end of the romance. As Star and Marco are trying to evolve their friendship, (I hope) this probably will happen with them too.

Her quixotic dreams may face another reality checks, even stronger than in Monster Bash, Divide and Conquer episodes. And she will probably spend time trying to find her mother.

So curiously the fundamental Romance of all history (Romeo and Juliet) and the Foundation Stone of modern romances (Don Quixote de La Mancha) are converging in a single story. In a similar way as traditional magical girls animes (like Sailor Moon) and modern society issues (prejudice being the most evident, but not the only one - as we can take from Sir Muscleton’s inappropriate behavior).

Will Globgore go for revenge?

That’s a good question. The best answer I have is: I don’t know.

If Star vs the Forces of Evil crew wants to keep the 3-way fight to the end, there is an important part missing: the monsters. As from Is Another Mystery, the ones who could were leaving Mewni.

From here

To stablish their return to fight against Mewmen, they would need a leader.

On the actual status quo, the most probable ones would be Toffee - who is presumably dead - Mina or Globgore - who will be released by Eclipsa from his crystal prision. I hope that creepy Ludo from Ludo, where art thou? is just in the process to reconnect himself to the love he never had from his family.

I don’t feel like Globgore would be an immediate threat. Reinforcing the immediate. 

In the first moments, I wouldn’t be surprised if he focused on being a good father for Meteora.

But, do you remember St. Olga’s ceiling?

From here

Daron’s crew recently started to give coordinates (latitude and longitude) for a scavenger hunt which gives for the first one who arrives and follow their instructions a card set with 13 queens (the exact number of different cards for each suit in card games, like poker) and two pictures: one from the season 3 poster and the other is this, which I poorly extracted from this Youtube video on the link.

The monsters drawn in the center of this poster are extremely similar to the ones pictured in St. Olga’s ceiling. If not the same but with greater level of detail.

Would this mean that Globgore has the power to invoke an army of monsters or is such a powerful monster that could destroy them?

I really don’t know, but I think that he will only go for revenge if and only if attacked by Mewmen.

Unfortunately, watching the Queen of Darkness and her Monster love throughout Mewni won’t bring Mewmen good memories because of all what was created around their figures and what her daughter just recently did... So that must be taken into account.

Another possibility, that fits one - or even two - prophecy(ies) statement(s) would be if Mewmen and monsters fought together for the sake of saving Mewni from a common enemy and Globgore would be the general of the monsters’ army. This fits both the bond interpretation (Eclipsa and Globgore) and the peace interpretation (Star and Marco).

Now, let’s speculate how would an enemy would react when finding the following situation:

The queen is missing.

The acting queen renounced to her main symbol of power: the wand.

The acting queen may have an image of being impulsive and follow her “gut feelings”.

The enemy could potencially see the acting queen as weak and prepare his / her forces to attack. And if the enemy would be Globgore, he would also have access to additional magic throughout the wand power.

But this fight would be similar to the Season 3 finale, only including an army to make the stakes higher. And for the good of the concept of Evil, not evil that surrounds the whole show, it wouldn’t be nice to Globgore to be a villain next season. I’m willing to bet that Globgore not only won’t be a villain, but may become one of the symbols of the peace between Mewmen and monsters, as this would fit most the Evil, not evil concept and the prophecy from St. Olga’s.

So, would this mean Toffee’s ressurection or Mina Loveberry going totally rogue, attacking the kingdom to “restore order” under her command, as it was hinted on Starstruck.

From here

Mina:  What these little ants lack is a ruler. And guess who's gonna give 'em one? [touches Star's nose] Bink. Now, [to everyone] kneel before your new ruler.

Well, with Eclipsa having the wand, watching Meteora and Globgore free would just complete the scenario for Mina Loveberry to claim that her past “mud sister” is do nut. Or for her doctor to appear as something that doesn’t come only from her immagination, but being the real puppeteer and the main villain, the one who would unite Mewmen and Monsters in the prophecy. And this brings us to the moment Star met Mina.

From here

Fighting for donuts in the garbage.

This way Star and Mina would fight to get which other is nuts in a destroyed Mewni. The garbage itself.

“Romeo must die”? I think it’s Juliet’s time. Final call.

Before analysing which could be the weakest links to go for revenge, we must take in account “Romeo and Juliet” end. I started analysing it on a past post, but now we have another element.

Extracted from this video

If Star died on Toffee, it was Marco’s time on Conquer.

So, in the romance, there’s only left Juliet’s final death.

But it will be Romeo the main target. Let’s try to explain this.

As I stated before, enemies may think the acting queen is weak and will try to attack.

Assuming that it will be of public knowledge that Star’s love interest is Marco - as Tom already knows about Starco kiss, from Marco himself, and taking Tom’s attitude in the end of Conquer TomStar may end soon - and that Marco is not magic himself, he may be seen as the weakest link to catch the acting queen.

But there’s something that only the viewers - and Janna - know about magic and Marco.

From here

That he is able to use the wand. One more reason to Eclipsa and Globgore not to side the villains. This way, the wand could be used again by Marco as a last resort to defeat the villain, because as Jackie said in Bon Bon the Birthday Clown and Tom reinforced in Conquer, even after the most catastrophic and ridiculous failure, he never gives up.

But to Marco to use the wand, Star should be incapable to do so. Or dead. It would be really the last resort.

But if Globgore becomes the villain, would Eclipsa side with her love or would she break up with him and, again team with Star to stop his threat? After we have seen with Meteora, it is very probable that, in the end, she would team with Star.

Until Season 4 starts, this is only speculation.

Next time, I hope to revisit the Evil, not evil concept, including what makes us humans interesting and contradictory: imperfection.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

Star Butterfly wins death, strengthens from the magic realm (rainbow?), fights with Moon (the real diamond, as opposed to the diamond card simbol), Marco (red baloon), Pony Head (unicorn), Kelly (the tree?) - Comet is Moon’s mother, what’s she doing here?, what is this symbol meaning? -, Tom / Heckapoo (fire) go to the sanctuary (the crocodile, who is the gatekeeper) fight, not without some drama (theatre symbol) with someone heartbroken - the sea capitain represents the Blood Moon call, so someone’s gonna be heartbroken, Tom most probably (the sea captain causes heartbreaking), but could it be Marco (sea capitain is heartbroken), or Meteora (as she won’t get Mewni’s throne) will be heartbroken? Maybe two or all of them -, Meteora (clubs) but in the end Meteora (if redeemed), Star (hearts) and Eclipsa (spades) will have a fancy reunion (the dress).

That’s it?

How in an hour they can redeem Heinous / Meteora? She is far, far, far away beyond redemption. Ludo may now be creepy crazy, but he may have some sort of redemption on Season 4, if well written, but Meteora? She sucked souls, killed people. Mother love already proved not to be enough.

Daron don’t throw your show away in such kind of moral lesson! It would take too much time to do such thing in the concept she has already taken.

Daron gave us new emoji spoiler

Hm, hm. Yes. It’s all clear.Is… is the tree Kelly? That’s… rude.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

Odysseus:  “Nobody is my name. My father and mother call me Nobody, as do all the others who are my companions”.

+Patreon+

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

I’ll make my version, considering that the cat meaning would be “daughter”. Explaining: as we don’t have children, and I am assuming the same for Daron and her husband, we call our cats as “daughters” - both here are female:

“Trying to palm Meteora off Mewni, because of what she’s done with Pony Head, Star Butterfly and Eclipsa’s daughter meet at the Rose Garden and even a sliced (wounded) Moon does not heartbreak Star into taking her decision.”

If it’s guessing time...

Have you seen the emoji spoiler from Twitter ?

Clearly it means that in the season finale Pony is going to go on a vacation to recover from her injury, while Star, Eclipsa and Baby fight over the last slice of pizza in the rose garden. Then someone will eat a magic donut, the only thing that could have saved Moon from her disease, and Star is going to be heartbroken.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

Nothing to add.

I can't understand overall fandom reaction to starco kiss. You know, those talks about infidelity, "Tom didn't deserve this" and so on. What is the best way? For Tom and Star to stay in mediocre relationship and Marco never confess? Because it's in their character! I can't imagine, how it could be resolved in any other way. And the kiss was absolutely natural! How could it be the other way? "No, Marco! I'm a decent girl and therefore must first breakup with Tom"? Ridiculous.

I try to see the matter in all its shades: the act itself was bad (and the characters regretted it, and the episode framed it as a mistake, and I’m sure it’s going to be addressed and handled well). Tom didn’t deserve it, as no one does, but Star and Marco clearly didn’t do it to make him suffer, to punish him (and I’m sure he’s going to come to terms with it, and that they’re going to talk things out). Personally I think there could have been other ways for things to move, other than a kiss (any other event that could have helped Star’s feelings resurface would have probably made the cogs move), but this clearly was a much more impactful one and one that could potentially introduce an incoming break up between Star and Tom that could be an exceptional occasion for the latter to prove how much he has grown as a character and a person.Star and Marco are far from being with no fault in this, but they shouldn’t be demonizes either: it was a mistake, and it’s ok as long as they’re going to learn from it, and put it right, as they did with all the “formative mistakes” so far.

Also it added some more drama to the mix and sped things up considerably.

So yes, I think that Star “cheated” and what they did wasn’t right, but I think it’s a very positive thing for their development (and the development of Tom too, probably!) from a narrative standpoint. Not only good things can be good for the plot. I mean, Star’s major turns in life have been utter defeat, apparent death, and heart break…

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

My reaction on Starco

This scene fits with whatever opinion you may have on Starco.

Some will think it as Dr. Frankenstein’s creation.

I’ll go with Frankenstein’s joy.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

I’ll write more later, deepening the Evil, not evil theme, because I feel that until Conquer we may have more food for thought on this...

But for now, I do agree. Moral problem, fact. Can’t deny a fact. But she did great.

Star was great.

Let’s talk about how incredible it was for Star, who knows how painful having unrequited feelings is, who experienced on her skin how horrible not getting an answer is, to immediately reassure Marco as soon as he talked about his feelings. How she immediately tried to make him feel less awkward, less… unwanted, to let him know that everything is still ok.

And how even after the kiss she doesn’t direct her emotional freak out at Marco even for a moment, but still tries to make him feel like everything is alright, 

because even with all the changes in her life, with all her “boxes”, with all the Heart VS Mind dissonance that still dominates her love life, she still values her bond with Marco over just about anything. She doesn’t hold an inch of grudge, and doesn’t want him to ever go through what she felt. 

Star put her feelings for Marco in an easy to manage “Squire” box when she thought he had exited her life “forever”. This episode showed us that the box never did anything to make Star’s emotional bond to Marco less intense, just “filtered it”, and now it has been damaged to the point of no return. Star’s mind and heart are soon going to agree once more, just like they did at the very end of S2, and this time Marco is going to know exactly what to answer.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

“At least, it can’t get more awkward”

Yes, it can. Heavy spoilers ahead. Don’t read any further before watching Skooled / Booth Buddies. You’ve been warned.

Ben Fotino: Congratulations! Greetings for the happy new couple!

Starco kiss happened without a breakup. One more layer for Star’s moral issues. 

Star: Hey, I’m glad you were honest with me, just needn’t to be that honest.

Meteora heavily injured Pony and she lost her horn. Meteora/Heinous is a one woman army and had Mewni’s throne taken from her in the past. Wants painful revenge.

A crazy theory from @analysis-by-vaylon is not so crazy anymore. First assumption: checked.

In the 3rd group of episodes before the beginning of 4th season, Starco happens. If each season was represented as an hour, would that be the meaning of 3:57, that appeared 2-3 times during the show?

The main table is set. Open the stage.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

“L’art doit discuter, doit contester, doit protester.” (Georges Pompidou)

Art must discuss, must challenge, must protest. The man who spoke this was himself a politician.

Maybe, some time, even not being a man of art - but who weirdly lived a part of its backstage - I may write something on this too. Starting by a fundamental question: What is art?

In John Oliver’s newest segment, he promotes Last Week Tonight’s children’s book about the Vice Presidential bunny rabbit, Marlon Bundo, entitled A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo. There’s some good animation near the end of this video at 17:59. I’m a bit of a sucker for comics and animations featuring funny animals, so I particularly enjoyed this. I wonder if the entire book was animated. If so, I hope we get to see it eventually.

But I also wanted to use this video as a sort of launching-off point for something I’ve been thinking about lately.

For the record, I support endeavors like this book – not only is it commendable that the proceeds from the book will be going to charity, I think it’s important to vigorously oppose authoritarians of all stripes. And the book reminded me of something I learned a long time ago: all art is political. Art is not made in a vacuum. It is made by people, and people are, in part, a product of the political climate in which they live.

Even someone who strives to produce a work that is entirely apolitical still has the touch of politics in their work through its absence: that is, they are fortunate enough to be so unaffected by politics that they have the luxury of producing art in the manner that they conceive, free of influence. Try to imagine writing or publishing political satire or queer content in authoritarian nations – you might be subject to fines, censorship, imprisonment, or even execution.

All art is political.

Now, I recognize this sort of post may seem unusual for my blog, but I don’t think it’s outside of the scope of what I do here on this website – critical analysis of animated works – to discuss the political impact that animations can have on their audiences or, more broadly, to look at the underlying philosophies and politics behind critical theory in general or my own critical analysis. With that said, keeping in mind this idea that all art is political, I’d like to talk to you more about the political dimension of my blog.

I recently read an article from Current Affairs entitled “The Intellectual We Deserve”, which paints a devastatingly withering – and wholly accurate – portrait of Jordan Peterson, whom you may have heard of in the past few months. You can read the article for yourself; I agree with nearly everything it says. This passage, in particular, stands out to me:

But here the left and academia actually bear a decent share of blame. Why is Jordan Peterson’s combination of drivel and cliché attracting millions of followers? Some of it is probably because alt-right guys like that he gives a seemingly scientific justification for their dislike of “social justice warriors.” Some of it is just that self-help always sells. Another part of it, though, is that academics have been cloistered and unhelpful, and the left has failed to offer people a coherent political alternative. Jordan Peterson is right that people are adrift and in need of meaning. Many of them lap up his lectures because he offers something resembling insight, and promises the secrets to a good life. It’s not actually insight, of course; it’s stuff everybody already knows, dressed up in gobbledegook. But it feels like something.

Reading this caused me to reflect on my own writing and whether or not my writing is accessible as well as useful. I am left-wing – severely so – and while I’m not by any means a professional academic – I certainly don’t get paid to write these posts, and I doubt any of your instructors would take this blog seriously if you showed it to them – I like to think that the analysis that I provide is very much informed by the sort of thinking that one would expect to find at any ordinary university. I run this blog mainly to entertain myself, to keep my writing sharp, and to explore a medium I’m interested in. But am I doing the best I could be doing to provide an alternative to charlatans like Jordan Peterson? Am I thinking about what’s best for you, the people (hopefully) reading this? Should I be?

I don’t believe there are any easy answers to life – which is probably why I will never get rich by writing a self-help book – and I think the very nature of critical analysis encourages skepticism of easy answers and challenges the idea of coherent narratives. That’s probably why so many academics seem, as the article notes, so distant and unhelpful. And the main thrust of the passage haunts me: who is providing an alternative to Peterson?

I’m not certain that I could rise to the occasion. But I will tell you this: I believe that there is a whole lot of mind poison going around these days. Jordan Peterson is just the tip of the iceberg. You and I are swimming in it: big, noisy distractions with no real intellectual heft to them; the constant siren song of consumer culture; the endless stream of data collected about you against your will and without you knowing about it; and sheer, bare-faced political propaganda. To live in a modern society is to be engaged in psychological warfare, and, whether you are aware of it or not, there is a war going on for your mind and the contents thereof.

But I also believe there is an antidote to this mind poison.

Two antidotes, actually: (1) engaging with literature and (2) applying critical analysis. Reading literature can make you more empathetic – it’s an effect that has been known for a while and reproduced time and time again. And by “literature”, I don’t mean simply books. Many things can be literature to an engaged mind:

“It’s not books you need, it’s some of the things that once were in books. The same things could be in the ‘parlour families’ today. The same infinite detail and awareness could be projected through the radios and televisors, but are not. No, no, it’s not books at all you’re looking for! Take it where you can find it, in old phonograph records, old motion pictures, and in old friends; look for it in nature and look for it in yourself. Books were only one type of receptacle where we stored a lot of things we were afraid we might forget. There is nothing magical in them at all. The magic is only in what books say, how they stitched the patches of the universe together into one garment for us.“ - Faber, Fahrenheit 451

Even animation can be literature. Even animation can have something to say about what it means to be human. It can be enlightening. That is why this blog was born, in fact.

The second thing, applying critical analysis – you don’t necessarily have to know about critical theory, about New Criticism, reader-response, structuralism, deconstruction, postcolonialism, feminist theory, and so on (though it certainly helps to know those things); a simple guide to literary terms can be a good starting place, as well as any old introductory text on critical theory.

At its heart, critical analysis is thinking about the text – and here the “text” can be whatever it is we’re thinking about, whether that’s a book, a movie, a song, a cartoon, or even an advertisement – with an eye for detail and meaning. That is, thinking about what makes up the text, how the text was made, what effects the text has on the reader, what the text really means, how the text might fail to say what it really means, and the like. When you think about symbolism or foreshadowing in Star vs. the Forces of Evil, for example, you are engaging the text critically: “What does this mean and why? What kind of effect is it supposed to have on people who read it? What kind of effect has it had on me? How did they get it to do that?” That’s critical analysis.

Critical analysis is as good of a ward against mind poison as any you will ever have. When you think critically about what kind of information you’re being subjected to, you are aware of the ways – often subtle – that people are trying to influence and control you. Some people find that awareness upsetting – even dangerous. That is why those people want to defund public education. That is why those people want to get rid of the humanities department at universities. That is why those people want you to be so distracted with using their website or their phone application that you don’t even have time to really think about what’s being said or done to you. For one reason or another, they would simply prefer that you don’t think too much about things.

But you can. And you should.

Now, you’re not going to learn the meaning of life by reading my blog. I don’t have an easy 12-step plan to fixing all your problems to sell to you. If you had asked me two weeks ago, I would have said that the goal of this blog is simply to talk about my thoughts on animation and to offer insights on particular works. Now, however, after reading that Current Affairs article I mentioned earlier, I think I have an additional goal: to demonstrate by example how I arrived at those insights so that you can apply critical analysis, too. I feel conscientiously obligated to make that a goal of this blog.

As you may have read, someone recently asked me if I would be willing to share my lecture notes on irony. That post is absolutely something that is going to happen, now. I’ve been working on it. Don’t worry – the analysis of animation isn’t going anywhere; I’m simply also now including the way that I think about animation. And here is what ties this post together: it is a political act for me to do that. My response to this era of mind poison is to intentionally promulgate, discuss, and encourage critical analysis. If someone claims they have all the answers, doubt them. If someone wants you to do something, consider why. Question everything – even what I’ve told you. I believe that if you do those things, you will empower yourself politically.

Even if you disagree with me and my political aims, I hope you will nevertheless continue to read my blog. Who knows? You may yet find something useful in it.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

For a Brazilian, it’s not a mystery

When you live in Brazil, specially at Rio de Janeiro, watching Is Another Mystery is not a mystery at all.

From here

But a weird familiar feeling. You can’t walk on the streets without the fear of not returning. 

Weren’t it enough, you are surrounded with prejudice from appearance, choice and wealth. For the poor, you are rich. For the rich, you are trash. You think different, you’re enemy. If your color or sexual choice is different, stay away.

This makes life here hell.

The only difference: it’s the only the ones who have money or luck enough to live abroad that can leave. Or you can take the risk.

[svtfoefan1976-blog]

As always, a deep and thoughtful analysis on Star’s identity crisis by @analysis-by-vaylon.

Only a small disagreement about Into the Wand episode: Star was actually replaced with a clone, which I call Star #2. And she never realized it. Maybe another Rosetta Stone for her identity crisis.

The death of the self: the deep-rooted, long-running fear of identity loss in Star vs. the Forces of Evil.

Hello, there. It’s been far too long since I’ve written a lengthy analysis like this, but it’s my pleasure to bring it to you at long last. Originally, this was going to be a Double Take post on the episode “Fetch”, but, in the end, I decided that this topic was so crucial to thematically understanding the series as a whole that it deserved its own individual post. So here we are.

I will still talk a great deal about “Fetch”, as I feel it is what I have begun to think of as a “Rosetta Stone episode” – an idea which I will elaborate on later – but this post will mainly draw upon examples scattered throughout the entire series, from the first episode up to the most recent one as of this writing, “Butterfly Trap”. As such, this post will have some spoilers.

My intention with this analysis is to draw a straight line through the entire series – not only to show you the many forms that the series uses to continually confront us with the idea of identity loss but also to discuss the far-reaching implications that identity loss may have in future episodes. I’ll also talk briefly about the philosophy that drives the show’s conception of identity loss.

Though several characters betray a fear of losing their identity, in the interest of time, I am going to focus solely on Star and her fear of losing her sense of self – her identity.

One more warning before we start: this analysis will include a brief, existentialist discussion of suicide. It is not an easy topic to read about – nor write about, for that matter – but I would be remiss if I did not tackle the philosophy behind the theme. If the discussion of it disturbs you, you may wish to skip this post.

This post will be a long one. Read on for more.

Continuar lendo