#<- not really a theory but could turn into one

[some-eldritch-bats]

One of the settings I have made that I like to write in has implied in-universe that gendered magic, such as it exists, it purely a case of externalised and internalised gender normativity.

While it's never explicitly stated to be so in-universe (because the laws of magic are still opaque to the in-universe academics who study it), it's heavily implied by their current models of magical theory that gender isn't relevant. What's relevant is how much effort you put into learning it... and girls and boys are expected to learn very different things.

In-universe, girls are typically better at illusions and deceptions. This stems, entirely, from a cultural belief that girls and women (and especially unmarried adult women) are manipulative, and this "leaks into" their magic. It is, of course, completely unfounded; but it plays a relevant part in how characters view themselves and others. "You girls are all the same, you're all liars, that's why you can do the liar magic" isn't even an unusual sentiment. There's this belief that "girls are good at deception magic" is conclusive proof that girls are manipulative, when the truth is that girls wouldn't be better at it if they weren't forced to learn it to conform to negative stereotypes.

Even when a stereotype is negative, people are pressured into conforming to it.

"Girls can't do maths" and the related "boys are naturally good at maths" are such common refrains in our society that WE MANIPULATE OUR CHILDREN UNTIL THE PROPHECY SELF-FULFILLS. It's awful.

So, yeah. Trans women and men would probably both be really good at deception magic in this setting, because of a combination of social pressure and their own internal belief that they are - by being trans - lying to people. And it doesn't have to be that way.

---

It turns out that gendered magic systems can be a really good way to explore WHY our society thinks the way that it does about the things that comprise it <3

Actually, with that in mind, I find it fascinating that Terry Pratchett - who famously HAD a strongly gendered magic system - evolved his own opinions on it over time. It became something that was used, in part, to explore how traditionalist, conservative, gender-traditional people were holding up a system that wasn't necessarily right... but that it was also so ingrained into society that they never QUITE managed to break it. Equal Rites was initially retconned out because it made future stories too complicated, but then subsequently it was re-retconned BACK IN because his opinions on how important it was to talk about changed.

I wish he'd had more time. I don't think there are many authors out there who could have deserved more time than him.

I’m far less interested in fiction where it’s like “This power/ability/prophecy is gender specific but trans inclusive” and for more interested in fiction that just… doesn’t do that

[saras-almanac]

So I’ve been sitting on my feelings about the BuckTommy breakup and handling of it for a while, trying to get my thoughts in order. And after a while of thinking on it—and the recent Lou interview dropping making me feel like my feelings are valid—kind of made me want to just blurt them all out and hope for the best. So this is that.

Ultimately the entire handling of the BuckTommy breakup feels cruel. And not just cruel in an intentional way, but cruel in a casually, not even given any thought cruelty, which is worse sometimes. And to be honest, I think that’s part of why I’ve been struggling with it so much. (That and the echoes of Magicians season 4, which if you know you know).

What I mean by cruelty is just the lack of any real effort or care put into this storyline, one that they had previously been handled with so much care and concern and were praised (rightly so) for at the time. It’s the way they introduce this Tommy as Abby’s ex thing, which makes hardly any sense at all, but also feels cruel in the intention of laughing at the invisible string of fate theory between them. It’s they way that they’re 6 months anniversary and not only have they not talked about this, but Buck (Evan Buckley) didn’t get him a gift that feels cruel because that feels so wildly out of character for him. It’s the way they had the break up play into some bisexual stereotypes at best and inherently biphobic at worst by having Maddie suggest Abby turned him gay or that Buck needs to “explore” things to figure out what he wants or that Buck “Doesn’t know what pond to jump back into” of it all. (Not to mention the comments from OS about wanting Buck to fuck—which I’m not getting into because I didn’t read it and as a bisexual woman, don’t feel the need to go and try to find something that might upset me more.)

All those reasons are why the breakup itself is cruel to the characters, but it’s also cruel to those of us watching, and especially to anyone and everyone who loved and/or related to the character of Tommy, who we see walk away much much worse off than when we found him. It’s the way the story (intentionally or not) is framing it like a romcom break up – make up – pining storyline which they apparently are not doing according to interviews. It’s the way they didn’t give any sort of closure to Tommy for the character or for the audience.

There’s a reason that people lose themselves in stories—it’s because they follow certain rules and contracts. It’s expected that stories do not match up to real life because while things don’t have bigger meanings in life or they don’t work out according to plan, in stories, everything happens for a reason. Because that’s the whole point of what you’re consuming. And along with that, emotional moments are meant to feel cathartic in a way, at least eventually, because you were able to see the bigger picture, to feel the finality to things, and to really understand what’s being said and what’s happening. This breakup does none of that and actually seems to have been included and rushed for shock value and that to me, is just shitty, lazy writing.

If you were going to break them up and have no desire for any sort of reunion or closure, why not make it intentional? Tommy could be the one who wants marriage and kids and settling down and Buck internally freaks out because theoretically he wants that but maybe it’s too soon and as much as Tommy loves Buck, he’s not going to wait around and hope that Buck feels the same for him because he’s been hurt too many times like that. Or Tommy could be leaving for another state because he’s no longer going to be a firefighter or needs to go for family reasons or gets a job at a different station that he applied for ages ago and he has everything all set up and isn’t going to ask Buck to leave his entire life for Tommy, so they decide to breakup even if it hurts both of them. In either of those cases, it’s sad and devastating, but at least there would be some closure to it and understanding of it for both the characters and the audience and some peace knowing that at least these two are going to be moving toward happiness in whatever way that means for them.

Instead, what we have, is a hail-mary last-second breakup that comes out of nowhere and feels abrupt and crappy in the way we leave Tommy specifically because we might never see him again. And that is the crux of the issue. Because the way this was written, the understanding is that they are going to get back together or reunion or at least have that final closure conversation—because that’s what happens in stories. We see this type of surprise breakups, breakups where they issue is they love each other too much and are afraid to go further (Athena/Bobby and Maddie/Chimney to name two examples we saw in universe) only to eventually fight to be together and realize that if they don’t take a chance they might never know how amazing it is. So the fact that it’s set up to follow this same path while nearly every interview is telling the opposite, again demonstrates that casual cruelty as well as an inherent failure on the writing. If you have to go in interview and explain what it is you wrote or are telling, then you have failed as a writer. It’s really as simple as that.

This breakup doesn’t feel set up or foreshadowed, it just feels like they added it on because they didn’t want to do anything more with it? And that feels incredibly crappy as a decision to so many people who related to Buck and Tommy and them coming out later in life and all those other things. I’m rambling and on my phone and feeling a lot of things that I can’t fully express right now, but the long and short of it: If this was always intended to be the final time we see Tommy, this breakup is even crueler than intended.

[ashprince-of-bel-air]

Little Dove

I'm hoping to make more than one part as I am getting brain rot for Caracalla now as well as Geta. This is just to set up the tension. @byronking as promised

Part two

Life in the Roman court was tedious, surrounded by withered old men talking about politics that would never affect them, having to smile and fetch them some wine whenever they asked.

Your father started bringing you into court a few moons ago, he told you it was to satisfy your thirst for knowledge, yet after the first few meetings where all he did was introduce you widows and wifeless men, you knew what you were really here for. You were to be essentially sold off to the highest bidder, whoever could grant your father the highest position in the Roman court.

Luckily for you your mind was sharp, where your brother's got to wield a sword you were able to wield your mind. The senators did not want a smart woman, they wanted a loyal servant who they could use as a fuck pig to breed as many heirs as possible. Your intelligence threw off many men, you could see the way they screwed up their faces as you questioned their politics and their theories.

Your father was not happy with your antics, he could see what ypu were doing, even if you tried to play stupid about it at home, yet he had no proof to punish you with, all he could do was keep dragging you to court, forcing you to mingle or even on occasion be the cup bearer and pour wine for men who considered you a second class citizen.

Court was due again today, this was a particularly special one as the emperors would be in attendance as it was nearing an election for new sensors. Your father had specificaly warned you today to be on your best behaviour, that just meant no arguing with anyone. An eye roll as his back was turned is all you responded with, you never sought out the arguments, it was the senators fault for probing your for your opinions.

As ever it was a dull affair, once again as the wine bearer you had to walk around the table filling the cups of lecherous old men that probably couldn't satisfy you even if they tried. You held a smile on you face and kept quiet as you felt your father's gaze on you, waiting for the Emperors to finally arrive.

You were stood quietly in the corner, wine jug in hand when the doors swung open, watching the two figures walk forth. This was the first time you had been this close to the Emperors, you had seen them at the games in their podium but this was different, you would pour them wine and be within touching distance, it made you nervous, scared that you would overfill their cups and be target to their wrath.

The twin emperors took their seats at the head of the table, the tension between them was thick, you could sense that neither wanted the other one there, resenting that they had to share their title. Geta was tall and imposing, clearly trying the be the leader of the two of them, you knew many a girl back home who had dreams about him, fantasies of being his wife. Yet your gaze lingered elsewhere.

The smaller of the two is where your gaze lied, upon Caracalla. He was less imposing yet something drew your gaze to him, it was like magnetism, you could not look away. Caracalla sat there next to his brother, looking no less regal in his golden attire, what did make you smile was the monkey upon his shoulder ruffling up his hair. It was a cute display and the confidence it took to sit there with a monkey making you look disheveled was something else entirely.

Time came once again for you to deploy wine for the decrepit senators sat before you, smiling your best as you did so, trying to ignore the hands that would find the small of your back as you bent forward to pour the wine, giggling at them as if it was all a joke, daring not to upset your father in front of the emperors now.

The walk around the table took some time, you were on your third pitcher of wine by now and you had not even reached the head of the table. You reached for your final pitcher as you approached the emperors, steeling yourself with a deep breath and approaching them cautiouly. Geta's goblet was the first to be filled, he barely acknowledged you, moving himself away from you as you poured his wine so he could carry on speaking down the table.

Next was Caracalla's, he had been mostly quiet this evening for some reason, little did you know it was because he had been watching you in the corner, chuckling at every eye roll you made hearing the senators speak. You bent forth to fill his glass when the monkey upon his shoulder jumped onto your back. You gasped slightly before giggling as she started playing with your hair, picking it up and placing your long locks over her own head pretending to be you.

"You'll have to excuse Dundus my lady, she has always been a cheeky one" Caracalla spoke softly to you, enjoying the joyous display and the smile upon your face as Dundus climbed over your shoulders. You lifted your hand to hold the monkeys own and guided her back to Caracalla with a genuine grin plastered over your face.

"Not to worry my emperor, it is a fine delight from this boring affair" Your statement caught his attention, as did your eye roll that you did not mean to do, it had been a boring affair but never had a woman noticed or cared to comment as such. He held his hand out and took one of your own in his heavy jewelled hands, cradling it as he spoke to you. "And what might your name be my little dove" he spoke as he looked you up and down, the name little dove making your heart flutter and almost rendering you speechless as you looked at him, taking in his handsome form, trying not to be affected by his smile.

This interaction caused you to blush somewhat, unable to refuse eye contact with the emperor you could not hide it from him. "My name is Y/N, your majesty" you bowed slightly before him, custom normally dictated for a full curtsey however it would be impossible with your hand still held in his own, feeling it would be more offensive to remove your hand without permission.

"Well Y/N, you are a delightful change from the bore of these trivial affairs, I hope I can see more of you soon to keep me entertained" Caracalla placed a light kiss on your hand before letting you go. You could still feel the smirk against your skin as you walked away from him, the tingle of his lips lingering.

The court moved on without much incident after that, yet you both kept steeling shy glaces at one another throughout the session. Your father had noticed this, the sly man that he was and kept the information in the back of his mind, especially after he saw Caracalla speak privately to one of his guards, watching how his eyes were on your for the entire exchange. He knew something was afoot and would use it to further his favour in the senate.

[cece693]

tony stark x male reader who’s kinda shy and quiet but crazy good at math and science and all those equations. something fluffy and cute thank youuuuuuu

Brilliant (Tony Stark x M! Reader)

Announcement: for those who have been following my Velvet Ring trilogy fic, I've created an AO3 account where I intend to flesh out the story. Here's the link! Also, since I'm not smart myself, I didn't go in-depth about science and calculations, so forgive me :(

Tony Stark was many things: a genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist—but being in a committed relationship? That wasn’t exactly the headline he wanted plastered all over the news. Not because he was ashamed—far from it—but because Tony had learned the hard way that the world had a way of ruining what mattered most. And you? You mattered more than anything.

You were everything Tony wasn’t—quiet, thoughtful, reserved. While Tony thrived in the spotlight, you thrived in the solace of your work, diving deep into equations and theories that would leave most people with a headache. You were a prodigy in your own right, a quiet storm of brilliance and ingenuity. The kind of man who didn’t seek recognition, only results. Tony couldn’t help but admire that about you—and, though he’d never admit it out loud, you kept him grounded in a way no one else could.

Tonight, you were sprawled out on the couch in your shared apartment, wearing a faded hoodie and sweatpants you’d stolen from Tony long ago. A notebook rested on your lap, filled with scribbled formulas and diagrams. The room was quiet, save for the occasional scratch of your pen against paper.

The sound of the front door opening broke your focus. Tony stepped inside, tie loosened and suit jacket draped over his arm. He looked tired, but his eyes lit up when they landed on you.

“Hey, handsome,” he greeted, his voice warm as he crossed the room. “What did I say about math after ten?”

You glanced up, rolling your eyes. “You said it’s a house rule. I said it’s not enforceable.”

Tony smirked, plucking the notebook from your hands before dropping it onto the coffee table. Sitting beside you, he wrapped one arm around your shoulders, your head tucked into the crook of his neck. “You were late,” you muttered, resting your head against his shoulder. “Everything okay?”

“Just the usual corporate nonsense,” Tony replied, pressing a kiss to the top of your head. “You know how it is—saving the world, keeping the board happy. Exhausting, really. I’m practically a saint.”

You huffed a quiet laugh, but instead of responding, your eyes kept flickering toward the discarded notebook on the table. After a moment, you shifted slightly in his hold, trying to reach for it. Tony groaned dramatically, tightening his grip.

“Oh, no, you don’t,” he said, pulling you closer. “I just got home, and you’re trying to ditch me for math? Do you have any idea how lonely I’ve been? I’ve been deprived of your presence all day, and this—” he gestured at the notebook—“is more important?”

You bit back a laugh, managing to wiggle out of his grasp. “I promise it'll be worth it."

Tony crossed his arms, slumping back against the couch like a sulking child. “Fine, but if I die from lack of cuddles and attention it's on you.”

Grabbing the notebook, you turned back to him, a small smile tugging at your lips. “You look fine. And for the record, this 'math' you're referring to is yours."

That caught his attention. His brows furrowed as he sat up straighter, his earlier theatrics forgotten. “Mine?”

You nodded, flipping open the notebook and holding it out to him. “You mentioned the other night that you were having issues with stabilizing the power output on the Iron Man suit. I’ve been working on it.”

Tony’s eyes scanned the pages, his expression softening with each line he read. Your neat handwriting detailed calculations, theories, and possible solutions. You’d even diagrammed potential fixes, complete with annotations on how they’d improve efficiency. “You’ve been working on this?” he asked, his voice quieter now. “For me?”

“Well, yeah,” you said, shrugging like it wasn’t a big deal. “I know it’s been frustrating you, so I thought I’d try to help.”

For once, Tony Stark was speechless. His eyes flickered between you and the notebook, the weight of your gesture hitting him like a freight train. You’d spent your time—not for your own research or projects, but to solve one of his problems. It wasn’t just the effort or the brilliance of your work—it was the care behind it, the way you always seemed to go out of your way to make his life a little easier.

Tony set the notebook aside, reaching for you instead. His hands cupped your face, his gaze warm and filled with an emotion he rarely let himself feel this deeply. “You’re incredible,” he murmured, his voice thick with gratitude. “I don’t deserve you.”

Before you could respond, his lips were on yours, soft and full of affection. It wasn’t the usual teasing kiss he’d steal when he was being playful—it was deeper, more vulnerable. A silent thank you, a promise that he’d never take you for granted. When he finally pulled back, his forehead rested against yours, and he smiled. “You’re too good to me.”

You laughed softly, your hands resting on his chest. “You’re worth it, Stark. Even if you are a little dramatic sometimes.” Tony chuckled, pulling you into another kiss, his heart full and his mind already spinning with ideas. If this was what it felt like to be loved by you, then he never wanted to let it go.

[elodieunderglass]

It’s a good question but not set up to be the case in the canon material! Obviously we are having fun, but it’s backed (at least in my own contributions) by the genuinely interesting public health problems and ecological implications of hobbits.

A few reasons, behind the cut because I’m conscious of having contributed TOO MANY WORDS across various iterations of this post already:

1. Tolkien provided a lot of extensive hobbit family trees, often with birth and death dates. These indicate large families produced by - this is important! - the same mother. Conclusions: mothers weren’t frequently dying in childbirth, and early deaths aren’t often recorded on the family trees. (Possible explanations you could invent for this could include things like “children only being recorded on family trees if they reach a certain age/milestone.” But then you’d be doing the same thing as making them all poly - adding your own imagination!)

One of the longest family lines is the lineage of the Old Took, who sired twelve children and was a shared ancestor of Bilbo, Frodo, Merry and Pippin. In addition to having “three remarkable daughters” including the adventurous Belladonna Took, some of his kids met such unusual fates that they were included parenthetically next to their birth/death dates. One of this generation Took siblings actually went to sea once (but came back and lived to be like 100), one never returned from an adventure, one had no children at all (!!!) and one, Hildigard, “died young.” Hildigard’s birth/death dates aren’t given, but she was clearly old enough to have been named. Dying young was clearly significant; perhaps on the same level of notability as dying childless or dying on an adventure. However, the Old Took was famous and influential, so it’s reasonable that there be more interest in his children’s fates than usual, and that Hildigard’s early death is recorded for those reasons, while perhaps working-class hobbits would have just lost children without recording them.

There is only one “working class” hobbit family tree, and that’s Sam’s.

And while it doesn’t have death dates, we do see that they all started having kids in early adulthood, around the age of 40. Sam’s parents had 6 kids over an 18-year span (!). Of those, 4 achieved adulthood as indicated by marriage or career updates. Again, there might have been dead ones left off the family tree/dying unnamed, if we use that theory I came up with. or this might genuinely be all the kids Hamfast and Bell had, and Daisy and May might have died. But we’re still seeing a general pattern of couples producing more than 2 living kids.

2. The statement in canon is that hobbits have notably “large families”, implying both lots of (living) siblings to be observed, but also something especially worthy of comment. The historical 30%-or-whatever mortality rate could certainly reduce numbers of babies like anything! but there would still have to be a LOT of siblings and cousins and big kids knocking around to create the apparently-accepted canon cultural truth of “hobbits have large families.” Then consider if they were living in a setting where it was normal for all families of all races to be affected by the same problems; they would have, say, five children, of whom two would survive early childhood. If that was expected and natural, those other people still have to turn around and point to hobbits, saying “THOSE little buggers have REALLY big families.”

Fold into that the fact that hobbits are (for their own reasons) living in extremely functional and prosperous 1700s-1800s England, with plenty of food and tea and biscuits, and a functioning postal service - while everyone else is living in various times of antiquity, and constantly getting mown down by raiders. and it seems like it should be backwards; humans should be having huge families with a few survivors, while hobbits should only be having a few kids. What the HELL are they doing over there -

3. We do need something to actually kill off the kids. We do need some cause or factor to do it. The absolute best thing is disease, especially infectious diseases! Especially since we’ve shown that we aren’t seeing family-tree indications of bearers and children dying together in childbirth, which was a formerly popular way to go - let’s go for the next best thing of preventable infectious diseases! And the tricky thing about disease is that the patterns here would have to be continually carrying off medium-sized children and young adults. This would crop the population like a mown lawn, constantly picking off people before they reproduced, while allowing the overall impression of “big families.” But this would have to be an infectious disease that somehow isn’t captured in family trees. And doesn’t stop mothers from bearing kids regularly. And doesn’t follow cycles of epidemic or pandemic (all the families all losing cousins at once in the same year etc.) so their most impactful diseases would have to be things like consumption (tuberculosis) where plenty of people can live as carriers, everyone has different levels of resistance, and they succumb to the disease at different times. I am quite happy for the Shire to have a lot of tuberculosis knocking around. Crammed full of TB. It doesn’t ever make a huge dent on the population, but it definitely hits constantly.

4. We could expect that non-infectious diseases - cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, etc - should be constantly and continuously wiping out a decent number of adults - although those normally don’t interfere with reproduction and don’t solve our problem. But hobbit life histories as recorded in those stupid family trees are VERY annoying. They’re so annoying with it that in a 2022 paper intended to teach evolutionary biology to kids, authors analysing hobbits had to conclude that hobbits were probably just resistant to disease and cancer. Those stupid birth/reproduction/death dates indicate a life history slower and more resilient than humans. There probably is a decent amount of this happening anyway, but to the adults, not so much the kids. The family trees definitely and continuously imply an absurdly resilient race that really should have a huge population.

5. Kids should definitely be dying by accident a lot - drowning, falling down stairs (admittedly their architecture has few stairs) and so on. However, the culture seems to suggest that it would have to be quite a subtle continuous attrition of children. Disasters, accidents, attacks and famines are all so rare in the Shire that people literally still talk about interesting deaths a generation later. Frodo’s parents were considered completely unhinged for dying of drowning. The Fell Winter, in 2911/1311, was legendary for being difficult - in the Unfinished Tales Gandalf says:

“They (the shire-folk) were very hard put to it then: one of the worst pinches they have been in, dying of cold, and starving in the dreadful dearth that followed.”

The Fell Winter caused a drop in population, and it’s possible that they hadn’t recovered from it by the time of the books; but everyone had a lot of kids since then, and it’s still a huge legendary outlier and the worst thing that every happened to their species.

Notably there weren’t many deaths in 1311 recorded in the family trees, which is obviously due to Tolkien not matching stuff up (this whole situation is about him not matching stuff up, and us filling in the gaps). But the point I wanted to make here is that disasters are rare to hobbits.

6. A possible theory is that every hobbit even tangentially related to the Fellowship hobbits has possessed a disproportionate share of luck and fecundity, so their family trees are absurd, and everyone else is just DEAD.

7. To be fair we do see a LITTLE political impact that could be attributed to having more young people than old ones. In The Hobbit, the middle-aged Bilbo is extremely conservative and concerned with reputation and respectability; the Shire is openly prejudiced against other races. But by LotR we meet a younger generation of hobbits who are very different. Some of this is possibly due to Bilbo having changed the culture a little bit (and that’s Gandalf’s own hope and meta-explanation*) but some of it could be because of the population effect I mentioned way back - constant, ever-growing new generations being (theoretically) ever-harder to control through cultural expectations, and therefore being ever more progressive and flexible.

For this we can see Fatty Bolger - a friend of the Fellowship hobbits, who is presented as the least brave and progressive of them all, therefore elected the one staying home as a decoy while the rest of them trot off happily on a high-risk quest. Fatty casually achieves some impressive feats without worrying at all about respectability. He agrees to be a living decoy for the Nazgûl, escapes them on foot and raises the alarm, and later is a rebel leader in the occupied Shire. The Bolgers are in a reasonable approximation of the same social class as the Baggins family, and Fatty did this while being younger than Bilbo, but Fatty is seemingly willing to go into ride-or-die mode. Bilbo’s constant personal worries and fears about “hobbits don’t do that, hobbits do this” and “is this respectable” don’t seem to form part of the Fellowship hobbits’ mental landscape, and even the most cowardly of the young generation is shown being active, brave, and taking initiative. By the time of Fellowship, a working-class hobbit openly declares his desire to observe other races (Sam’s fascination with elves), young hobbits apparently normalise far-ranging camping trips all the time, Gandalf is a frequent Disturber of the Peace, dwarves come from all over to help out with a birthday party, and Frodo’s four best friends plan a journey outside the Shire in a spirit of helpful mischief. Culturally, they’re more open and responsive than Bilbo portrayed them.

So it’s possible that the Shire is in a constant state of ongoing exponential growth and development and progress, and is just so obscure that nobody has noticed that yet. And THAT could be why they’re reasonably technologically advanced and so on. Which slightly changes the flavour - but once again requires the reader’s input and imagination and research and three different sources to bring to light. So we might as well just have whatever fun we like, right? The ultimate answer is that Tolkien didn’t think about it! and meanwhile he made so many statements of such confidence and such implications that they created huge numbers of attractive fanfic gaps, in which fans can nest, like cliff swallows.

At any rate, it’s all provocation and good fun. You might as well announce that hobbit family trees are a mishmash of kinship types that conceal a truly goofy amount of polyamorous activity, as try to work out why kids aren’t dying more, when they really should.

* in the Unfinished Tales, Gandalf tells Pippin that he chose a hobbit for Thorin’s company partly because he foresaw an apocalyptic world war coming and wanted hobbits to survive it: he picked Bilbo to be a social catalyst to change their culture and increase their likelihood of surviving it. the Unfinished Tales aren’t 100% canon, but it does seem to have worked.

Every time Sean Astin makes a statement on whether or not Sam and Frodo were indeed gay for each other in lord of the rings he’s always like “well we have to acknowledge that attitudes around sexuality have changed dramatically over the past several decades and since authorial intent is only up to speculation, the story is open to multiple readings, some of which might have different significances for different groups of people also they kiss on the lips because I said so”

[httpvomitello]

This is for turt of choice, how would they react to being asked by their S.O "do you think we're together in every universe?"

OMGGGG YEEEEES! That's sooo cute, and i hope you like it! ♡♡♡♡

Across Every Universe *⁠.⁠✧

It had been an oddly peaceful night at the lair, one of those rare moments when everything felt quiet and calm. The city was distant, the usual chaos of crime and Foot soldiers on hold, and all of you had a little time to breathe.

You sat next to Raph on the couch, leaning into him as you both shared a bag of chips, watching some random movie on the screen. It was one of those silly action flicks, full of explosions and cheesy one-liners. Neither of you were really paying attention to the movie; it was just background noise.

After a few minutes, you found your thoughts wandering, as they often did when you were with him. Lately, you’d been thinking a lot about the “what-ifs.” The alternate realities, the multiverse theories, and the idea of everything that could happen across different universes. You and Raph had been through so much together, and the thought of what could happen to you both, in other timelines or other versions of yourselves, made your heart ache in a way that was hard to explain.

You broke the silence first. "Hey, Raph... do you think we're together in every universe?"

Raph stop mid-bite, chips in hand, as he looked at you with an expression of pure confusion. His brow furrowed slightly as he processed your words, his mind trying to wrap around the odd question. You could see the gears turning in his head, trying to figure out what you meant.

“Wait, what?” Raph’s voice was deep and a little gruff, but there was curiosity there. “You mean like... in every alternate universe?”

You nodded slowly, shifting a little closer to him. “Yeah. Like... every version of us. Do you think that no matter where or when we are, we’d always find each other? Like, no matter what happens, we’d end up together?”

Raph set the chips down on the table, his full attention now on you. He let out a deep breath, looking down at his hands for a moment before glancing back at you.

“Well, that’s one hell of a question,” he muttered, his voice low and thoughtful. He seemed to be grappling with the idea.

You waited patiently, not wanting to rush him. It was rare to see Raph this reflective, and you didn’t want to interrupt the quiet storm of his thoughts.

Finally, Raph spoke again, his voice quieter now, almost uncertain. “You’re talkin’ about fate, right? Like, that no matter what the universe throws at us, we’d always end up together... no matter what kinda version of ourselves we are?”

You nodded again, your heart racing a little. You weren’t sure why the thought had come to you, but the idea of always being with him—no matter the circumstances—felt like something you had to know, something you had to understand.

“Well...” Raph started, his eyes flicking up to meet yours. There was a seriousness in them that was so rare for him, his usual confident smirk replaced by something deeper. “I think... if I’m bein’ honest, I think we would be.”

You blinked, surprised at his response. “You really think that?”

He gave a small, uncertain shrug. “Yeah. I do.” His voice was rough, but there was something tender behind it. “I mean, maybe it sounds crazy, but... I think if we’re meant to be, we’ll find each other. No matter how many universes there are. Whether we’re turtles or humans, heroes or not, you and me—we’re always gonna find our way back to each other.”

The sincerity in his words made your chest tighten. You didn’t know why, but hearing Raph say that felt like an anchor, something solid in the chaotic storm of life. Maybe it was his voice, low and steady, or the way he said it as if he truly believed it—no hesitation, no doubt.

“You really believe that?” you whispered, your voice barely audible as you scooted closer, your heart beating faster than it probably should.

Raph’s gaze softened, and he gave a slight, almost shy smile—something that was rare for him, especially in moments like these. “Yeah, I do. I mean, fuck, I’ve always been the kinda guy who’s ready for a fight, but... with you? With you, it’s different.” He shifted a little, his hand finding yours, giving it a gentle squeeze. “I don’t think I could ever let go of what we got. Not now, not ever.”

The weight of his words settled in your chest, and you squeezed his hand back, feeling an overwhelming sense of warmth spread through you. You had always known Raph was a guy of few words, especially when it came to matters of the heart, but in that moment, he was saying everything you needed to hear.

“You know, you’re not that bad when you’re serious, Raph,” you teased gently, your heart swelling with affection.

He chuckled, a deep rumble in his chest that made you smile. “Don’t get used to it, babe. It’s rare for me to get all mushy.”

You smiled softly, resting your head against his shoulder, your eyes closing as you let the moment linger. “I don’t need you to be mushy. Just... always be here with me.”

Raph’s arm wrapped around you, pulling you a little closer. “You got it. I’m not goin’ anywhere, no matter what universe we end up in. We’re stuck with each other, alright?”

You laughed quietly, feeling a warmth flood through you. “Guess I can’t ask for anything more.”

He kissed the top of your head, his grip around you tightening just slightly, as if to prove the point. “You better not.”

[twopoppies]

About those people making up theories just to stir something up from the 4 boys, I just wanna say how dumb that sounds. I, unfortunately, came across the livestream on my YouTube feed as I have been binge watching every 1D content I could find to cheer myself up (I guess the algorithm decided that for me). I decided to check it out for a bit to know what the hell they were streaming - which, as it turns out, were all about the arrivals as if it’s a damn red carpet - then I ended up staying a bit more to report insensitive and offensive comments in the live chat (I’ve been doing the same on Twitter but there are tons of bots reposting).

I saw the time when the four arrived, and they literally arrived in convoy within a span of 6 minutes. They’re making up a nonsense hate narrative just because Louis and Zayn ended up entering the church together after Harry did since their vans pulled up a bit closer to each other, and Niall’s the last one to get out with his gf. JUST BECAUSE OF ONE PHOTO THAT DIDN’T SHOW THE OTHER TWO. Like? No one knows what happened before they went there, what happened inside, nor what happened after they left. Seriously, that’s just dumb. They’re making it a thing because it was a very quiet despite the paparazzis out there (thank god the info they spread yesterday was wrong). AS IT SHOULD. Liam deserves a proper send off.

I’m just ranting a bit because I saw a photo of Louis without his sunglasses and it broke my heart even more. I’ve been crying since I woke up and I know a lot of people here feel the same. I wanted to share that thing where they arrived in convoy, literally 4 cars pulling up within 6 minutes, and I feel like they’ve probably even met up before coming to the service. It was likely a choice to arrive and leave separately, though consecutively, so as not to give the media anything else to put in their headlines.

So, I guess what I’m saying is I hope no one overthinks because of those nonsense theories. And I also agree to stay away from social media, especially on Facebook and Twitter, if you don’t wanna see photos. Effin’ bots all over reposting photos.

Thank you, love. I’m sorry you’ve had such a rough day. I’ve tried to stay away from anywhere I might see the photos. But I did see a couple of Louis that really broke my heart.

It’s such a tragedy any way you look at it. So, for people in the fandom to be focused on stupid fan theories, gossip, and trying to make people feel badly about their faves, is just revolting.

[your-local-squip-fanatic]

I've decided to reread the BMC book for the Two Squips AU, and since my copy is tied to the Broadway musical, it has an intro by Joe Iconis and Joe Tracz- and I noticed something interesting, as I didn't read the intro before.

When talking about how they had to change stuff, they said this:

Now, I'm no master theorizer, but that seems to suggest that the SQUIP turned evil... because of what it saw in other people. I'm stating the obvious, yeah, but I REALLY need to talk about this.

I mean, wasn't this what sparked "The Pitiful Children?" The SQUIP had done all it could to improve Jeremy, and came to the conclusion that, since Jeremy has been improved greatly from its efforts, then the real problem is not him but his peers! And it had seen how they all were, seen how mean they could all be, and so it decided to help Jeremy further by trying to take over the school (or all of humanity in Broadway, apparently)

The fact that it's a learning AI explains why it jumped to such a conclusion and made such a drastic plan to kill two birds with one stone.

"So, Astrid, you're just restating facts, what are you saying?" I'm saying my theory. The SQUIP never, not ONCE intended to be evil. It was just simply doing its job to help Jeremy, and went too far in its attempt- it pulled a Phaethon. AKA, it overstepped its place and paid the price. All the SQUIP wanted was for Jeremy to be cool! And powerful! And popular! And to be more chill! But once it set to "save the pitiful children who haven't a clue," everything came crashing down!

...then again this is just what I think, do tell me what you think. I like hearing peoples' takes.

[murfpersonalblog]

Sincerely, thank you SO much for all of the input you (and @alleyskywalker) have been giving me; talking to y'all has really raised a lot of excellent points that I hadn't considered. I'm definitely doing a revised Trial Timeline Pt2d, to make a few changes based on everything we've discussed together.

Sam's presence by Armand's side

"When Daniel points out the inconsistency of the memory of Sam’s role in the trial, Louis experiences cognitive dissonance, because Armand has told him and most likely wants to believe that his companion of 77 years was also a victim. To resolve this dissonance, Louis ends up blaming himself by saying he’s the one remembering things wrong."

Yes, y'all have convinced me that Sam was probably NOT a fake memory from Armand or a hallucination from Louis' thoughts. Sam was just moving back & forth b/t Armand's box to watch the Trial play out, and the Wet Room to torture Louis.

Which is a theory I really like, cuz it makes Louis' excuse that he never went after Sam cuz "time heals all wounds" seem even more sus, cuz this is the man largely in charge of writing the play & all of the horrible things about you & Claudia. You killed the frikkin musicians, but not the actual writer?????

Same with when people point out Louis' strange personality changes b/t 2x4 & 2x5, how he's mad one second and hearteyes the next, like...?

So I'm VERY excited to get Sam in S3, cuz he's got SO MUCH explaining to do.

Coup & Script

From the show, Santiago went to Louis’ apartment to find evidence they could nail him on. Before that, they didn’t really have anything to put Louis on trial: the maitre had given him dispensation from joining the coven; he’s not the one who turned a child. They could kill Claudia based on her being ‘deformed’ alone, and I think until Santiago knew about their killing of Lestat, that was the plan. So can we assume that Sam started writing the play in April 1949, but it was a meatless play, which is why Santiago went looking for something and ended up finding Claudia’s diaries in June/July, a time when Armand was heavily distracted because Louis had committed to a companionship with him. 

No wait, Santiago went looking for the diaries in late 1947/early 1948, way before Sam wrote the Trial script in 1949 (AND Godot). Sam already knew they'd tried to kill Les in 1949, he already had the diaries by then.

But it was still a meatless play, agreed, cuz they wanted LESTAT'S testimony. Which is why we then get Roget's interrogation in 1948ish, and them climbing the Eiffel Tower in 1949--they wanted the drama of Lestat being on the stage, "swearing on his own blood" that "his" version of (scripted) events was true. Cuz they're vicious; it twists the knife to have Les' testimony be the thing that condemns them.

Maybe what we saw of Celeste and Estelle's conversation on the bridge was one of those times the audience got a rare objective reconstruction of events. But since Louis is the one doing the retelling at this point of the story, let's assume he was privy to their conversation, and that Santiago’s insistence that he was Maître probably convinced him that Armand was telling the truth about his involvement. (I think the show was doing that thing where they’re trying to tell us Armand wasn’t the mastermind behind the whole thing, but it was done so clumsily that it feels out of tune with the tone of the show).

Celeste & Estelle give 2 reasons--the London coven targeting their weakness, or Eglee being mad that Santiago dumped her for Celeste. So yes, their convo speaks to the coven's insecurities about their tenuous loyalties to e/o--no honor amongst thieves, a group's only as strong as their weakest link. Santiago insisted that he was the mastermind of the whole Trial the same way he wanted everyone to follow him as Maitre. Louis was right about him in the park, "He wants your job."

So I have no doubt that it was Santiago's plan from the start--he wanted Louis dead the second Louis fell asleep during Santiago's performance in 2x2 & didn't wanna watch anymore of their plays, "persona non grata." This whole Trial is about Santiago's beef with Louis ever since, and he dragged Claudia, Lestat, AND Armand into this mess. I was shocked that more people blamed Armand for Claudia's death than Santiago, like wtf? He literally said IT WAS ME!

But the juicy question is: WHEN did Armand agree to follow Santiago's schemes? WHEN did Armand start lying REALLY? 🤷

Loumand

Did Armand lie to Louis about Gabrielle and Nicki, or was he lying/not telling stuff to Daniel?

Louis said in 2x3 "He abandoned Nicky. He abandoned Armand. He abandoned the coven. Lestat is, was, and will always be, for Lestat." So Armand has obvs lied by omission TO LOUIS before about Lesmand's past, cuz that is NOT the full truth, as I explained in the post I linked--Sam even says in the article that Rolin deliberately wanted Gabrielle's absence to be a red flag about Armand's unreliable narration.

Which makes me think Armand can’t just snap his fingers and rewire a memory. It’s probably easier when someone is ‘half in love with easeful forgetting’, but even then, a vampire who’s feeding human every other day, as Louis is in Paris, isn’t so easy to memory wipe to the extent of never remembering anything despite interacting with the memory wiper every day compared to a drugged up, drained human who manages to retrieve important memories while dying of a neurodegenerative disease. I guess this is me coming out as the person who believes that Louis asked Armand to erase the memory of him going into the sun (Armand took advantage, of course, and painted himself as a saviour, but I’m convinced the initial decision to erase those memories was Louis’).

Agreed! It could very well have been Louis' decision to ask Armand to wipe his memories.

BUT.

That loops us back to this:

Same thing with the pages he removed from the diary. Louis knew what was in those pages, he’d had access to them for a while, he was okay with them being shown/not shown to Daniel. He also knew that Armand had made the unilateral decision to remove some of the diary pages because he didn’t want Daniel to know certain things about him.

SOME of the pages Armand removed WITHOUT Louis' knowledge and consent/permission, behind Louis' back, "on my own", Armand admits this himself:

Cuz like I've said 1000x times, Armand abused Louis' trust, and took advantage of Louis over & over again, and played him for a fool. YES, Louis ripped pages out (eg: Claudia's rape). And yes, Loumand obvs agreed to the Rashid ruse together, to protect Armand's true identity from Dan cuz of what happened in SanFran.

But the pages Armand removed "on my own" were NOT part of their agreement--Dan would've just read Armand's name & been like WHO? And Louis & "Rashid" would've just been like: Oh, the coven master, move on. Armand didn't cover his tracks well enough--he was sloppy. And revealing himself "this time I won't save your life" blew that whole "Rashid" plan out the water. And ironically, revealing himself was the string that unraveled this whole web of lies. Cuz Dan had his scent at that point, and followed it all the way to Sam & the Talamasca & the rest of Armand's lies.

It ain't a good look, and it casts Louis' agency asking to be mindwiped in SanFran into HIGHKEY question. No mental health expert who works with traumatized neurodivergent victims of abuse would EVER agree that Louis was in the right mind during that time:

fresh off a suicide attempt and STILL burned from it (even when they took Dan to the drug den he's got the burns on him in the Talamasca photos; so Louis wasn't even healed at the time & was still in incredible pain)

AND a mental breakdown (triggered by drugs, Dan's rudeness demanding to be Louis' Lestat, and Armand's deep cuts during their fight)

AND a traumatic phonecall he did NOT ask for (thanks Armand) with the Maker he was told (by Armand) had sentenced him to death in the Trial

So yes, I also believe Louis asked Armand to mindwipe him. But Armand should've never done it, cuz Louis wasn't mentally well to make that kind of decision with full consent, and his anger about it in Dubai strongly indicates that if he HAD been more cognizant, he wouldn'tve wanted it done either.

Again: Armand is well aware that it makes him look better in Louis' mind to have those memories removed--not just that Louis tried to kill himself, but also the entire fight Loumand had--Louis admitting how he was bored to dangit death being with Armand & hated having sex with him; and Armand mocking Paul's suicide (a la SanFran) and Grace burying Louis alive (a la Paris) and Claudia resenting Louis (a la Merrick). Their whole fight was about Louis' deep discontent being with Armand anymore, and by erasing Louis' memories of the fight, it allowed Armand to rewrite history so that Louis never even remembered that he didn't like Armand anymore & that Lou was READY to call it quits with Armand in 1973--even if it killed him.

Which ofc brings us back to the complex self-preserving/self-sabotaging choices Armand makes. Cuz on one hand, he's terrified of being alone, and is not above lies & mindewipes to keep someone with him; but on the other hand, he's also not above throwing them to the wolves like castoffs the second he has better options. Which is KINDA book accurate...but kinda NOT book accurate. Which is my personal beef with AMC!Armand vs book!Armand.

But, we’ve seen Armand distracted and unable to use his powers in Dubai, like when Rashid and Daniel lie to him about what went on in the restaurant, or when Rashid brought Daniel a fat-ass newspaper, or when Daniel was plotting to reveal everything at the table. The only person who used mind reading often in Dubai was Louis, not Armand. Now, maybe it was the show not knowing what to do with Armand since they’d made him too powerful and if he was a Master Plotter, there’s no reason why he wouldn’t be able to see the plotting around him in Dubai. But let’s go with what the show has told us: when in love, Armand fails to see what’s happening around him.  Let’s say he was so in love with Louis, that he not only lost interest in the coven and broke the rules he’d enforced for centuries, but he also deluded himself into believing that other coven members wouldn’t rebel against his selective tyranny.

That's been my deep suspicion since Day 👏 Effing 👏 ONE. 👏 I'm convinced Rolin never intended for Armand to get so popular in the fanbase, and was fully prepared to throw him under the bus with the "Banishment" plot twist & make him the bad guy & look even worse than he was in the books; by helping to plan his own companion's murder, and lie about saving him for 77 years.

Cuz IMO book!Armand is MUCH easier to defend; he's my fave character in TVC, BECAUSE to a large extent he was right: toddler!Claudia was an abomination, she was the ONLY one who stabbed/poisoned Les, Louis was 100% oblivious to her plotting, and Armand never had any intention of killing Louis. The effed up part was killing Madz, who had nothing to do with anything. The whole duplicitous backstabbing aspect of the Trial only pertained to Armand torturing Les to force him to condemn Claudia, and lying to Lou that Les had died after the Trial/fire. Armand was THE most powerful vamp, and Santiago was more in the background. AMC!Armand's actions against Louis are skeevy AF, casting into question how he could be so painfully oblivious, both to Santiago AND Daniel plotting. book!Armand loyally stayed with Louis until Louis was literally too depressed to be around anymore. He never wiped Lou's memory or anything, he just left Lou to his own devices, which was the SMART/BETTER thing to do--regardless of if AMC!Lou asked him to erase the memories or not (post-suicide attempt & mental break; the dubcon is through the ROOF 😩).

I'm in the same position as Lestans who hate AMC!Lestat, cuz I find AMC!Armand SO much worse; I don't like or trust him AT ALL. And I see no logical explanation for AMC changing so much, other than that that's what AMC intended us to feel about him here. 🤷 Only difference is that Loustat's still endgame, so there HAS to be a redemption arc for Lestat, "can I cry and say I'm sorry, too!?" in order to make Loustat getting back together palatable. Lestat's the new MC, and Lestat's endgame for Louis, period, Rolin's said it 1000x. AMC has zero obligation to make Armand look any better, cuz Loumand's not endgame; Armand's not a focal point going forward. I reckon fan pressure from the Devil's Minion side will be MOST influential for getting AMC to give Armand a redemption arc--but that would be making a Armand better person for Daniel's sake as his Maker, NOT Louis' sake as his ex. But who knows, time will tell.

Loustat

Did Lestat do this literally, or did he recount the events out loud from his point of view, and Louis remembered? Because Claudia saw/heard the same things: it’s why she told him that Lestat was doing the retelling to hurt him further and what made her get on her feet to mock the audience for believing him.

I like your earlier point that AMC is obvs. adding objective POVs, where I responded about my own suspicions wrt 3rd person POVs AMC has included.

And I also like @alleyskywalker's point that maybe it's Armand sharing/projecting images/memories to Louis & Claudia--although that still leaves the door open for him to interfere with things.

Another thing that bugs me about the extent of Armand’s memory wiping powers is, if he’s time and time again used this power to paint Lestat in a negative light: 1: What purpose does softening Louis’ perception of himself serve? From what we’ve seen, Louis’ belief that he’s unable to control his temper and often causes grave damage to himself or others is crucial to the control Armand has over him. Making him believe he was helpless to stop Lestat’s turning of Claudia or unable to go through with burning Lestat because of Claudia doesn’t serve Armand in any way because then Louis would think he’s incapable of causing harm when he’s not under the power of stronger forces (older vampires, a child he loves unconditionally, etc). Having Louis believe he has self-control wouldn’t do Armand de I Need to be Needed any favours.

The Trial's EP4 revisit wasn't about softening Louis' perception of himself or making Louis think he could/couldn't stop Lestat. It was about implicating Louis in being aware of the coven's Great Laws forbidding turning children, and him making/manipulating/forcing Lestat to do it for him anyway, deliberately breaking the law & thus being guilty & deserving to be put to death. It painted Louis negatively to the audience AND the IRL fanbase. It wasn't about benefiting Armand per se; rather, it was just another coal on Louis' head to guarantee that he would be found guilty & killed. (And I've spoken sat length about why I think the revisit's scripted AF, even though SOME parts of it DO match with what we already saw in 1x4.)

I don’t think is entirely true. I think Louis blames himself for minor things or stuff he knows he didn’t do. But not about the things that would make his worldview take a 180-degree turn. Louis’ One Thing, Only Thing, has been Claudia’s death. As we saw in 1973, he cannot live with the memory of what happened to Claudia. In episode 5, when they start to talk about the events that directly lead to the trial, Daniel calls Louis out for using language that distances him from the narration, because it’s a difficult memory and one he’s never actually had himself recount, ever.  Raglan said 3 or 4 other journalists had tried to get the full story out of him and ended up dead or undead. Even in 1973 we see Louis and Armand use ‘Her’ instead of Claudia’s name when talking about Paris. In Season 1’s finale, we see him remember that it’s not Claudia who stopped them from burning Lestat; he was the one who used violence to stop her from finishing the act. Armand tells Daniel that he’d be ashamed of calling Louis a liar for his faulty memories after learning the full extent of the repercussions for not burning Lestat. I say this also applies to Louis. He is ashamed/cannot live with the fact that what he failed to do in NOLA is what led to the events in Paris (I’m speaking purely about the character’s mindset. I don’t think burning Lestat would’ve changed anything; it might have made things worse).  Cognitive dissonance again, and this time he resolved it by blaming Claudia. He’s believed the kinder version of events because he can’t face the fact that his refusal to burn Lestat is the reason why he could come to Paris and testify in the trial that ends up killing his daughter. To know himself as the man who picked Lestat and ended up condemning Claudia? That would send him to the sun 10 times over. And it’s easy to blame Armand for this again, say that he messed with the memory of Lestat’s killing and that’s why Louis blamed Claudia for the failure to burn him (which okay, if it kept Louis from the sun, is almost a sympathetic and loving edit, as messed up as that is lmao). But, Louis has read the diaries and knows Claudia hated him for 5 years while they were going through Europe. Daniel also mentions this in Season 1 iirc. So it’s not like Louis doesn’t know it wasn’t all roses between them after leaving NOLA.

Agreed.

Revisiting the Trial

2: Why would he leave his involvement with planning the trial in there? If he can basically snap a finger and rewire a memory forever (or drone on and on about a version of events until the victim fully believes him), he could remove himself from knowing about the planning altogether. If he can even make his victim hallucinate something (like Sam being next to him during the trial), he could’ve made Louis hallucinate him next to them on the stage during the trial. Why doesn’t he? Why leave the memory of his culpability in there despite knowing it’s the one thing Louis wouldn’t forgive Lestat for, let alone him?

EXCELLENT questions. ��🤣

AMC's Trial changes very important bits from the book, that bring all of Armand's actions into question, and make him look either sinister AF (malicious!), or incompetent AF (in love!), or both (nuance™???). IMO he just grossly underestimated Daniel's ability to pick his lies apart (more on that below)--and for some strange reason, he never went after Sam (or got Louis to kill the last person involved in Claudia's murder, which is ALSO wildly OOC for Louis--unless he's been brainwashed with that "time heals all wounds" BS), to make sure Sam kept his mouth shut, let alone ran blabbing to the Talamasca. I've seen some fan theories that Sam was an agent for the Talamasca the whole time, which is WIIIIILD~! I can't WAIT for S3.

Louis prefers to believe a version of events that paint him in a kinder light, and so he wouldn’t willingly upset his worldview by reading an account that challenged it (“I knew who I was without those pieces.”) I don’t know whether he does this deliberately or by not fighting against Armand’s (supposed) control of the archives. I say deliberately because, once he gets the memory of Lestat’s non-burning right, he needs very little prodding to remember what happened next..... ....it’s Louis who decides what memories he carries and which ones he forgets or edits to maintain his self-perception. He doesn’t do this maliciously. I think everyone believes they’re better than they actually are. Not many people are willing to look in the mirror and truly see themselves, flaws and all. Louis “I didn’t put those there - You sure about that” de Pointe du Lac has gone through life refusing to look in the mirror. What likely happens is similar to what happened with Claudia’s turning: he made the story gentler for a child’s mind, like how mothers do with their kids’ birth stories, and likely retold it to her enough times that it became the full truth to him too. 

Louis' lost pieces come from A LOT of different places; and his triggers don't ALL react to the same stimuli or amount of prodding:

I think THE BULK of Lou's lost pieces are cuz of his own repressed memories & coping mechanisms from decades of trauma & PTSD & grief. He just doesn't WANT to remember bad things in his life ("I want to die!"), so he mindwipes himself; cuz suicidal tendencies & mental illness BOTH run in his family. (Dan has to GRILL Louis in 1x7 "was it raining; what murder? You don't need a memoir, you need 100 sessions of EMDR!"). Ofc by 10 sessions (2x8), we learn the truth about "Banishment," which changes the trajectory of the whole interview (Louis goes from toasting Armand across the table; to setting Dan's laptop on fire & running to NOLA)--

--because other lost pieces are predicated on The Seismic Lie that said "Lestat wanted US dead," (ie: Banishment); which have THOROUGHLY confused Louis wrt Les' motives, going alllll the way back to NOLA--"And then something real. This is Lestat." He's unsure if Les EVER loved him, or if Les EVER felt anything real for Lou beyond having "all the emotional acuity of A MONSTER~!" (a la ranting in 1973; a la book!IWTV)

And some are memories/lies Louis fabricates for himself, cuz he KNOWS Loustat shared real love (a la Dreamstat--did Les REALLY have Lou's initials monogrammed, or is that something Lou WISHES Les did for him?). Which makes the Banishment lie the deepest betrayal, cuz he's been operating for the past 77 years thinking Les hated his guts. He KNOWS that can't be true though, which is why he's so determined to get this 2nd interview right in 2022, where the 1st one in 1973 went wrong; "the more nuanced portrait."

Some are cuz of faulty memories & GAPS in his knowledge--during the Trial he was in & out of conscious cuz the coven kicked his head in & knocked him out cold in the Wet Room and he had a bleeding head wound the whole time he was on stage; and he was mind fogged so bad he was hemorrhaging from one eye; and had all these different versions of events thrown at him that had him confused even in Dubai 77 years later.

And ofc others are cuz he's been mindwiped ON; some of his memories are tampered with, and we'll NEVER know the full extent of what Armand did & didn't remove/replace; "I had a hunch."

LDPDL is the dictionary definition of Mentally Unwell, ("If I had been an actual journalist and, you know, not fried on coke and ludes, I would have realized what a dangerously unstable psyche I was with").

So I wouldn't say Lou needed "very little prodding"--he needs the entirety of S1 to even START the process of properly unlocking all of these memories, once Daniel realizes that the ravages of TIME aren't the problem with Louis' odyssey of recollection ("I never owned a Buick; you don't need a memoir!"). There's a bunch of other internal & external factors affecting Louis' memory, and it all goes back to the seeds planted when Dan said in 1x1: "I do my best work 1 on 1," without "Rashid's" constant interference.

The memories come flooding back, including and especially the more correct version of NOLA events that Lestat showed him during the trial re: Claudia’s turning, the fight, etc. If Armand had maliciously edited these memories, then he’d stop Louis from recovering them (kill Daniel and make Louis forget he even thought of doing an interview). But he doesn’t. He’s right there as these memories come back and, aside from suggesting Louis stops during emotionally charged moments, doesn’t prevent the remembering, despite this making it more likely that the extent of his betrayal would be uncovered. Why?

Both revisits were intended to show Louis in a bad light & condemn him to DEATH.

The 1x4 revisit was supposed to implicate Louis in breaking the Great Law against turning children. Neither Louis not Claudia could corroborate these events, and Louis gave up and just accepted it, "you should go with Lestat's version."

The 1x5 revisit was supposed to push Santiago's narrative of "mutual" abuse--"what's as bite between paramours; remember that we are monsters~!" and diffuse the brutality of Lestat's actions by minimizing Louis' pain "it was a hard fall, nothing more!" Claudia wanted Lestat dead after his actions in Ep5 proved to her that Les was no better than Bruce.

"I refuse the idea that Armand is some passive “I couldn’t prevent it” character. If he’s been editing Louis’ memories at will, then he’s a very actively malicious creature (even if he doesn’t think so). Moreover, the renewed memories paint Lestat in a much kinder picture, which doesn’t serve Armand de Possessive. "

The Trial was deliberately designed to prove that Claudia & Louis had NO right or reason to kill Lestat, and that NOTHING Lestat did warranted him being killed by his fledglings ("The father, duped by his ungrateful and diabolical children"). The Trial was meant to end with Claudia AND Louis DEAD. The malicious edits to the revisits are embedded in the script itself, with all the deflecting Santiago does to keep the narrative on track that Lestat is NOT the one on Trial (LESTAT: "I broke the Second Law. When you sentence them for their crimes, you sentence me too." SANTIAGO: "Ha! But you were manipulated into it...teased until you toppled!").

Armand doesn't HAVE to hide the Trial events from DanLou, cuz the Trial still ended with the seismic lie about "Banishment." By painting Lestat as the ultimate betrayer, Armand expertly diffused any & all forgiveness Louis could give Lestat; painted HIMSELF as the ultimate hero. Like, YES, Armand took care of Louis, and allowed him to stick to his vegan diet, and was never physically abusive (beyond NOT putting Louis in his coffin for hours (days?) on end in 2x5 so he could sleep & heal). But the decades of psychological manipulation are Armand's misstep, when he had SO many chances to come clean & never did--what hides in the dark comes out in the light! Louis tagged Daniel in for the 2nd interview & Dan came in clutch ("it's his job" "it's his drug" "I know. It's my job. I'm built this way!"), cuz Louis knew in his SPIRIT that something wasn't right about Armand; Jacob's talked about this several times.

What makes Armand de Possessive "more likely that the extent of his betrayal would be uncovered" is NOT the Trial proceedings being recounted to DanLou & Armand letting it happen (a la Lesmand in 2x3). It's Daniel's snooping with RAGLAN. If Dan hadn't gotten Sam's script from Raglan at the last minute, that interview would've ended with Loumand STILL together & Louis STILL lost in the sauce for another 77 years. 😬

Dan would've died from Parkinson's Disease, and NO ONE would be able to get close enough again to help Louis--god, when I think about how things could've turned out for Louis I get chills. Which is why I keep comparing IWTV to Get Out--the HORROR of psychological abuse & trauma effs me up way more than physical abuse--physical wounds heal, but mental damage can last forever; esp. when you're rewriting entire histories.

Cuz 100%, Armand should've killed Daniel the second he threw the real script at Louis. 😭🤦 Armand underestimated how much Lou would side with "insignificant" Dan over him ("She was a destitute little girl, destined to live an inconsequential little life!"); and Armand overestimated his ability to KEEP Lou & keep him mind-controlled.

I suspect that he was actively TRYING to mindwipe Louis when they ran into the living room, and that Louis was being mind-fogged offscreen.

"One night, 70 years ago. You are over this, Louis! The pain of it has left you. Don't let an insignificant detail, delivered from am insignificant mortal… You have forgiven me for what part I played in her death! And time has opened back up to us and we are once again teachers of one another. Louis, everything that gives you happiness gives me--Louis!"

But we've seen in 2x7 that even a BARRAGE of mind fogging CAN be shaken off if a vamp tries hard enough--Claudia did it several times, and even Louis managed to do it, even though it made his left eye start hemorrhaging.

So yeah, as to why Armand didn't rip Dan's head off, IDK. 🤷🤷 I think the DM fans might be onto something, that even then Armand was "hedging his bets" and kept Dan alive as a contingency plan to make his own fledgling if Louis left him. Which IS book!Armand's pattern of behavior.

Armand’s hold over Louis isn’t because of some insidious memory edit, it’s the ‘prison of empathy’. He doesn’t challenge Louis’ version of events, mostly because it puts his position as companion at risk. And Louis stays in this prison of empathy even as it suffocates him because he doesn’t want to face memory, the monster.

AGREED. Armand's "maliciousness" isn't cuz he HATES Louis & wants him dead (a la Santiago); it's cuz he's fatalistic to a fault and has twisted ideas about the world AND about love-as-service. He selfishly thinks he's doing Louis a favor/kindness/mercy by having his mind stay as scrambled as eggs, cuz Armand is thoroughly unequipped to handle ANYONE'S mental illness--not Louis, and as we'll likely see in S3, definitely not Nicky's. 💀 Lestat's fledglings keep ending up either suicidal or dead under Armand's watch ("Does he want to lick my boots or chop my hands off? Is it the gremlin or the good nurse tonight?" ).

Even Armand torturing Nicky & chopping his hands off was what Armand thought was an act of kindness/mercy, when he thought Nicky's obsessive violin playing was unhealthy. But violence isn't the answer. 😭😅 He does the wrong things for the right reasons; the road to hell is paved with good intentions, as I've constantly said about book!Armand.

But AMC's twisted that by having Armand actively trying to have Louis killed & lying about it, which takes the wind out of the sails.

TL;DR: My problem with blaming Armand for everything/most things Louis remembers wrong is that 1. It removes Louis’ agency and flattens his personality, and 2. Turns Armand into this Big Bad who plans and executes shit meticulously but somehow doesn’t do anything to stop people who’re 1000X weaker than him from unraveling these plans. I think most of these problems are because the show fucked with Louis’ and Armand’s characters in favour of Lestat’s, but that’s a story for another day.

So IMO, defending Louis' agency & autonomy WITHOUT addressing the roles played by Armand (and even moreso Lestat) in ABUSING Louis' agency/autonomy misses the point wrt this story's overall point about the abuse of power.

Who is ARMAND to determine the trajectory of Louis' life? He was all up in Daniel's face, "Why did I owe YOU my shame? Why did I owe YOU my one act of cowardice? The series of abhorrent consequences that followed?" Well, why does LOUIS owe ARMAND his life or sanity?

Cuz Armand's brand of empathy IS a prison--Louis built it, yes (as I said: the BULK of Louis' lost pieces is him coping with trauma & grief); but Armand holds the keys. Armand equates companionship to covenship, as if there has to be a master & a slave--same way Lestat did. (Only Claudeleine saw e/o as EQUALS.) And Louis' been beat down all his life that he comes to just accept when certain roles present themselves, even when they make him miserable--esp. when they're twisted to use his strengths & weaknesses against him.

Louis can stay in his mind palace of delusion all he wants--it's HIS life, and it should be HIS choice, HIS agency & HIS autonomy if he kills himself or starves himself or wtvr.

Armand treated Lou like a possession the same way Les did ("I GAVE you to Armand"), and not like his own person; it's ableist AF.

Only once Daniel exposed everything was Louis FINALLY able to "LEARN to live honestly." Lou can't learn or grow or KNOW himself, if Armand's ENABLING his worst habits, and SUPPRESSING Louis' identity, by REFUSING to "allow me my odyssey [of recollection]," just cuz YOU'RE too scared to be alone if I kill myself or leave you. Armand POUNCED at the opportunity to wipe Louis' memories, and LEAPT at the chance to remove extra pages from Claudia's diaries, taking undue ADVANTAGE of the trust Louis had in him.

Also, by lying about Banishment, he simultaneously ROBBED Loustat of the chance to grieve for their daughter properly. 77 years have been stolen & wasted on helping Louis AVOID uncomfortable truths about himself, rather than facing everything honestly. It's a childishly immature act that is in line with 17yrs!Armand, so I get what AMC was tryna do, but I agree that it doesn't do AMC!Armand any favors, when we see this uber-powerful vamp CONCEDE power to people 1000x weaker than he is--

--at least not without adequately contextualizing those concessions in ways the audience can understand/accept; what with the convoluted chronology and muddy motivations blurring the lines between clever plot twists & cheap plot contrivances.

But like I said, IMO S2 wasn't interested in exonerating Armand or painting him in a good light. IWTV's been about the abuse of power, and the various ways that ALL vampires have wronged e/o, Louis & Lestat & Armand included.

But it's also about the mishandling of power--not realizing the ways that ALL of these vamps really COULD have prevented the bad ish that happens.

BUT also also, the ways that all these vamps are doomed by the narrative to some extent ("But the suit changes nothing!"). Innocent children end up dead. Abuse victims either get back with their abusers; or they start the cycles of abuse in other ways. Guilty parties (like Sam) get off scott free for no reason.

IMO, saying Armand & Lestat are abusers is not flattening Louis' personality--it's the avoidance of Armand & Lestat's culpability and the overt insistence by Louis-antis/Lestans/Armstans that because Louis DOES make bad decisions that everything IS his fault that flattens Louis as a character. Louis can be a naive effing idiot AND his husbands can abuse him--both things can be true--and ARE. The denial of which is what I see as Santiagoisms, that strip away all context behind WHY Louis makes the decisions he makes; by deflecting/diffusing/minimizing the damage caused by the agents, factors & forces at play that move & direct & shape him in very specific ways:

from his homophobic godawful mother making Lou think he "failed my brother" (THE domino effect that set this whole story into motion in the first place)

to the white racists "It was the call and response of my entire life. I had let them talk to me like that so long, I stopped hearing it. 'Yes, sir. Of course, sir.' Subject, verb, agreement, 'sir.' Smile, nod, 'yes, sir.' They all came from the same organ inside me, an organ unknown to science at the time. Because what scientist would look for an organ found only in BLACK MEN who use their weakness to rise?"

to French White Lestat's constant God Complex rhetoric ("you need to show restraint, fledgling!")

to the obligations Lou felt towards Claudia conflicting with his love of Lestat despite all the heinousness Les had done to BOTH of them ("You want to kill him too, and you will enjoy doing it!")

to Santiago ("I handled folks like Santiago both my lives. I don't need you flying in like vampire papa.")

to Armand ("You think I need to be coddled, hyped up, lied to?")

to Daniel disrespecting Louis at every turn, up until 2x6 ("I could be your Lestat, your Claudia, but better! I mean, I got a little bit of both of them in me, plus a few things they don't.")

And it's using one's weakness to rise that I love most about Louis, cuz I've been saying since Day One that Louis has POWER IN SUBMISSION; playing INTO people constantly underestimating him; ESPECIALLY Lestat & Armand, by NOT seeming like a threat. It's not that he's victim = weak = helpless damsel = blameless = victim, it's that he's weaker → vulnerable → victim → unreliable narrator → weaker. And the TRIUMPH of Louis' story arc completing in S2 (that CELEBRATES the fact that he is NOT a flat & hollow shell that's had his whole identity scooped out of him by BOTH his p.o.s. husbands) is that he's FINALLY able to break the cycle & Get Out of this Sunken Place!

He shoves Armand into a effing wall & throws the script at his effing face & reconciles with Lestat & declares he's "companion enough FOR MYSELF" & redecorates the whole penthouse & puts Paul AND Claudia on his wall in places of HONOR--to HONOR their memory, and all that that implies; cuz Memory is NOT the monster--ABUSE & DENIAL is. The bloodstains are still on her dress; he didn't get it cleaned off--he didn't remove the rocks from his feet for 70+ years. He's WANTED to fully remember the good AND the bad this entire time, and Armand ("you're lingering, Rashid!") never let him. He tells Armand "you need to be GONE," so Louis can FINALLY start healing & relearning who TF he is bless and amen I LOVE this for him. 😤👏❤️

IWTV S2 Tentative Timeline (Pt2c) - Unreliable Narrators, Armand & the Trial

Thanks for the response to Pt2b, @usuallydeepalpaca-blog! I really want people to talk to me about the IWTV timelines, cuz this show is SO confusing! 😩😭

"I think if you create the timeline with info the show doesn't provide, i.e. Armand was involved from the start, then you're bound to get it wrong."

Absolutely. I fully expect that I got some stuff wrong, which is why I said it's a TENTATIVE Timeline.

I've in no way said it's THEE CORRECT™ timeline, cuz chile IDKWTF is going on. 😅 I openly say what confuses me, questions I have, and how I come to the conclusions that I draw. I'm being as transparent as possible to let y'all know that I DON'T know. 🤷 The show doesn't provide EVERYthing, so I'm just piecing things together in a way that makes an iota of sense to me, following the logic of what the show HAS provided. The only solid details we have are diehard IRL dates, that gave us a time range when certain events can/can't happen. AFAIK I'm working with the same set of details everyone else has, until AMC gives us more info in S3+. And unfortunately, the 2 biggest unknown variables are Lestat & Armand, and to what extent they were/weren't involved in the Trial that got Claudia killed & Louis buried alive.

"saying Armand messed with Louis' memories re: the trial is also something not supported by the show."

The show obvs. wants us to assume that Armand made Louis hallucinate Sam guarding him in the theatre box (thus painting Armand as a "captive" along with Louis & Claudeleine).

Even if Armand didn't use the Mind Gift on Louis, he lied at least twice:

lies by omission: letting Louis think a hallucination of Sam was real

lies to Louis' (& Daniel's) face: going along with the premise that he was Sam's "captive" & Armand sat there the whole time thinking of a way to rescue Louis

And we KNOW this is a lie, cuz Daniel calls it out explicitly, asking how Sam can be "in two places at once," allegedly "guarding" Armand, but ALSO helping to torture Louis in the Wet Room.

Armand never denied or contradicted Louis saying Sam was in either place. Maybe Louis really did misremember Sam being in the wet room--the ONLY one who can corroborate all this is SAM--whom Armand ALSO lies on, throwing Sam, Daniel & the Talamasca all under the bus by saying the script with his handwriting all over it was forged! No honor amongst thieves I guess! 🤣

(Eff Lestat's POV in S3--when is SAM gonna give HIS POV of the Trial?!)

So I'm operating on patterns of behavior, and the logic that if he's deliberately lying about one thing (a VERY BIG THING, actually), then what else is he lying about? How are you "atoning" for anything, when you're just heaping lies on top of gaslighting on top of manipulation?

Armand has used Louis' obvious confusion to his advantage, just going along with whatever will make him look better & more sympathetic. Which ofc, is the exact same thing he does with the "Banishment" lie. "They gave me a choice...I could not prevent it" is the truth and a lie all rolled into one incredibly manipulative cocktail, cuz if it was just a simple matter of Armand selling Claudia out to save Louis, that would be one thing--but Armand KNEW the script planned LOUIS' death the whole time. The "seismic lie" about "Banishment" effs up Armand's whole defense.

Cuz Sam already wrote the script in April 1949 (and I said this is confusing, cuz if it's the WHOLE script, then this implies Lestat's half was written by then, too, and NOT in September after the Eiffel Tower crime--which means he was ALREADY in Paris & working with the coven; inc. Armand (which would also explain WHY Armand took Louis to the library so much--perhaps anticipating that Loustat would feel e/o's presence if Louis was around the theatre too much? But that doesn't explain Claudia)--omfg I'm confused). Wtvr--we KNOW that at some point b/t April & September 1949, Armand made his edits & directed the entire production--from Santiago to Lestat to Tuan's projections--ALL of it. And we know Tuan's projections started being made in June/July 1949.

Armand KNEW Daniel had been given the OLD script from the archives, WITHOUT Armand's edits & directions, and LET Daniel AND Louis think that was the truth--

--same way he went behind Louis' back and removed extra pages from Claudia's diaries that would reveal MORE of his shenanigans--

--and the same way he lied about Nicki (& Gabrielle) in 2x3.

The show ALSO provides us with quotes like this:

And this:

And this:

Which in retrospect make Armand look even more insidious, esp. when we wonder to what extend Louis' been "driven to form new conclusions about myself" when he doesn't even KNOW himself; let alone WHAT memories he has that are real or false.

It's so effed up, and it makes me side-eye all the insistence that LOUIS is the one mostly at fault, when he's got literal double-hypnosis Brain Scramblies from WWDITS. 😭🤦

Ofc there are unknown-unknowns when dealing with unreliable narration. But there are also known-unknowns, too, that also make Armand sus.

Sure, Loumand was away at the library in July (IF that memory's even real, Mr. "I Had A Hunch")--but how on earth would Armand have NOT known that the coven was working on the Trial right under his nose for MONTHS prior & after July--Luchenbaum sewing new barrister costumes & wigs; Tuan painting projections & testing new lens/film tech; and Sam writing a new script (when we already KNOW Sam can't multitask when his "head's in a hat")?

July is only ONE month in over HALF A YEAR of Trial prep. Louis was never around the coven to know what was going on--but ARMAND was; it's where HE lives.

Whose POV was it that showed the whole coven passing around Claudia's diaries? Whose POV was it that revealed Santiago being called Maitre in every scene that ARMAND was also in?

Armand was in the park with Tuan when Tuan called Santiago Maitre; and Armand was in the theatre with Sam when Sam called Santiago Maitre--so this is clearly either Armand's POV telling on himself; or it's AMC screwing with us.

It's TRUE that Turning Madeleine was the straw that broke the camel's back, as Armand was like I can't keep THAT a secret from the coven, too (and ofc he couldn't--they're VAMPIRES; they'd FEEL a new vamp in their territory). But Loumand's problems PREDATE Madeleine; the same way Loustat's problems predate Claudia. I blame Les for not dealing with Lou's BS, just like I blame Armand, cuz THEY are the Coven Masters, NOT Lou--esp. cuz Armand had 14 other vamps in his coven he SHOULD be prioritizing over Lou. The same way Loustat's guilty of being bad fathers (which they BOTH admitted to), Armand's guilty of being a bad coven leader (which HE admitted to).

IMO, all this makes any & all discussion about Armand's trustworthiness difficult, when his "seismic lie" throws EVERYTHING else he's done into question. Esp. since the show ALSO provides us with the FACT that Armand knew from DAY ONE that Claudia lied about "Bruce"/Lestat; and that Louis was a terrible liar & terrible with the Mind Gift; and that he'd ALREADY planned on killing Louis in 2x3! Armand knew from the get-go that he couldn't do EFF ALL to keep Louis & Claudia out of danger, and TOLD Louis so.

"It also ignores that Louis softens his participation in certain things because he can't live with the guilt of his full participation, e.g. Claudia's turning, which he continued to lie to Claudia about even during the trial and only accepted the extent of his involvement in Dubai"

The Trial Timeline's purpose is to pinpoint when the preparations took place, NOT to hash out how bad of a father Louis was to Claudia. 🤨

And it certainly isn't meant to provide a timeline for the events in S1 wrt Claudia's Turning--we already know the dates for all of that, that she was made in 1917. I focus on the 1940s in S2, and the European dates, NOT the NOLA dates. LOUIS did not participate in the Trial's preparations, ARMAND & LESTAT did. My timeline has ZERO bearings on Louis' guilt for not warning her, etc.

But on the subject of Louis & Claudia, I've cussed Louis out for not telling Claudia about Armand b4 (x x), I don't ignore it at all. I fully understand & even agree with Armand being fed up with dealing with Louis' BS. But HE CHOSE not to kill Louis when he had the chance, and it's obvs that whatever arrangement they made when they had sex in 2x3/2x4 allowed Louis to TRUST that Armand would keep "the secret" & keep Louis & Claudia SAFE from the coven. (Which is a BOGUS claim for him to make, when Santiago'd ALREADY peeped that they were lying about Lestat & being from NOLA, but wtvr). I've called Louis a naive idiot 1000x for overestimating Armand, putting his life in Armand's incapable hands--just like he would AGAIN by trusting him about "Banishment;" and AGAIN by asking Armand to wipe his memories in SanFran (and LIE by omission about Les saying "I love you, Louis").

"Louis remembers the trial, he remembers what was said and what Lestat showed him."

HOW can Lestat have showed Louis ANY memories during the Trial (inc. the Ep4 revisit), when Makers/Fledglings CANNOT read each other's minds???????

I love this show so much, but I effing hate this show--they don't even give us an answer, Daniel just moves right past it, like wtf are we supposed to do with that, AMC? There's plot threads, vs plot HOLES. Louis' TOO unreliable, Armand's a shysty liar, white savior Lestat to the rescue~~~! "BANishMEnT~!" As if Lestat's any less impartial?

Esp. when at least SOME parts of the Ep4 Revisit were OBVIOUSLY Scripted lines written by the coven to implicate Louis in breaking the Great Laws that Lestat allegedly taught him AND Claudia to follow?

Like, Louis HATES himself, and is quick to blame himself for things beyond his control (a la Paul, a la the Ordinances; "Can we be forgiven if we do not forgive others ourselves?"); so if one is determined to see him bad faith then of course one can easily pounce on him Florence DPDL style / Santiago style, and blame him.

(Esp. since in 1x4 we literally SEE Louis admit to begging & emotionally baby-trapping Lestat into turning Claudia--the revisit in 2x7 is more (melo)dramatic & extended, sure, but it does NOT contradict Louis' account in S1. So I get REAL confused when people say he lied about 1x4 or wtvr.)

Louis invalidates his perspective cuz he KNOWS he's an unreliable narrator--he spends 2x1 sobbing about wanting to remember & "get every detail right"--and ARMAND is there constantly tryna STOP the interview; having directly contributed to his already deteriorated (& inherited?) mental illness, by bending Lou's trauma into "a Lestat shaped-effigy" with all that "I will not harm you" bullcrap.

TL;DR: We won't know for sure what the Trial timeline actually looks like, unless S3+ revisits it with more context.

But as things stand at the end of S2, NO, I don't trust Armand as far as I can throw him, cuz there are waaaay too many instances where he's deliberately lied & obfuscated & omitted in ways to deliberately confuse the narrative surrounding the Trial--that go beyond Louis' already confirmed trauma, PTSD, mental illness, repressed/faulty memory, and guilty conscious.

If y'all want a timeline of S1 events, those have already been made by other people in the fandom (this one is goated).

I wanted to know what was going on in S2; so I used every single date and IRL reference possible, and put them in chronological order in a way that makes sense based on how I TENTATIVELY understand things currently; NOT how AMC has confirmed yet--if they ever will.

If anyone has more relevant in-show references & IRL sources we can cite, to help make better sense of S2 than I did, let us all know!

[l0vagrend]

What is "arcane" and what happened to Jayce and Viktor ? [+Ekko]

[ aka an arcane theory ramble based on League of Legends lore and what we know from the show ]

I. Runes

We know runes are powerful symbols and magical energy that is / was used by mages a long time ago, but was banished and forgotten by Piltover, because of the influence of Heimerdinger. Who saw what magic can do and how it can lead to ruin.

Jayce was saved by a mage and arcane/magical energy [hence the crystal in his wrist].

In the game's lore, there exist the most powerful runes, the World Runes. These runes are speculated to be the creator of everything in Runeterra. Everything came from these runes. However since they hold this enormous power, they are very dangerous and in wrong hands can cause ruin and destruction. Posessing just one rune, a fracture of a rune even, is enough to corrupt its wielder's mind. [khm Lord of the Rings].

I believe "arcane" aka magic, comes from these runes, and is present all over the land.

II. Ryze, the rune mage

In the game, a character named Ryze wields the task of collecting the World Runes to keep away from civilizations. He witnessed the runes destructive powers first hand during the Rune Wars. Where nations posessing just even one rune made them hungry for power.

Ryze binds each rune in a secret location far away from the eyes of others.

The Runes and arcane surrounding Ryze transformed his body, extended his life span. He went from a human looking mage to a purple rune mage. [Viktor is purple as well where his body made contact with the Hexcore]

III. In Legends of Runeterra

Legends of Runeterra is another Riot Games game revolving around the world of LoL. In it 5 shards of the World Runes are mentioned : shard of madness, shard of betrayal, shard of violence, shard of hope, shard of reverence. However there are at least 9 runes we know of from both Ryze's lore and Runeterra's.

So there is a possibility that a 6th Rune is present in the Arcane storyline.

IV. Hextech, artificial magic

Jayce created artificial arcane energy based on his experience with a mage. Hextech merges ancient magical powers with technology and machines.

HEX LITERALLY MEANS CURSE.

RUNETERRA HAS THE WORD RUNE IN IT.

But back to being normal !

V. Wild runes

Wild runes could mean that the original form of runes and arcane is present beyond the artifical machinery. It evolves and corrupts the environment around itself [see Victor's followers, the Hexgate, Ekko's tree].

VI. But where did Jayce go ?

I have 2 ideas for the whole Hexgate mind-fuckery. 1) its just arcane and runes related, 2) its arcane AND time related.

Its possible that the Wild Runes showed Jayce through visions the foreseeable future of the arcane corruption getting really out of hand [Victor and his followers changing in huge ways mentally not just physically].

But also Jayce himself got corrupted by the Wild Rune. His mind is all over the place.

His new LoL skin has a voice line that goes like :

"Unmade, made again. I never know how much of me is left."

Which could imply that he was changed in a much deeper level. I mean hell he looks fucked up and fused with arcane energy.

VII. What will happen with Viktor ?

He will lose his humanity fully and turn to machinery, become against humans and what makes them humans overall. I mean that is just canon LoL lore so its most likely to happen.

He will most likely be reconstructed, because his conciousness is still active and well in some kind of aether.

But also, in the intro we can see Jayce's hand is the one putting the mask on Viktor, he is the reason, like a butterfly effect that caused Viktor to become who he is, the Machine Herald.

[there is a highly likely possibility that LoL Viktor will receive a rework after Arcane to fit the canon]

VIII. What will happen to Ekko ?

In the game he has time related abilities, so it would fit that when he comes back he gains these abilities. Rewinding time will be useful thats for sure ! [Idk about Heimerdinger tho]

BUT this is all i could come up with so far and these are just thoughts and theories ! :]]

posts/videos that inspired me to make this : 1, 2, where did jayce go ?, the cataclysm, ryze cinematic explained

[lulublack90]

Prompt 19 - Fresh Start

@jegulus-microfic November 19, Word count 551

Previous part First part

They sat in McGonagall’s office and waited for her. They’d been let in by one of the other staff members and told that she was on her way. 

Regulus had his left hand in James’s, his right in Sirius’s, and Remus had his hand on his knee. He felt very safe, if not a bit claustrophobic. He’d been wracking his brains over who could have done it, but he always came up blank. He really didn’t know anybody that well on his course. And he didn’t think he’d offended anyone enough for them to cause the amount of damage they did. His question was answered when the office door opened and Minerva strode in, followed by a beefy, acne-covered twenty-something-year-old. Regulus had no idea who he was, but judging by the reaction of James, Sirius and Remus, they did. 

“Mulciber?!” Sirius spat as he tried to raise himself out of his seat, but Remus’s arm across his lap held him down. Regulus turned to James. 

“Who is he?” He asked. James’s eyes never left Mulciber while he answered Regulus’s question. 

“He’s in our year. He’s best friends with someone we don’t get along with.”

“Snape,” Sirius hissed, trying again to get out of his seat. This time, Regulus helped Remus to keep his brother sitting. He’d only make it worse. 

Regulus had no idea who Mulciber was, but Snape was a familiar name. He’d been one of the others in the competition to display their art at the art show, but Regulus had beaten him out for the top spot with ‘Burk with a ‘Nana’. Did that have something to do with this? He'd never even met the guy.

“Mr Mulciber has confessed to breaking and entering with the intent to destroy a painting of yours, Mr Black,” McGonagall said, bringing him back to the present. “He says he acted alone and that no one else was involved,” The tone of her voice and the way her brow ached told Regulus that she didn’t believe it for one minute. 

“I-I-I-If he’s friends with Snape, I think I know why I was targeted,” Regulus said, his words getting stronger as three hands squeezed him reassuringly. He told McGonagall his theory, and by the paleness of Mulciber's face, he’d hit the nail right on the head. 

“Well, Mr Mulciber, what do you have to say to that?” McGonagall asked. Mulciber was sweating profusely, and his skin had turned a pale sickly green. 

“Snape told me to do it. That Black had cheated him out of the art show and that his art should be displayed and not the rubbish he painted. He told me I’d never get caught!” 

“Nor would you have if you hadn’t been bragging about it in the cafeteria,” Minerva snapped at him. She turned her gaze on Regulus, and her features softened. “Rest assured I will be following this up and dealing with it accordingly. If you would like to return to the Halls, I can make that happen for you, a fresh start in a different part of the camp, maybe?” Regulus shook his head. 

“No, thank you, Minerva. I’m happy where I am,” He could see the beaming smile on James’s face out of the corner of his eye and knew James felt exactly the same way. 

Next part

[charcubed]

"Did you love medical school?" Avery asks Max.

"Medical school is the greatest longest hardest thing you're ever going to do," Max says, not answering the question, as he is already fucking famous for doing to get out of talking about himself.

(But this is not a post about Max. This time.)

The use of the word love here and the subtle framing of medical school as a relationship... Well.

My theory for Avery since the start has been that part of her arc is going to be growing to understand herself and realizing that becoming a doctor is not synonymous with fulfillment.

In episode 2, we got her saying,

"I've given up everything good. Everything that matters. Relationships, family. All for this job. And at the end of the day… I'm alone. Adrift. With nothing to show for it. I'm never going to be a doctor. This is all there is for me."

(This follows a pattern of a thing this show does with dialogue where characters say things that are more revealing to us as the audience than the characters themselves are conscious of, but that's a point for another post.)

Her bucket list included,

"I want to know myself."

because she doesn't know herself yet.

And now we got,

“I always thought that if I became a doctor things would start to make sense.”

I think Avery wants far more than just being a doctor... or, to be fully honest with you, I think they're conceivably going to go the route where she decides she doesn’t need to be a doctor because she’s found fulfillment in her life and work (and love!) in other ways anyway. I’m not talking “Rachel gives her life up for Ross” type of bullshit with two men instead of one, but rather tied into the explicit arc of how Avery wants to know and understand herself because she doesn't currently, and the "you're never alone" theme. That's part of what this pregnancy and future abortion plotline is setting up anyway: it's a brute force tool for self-reflection for her.

Does Avery really want to be a doctor, especially at the expense of all other parts of her desires? Or has that just always been The Plan and is she unconsciously thinking that earning that title will fix the holes she feels in herself and in her life?

If you think this sounds tricky to pull off as a story, you'd be correct – but hey, so is polyamory, and yet they're doing that. They’d have to write Avery's arc well enough that it doesn’t come across as reductive, but I really think they could land it because of the character setup they seem to be doing for her – and I've thought that for several weeks already. This week just has me locking in on that possibility more.

Now, going off the rails here from meta to straight up crack theorizing even though it's way too early to be predicting shit...

Weeks ago I was already wondering… what if the season ends with Avery going to leave to become a doctor and the guys decide to follow her? Maybe even in a big dramatic traditional “they run off the ship / to the airport” sort of romantic scene sort of way lmaaaooo. And as the boys abandon ship to follow her, at the same time, SHE turns around to go back to them without knowing they were following her! Idk. Who knows! Not me. Like I said, way too early to know anything.

Regardless though, the Hot Take™️? I would not at all be surprised if Avery changes her mind about wanting to become a doctor. And I think it could, if done correctly, be a weirdly bold move (in a show that's already planning to pull off A Big Bold Move).

[oswhys]

So, when I played Lucanis’s questline for the first time, I genuinely thought that Illario was going to turn out to also be possessed. I like to try to come up with theories if there's some kind of mystery involved. Obviously, Illario is suspicious from the get-go but if you want to give him the benefit of the doubt you can, after all, grief really does make people act strangely, but not usually immediately after the death. But when he shows up after the defeat of Zara and kills her just as she says “Amatus” upon seeing him there's no doubt he was in cahoots with her. But then something interesting happens, he uses blood magic, some enchanted pin. He still keeps up the act of innocence though. We get further confirmation during the questioning of Zara’s corpse that the two were extremely close, at least from her perspective. But then we get a strange little tidbit from the memories of Lucanis later in his quest line when you're with spite. Lucanis has a memory or maybe it's some warped memory of Zara talking about the cultivation of an Envy demon. 

Zara’s project was to cultivate and bind different types of demons more easily through new techniques. Zara was talented enough to be able to put a demon inside of a non-mage subject, something that shouldn't be possible in the first place, or at least unheard of. She also wanted to cultivate certain types of demons, ones that are more rare and possibly harder to bind. We see the results of most of her test subjects, either walking corpses or bound demons. Let's say she agrees to take Lucanis to be a test subject, thinking the whole thing would just kill him and the terms of her deal with Illario would be met. Let's say shes surprised Lucanis is even able to merge with spite, let alone survive well afterward. Now let's say this gets her thinking, can she replicate this? Can she put demons and spirits into non-mages? Was this a freak accident?

I know I’m speculating a lot here but hang with me. Now I don't know if her scheme is to take advantage of Illarios jealousy and use it to create an envy demon, something rare and hard to bind, but it would naturally be attracted to that much envy in a person. Or maybe it's presented as an opportunity later down the line, that Illario could become an abomination and gain as much power as one, being able to tap into magic even if not in full control would still give him an edge. I don't know, I just think there was a bit more to the story that we don't know about, aside from what we’ve seen in some of the concept art. Which shows something akin to Illario being manipulated by either Zara or some kind of desire demon or??? Just someone in a pool of blood, with horns? But pieces of these ideas got left behind in the game. Fragments of something larger and it drives me up the wall. 

There's an obvious romantic connection between Illario and Zara that is never elaborated upon in conversation, It is a deeply interesting tidbit of information and nothing is done with it. Then there's Zara’s line in Lucanis’ memories of her saying that the conditions of cultivating an envy demon must be perfect (the line that sent me through this spiral). And then there is Lucanis’ log book. His 5th one if you don't save Treviso shares a reading list of books and he writes some notes with his thoughts about each. He says that Spite “trusts nothing to do with envy demons” which to be fair to spite, is reasonable they're… creepy, and envy as an emotion is a huge liar sometimes. 

There's just something there. Obviously, the story got cut up and changed with time but there was a time when I started to think that the reason Illario is so suspicious is that he's a red herring, or he's a patsy, or not in control of himself or being manipulated or SOMETHING. But no he's just… kinda stupid. He locked up his grandmother and kept her alive? IS HE STUPID?

Anyway, I just like the idea of some grander conspiracy or grander narrative and that maybe Illario wasn't all to blame for everything or that he was, and he was actually even more villainous. Being controlled by his own jealousy to the point of madness blah blah blah you see why I’m thinking about this so much now yeah?

[epickiya722]

Thank you Kiya for being The Number 1 Defender of Izuku and Yuuji...😆😁😄🎖

Every time I read your posts about them, I'm so happy and proudly reblog and even show your metas to anyone who like to badmouth Izuku and Yuuji.

What I love about your metas about them are they're all based on canon. Yes, you also loce made headcanons about your favorite characters but when you defend them against those haters, all your analysis are based on canon material that most people don't really paid attention, too...🥇🏅💐

From that anon before, yes, I've read them in twitter, and got so mad, like why you have to hate Izuku and Katsuki that much?! Thanks for your posts, Kiya...💐🌻

Anon, I am sending so many hugs to you right now! You're too sweet! 😭💜

Yuji and Izuku are my boys, my faves, I just adore them, you know?

This past year or so, I just find myself wanting to ramble whether it do be meta posts or fun little headcanons and I'm glad to see you enjoy them!

Honestly, while sometimes I feel like I maybe reading a little much into the mangas (or anything), I like going back and taking in each detail bit by bit. From what I have seen, sometimes those little details do matter.

(Right now, I have two posts about the last volume covers for JJK and MHA because I have thoughts and I feel like I must say these things before they stay in my head rotating over and over.)

It's really just I have my favorite characters and I hate it when I see people hate on them for reasons that don't really make sense at all!

Like, hate them if you want, alright. Not everyone will like that character. I have characters I don't feel a lot of hype for.

However, when I see people hate on Izuku and Yuji, it's like they post anything just to be "right" about their hatred. Like "I hate this character and I'm right because of this reason." You don't hate to be right about how you feel. Your opinion of a character isn't a fact! It's based on feelings!

You don't have to throw anything to be like "my opinion is a fact".

No, your opinion is BASED on a fact.

When I have my meta rambles, they're my opinions, they're my theories. But I don't just have them and think I'm right. I have them because of what I interpret from canon and then the gears in my head get to turning.

I honestly feel like it's just the "Let's hate on New Gen MCs" trend. Which is weird to me because these some of these new MCs are no different and just as great as their predecessors.

Maybe it's just me, I don't know, but when people say they hate Izuku or Yuji I'm just like "huh".

I'm still trying to process how anybody can find Yuji or Izuku "boring" or "have no development". HUH?! I don't know if they just see that sunshine personality and they're stuck on that "nice characters are boring" mentality. Maybe it's that.

Like, they're both nice and compassionate, but they can also have their moments when they're not. Neither of them is as "pure, naive and innocent" as some people try to portray them as and when people do that, sometimes it is to say "see they're not that badass, not like my GOAT who would body their enemies".

Watching the Izuku vs Muscular fight, I thought Izuku killed that man. Yuji literally has put fear into the curse that embodies the fear of humans... HOW DO YOU MAKE FEAR FEAR YOU?!

Really, it's gotten to the point that even characters that aren't my favorites (or my number one faves) will get hate and that hate make no sense that it makes me go "am... am I reading a different manga?" Yeah, Katsuki is definitely an example. Like, I get it and as I said, hate him if you want. Not everyone will like him.

But if you actually read the manga and watched the anime from start to finish and say "Katsuki doesn't have development", I don't trust you. Yeah, he's an ass and all that but even he is aware. I have seen people defend WORSE characters and hate him..

Could be just me, but I don't know what's fun about being a hater. And I mean, someone is constantly hates and hates and post about it endlessly.

I have things I hate, too and yeah, I will express it. But to do it every single second that you're known to be a hater is wild. And then calling it being "critical"? No, criticism can be helpful. You're not helpful if you just say you hate this thing and then make up something.

That's enough rambling! 😆

Again, Anon, thank you so much!! And I hope you have a lovely day! 💜

[hollyrogerbay]

anyone else notice how Deltarune seems to be getting more advanced each chapter, diegetically?

chapter 2 introduces the Recruits system, and updates save points to show all 3 slots in-game. chapter 1 was not retroactively updated to include the feature - it's an in-universe change. (although i believe chapter 1 npcs are automatically recruited once the system is introduced.)

and is it just me, or does it almost sound like the soundtrack is getting more advanced, too?

chapter 1's soundtrack was almost all soundfonts, chiptune, more retro synths, etc. - and the same goes for chapter 2, mostly. (mostly except for Susie, notably. her and her maybe-synth, maybe-live distorted guitars.)

we don't have much to work with, so this may not be anything worth mentioning, but the three songs for chapter 3-5 we've gotten sound noticeably more "real," i'd say?

"Hometown Day" is definitely the least notable of the three in terms of this, but still sounds relatively "realistic"/live

"My Funky Town" was what gave me this thought in the first place. the more live-sounding guitar in the left ear, something about the drums i can't quite describe accurately, the electric piano being played/recorded live. of course, it's not entirely "live" sounding, notably the saxophone being straight from the Touhou soundfont. but still much more than anything in chapter 1 and most in chapter 2.

"Green Room" is an odd case in general, considering it's pretty much just a remix of "Hip Shop," unlike any other song i can recall. but, yet again, it does sound a lot less "digital," would you agree? more effects on pretty much everything, the spacey drums and electirc pianos, everything.

this may not go anywhere, but i figured it was worth noting. the idea of chapters becoming more and more advanced as each one is added could also definitely be theory-crafting material methinks

[tio-trile]

Some of the photos I took of the cast and showrunners at the Chaos Theory panel yesterday : )