#“so you do a faustian bargain with them” i mean

[rainbowgod666]

Using @sm-baby's "TADC carnival AU" i like

H

I can totally use this as a baseline for pomni's "Knight" form

[slavghoul]

Hey Slav, first of all, I hope you’re doing good!

I just wanted to add something to the music topic.

I don’t understand this weird and kind of parasocial interest in TFs past.

as you’d said he surely wouldn’t be happy about this whole passiflora incident and when ever I see some “new” pictures of him pop up from when he was a literal teenager I feel so bad.

I know he’s a grown man and doesn’t need to be defended, but I just wish people would stop digging around to find the oldest and most irrelevant things about him and post it on instagram etc.

I'm guilty of such parasocial interest so it would be hypocritical of me to say I agree, but I agree with the fact it's weird 😭 If that makes sense? I'm painfully aware we're very selective with our ethics. If I started a fanpage about my neighbour they'd place a restraining order against me, but if it involves a celeb it's all fine and dandy for me to clickety clack on the keyboard all day theorizing 'how Tobias feels' about X, Y, or Z. I mean, I've literally just done that in the previous post. It's so normalized we don't even think about it. Post after and post and tweet after tweet that's all we're doing. There's an odd element of, I don't know, transactionality at play here.. the artist relies on the fan for validation and financial success, and in turn the fan derives enjoyment and a sense of connection. But then the line between appreciation and entitlement blurs, cause having invested all this time, money and, above all, emotional effort, the fan begins to feel a sense of ownership over the artist. And you may think "Pfft maybe that's the case for you, I'm not doing that" but we're all doing this subconsciously me thinks, we feel entitled to celebrity lives because we make them who they are. In turn, they must learn to live with it cause that's the Faustian bargain they had made, sad as it is.

I don't even know where I am going with this answer. I have no conclusion and no punchline. Tomorrow we'll wake up and do it all over again.

[vidavalor]

hi again! rewatched the 1st season now. so first off thanks again for the excuse i appreciate it lol. but secondly hoping you wouldn't mind explaining the satan's obssession with crowley thing? cos he's obvs creepy as all hell pun not intended in the 11 years ago scene but i haven't found the bit that confirms it's a fixation on crowley and not just satan being satan. tysm!

Hi! Thanks for the ask. I can try and we can see what you think after, yeah? :) Christmas cookie? *passes plate and pours some tea*

TWs: discussion of PTSD, sexual assault, including rape, intimate partner abuse, anxiety, depression. We're looking at Crowley as an assault survivor here so it's a bit dark. Lindsay's abuse of Nina is also mentioned here. This will wind up having a companion meta at some point soon as I was also asked in comments on another post to talk about Crowley and intimacy issues which is then really also talking about Aziraphale as a trauma-informed partner so a less intense Part 2 at some point soon...

If you're the anon who asked me this (or anybody else) and you can't read something with these warnings but you'd like to see what I'm saying, PM me or throw something in my Asks and I'll see if I can do a version of this that gets the points across while omitting the darker aspects.

Meta on Lucifer and Crowley under the cut.

The Ask here was about why I see Lucifer as fixating on Crowley, in particular, and not just being generally evil as, ya know, he's Satan. It's a fair question since Satan's evil isn't exactly something that anyone would consider restrained as he's the devil. Some of this is inference here when it comes to Lucifer, since the show intentionally holds the character back a bit... but I also think that holding Lucifer back is by design to help illustrate some things that we'll look at here.

The first clue to me that Lucifer has a bit of a fixation on Crowley comes from Crowley's gigs in Hell. Before the end of S1, Crowley was high-ranked in Hell. He seems to go by quite a few names in his demonic world. By making himself Nanny Astoreth when he's looking after Warlock, it alludes the idea that Crowley is also the demon of that name, who is considered part of the "evil trinity" of Hell, along with Lucifer and Beezlebub, with whom Crowley used to spend time with pre-Fall and with whom he has history.

Astoreth is a genderbent serpent goddess in lore with an abundance of other Crowley traits so safe to say that Crowley is meant to be Astoreth as well. Aziraphale proposed in 33 AD that Crowley is also Mephistopheles and Asmodeus, which Crowley didn't exactly deny. Mephistopheles is one of the most famous demons to ever exist-- he of the Faustian bargain-- and Asmodeus is the demonic prince of lust. Crowley's already been shown to be a Bible figure in disguise-- Bildad the Shuite being a Biblical character-- so the idea that we are at the 2/3rds mark of the show and we've met all the high-ranking demons in Hell but several famous ones appear to not exist in Good Omens, despite more minor ones (Shax, Furfur) making appearances, implies that we probably actually have met demons like Mephistopheles and Asmodeus because they're all really Crowley.

Crowley retained power in Hell because it allows him what little freedom he can have in damnation. It means he likely won't be removed from Earth if he proves he's "good" at being a demon and that means he won't get stuffed in some cluttered, dark, cubicle in Hell for millennia. (Or destroyed.) More importantly, it means he'll be able to be on Earth with Aziraphale. That's easily worth taking credit for a bunch of human wars to fool Hell into thinking he's evil.

While we see that Crowley, when forced to come up with a demonic plot of his own, picks more annoying things than evil things and sells them as evil-- the M-25 design, taking down mobile phone networks, he's sometimes forced into doing things he doesn't want to do in order to not be outed as a demon who isn't super jazzed about being a demon and is really, secretly, a free-flying crow. He doesn't live to serve their Master Satan like some of the other demons do. He's going along with Hell as best he can and sometimes, he finds himself in a situation where he has to get creative because he's been tasked with something he disagrees with-- like we saw in the Job minisode. Other times, he might be forced into something he can't find a way out of, which is implied a little to be at the root of his terrible mood when he and Aziraphale meet up in Ancient Rome. He's wearing military garb that implies the temptations he's saying he's in Rome to accomplish are tied to Caligula, who wasn't exactly a swell guy.

What's interesting, though, is that Crowley is in this position of power in the first place. Other demons are shown in both seasons so far to be jealous of Crowley. He gets all the good gigs. Satan makes a bet with God that has both Upstairs and Downstairs in a tizzy for weeks and who is sent to whack the kids? Crowley. Who was sent on the first ever really Earth mission-- to get up into the Garden of Eden and "make some trouble"? Crowley, long before he'd cemented his big reputation. Who gets to deliver the antichrist baby and so kick off Armageddon, the thing that angels and demons basically "live" for? Crowley...

Across both seasons so far, Hastur, Ligur and Furfur are all given scenes of showing that they're jealous of Crowley being a favorite of Satan's and given the best assignments while they slum it in middle-management at best. What Crowley never says or admits to with other demons is that they actually don't want to be the favorite of Lucifer over here because he's the actual fucking devil and it's an absolute horror show. Crowley isn't about to admit that to them because he's supposed to want nothing more than to be Satan's slave and to express anything else is not demonic.

The other demons who are antagonistic towards Crowley are invasive and creepy but they stop short long before what we've seen Lucifer do. Hastur and Ligur pop up unannounced in Crowley's electronics-- the tv in his flat, on the screen at the movies-- and that's already disturbing. Imagine having your evil coworkers able to interrupt your r&r tv time in your own apartment... let alone the fact that Shax and even Beezlebub both pop up into The Bentley unannounced in S2. There's no evidence so far that Satan is out here "delivering instructions" like this to others in Hell the way he does to Crowley in 1.01 (and there's actually a scene in S2 that we'll talk about that suggests that he's not or, at least, that it's uncommon, which we'll get to in a second.)

He might well be but when you combine assaulting Crowley with giving him all the prime gigs in Hell and the other demons' jealousy of their Master's attention towards Crowley, you wind up with the impression that Satan is a bit fixated on Crowley.

The Bentley scene with Lucifer in 1.01 is analogous to rape. Crowley's sense of personal autonomy is violated. He doesn't consent to Lucifer forcibly entering his body. Lucifer does so by first penetrating through Crowley's two foremost metaphorical defenses-- The Bentley (enters through the radio and uses it to invade Crowley) and his sunglasses, which cannot shield his eyes/himself from Lucifer. Crowley already has these signature defenses mechanisms on in the attack scene and the horror in the scene is actually watching neither of them protect him. The scene is so early in the show that it's only the second scene we've ever seen Crowley wearing his glasses (and it's pitch black dark out, to add to it) so the glasses are basically introduced to us by showing us a situation that motivates Crowley's desire to hide his eyes from people he doesn't trust, even if they aren't human and know what his eyes look like. This is Crowley's third scene in the series itself and it's really arguably the second half of his second scene (the Hastur & Ligur in the graveyard one.) It's part of our introduction to Crowley in the modern era, with only Eden preceding it. Armageddon is new but the rest of this hell-- faking being evil, suffering violating attacks-- is thousands of years old for him at this point.

Crowley is driving when this happens.

Driving is the ultimate symbol of self-control because you're literally behind the wheel, navigating yourself through the world, in control of where you are going and the decisions you need to make to get you there, trusting yourself to make decisions that protect others on the road around you. Lucifer rips that from him by rendering him unable to drive while "delivering instructions" to his mind. Crowley-- a very powerful, magical being-- is unable to fight him off. When Lucifer leaves his body, Crowley had to grab the wheel and steer The Bentley away from hitting an oncoming truck with about three seconds to spare from a head-on collision. Crowley, The Bentley and the antichrist baby all would have likely survived that crash without issue because of their magic-- but the human driving the truck likely would not have. Obviously, Crowley would prefer not to kill anybody but Satan nearly made him against his will and rendered him unable to fight him, the powerlessness of which is then interesting when tied into things like Crowley essentially drugging himself to save Elspeth, trusting the present Aziraphale to help protect him while he did, etc..

As the attack happens, parts of "Bohemian Rhapsody" are underscoring it, picking up on a musical cue from when Crowley rolled up in The Bentley to see Hastur and Ligur in the graveyard. The graveyard scene sees Crowley arrive at the big crescendo of the song and what is it but the lyrics Beezlebub, has the devil put aside for me? and, prior to that, the eerie lyrics, especially on rewatch when you know what happens as a result of this scene: we will not let you go (let him go) x a million, not to mention the no no no no no no... bit.

By the time we're back in The Bentley and Lucifer has shown up, parts of the song play through it. I see a little silhouetto of a man plays as Crowley is literally seeing the driver of the oncoming truck in front of him, just as he loses the ability to control The Bentley. When Lucifer leaves him and Crowley grabs the wheel, we hear thunderbolts and lightning/very, very frightening/me and the Galileo segment of the song. Thunderbolts and lightning is interesting since God makes it a point to point out that this night is not dark and stormy but then that type of weather is what Crowley does in S2 that causes the power to go out and his parallel, Nina, to be trapped. It's also what demons in general can do so you could say sending a storm-- like in the Job minisode-- to be demonic and of Satan. (If it's not Crowley doing it to play Cupid, anyway.) The thunderbolts and lightning of Satan/Hell is very, very frightening to Crowley...

...Me/Galileo/Galileo/Galileo/Figaro... Galileo is arguably the most famous astronomer to ever live. He was a polymath, really, like Crowley was. Crowley, as an angel, made the stars and invented gravity. The scene with Hastur and Ligur that precedes this and ties into it has Hastur mistranslate the Italian Crowley spoke during it. Crowley said "ciao", meaning "goodbye", which Hastur correctly said was Italian but he claimed it meant "food" (mistaking it for "chow" because he's an idiot.) So a scene that ends with Crowley speaking Italian then connects directly into the scene of this attack, where Italian is spoken in the song scoring it, as Galileo was Italian and figaro in Italian is "fig tree".

While Eve does eat an apple in Good Omens, the Biblical 'fruits of knowledge' that tie to the Serpent tempting Eve in Eden are interpreted in different ways throughout different religions and at different periods in history. In Good Omens, Crowley got Eve to eat an apple and the pleasure of food opened a door to sexual pleasure. Eve shared the apple with Adam and they were *Aziraphale's hilariously judgemental voice* "expecting already" with Eve about 8 months pregnant later a day later because Eve's biology is atypical of other humans and all that. It's debated as an apple, with other different fruits and sometimes even wheat mentioned as possible things Eve ate-- if she ate food at all, as some people take the entire thing as a sexual metaphor. Figs are one fruit that some people believe it was instead of an apple, so this is a reference to Crowley as the Serpent of Eden.

Me/Galileo/Galileo/Galileo/Figaro... Crowley holding onto himself while under attack and just after it, which speaks to activation of a plan, which speaks to this not being the first time he's endured something like this. Galileo and Figaro = The Starmaker and the Serpent of Eden. The things he's done that he is proud of, that make him not evil, in his mind, and not deserving of this. Things he likes about himself. Things Aziraphale loves about him.

The song is narrating for us Crowley through the attack as he's basically frozen there enduring it, seeing the driver of the truck coming at him and Scaramouche/Scaramouche/Will you do The Fandango?

A scaramouche is a kind of mischievous scamp-- so, Crowley; The Fandango is a Spanish couple dance. Historically, one version of it is done between a pair of men who try to outdo one another with skill, in a kind of homoerotic competition. It's also slang for fucking during a concert and I have the feeling that Crowley would probably enjoying doing that Fandango a lot more as that would be consenting with a partner of his choice at a live concert rather than being mind-raped to Queen by the devil in his car. Regardless, it's another allusion to sex in the scene, adding to the rape overtones.

There's also something that is pretty horrifying about the fact that these scenes of Crowley and Aziraphale being separately reintroduced to us in 2008 after we first met them both together in Eden are intercut so that Lucifer's attack on Crowley scored by "Bohemian Rhapsody" ends with the Italian sung and cuts directly into Aziraphale speaking Japanese to the chef at the sushi restaurant.

He'll try to explain to Gabriel that eating sushi is "what humans do", which is the same phrase he'll use to try to explain to Michael and Uriel in S2 what falling in love is. During the bookshop attack, Shax will bully Aziraphale about his humanity-- about the same two things (food and love) in the two previous, connected scenes. (Gabriel, initially the one repulsed by tea in 1.01, leaves the scene after Aziraphale tells him to hide by asking if anyone wants a hot chocolate, in a pretty hilarious turnabout.) Shax calls back to the food-related and the love-related "it's what humans do" moments for Aziraphale by asking if she should "send up the sushi" and by mocking his relationship with Crowley ("What are you? Crowley's emotional support angel?"). Crowley and Aziraphale are the ones in love and it's tied together throughout multiple scenes in both seasons to sushi, in reference to the night Armageddon began in 2008.

The point then is that, making this all even worse, Crowley is actually supposed to be at a back corner table in a dark sushi restaurant sneaking a date with Aziraphale when he's attacked by Lucifer in The Bentley-- and then forced into helping start Armageddon, which could bring about the end of his and Aziraphale's relationship... and that's our grim introduction to his world in the modern part of the story.

As we go learn what Aziraphale is like in the modern era and contrast him with his head office's mentality via Gabriel's arrival, we also are given clues in the scene that suggest that Aziraphale was actually expecting Crowley, as he looks to the side Crowley comes up on when he hears the miracle sound that actually signals Gabriel's arrival instead. Aziraphale will then explain that he's there, doing "what humans do" and enjoying it, to Gabriel, and it will be only eating sushi in this moment, just as Crowley will not be present when Aziraphale explains that falling in love is "what humans do" while objectively talking about Maggie & Nina but, ultimately, talking about himself and Crowley beneath it-- his real motivation for keeping Heaven off their backs is Crowley. The writers then have Shax combine the two "it's what humans do" scenes around love and sushi and throw them back at Aziraphale while Crowley is once again not with him because of Heaven/Hell but is present in his absence in the moment.

All of this happens in the first scenes of Crowley in the modern era, all the way back in the first episode, and it's done to give us an understanding that he is a survivor of attacks like this and how that impacts his behavior, his choices, his relationship with Aziraphale. It's to give us a finer appreciation for his strength and his humor and his capacity to love in the face of it. It's to show that while some of the demons are just kind of amusing idiots, if dangerous, and that there's a lot of humor to mine there, some aspects of being a demon are not at all amusing. Crowley is really just doing the best he can to survive the absolute horror show that is an eternity of damnation as Satan's favorite over here because there are very dark, very violent aspects of it that he cannot permanently avoid.

While the attack we are shown is a mercifully short, if horrifying, scene, the implications of it are even worse. The assault we are shown had a plot purpose in that moment-- Satan giving instructions on delivering the antichrist baby to the satanic nunnery-- and since everything was in motion, that was the extent of it. Armageddon took precedence. What we are left with, though, is the impression that this type of demonic assault with its massive rape overtones is something that Crowley's experienced before and that the implication is that Lucifer attacking him is not always just to deliver a message related to an assignment but to deliver one of forcible control over him and that this is something that Crowley has been dealing with periodically for the 6,000 years he's been on Earth. It's akin to a kind of rape in 1.01 and that is already way more than enough to see how that would affect Crowley in the story... but then S2 takes this scene and both alludes to it in a key moment and gives it a whole paralleling subplot, highlighting its importance and continuing to expand upon the meaning of it. Both things together then suggest that while we saw a rape-coded assault in 1.01, the feeling that the scene was alluding to other instances where it was rape itself was definitely the implication of it.

In S2, in the group scene at the end, Crowley is out of the bookshop taking Maggie and Nina away from the angels for their safety when the subject of Satan comes up for the only direct time that season. Shax demands that Gabriel and Beezlebub be taken to Hell to be given "as gifts for Satan, our Master" and Head of the Dark Council Dagon replies that "he wouldn't want them-- maybe as hors d'ouerves." On the show obsessed with food symbolism and that codes different types of food with relation to sex-- in particular, because of Serpent of Eden Crowley-- and with the brothel owner named "Mrs. Sandwich", to say someone would want a being as a "hors d'ouerves" implies sex and if we're talking about Lucifer, then we've already established that consent isn't exactly a priority. Rape isn't about sex-- it's about power-- but the show is coding Lucifer's behavior in line with its coding of sex to highlight that his violation of Crowley isn't just of the heavily rape-coded variety that we saw in 1.01 but has actually, at other times, been rape.

Dagon's most significant line in S2 is essentially to point out that Satan's a rapist-- but it's also to point out that not everyone in Hell has been through that horror. Satan's choosy. Satan's a bit fixated. Dagon's comment is actually surprising. Your first thought when Shax suggests giving Gabriel and Beez to Lucifer is that he's the devil so they'd be in danger and what you've seen of what he's done to Crowley was skin-crawling and you don't want that to happen to Gabriel and Beezlebub. You assume that it might because we're talking about Satan but then Dagon puts a check on that and says-- to not a single bit of even implied disagreement in the room-- that Satan wouldn't really care that much about getting Gabriel and Beez.

Think about how truly kind of crazy that is.

Satan would not be that interested in being handed over his old friend and the Grand Duke of Hell who betrayed him and the Supreme Archangel of Heaven? He'd maybe rape 'em, sure, possibly, casually posits Dagon, but they aren't what he's really after. They'd just be hors d'ouerves.

Not a single being in the room even so much as signals disagreement with that assessment that the not terribly subtle Dagon chose to voice aloud, which means they all agree with her. They all know who Lucifer's fixated on.

*Gabriel* and *Beezlebub* would only be fucking *appetizers* to Satan.

That implies the existence of *a main course*, does it not?

Who else but Crowley (and Aziraphale) could be on that menu? No one.

We also have that Crowley is conveniently out of the bookshop for the moment that Shax and Dagon have this exchange about Lucifer. He comes back in on Dagon saying "hors d'ouerves" but was outside when Shax was referencing Satan so he didn't hear any of it. This seems very deliberate on the part of the writers, as if Crowley had been in the room, it would have prompted some kind of response and changed what happened in the scene afterwards. Instead, the only reference to Lucifer is specifically when Crowley isn't in the room, probably because this conflict is on-going and going to continue into S3.

Prior to Dagon's line, the show also paralleled Lucifer assaulting Crowley in The Bentley in 1.01 with Lindsay abusing Nina, which adds another layer into this. You could even make an argument that one of the reasons why we never see Lindsay and we just see their abuse of Nina via the text messages they send Nina is to draw an intentional parallel to how little we've seen to date of Lucifer/Satan in the series.

It directly ties to the 1.01 scene in The Bentley because, prior to Lucifer coming through the radio and assaulting Crowley, Crowley was trying to call Aziraphale (the Maggie to his Nina in this parallel, though obviously much further along in that relationship) to tell him about Armageddon but he'd taken out the mobile phone networks earlier in the night to have something demonic to share with Hastur and Ligur. This parallels Crowley knocking out the power in S2 accidentally and Nina getting locked in the coffee shop with Maggie. Lucifer and Lindsay both attack through electronic communication devices-- The Bentley's radio and Nina's phone-- and unleash a torrent of abuse. The difference is that Nina might be more easily able to escape Lindsay and live a more peaceful life after S2 while Crowley has yet to be truly able to evade Lucifer.

While Lindsay's abuse of Nina is at least psychological and emotional in what we are shown and Lucifer's abuse of Crowley is that with physical and sexual aspects that may or may not be present in Nina's relationship with Lindsay, the type of abuse doesn't matter to the parallel as it's all terrible and that's the point. Lucifer's abuse of Crowley is paralleled with the intimate partner abuse Nina is suffering in her relationship. This is objectively pretty interesting since it sort of suggests that Lucifer is Crowley's Lindsay, in the sense that they might have once been involved pre-Fall, which might add another element to why Lucifer is fixated on Crowley.

So, while Crowley can encourage his parallel Nina all he wants to take a risk and trust more and to trust him when he promises that it will be worth it, Crowley himself can't really extract himself from his own Lindsay-ish situation yet. He does know how to survive it, though, and it's not all about the defenses he and Nina put up-- it's about learning to shed some of those defenses enough to have a sense of intimacy with a kind person you can trust to love you and help you feel safe.

[miminmimikyu]

Episode 7-8: so, one day after drinking that coffee + espresso abomination Dal thinks diving into a Borg transwarp conduit to save travel time is a good idea. And later starts admitting that he has a tendency to forget about everything else when there’s an important mission to focus on. Who does that remind me of?

So the death racing episode that disabled Zero is simultaneously a breather episode lmao

Of course the Kazon Maje wasn’t the big bad in this episode, that would ask for some unprecedented competence from them :’D love how so far they’ve been relegated to “child abductors for a despotic slaver” and now “doing kidnapping for a rogue ai that’s channeling world’s worst tutor”. Not even that really, this Maje pretty much is forced into an “NPC who makes you do a racing sidequest on pain of death” role.

Ohh I really love the personality swaps in the holograms! The voice acting is so good! Brett Gray’s version of Zero was so spot I had to go back a bit just to listen if it wasn’t actually Angus Imrie imitating Brett Gray’s voice @_@ Same for Angus Imrie’s Dal!! Rylee Alazraqui’s Jankom shouting at the Doc and Jason Mantzoukas’ Rok Takh being so sweet and innocent are so funny! Also, taking the Gwyn hologram out is such a convenient way to prevent Murf’s personality from talking

only just realising the Maj’el - Majel Barett name connection!!

Ovidia IV is so pretty and the designs of the corporeal non-corporeal aliens are so cool but it’s a trap it’s a trap it’s a trap, it’s giving me Star Trek TOS vibes of “Faustian bargain aliens” or “planet with a death ritual masquerading as a incredible party”.

After watching the whole episode, setting aside the scenes on Voyager-A, episode 8 really really felt so much like a TOS episode with a modern twist to me! It had the uncanny idyllic planet, the race of telepaths enthralled by their senses, the weird euphoric call to death, culty death festival, the inability to leave once you’ve made The Choice.. but then it has the emotional arc you see in NuTrek and also includes a beautiful, thrilling scene flying on top of the Nazamon (very Discovery). And obviously without the gruesome deaths and madness that would have accompanied a TOS episode. (Ok maybe TOS deaths aren’t that gruesome compared to Disco/Pic//SNw but when I was 9-10 and watching TOS repeats with my dad on Sunday afternoons against my will it was terrifying so that’s what in my brain now). And despite the weird vibes they weren’t actually bad people, just dangerously secretive.

Zero’s arc is also so interesting. Their desire to obtain corporeal body is such a contrast from S1 Zero, who waxed lyrical about life with other Medusans, how they miss it and how it’s like nothing the others can imagine. It figures that now they’re liberated from being a living torture device and have had time to spend so much time enjoying freedom with their corporeal friends, they are able to put into words something might be missing. The joy on their face and in their voice after the transfiguration was so sweet! Also I like these shots through Zero’s cracked visor

I think it’s also an interesting juxtaposition that the previous episode, which ended in Zero performing a self-sacrificial, disabling manoeuvre, started with the gang diving into a Borg transwarp conduit and Zero voicing discomfort (fear) at that. Zero did stop talking less about their Medusan physiology post-Borg encounter (also after injuring Gwyn?) iirc. There was that fear of hurting others just by being Medusan. But this episode talks about fear being an essential aspect of life (ok. corporeal life i guess). Also interesting that Prodigy is framing the corporeal/non-corporeal thing as a binary. I hope it's going to delve a little deeper into that and go a little more complex. I can't wait to see if Zero’s new body lasts and what its possible deterioration will mean for Zero and their feelings about living as a Medusan among humanoids.

Another thing that I like about this episode is that the gang only cares that Zero was properly informed about what choice they were making and that they were safe during the process. They are sure that Zero knows what’s best for Zero.

Poor Gwyn can't catch a break, even her hologram is traumatised now.

Can’t believe how strong this first half of the season is already. If season 1 is anything to go by it’s going to be a hell of a two parter for the midseason finale!!!!!

(I’m still in doubt about the Entity being a time-displaced Chakotay, because in the second message it called Janeway “Janeway” and not “Kathryn” or “Captain” or “Admiral”. Even if he was trying to hide his identity for timey wimey reasons I can’t imagine he’d call her just Janeway and not “vice admiral Kathryn Janeway” or some other more businesslike title.)

Oh no these posts are getting so long OTL

[askthelordsinblack]

heya!! wanted to bring in some OCs if you're interested, idk if I'm doing this right tho

"Evelyn. I must be wrong--please, God, tell me I'm wrong--but you're saying to get back to...our reality, we have to summon five almost all-powerful eldritch gods. Who can and will kill us."

"Hate to have to say this, but that's exactly what's necessary. Now shut up. I love you but I'm trying to concentrate."

"We really had to do this in a high school gymnasium...it reeks."

"I personally think it's quite fascinating! We're dealing with essentially gigantic extradimensional cryptids--and yet we ourselves have power over them and have the ability to make them do our bidding!"

"For a price, Quinn. It's not that easy. The Lords in Black are not to be trifled with."

"A Faustian bargain, then! Even more fascinating."

"Just--let me do this. Okay?"

"I invoke the names. Pokotho, Bliklotep, T'noy Karaxis, Nibblenephim, Wiggog Y'rath, heed my call and grant me your power."

"You did great at spouting gibberish shit, darling. Did it work?"

“Hello, friendy-wends,”

[A baby-talking voice echoes around the gym, the room suddenly flickering with colored light. Shrill, cackling laughter surrounds the people in the room, coming from everywhere and nowhere all at once. It comes to a sudden halt, the gym going pitch black. The voices come one by one, reverberating off the walls.]

“Oh, my, just look at these ones!”

“I already hate them.”

“Ooo, Pokey, you’re so mean!”

[This voice is followed by bleats of laughter.]

“Yum yum, these ones look delicious.”

“Now now, settle down, brothers.”

[This voice clears it’s throat.]

“The Lords in Black are here— it sure as fuck worked.”

[batsplat]

still the same anon here. so what if instead of The Devil™️ it is a demon instead? valentino still strikes a faustian bargain and all we’re 100% keeping that. and yeah yzr-m1 is the manifestation of that demonic spirit. you know that valentino tribute video which is from the bike’s pov? “I’d been waiting for somebody like you for so long. I was nervous, but it was love at first sight for both of us. I knew instantly our relationship would be something truly special. We had that undeniable once-in-a-lifetime spark, and all the pieces of the puzzle just came together. I will never forget how we stopped on the grass in Welkom in 2004. Just the two of us, realising that you and me together was right – and that this was only the beginning….” etc. like this was so insane I think about it a lot. anyways, yzr-m1 is not exactly like a malicious presence, and obviously loves valentino but it is inhuman! and valentino chooses to give it…..or her? his heart and that turns him a lil bit inhuman too….. and let’s remember that irl valentino keeps this fucking bike in his bedroom…….very “character who keeps the cursed artifact, which is the source of their power, close” of him. and also talks to her before every race…..

the ducati years is yzr-m1 cursing valentino for abandoning it/her btw.

ummmmm what possessed me to write all this I don’t know btw

(x, x) no go on, anon... that bike letter is so. so.... I also think about it too often. the fact they literally got someone to read this stuff out loud... they gave the bike a voice... what a sport. *pinches bridge of nose* anyway. I think!! the bike can be a little bit demonic. but it can also like... reflect something of the rider back at the rider - so that as a Part of the rider, it ends up becoming an externalisation of some of their most notable traits, a way of emphasising them as well as distorting them. it whispers back at you what's already in your soul... and if you pour a part of yourself into that machine, then this is what your machine will inevitably become. so it's a bit... the nature of competition, right, ensures that this naked desire to win will end up being transmitted to the machine. but then if you draw your desire to win from spite specifically... if you have, for instance, switched manufacturers and wish to prove the entire world wrong, to make your former employer miserable, to show up your rivals and make them suffer... then eventually, that desire will fester within the machine and its nature will be twisted and corrupted accordingly

though I do like valentino's yamaha being Special and Weird!! adores valentino, is possessive of valentino, is unnatural and by definition inhuman, is already kinda inclined towards malice, calls valentino away from honda... again, it's a way of representing what the step from honda to yamaha actually Means in narrative terms, how it's this process of self-actualisation with both good and not so good consequences... like!! it was the perfect marriage between a giant of the sport in ill-health and a champion who desperately required a new challenge. some purpose. so if you have a capricious, maltreated bike that simply finds the concept of valentino - uh, *clears throat* riding it too attractive to resist... then why not tempt the two-time defending champion to make the switch? to take the leap into the unknown? to give himself over to this new adventure? and, yes, this bike will not take kindly to being abandoned...

anyway yeah there's a happy middle ground there somewhere in where the malevolence Comes From. something already kinda creepy, unnatural about the yamaha that then is encouraged by valentino - who talks to it before every race, imposes his own will on the machine and gets some of his malice and spite reflected back at him. valentino whispers to the bike and the bike whispers back... he keeps it close to him, as it now contains a part of his soul. a mutuality here, a symbiosis... it's coming into your own as a bike and as a rider by embracing the cruelty of competition to the fullest. a partnership that is extraordinarily successful but also morally corrosive. a "once in a lifetime spark", if you will

[nomsfaultau]

Daily ask №23!

Random/cursed edition!

What if I were to try and tell Fault!Wilbur where babies come from?

So. Phil has said that Tubbo's problem is not having blood in that one famous shitpost which got me into Fault in the first place. So. What if they did have blood though? Like what if some of the wax cells were filled with blood? Just spontaneously. For blood-letting purposes, yk.

I think I saw you mention somewhere that Fault!Tubbo either has or could potentially have memories from different alternative versions of themselves. Explain please?? Also does that mean that they potentially have memories from my personal au where most of my ocs and headcanons live? Btw my first reaction at that thought was "AAHH FUCK NONONONONO BITCH CHEESUS CRUST". It's not that bad though I promise I'd just be embarrassed either way.

What if. What if the Fault crew + the scp researchers got spontaneously teleported into a gacha reaction videos where they had to react to your shitposts, animations and drawings. Also throw a couple of 2018 style gacha vids in there for good measure. (While writing this I checked the lyrics of Devils don't fly and realised that it's actually a pretty serious song. Which like- damn.)

What role would the Fault crew characters get in the soldier poet king test? I do love that test a little too much maybe- here's the link to the quiz! https://uquiz.com/quiz/MYLbZ3/are-you-a-soldier-a-poet-or-a-king

This one has heavy spoilers!

1. Probably depends on how you do it, but I think he’d just take basic notes on sex-ed. Doesn’t have much puritan context of taboo or embarrassment on the subject. Fairly indifferent on the whole sex thing because he doesn’t think it’ll ever come up in his lifestyle of avoiding humans and knowing only 4 people. Probably a little irritated that its theories were so wildly off base, grumble a bit about how its own ideas about making Faustian bargains with dark entities and trading organ: [womb] for power make far more sense but whatever. He thinks pregnancy is stupid because how are you supposed to run like that? And your food is SIPHONED off by the fetus? Why can’t they get their own? And at the end you get a human. Terrible process all around. 3/10 Tommy has less ammunition to tease it now and that’s IT. 

2. Probably smell bad. Maybe they could do things like blush? Mosquitoes would go crazy for them. If this is ‘a previously weren’t a blood fruit gusher’ situation, Tubbo would be freaking out about 1. Who the muffin’s blood is this and 2. Starving 2 death babyy. Cause they really need that honey to operate. A bunch of baby larva are going to die even if all the workers can go into overdrive to feed the Hive. I think it would be very funny if Tubbo tried to break into a blood bank to donate it all. Shhh don’t worry about where this blood came from. Or what happened to the security cameras. It’s for a good cause trust trust. 

3.Heavy spoilers. The plan was that Tubbo and Wilbur get dunked through the near apocalypse via dissolving of the narrative due to SOMEONE being so depressed it fails to keep the void in check/potentially interpretable as being suicidal, thus exposing the two to pure void madness and realizing everything is a story. Which would entail having some familiarity/confusion about the source material of the dsmp, some vlogs, etc. but not necessarily AUs. But then SOMEONE turned out to be an abusive ass, and that plot point got very icky to me. I’ve been debating it for months, but realized I’m sexy and do what I want so am going to limit it to pure awareness of being a story, but not necessarily a fanfic. Still has the existential crisis of it and the philosophical implications that are going to so beautifully deal with themes of attachments, the purpose of narratives, and parallel whatever the hell trauma Tommy is dealing with during that section. But won’t actually deal with having any true awareness of stuff outside of Fault. Except maybe for realizing “Lawrence killed our muffining husband?!” because that scene was funny as hell to write. I dunno plans change. I’ve tried not to let outside events change my artistic vision, but it’s inevitable. 

4.Oh goodness they absolutely despise me for all the jokes about the horrors they’re going through. Probably think they’re being drawn ‘cute’ given they’re probably a lot freakier looking irl, and slightly distressed about being chibis. I think most would even consider it ‘out of character’ given their self perceptions don’t tend to be the most accurate. Current Wilbur is hissing and vehement about being constantly called an it because his character development is very far off from when that happens. Philza is a little disappointed that his bloodthirsty moments gets so much emphasis since he’s so chill 97% of the time. Tommy is absolutely chuffed to bits to realize he’s the main character, though trying to do damage control cause haha I’m fine guys this crazy internet person just made me seem edgy and depressed. 

Webb is going to strangle me for the Philza/Webb post tho. And the haha poor alcoholic divorcee doormat jokes. Dr. Blake assumes the blog is an anomaly and starts trying to torture it…?

5. I took the quiz sitting in the heads of all of them. 

Tommy: The Poet. “So I wait for you like a lonely house till you will see me again and live in me, till then my windows ache.” “The one who hurt you haunts you. In your nightmares, they say I am disappointed in you” literally happens in Fault. With Philza. “What is a sin? Inevitable” is pretty much something he tells Tubbo word for word. “What is hell anyway? Barren” "how can you love me with all that I've done ?"

The Blade: The Soldier. “if you were to wear a crown it would be covered in blood. The one of the guilty.” “The sword is at your side. It bore your name long before you did.” is rather literal both for his name and The Blood God. “but how can I sleep with the world in my head?" “What is hell anyway? Doubt”

Wilbur: The King. “Despite all your attempts, you have never been a healer. You hurt people and they leave and you are alone in a room full of silence. You sing to try and forget, but it does not work” everything about this. Trying to heal but being made of destruction, his fears of devouring his family, singing, memory loss, everything everything it’s so Wilbur. "come and be human with me" “The one who hurt you haunts you. In your nightmares, they say I love you." <literally Phil’s last words when Wilbur killed him in the Whumptober au. "but how can I sleep with the world in my head?" why it has insomnia.

Philza: The Poet. “There are rules. How many? One, and you will follow it.” For his Collected. “Fear: You did your best and it wasn't enough. You tried and failed and kept trying and it wasn't enough. You had the power to change things and it wasn't enough.” For all his dead children. "you’re trembling, but he reaches over and he touches you, like a prayer for which no words exist" it's him reaching out. I love the reverse imagery with Phil, a god worshiping his mortals “anger is a strength in a world of apathy.” He feels no shame or burden for his anger, knowing well the good it can do. “Who taught you about guilt? The silence” 

Tubbo: The King. Absolutely perfect as a foil to The Blade btw. “What is duty? Undeniable” “The throne looks golden, and covered in flowers” “Fear: You did your best and it wasn't enough. You tried and failed and kept trying and it wasn't enough.” Saving people from Philza. “The one who hurt you haunts you. In your nightmares, they say I forgive you” Rosaliiiiiind. “Who taught you about guilt? God”

[samueldays]

Evil Undead, revisited

As a veteran GM, I feel that kids these days complain more about the brute fact or moral law of Evil Undead in D&D or similar games, and I get questions from people wanting to use necromancy for good purposes like having tireless skeletons plow a field. Shouldn't that make up for the [Evil] tag on spells like Animate Dead? Why is that tag there, anyway?

With a caveat that "Undead" in fantasy is a kinda vague category which can reasonably have some special cases and cosmological exceptions like repentant ghosts, here's an attempt at describing how "core" undead like skeletons and vampires still count as evil and can be smote with Smite Evil, and making them is evil even if the necromancer has good intent in contemporary terms. This is mostly written with reference to D&D 3.5, which I like for its SRD, but the principles can be used elsewhere.

TL;DR: Making undead is like a faustian bargain but with Death instead of Mephisto, and every hand you lend to Death in the world is a corrupting influence even if you get something good from it.

The TLDR is inaccurate because the implicit contract is with the negative energy plane instead of a demon or avatar. Now for the long version:

In the example of the plowing skeletons, the questioning wizard is presumably treating the plowed field as an end and the skeletons as a means to that end - he's not doing necromancy for its own sake.

So he could cut out the necromancy part. He could use Animate Objects instead of Animate Dead, and make the plow move itself. (Or build a golem, but that's another story.) But notice that Animate Objects is a higher level spell than Animate Dead, as well as being temporary. Making it permanent requires another high-level spell. Wizards (and D&D players) are prone to optimizing towards Animate Dead, because it seems to be an easier and better way to achieve the desired effect.

But why does this lower level spell work better? My answer is that when casting Animate Dead, something else is providing much of the power, and that "something else" is the Negative Energy Plane. It is the plane of annihilating everything that exists, and is not on your team. You should not be contracting with it for power. Casting Animate Dead is evil because it's teaming up with an omnicidal maniac in cosmological form.

The Negative Energy Plane is arguably not strictly speaking able to power anything, because it's negative. It's a convenient shorthand to speak of "negative energy" when referring to a drain on positive energy. An undead creature produced by Animate Dead or a similar spell contains a tiny portal-conduit to the Negative Energy Plane through which light and life and heat are sucked out of the world (=negative energy flowing in) powering a magic "turbine" that makes the undead go.

Some advanced undead creatures have the power or fine control to weaponize this conduit, thus the various life-drain and energy-drain abilities possessed by vampires and wraiths and such. Different undead have different configurations and need to feed on the living more or less often, while others get by with environmental drain. Even the environmental ones can be deadly in large quantities. The Libris Mortis splatbook hints at this, and I've taken some of my inspiration from a discussion thread on that book:

This has a bunch of fun implications that match up with other narrative roles of undead and horror tropes. That crypt (haunted) which seems unusually cold? Undead are sucking the heat out. Candles suddenly blowing out? Undead!

Even though the minor drain of a skeleton doesn't amount to hit-point-damage on the scale of combat-time (the usual metric of D&D effects), it's still a creature that leaks negative energy/sucks the life out of its surroundings. Using that to plow your field is a bad idea.

That's an immediate and practical impact; in a high fantasy setting you can get more fantastic about it. Perhaps the tiny negative-energy conduits in regular undead also serve as windows for necromancers and negative-energy-beings to look on the living world, or worse, perhaps the portal is two-way. A skeleton contains a tiny hole in the planar fabric through which The Unmaker can reach, whether to affect the world directly or to seize control of the undead.

Note: your players may still insist on trying to find a utilitarian use for this sort of life-draining undead, like a haunted refrigerator that stays cold because the ghosts are sucking the heat out of it. If they're insistent, I suggest saying "Yes, but" instead of "No", and then run with the fun implications and second-order effects of binding a dozen ghosts just to store food (obviously one ghost won't cool it enough) and what normal people will think of the Superhaunted Doomfridge. Maybe the paladins will send a complaint letter. Your PCs are Good enough that the paladins will send a letter rather than showing up to Smite Fridge immediately, right? ;-)

And now I'm imagining the Paladin Job Board posting, with the headline saying "Destruction of Evil Artifact" in big letters and the fact of "it's a fridge" in the small print.

[invested-in-your-future]

So how do you explain Qrow and Taiyang and especially Ozpin not telling Ruby anything about her silver eyes during her time at Beacon? Off the top of my head the only time Ozpin did try tap into triggering them was when he enabled team rwby go on a mission leages above them in v2.

The way I see it - that neither Qrow nor Tai would want that for her. Just keeping it a secret and hoping it never triggers was the plan. It always felt like Ruby deciding to be a huntress was something Tai wasn't comfortable with because of how Summer ended up. Of course, Taiyang isn't one to go against his daughter's dreams, so being passive-aggressive with Qrow was all he could do.

As far as Silver Eyes go, genetic inheritance is not guaranteed - Ruby being born with them was up to a chance. And at the same time, having them didn't mean she would activate them - that also would be up to chance. But if she ever uses them, she can't "undo" that.

It's also why Qrow did not sound that happy when he had to tell Ruby about the eyes at the end of V3 (And the awkward look he shared with Taiyang). None of that conversation sounded like an "Oh yay, you unlocked superhero powers!" kind of deal - it always felt like a "there's no point in hiding it now since we failed" situation. Qrow sounds defeated when he has to tell her - she already used them, so there's no going back.

Ozpin only found out she had them at the start of V1. So, till then, both Tai and Qrow hid it from him.

Why did he not do anything? Ozpin was busy with everything else happening - like the Fall Maiden assault. In the show, it does feel like he sits there going ":O" at everything going wrong, so one of the first things I am doing is the idea of Ozpin possibly having attempted to steer an unavoidable outcome towards something more favorable by using his students as chess pieces. This whole generation of Beacon has lots of weird and unique circumstances - a champion of mistral(reminder that Monty wanted Raven to fight JNPR), a boy who was allowed to stay despite forgery and having no training, a girl with silver eyes, a heiress to one of the most powerful corporations in the world, a former high-ranking white fang terrorist, a daughter of someone who deserted Ozpin. Even Nora and Ren had unique circumstances. So, instead of Ozpin sitting and doing nothing, it is more like he had attempted to stack the deck in his favor before everything fell apart.

The one time we see him interfere directly is when clearing up obstacles for their journey to Mt.Glenn - the decision that starts a chain reaction that sabotages part of Cinder's plan by having Roman use the train stuff months before the Fall. He has lived for hundreds if not thousands of years - he has patience and a sense of what to prioritize. So chances are Ozpin wouldn't directly act on the silver eyes' knowledge, but at the same time, Ruby would have likely found herself in situations that would nudge her towards them, and if they work, they work.

Ozpin shares information when it is beneficial. Knowledge is a tool for him in a way that veers toward Faustian bargain, especially if the story ISN'T going to go along with the idea of Raven being mad at being able to turn into a bird. He wouldn't tell her anything if it would make no difference. Does telling her cause her to activate them faster? Then he would. It doesn't? Then, there's no reason to inform her because it introduces too many variables.

Whatever happened with Summer didn't happen in a few days after all - Team STRQ has been in the game for quite a while. There's no reason to believe Ozpin would have moved faster with RWBY.

Both Ozpin and Salem have lived for centuries - it would be awkward if they treated the passage of time as well as the concept of planning the same way human beings(who live ~100 years tops) would.

[voidscreamintheories]

HtP Theory: Blue Man in a Pound Land 1 of 2

Spoilers for Hunter the Parenting This is part 2 of a series exploring the potential identity of Big D, and what we can do with that information. Part 1 here

The Blue Man. Who is he? Well, obviously HE IS THE BLUE MAN. And also an allegory for capitalism. As I understand it there are organizations in WoD who are big capitalist nightmare companies that are either ran by demons/devils or they try to shove demons into their products to get demons into the heads of their customers (maybe both at the same time!). So it would not be out of the realm of possibility for “Line must go up” Blue Man to be a demon of some variety. The whole interaction about GROWTH and inevitability is obvious capitalism satire, yes, but I think also points towards the Blue Man as being only part of a greater whole. Perhaps similar to a branch of a chain. Though in this case the corporation is some evil cabal of demons from hell. The suggestion to “invest” may have been a classic “join us and experience great power” villain trope. Similarly “We are coming soon” implies that this group of demons is planning to break out of hell soon.

“If he’s a demon doesn’t that mean he is a fallen angel like D? How come D needs to inhabit some frail old guy to be on earth? Didn’t you say that demons might need a bunch of magic users to call them up?” Great questions all, and ones that I think actually help the idea of him being some kind of fiendish being. If he is the same type of demon as what I theorize Big D is, a fallen angel, then he doesn’t have to be a good one like D. Some of the fallen decide to roll with the punches and just lean into being evil bastards, perhaps the Blue Man is one such high torment being. Or perhaps he’s another kind of malevolent entity that my unawakened mind calls “demon” because he fits a lot of criteria that I associate with those creatures, even if he is something else. One example here is the possession of a frail body/soul: On one hand, maybe the old, oxygen deprived body we see IS the host of the Blue Man, an aged and hypoxic man. On the other hand, and what I believe to be the case, maybe the Blue Man doesn’t need to be fully over the threshold and on earth to do whatever it is he wants to do, and that leads into who might be calling him. At the end of the audiolog we see the manager call up the Tremere regent and she informs her that D found the pit, which she calls the “entrance”. So if the Blue Man was called by a group of magic users, I think I know a certain bunch who would fit. However, let’s discuss that at the end of this theory.

I think it’s made clear to us by the end of D’s part in the audiolog that the encounter we witnessed was not happening in the flesh and blood real world. The distorted sound during the encounter, and the evidence D himself notes indicate it was some kind of mental/spiritual encounter. BUT D does get a physical blender, and a very nice one at that, so what does this mean? I think the Blue Man and the 99 pound shop represent a classic Faustian bargain. A deal with the devil where you get precisely what you want, and it might even seem like a good deal on the surface (a very expensive blender for only 99p!), but the REAL price is more than you thought you were bargaining for. In this case that may have been literal, D’s horror at being in a 99 POUND store instead of 99 pence, but I also suspect figuratively. There is no way D just gets that blender and walks away, there will likely be some devil-deal cost somewhere down the line. HOWEVER, D didn’t pay the full cost of the item. Giles spotted him a pence because he was one short. I don’t think this moment was put in as a throwaway. Either this means D has a way to wiggle out of the deal and associated cost on a technicality: He didn’t pay the full price and thus the deal didn’t actually happen. This would fit with some of D’s behaviour around legal dealings, such as not TECHNICALLY being divorced from Occam since D never signed the papers. Back to Giles though, there is also the potential that him chipping in to paying for the blender means he is now roped into whatever punishment is coming D’s way.

Have to split this post up again, too many words, second half here

[abeautifulblog]

Actually, let's talk about the Baba Yaga storyline

...And how much I fucking loathed it.

(A discussion of tropes, narrative choices, and how goddamn dirty The Witcher Netflix did Yennefer in S2.)

So this subplot is actually a pretty tidy object lesson in literary tropes, and why writers need to understand how tropes work in order to utilize them effectively. The trope at play here is the "Faustian bargain" or "deal with the devil," in which a character barters with a powerful supernatural creature of dubious moral alignment in order to gain something they desire (often something self-serving like wealth or power), at a price that's almost never worth it.

...It is pretty much a given that you will not be getting the better end of the deal, as it’s written. But there are a number of different ways to play this trope, and they each say something different about the kind of character who would take that bargain:

1) If you don't realize this is a trap -- if that sounded like a Pretty Sweet Deal! 😀 -- then you're either very naive or very dumb.

2) If you know it's a trap, but expect to get your prize and then weasel out of it with your soul intact anyway, because you think you're cleverer than this eldritch creature you're dealing with -- then you are very cocky, and probably wrong, because modern narratives don't tend to reward hubris.

3) If you know it's a trap, but you think you can get what you want without consequences to you, because you can pay the price with someone else's life or soul -- then you are evil. (And probably also wrong, because it's rare in fiction that you can commit an evil like that without doing some sort of spiritual damage to your own soul.)

4) And lastly, if you know it's a trap, but you are in such desperate, dire straits that even this self-evidently bad bargain looks like your best option -- then it might still be a mistake, but it's the one that audiences are most likely to forgive you for, or at least find understandable.

I don't make the rules. Those are just the audience reactions you can expect from playing the trope in those particular ways -- and if you want a different audience reaction (say, you want forgiveness for character who tried to sacrifice someone else), then you have to put in some extra work to make that happen, mitigating circumstances, etc (say, that the character genuinely believes it's the only way to save a greater number of lives).

--

So how did TWN play Yennefer's Faustian bargain with Baba Yaga?

E2 - Yen and Francesca and Fringilla meet Baba Yaga in her spirit realm or whatever, and she dangles their Heart's Desire, For A Price in front of them. Yennefer doesn’t ask for her magic, because at that point she doesn’t realize she’s lost it.

E3 through E5 - Yennefer tries without success to get her magic to work again. I don't recall any mention of Baba Yaga during that time -- it doesn't even occur to Yennefer as a means of getting it back.

E5 - Yennefer and Jaskier are being pursued by hooligans or something, and even though Yen has ducked into a brothel to hide and is nominally safe, that's when she decides to contact Baba Yaga for help. She gets whisked off to the spirit realm again, and agrees to give Baba Yaga a particular kid in exchange for getting her powers back. 

She agrees to this deal knowing that she'll be sacrificing someone's child to this creature.

(And, critically, a point I’ll come back to later: she hasn't signed anything yet. She doesn't get her powers back here. That's the reward being promised for after she feeds a kid to a demon.)

E6 - Yennefer actually meets Ciri, but, notably, does not immediately swear off the plan. She's just kinda ~conflicted~ about it now.

(This was also the episode where they started trying to have Yennefer and Ciri do their mother-daughter bonding, and Yennefer says all the right things, to be sure, but since we-the-audience know that she is at least still contemplating feeding Ciri to Baba Yaga, that, uhh, RINGS KINDA FUCKING FALSE.)

E7 - Ciri reads Yennefer's mind and finds out about the plan to feed her to a demon. (Or so wikipedia tells me, since I have literally no memory of how Yennefer's Baba Yaga related plans got outed.) 

E8 - Baba Yaga gets loose, possesses Ciri. Lots of high-drama CG bullshit. Yennefer sacrifices herself to become the host to get Baba Yaga out of Ciri. More CG bullshit, Baba Yaga is vanquished and leaves, and when everyone comes out of their woowoo CG trance, Yennefer has her magic back. But after that BETRAYAL, Geralt can no longer trust her.

--

So, Yennefer losing her powers is actually a subplot I'm entirely onboard for. Whenever a character loses something that is a pillar of their identity, and now has to reckon with who they are without that -- THAT'S THE GOOD SHIT. That's grief. That's loss. That is scattering the pieces of their self and seeing what happens when they have to put themselves back together again. Muah. Delicious fucking food. Peak drama.

We know that Yennefer has been raised to define herself, and stake her entire self-worth, on her magic. It's what she gave up everything for, because they told her it would be worth it, and now she has nothing -- not the magic, not the things she sacrificed for it. Of course she's searching for a way to get it back -- her first reaction is going to be denial and bargaining, not acceptance.

And I can think of two different ways you could play that arc, both of which have the potential for good, meaty character development:

The first (and the one I would have preferred) would have been an arc in which Yennefer discovers who she is without her magic -- that she comes to realize there's more to her than her power, that she's not helpless, that her worth isn't tied to having magic. We get a glimpse of that in the scene where she rescues Jaskier from Rience (my favorite scene in the whole damn season 😁😁😁) using her wits instead of her magic, and that was genuinely REALLY COOL -- it's intensely gratifying to see a character being clever instead of just magically overclocked. 

They could have carried that through into her meeting Ciri as well, and realizing that she has more to offer Ciri as a mother and a friend than as a mage, that her love and support is worth more than her utility to Ciri. Yennefer reaches an enlightened understanding where she might well still want her magic back, but she doesn't need it to define herself anymore.

(This shares a lot of beats with disability narratives, and I think the sensitive way to handle it would be to treat it as such.)

The other kind of story would be one in which the character has no interest in reaching that enlightened understanding -- Yennefer’s not coming to the "acceptance" stage of loss, because she refuses to accept it. She's searching relentlessly for a cure, chasing down every lead for someone who could fix this, every avenue that might get her what she wants. Then the question becomes, "How far would you go for this? How much are you willing to sacrifice?"

And the answer is everything....... until it's not. And that is the pivotal character-making moment in this kind of story -- when you find out where this character's line is, the line they won't cross even for the sake of the thing they want most in all the world. Where the devil could dangle that oh-so-tempting bargain before them, and they would still say No. No, the cost you're asking isn't worth it, even for this. Yennefer -- who has spent her whole life being coached to be selfish, and has wound up alone and alienated for it -- finally has people she loves enough that she would choose them over herself.

--

TWN kinda went the latter route, but they didn't fully commit to it -- both the plot beats and Yennefer's emotional arc are so muddled that it's not clear what they were trying to say, and both the dramatic impact and the message got completely lost.

Problem 1: Yennefer wasn’t proactive enough.

She's sad about losing her magic, but she's not shown DOING anything about it. This is what I kept yelling at the screen about in E3, when she's just drifting aimlessly around Aretuza in that fucking prom dress and being ~helplessly damseled~ by Stregobor. Send her to the goddamn library to do some research! Show her arguing theory with Tissaia, and refusing to believe that this can't be fixed! Show us HOW BADLY she wants it, and how hard she's willing to fight for it.

Hell, seed the future conflict with Baba Yaga: Yennefer finds an account of someone who acquired their power through a deal with a demon, and she takes is to Tissaia as proof-of-concept, and Tissaia is like, yeah you CAN, but you SHOULDN'T. (Hoe don't do it!) That both establishes it to the audience as a possibility, and preemptively raises the question of what extremes Yennefer will go to in pursuit of this goal.

Problem 2: The stakes were never high enough

As I mentioned above, it's easier to get audience sympathy for a character who’s only making a devil's bargain because they're in extremis -- when something predatory has them over a barrel and is taking opportunistic advantage of the fact that they've got no other options. That hits a nerve with our sense of injustice -- we get angry when we see someone being taken advantage of like. It'll make us root for the character to find a way out of the deal somehow, because even though they agreed to it, we don’t feel that they should be held to that extortionate price.

But Yennefer is never quite desperate enough; the stakes are never quite high enough. She wants her magic back, but at no point does she need it. They never make her desperate enough to justify that bad bargain.

So raise those stakes.

Make it so that Yennefer is in desperate straits when she makes the bargain. She is in a situation that would have been trivial to escape if she'd had her magic, but now she is about to fucking DIE, and there's nothing she can do about it, and yeah, this sketchy creature that's been in her head trying to talk her into this bargain is obviously sketchy A-F, but she either takes its offer, or she dies in the next ten seconds. Them's her only two options.

Because without that level of desperation, her decision instead becomes premeditated, selfish, and stupid.

Problem 3: She needed to NOT knowingly make the evil choice.

Audiences will forgive a Faustian bargain made to save a child, but there's no way to sacrifice a child (or even seriously contemplate it) and come out of that looking good. 😬

The easiest way to fix that would have been for Yennefer to not know what the terms would be when she agreed to the bargain. 

To be sure: handing a blank check to that kind of creature is a bad idea, but we've already established that Yennefer needs to be fuckin hard up when she takes that deal; she doesn't have time to negotiate or think it over, she barely has enough time to say yes.

TWN made a big mistake, imo, by not having Baba Yaga give Yennefer her powers back upfront in E5. They made an agreement, yeah, but it did not put Yennefer on the hook, in her debt. Yennefer could still have noped out at any time once she found out what the terms were, since Baba Yaga hadn't given her anything yet.

It would have been far better if Baba Yaga saved her first, restored her magic, and then presented her with the bill -- it becomes a hell of a lot harder for Yennefer to back out at that point.

(And also: get the goods upfront, because why the fuck would you trust that this sketchy creature has any intention of keeping their promise? Whoops, egg on your face, when it turns out you murdered a kid for nothing!)

Furthermore, raise the stakes on what happens if Yennefer doesn't hold up her end of the bargain: that if Yennefer doesn't deliver Ciri to Baba Yaga, then she gets eaten by the demon instead. It’s still evil to murder a child, obviously, but "their life vs my life" is a bit more of a dilemma than "their life vs my magic."

And after she meets Ciri, after Ciri becomes a real person to her rather than an abstraction, then she cannot continue to entertain the possibility of sacrificing her for another episode and a half. Full stop. Yennefer should have immediately started scrambling for "There has to be another way!" The fact that TWN-Yennefer is even still considering it after meeting Ciri says really, really shitty things about her.

(And when she does get caught out, she starts sobbing, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT YOU WERE TO HIM!!, which is, lol holy shit, not the defense you think it is! "I totally would have sacrificed you without a qualm if you didn't happen to be my fuckboy ex's kid" ??? What? Not "because you matter to me"? Or "because I realized that what I was contemplating was FUCKING EVIL”?? And she tells Ciri that to her face? 

Writers, did you stop to think about the implications of that line for one half of one hot second??)

Problem 4: Revealing Yennefer's betrayal ahead of time

By having Ciri and Geralt find out about her incipient betrayal before it happens, Yennefer never got to decide for herself that she wasn't going to go through with it. There needed to be no guilt trips or external peer pressure -- just that she herself thought this over, and decided on her own that Ciri was worth more than getting her magic back.

The fact that it wasn't her choice to come clean about that -- that the choice gets taken out of her hands before it reached the moment when she'd have decide one way or the other -- not only robbed us of what would have been a massively powerful, character-defining moment for her, but also means that we have no proof whether or not she would have done it, if left to her own devices. 

Because let's be honest: Yennefer doesn't exactly have a track record of prioritizing other people above herself. Maybe she would have found her conscience in time -- or maybe she wouldn't. (She had, after all, already made this bargain knowing full well that it was going to involve sacrificing someone's kid.) It is by no means a given that she would have changed her mind.

So what a powerful moment it would have been when Yennefer throws off those teachings that tied her worth to her utility -- when she proves that she’s come to care about other people, and puts their well-being above her own. Imagine the bomb drama if Yennefer had been the one to reveal the bargain to Ciri and Geralt, ideally at the moment when she also reveals that she's rejecting it and taking their side against Baba Yaga, even at the cost of her own life. The moment when her core of steel comes through, and she takes a stand and is willing to face the consequences of her mistake.

That would have been a fantastic climax for Yennefer's character arc in S2: when she decisively shows how much she's changed from the aloof and self-absorbed (and desperately unhappy) woman that she was in S1.

But that's not what TWN gave us. There's no big dramatic moment. I literally do not even remember her sacrifice in the final battle, even though I watched S2 twice, because it got lost amid the boring-and-confusing CGI fight scene that drags on forever. Everything is supposed to be big drama there, and so Yennefer’s sacrifice doesn’t stand out.

Moreover, it doesn’t even really feel like Yennefer's choice at that point -- more that she's belatedly trying to clean up her mess, after she's already missed her chance to trade Ciri for her magic. That makes it feel a hell of a lot less sincere, like too little too late. Of-fucking-course she's sorry for it, now, now that it didn't work and everyone's mad at her. Yeah I'm sure she does regret it, now. It's just that sorry rings pretty hollow at this point.

S2 didn't give her a chance make the right choice for herself -- and as a consequence, Geralt and Ciri will never, ever know for certain what she would have done if circumstances hadn’t intervened. And realistically, there's no way for them to trust her after this; she can’t retroactively prove that she wouldn’t have betrayed them in the end, which casts a doubt that would poison that relationship forever.

--

So.

Breaking down the story into granular detail like this makes it feel almost like nitpicking, but those small situational changes make a huge difference in what the narrative is telling you about the character, and what kind of person they are. And the audience doesn't need to understand the mechanisms operating behind all of this -- but the writers fucking do. That's their job. To know what the words they write are doing, and the TWN writers manifestly do not. The Baba Yaga storyline is the most egregious demonstration of that, in my opinion, but it's far from the only one.

Through their shoddy execution of a straightforward trope, they made a character we're supposed to love and root for -- whom we want the other characters in the show to love too -- make choices that were unforgivably, murderously, short-sighted and selfish. Which is pretty obviously not what they meant to say about Yennefer, and not how we as the audience were supposed to interpret her actions, but that’s what they wrote. Thanks, I hate it.

(And worse: half this shit isn't even in-character. Yennefer doesn't fucking waffle like that. She is decisive and proactive to a fault, but this season reduced her to such a passive character who just gets shuffled from setpiece to setpiece. I think she makes all of four proactive decisions in that season -- freeing Cahir, rescuing Jaskier, making the deal with Baba Yaga, and sacrificing herself for Ciri -- and half of them were dumb. 

Ugh, it's such bullshit. Yennefer deserved better.)

To be honest, I don't think the season needed the Baba Yaga plot at all, done well or otherwise. It was a misbegotten attempt to pump up fake drama, one that showed a lack of confidence in the story they were telling and a lack of respect for the audience -- like they didn't expect us to care about the found-family story without some cheap ~betrayals~ to spice it up.

But all they succeeded in doing was permanently undermining Yennefer's relationship with Ciri and Geralt, the relationship that is supposed to be one of the bedrocks of the series. That’s a betrayal you can’t come back from (except by authorial fiat, because they're ~Destined~ and so they have to). That's a well that's been poisoned.

And lastly, it puts Yennefer on the defensive now in her interactions with Geralt. Despite the fact that he was the one who overrode her free will by tying them together with djinn, the season ends with her having to grovel for his forgiveness. Geralt is now the one with the moral high ground, the injured party who gets to dispense or withhold forgiveness as he sees fit, and he's not required to make any real acknowledgment, or apology, or amends for what he did to her.

THANKS, I HATE IT.

--

So yeah, there was a lot in S2 that was Some Fucking Bullshit, but that is my narrow-focus deep dive into my single least favorite of their bad-ideas-executed-badly. 

[insanitysscribblings]

I mean you'd with the least amount of pressure possible but, would you ever think about writing a book? Every once and a while I remember how it felt reading Back to Us and I just wish I could read a story that was fully yours.

HAAAAAAA.

Friend.

Let me tell you a story about what was my writing journey post 2020 for me.

As some of you might know, I finished a book at the very end of 2020, by the title of Charlatans. It's an adult novel about three voodoo-touched adult siblings who make Faustian bargains to find their long-missing father in exchange for their hearts' deepest desires.

I was super proud of it. My first full-fledged novel, something I had always known I was capable of doing. The hard part was over.

Or so I thought.

See, to be a GOOD novelist, you have to let your work marinate. So that's what I did: I sat on it for a few months, not touching it at all, not even remembering that it existed. After those few months, I set to the hard work of editing.

When I tell you it is SO hard to edit a book you know is missing SOMETHING, but you have no idea what...ugh. And asking for beta readers was tasking, 'cause the thing was over 90K words. I did still ask, of course, but didn't really manage to get a lot of feedback at that time of editing.

Nevertheless! I pressed on. Started researching literary agents, fully aware that with a single project, you only get ONE shot with each agent.

I had a spreadsheet. I had my query letter. I had detailed notes on who to ask for and why. I was ready.

And so I started querying.

...The agents that didn't straight up ignore me gave me automated rejections. The agents that didn't do that gave me personal rejections.

And the one or two agents that actually bothered to ask AND read the whole manuscript?

They loved it!

Just...not enough to publish it.

So. Here I am, with a fully finished manuscript and no one looking to publish it. What do I do?

I put it away and go back to the drawing board, because clearly, I'm missing something. But since no rejection is personalized enough, I don't know WHAT.

Frustration makes me put it down, and I let it sit for a few more months.

Until #DVPIT.

For the uninitiated, #DVPIT is a literary event in which diverse prospective writers and established agents come together to discover new working relationships. The diverse writer has three chances to pitch their project throughout the day to agents, and if agents like your pitch, you may send them your query package. Cool, right?

I take the day off work. I have my pitches queued on my phone, ready to go. Throughout the day, I strategically post them at peak hours, keeping my fingers crossed for even one single agent's attention.

The event runs for an extra week to give agents a chance to read the thousands of pitches flooding the Discord channel. I wait.

No likes. Not a single one.

Now, this part I'm less bitter about, because 150 characters to describe my book? That's just ridiculous. And the comp titles to prove that people would like it? Ugggggh. Not an opportunity to really sell Charlatans.

But this means that, still, my first novel is without an agent. No agent, no publication.

So I put it away again and decide to move on.

And before you ask, yes, I did look into self-publishing. Still lowkey looking, but it's tough, since everything seems like a scam nowadays. And don't even get me started on the AI books being published.

I know you didn't ask for this rant, @hydrogen-ann and for that, I apologize. But TL;DR: a published book is currently a pipe dream for me, though not for lack of trying.

Bitterness aside, thank you so, so much. I'm so happy you'd be interested in something original of mine. If I ever push Charlatans out the door/find the time to write an entirely NEW novel, I'll be sure to let you know 💜

[forjustice]

The Overly Detailed Pokéarts Meme

Slightly updated from when I last posted it 6 years ago. This meme covers any form of art involving Pokémon, namely Contests, Showcases, Musicals and any headcanoned performance form that you might be able to think of. Shoutout to my Discord bestie Seniichi for helping me with this!

GENERAL

🌟What is your muse’s overall opinion of Pokéarts? ✨  What does your muse think about forms of Pokéarts other than Contests? Like Showcases, Musicals, etc. 👪  Does your muse have family or friends that participate in Pokéarts? How does this affect their view and/or participation in Pokéarts? 👍🏿  What are some Pokémon that your muse likes to use and/or see in Pokéarts? 👎🏾  What are some Pokémon that your muse does not like to use and/or see in Pokéarts? 👌🏼 Is there anything in particular (performance style, moves, typings, etc.) that makes them go ‘mmmmm yessssss this is one A++ performance’? 😍  Who are your muse’s favorite Coordinators and why? 🐸  What about their least favorites, and why? 😘  Any stars they’ve got a crush on? 🤔  What are some things that your muse would change about Pokéarts? 😬  A stronger version of the above: is there anything they think just shouldn’t be allowed? 😮  Performance-wise, what’s the most shocking thing your muse has ever seen/experienced? 🛍️  Does your muse collect Pokéarts-related merchandise? 🎤  What does your muse think about the culture surrounding Pokéarts they are familiar with? Doesn't have to just be Contests! 📈  Give your muse’s opinion on current trends. 👿  If your muse hates any form of Pokéarts, why? If they hate one form and not the others, why? Would there be anything that might change their mind? 😰  Is your muse one of those people who wants to perform, but doesn’t? What holds them back? 🥚 Pokéblocks vs. Poffins. Discuss. 🔥 Unpopular art opinion time. Go off! 👯 What does your muse think of Trainer participation in Pokéarts? 🎁 What does your muse think of the way Pokémon are groomed and dressed in performances? 💌 Does your muse think competitive breeding is the way to go? 👥 Most competitions feature performances by one person and their team, but what about two or more Trainers collaborating? 👀 How picky are they when evaluating the work of a Pokéartist? Do they have exacting and/or specific standards, or will they accept anything that is well done? 👊🏼🕊️ Contests with battles vs. Contests without battles: have your muse weigh in. 🌆 What are Pokéarts really about to your muse–the art or the fame? 🌌 What is their opinion on the avant-garde? 🔏 And now for a moral kicker: It’s been said that celebrities MUST make a Faustian bargain: their privacy in exchange for their fame, and so they are less justified in complaining when their privacy is invaded. What does your muse believe?

FOR COORDINATORS & POKÉARTISTS, HOBBYIST OR PROFESSIONAL

💖 What made your muse decide to try Pokéarts, either as a hobby or a career? #️⃣  How long have they been doing it, and how has their progress been over the years? ⚜ What are your muse’s ambitions in the Pokéarts? How realistic are their goals, and how close are they to achieving them? If they have achieved their dreams, are they happy/satisfied? 💎 What is their performance style? 😈 An alternative to one of the questions above: What is the most shocking thing your muse has ever personally done in a performance? >:333333 💬 Do they like to put messages or meanings in their performances, or are they more of an “art for art’s sake” kind of person? 👩🏻 What is your muse’s reputation in their field? Is this reputation deserved, and if so, how much? 💃🏽 As the Trainer, what sort of talents (natural or supernatural) do they like to display in performances, and how good are they at those talents? If they don’t, why? ⚡ Who is/are your muse’s Pokéartistic rival(s)? How did the rivalry begin, and what kind is it (friendly, unfriendly, filled with sexual tension, etc.)? 💥 How do they deal with the haters? 🐉 How do their Pokémon feel about being performers? ⚖️ Has your muse ever judged? How did it go? If they do it regularly, what is their judging style? 🎀 Describe the first time your muse won a competition. 😳 Describe your muse’s most embarrassing performance experience. 💭 How much difference is there between your muse’s public persona and private self? How do they feel about this? 🛃 Has identity ever played a role in how your muse was perceived as a performer? Does it affect how they perform? (This could mean identifiers like race, gender, sexuality, etc. or being a Psychic or Aura user.) 😏 Honesty hour: Has your muse ever cheated to win? 💢 Any trends on the scene that your muse wishes would just die? 🚃 How about trends that your muse likes or even has started? 👱🏻 If your muse is experienced, what is some advice that your muse would give to newbies? If they’re inexperienced, what is the advice that they really need to hear? 🙋🏾 If your muse is experienced, what would they go back and tell their beginner self? 😂 Share some gossip from the Pokéarts scene. Because the person who wrote this meme is a petty ass bitch. [2024 edit: A recovering one, but still. LMFAO] 😢 Has your muse considered quitting, actually quit, or chosen to take/considered taking a break? What made them stop/want to stop?

[ckret2]

can the human bill you made still make deals? i feel like that's a huge power he can have so if he didn't have it it'd be interesting (but also a bit of sense, if he did have the power to make deals he could just make a deal somehow out of the body maybe), also, like, wtf does stan and ford think? i'm invested.

(In response to this human Bill post!)

I'll answer your question but first I'm gonna go on a digression about what I think "making deals" means for normal Bill! I'm not sure what most of fandom thinks his deals can do, but I think most assume that it's some sort of Faustian deal-with-the-devil type thing—where, once you shake his hand, you're magically contractually obligated to carry out the terms of your agreement, and so is he.

From the evidence in the show, I think he wants you to think that's the case, but it isn't really.

Despite the big blue fiery light show he puts on when he shakes with Gideon, Gideon doesn't have to do anything special to break off the deal later (and there's no magical consequences to Bill for being unable to uphold his side of the deal).

When he shakes with Dipper, he immediately does the exact opposite of what he implicitly promised by breaking the laptop instead of unlocking it, and there's again no consequences for Bill—and I doubt Dipper could have gotten his body back then by saying the deal's off like Gideon did.

Gideon made another deal with Bill later; we don't know the details, but when Gideon turns on Bill, the deal doesn't cause any magic backlash or anything—Bill has to be TOLD about the betrayal and then choose to punish Gideon.

Ford made SOME kind of deal with Bill in the past, willingly letting Bill inside his mind; once he and Bill fell out, it appears that Bill was unable to just possess him again to turn the portal back on—despite Ford's "from now until the end of time" promise—suggesting that this access isn't indefinite.

Bill's "deals" aren't very binding: it's SUPER easy to break them off or fail to fulfill them with no consequences. It seems there's no more magic behind his deals than there is between two humans shaking on an agreement. So, I think making a "deal" with Bill doesn't actually do anything, to either party. Bill's just relying on people ASSUMING magic is happening to make them fear the consequences of breaking their promise—and to make them think HE'S compelled to do what he promised. It's manipulation and con artistry; he's a grifter using special effects to make you think he's offering Faustian bargains.

The ONLY exception is that, in order to possess somebody, he needs their consent—even if it's obtained under false pretenses—and possibly the physical contact of a handshake. And that consent+contact need only last as long as it takes to yank them free and grab their body; once he's out of their body and they're back in, he can't take over again until they next give him permission (when they're in a mindset of consent).

So! That's what I think "making deals" means for Bill: a lot of big talk and manipulation with no magic behind it, EXCEPT when possession's on the table.

Back to the original question: can human Bill still "make deals"? Yeah, any human being can make deals—and he can probably carry himself pretty far on bargaining, manipulation, empty promises, and outright lies. I think a lot of Bill's apparent power is smoke and mirrors, and trapping him in a human form is a chance for other characters to go both "wow, he had a lot less power than we gave him credit for" and also "WOW, his con artistry is a lot MORE powerful than we gave him credit for!" Watch him turn a whole neighborhood into jelly just because he knows the sigils to summon a guy who can get it done and exactly what to say to sweet-talk him into doing it.

On the other hand, can human Bill still possess people? That, I think, is a no—for now. It looks like his ability to possess people is rooted in the idea of mind-body dualism—he has to separate a "ghost" from its body, and then, because triangle Bill is essentially a ghost in our dimension, he can move into the empty body. That's no longer the case for human Bill. He's now a ghost tied to a human body, too. For him to possess somebody, he'd first have find a way to exit his body—and if he achieves that, what happens then? Wouldn't it die? If it dies, does he die? How long can he be separated from it before it dies? Wouldn't it be vulnerable to the ghost he tricked possessing it in return?

So before he can possess people, he first has to address all these "what are the implications for me" concerns, and then learn a safe human technique to separate himself from his body. Astral projection or the like. (Astral projection strikes me as the sort of New Age-y type trope that'd fit in well with Gravity Falls.) On top of that, since being stuck as a human is, presumably, some sort of punishment the axolotl's putting him through to redeem himself, there's probably some kind of magical/spiritual "locks" in place keeping him trapped in this body—meaning that learning to astral project or whatever is a LOT HARDER for him than it would be for anybody else.

So, eventually, he might could regain the power to possess people. But there's a lot of barriers in place, both from being human and from being punished, that he'd have to get past first.

As a side note: I think this is probably one of the first things he'd try to figure out how to do. He hopes he's still his old triangly self on the inside and this body is just a prison; if he can only project himself out of the body and leave it behind to rot, he'll be free and just like he was before, a little triangle zooming around the mindscape. But the first time he gets even a little separation from his body, he sees his soul is now human-shaped, too—and the despair of that realization, that he's not a soul trapped in a foreign body but that the body+soul is a unified package deal, makes him give up for a while.

(Something something "you can conjure whatever you can conceive in the mindscape" something something "does his soul look like that because his body looks like that or does his soul look like that because right now he FEELS like he looks like that" something something. I think he could re-triangle his soul but first he has to believe he can—and right now, he's feeling pretty hopeless & powerless, to the point he's forgetting things he himself already knows to be true about the mindscape.)

This is already really long, so I'll answer your second question in a second post! Thanks for giving me an opportunity to infodump. :D

[bluef00t]

speaking of Atomic Robo and Hellboy, one similarity they have that I've always thought was interesting outside of all the staple pulp stuff was the "government granted human status." it's more of a point of tension for Robo than it is for Hellboy (as far as I remember), but do you have any thoughts on it? It feels kind of unnecessary cause I don't think it would really stop them from doing what they do if they didn't have it, but it is an interesting bit of lore that's unique to them.

Answering this and the related asks under the cut:

(annoying pedant voice) really, everyone's legal human status is "government granted". But I get what you mean. I suspect it's a byproduct of needing a ~super durable ageless inhuman~ protagonist who can still move around the world the way any human character could. And you're right, it's almost an afterthought in Hellboy.

I suppose it's largely genre: fantasy horror focuses on the spiritual and science fiction focuses on the material. For Hellboy, the true battle for his humanity is over his soul, his destiny, which are very tangible concepts in his world! Does he have the free will to live as a man when he was created and summoned as a pawn to bring about Ragnarok? Even he isn't sure, and the question upsets him as much as it does anyone in charge of him.

Logical issues like voting + property rights are more relevant to Robo's world. Tech is regulated by some major government agencies, covering his life's work and his body. Robo is sure he's a person in every way that matters; that's not a point of debate. But starting Tesladyne was made possible by deliberate PR + legal decisions recognizing him as Tesla's heir rather than his property.

It's interesting, placing these side-by-side. Usually fictional robots are the face of predetermined purpose (and the struggle to transcend that) while demons are figures of chaotic freedom (and clever navigation through rules and deals which bind them). But Hellboy is rewarded for filling a role he was practically raised for; Robo takes a rather Faustian bargain behind his dad's back. Those swapped patterns recur all over both series' humor and drama.

I guess government-granted humanity has been a point of tension for both—in Conqueror Worm, Hellboy quits the BPRD over how they treat another nonhuman agent as dangerous and disposable, and in Savage Sword of Dr. Dinosaur, the media circus around the missing WMDs includes a call to reclassify Robo as a weapon—but there's never a moment where losing human status is an actual threat. It's not like the "war on terror" has any trouble dehumanizing actual humans; and let's be honest, Hellboy has MUCH bigger problems on his hands. (Hand?)

That's something Alan has in common with Hellboy. "Does the government think you're a person?" kind of takes a back seat to "so are you going to end the world when you grow up?"

Robo's vamps are functionally just fast zombies while Hellboy gets the full package of classical vampire lore. Though they both have exceptions, Rex Cannon as a pretentious scheming science vampire and those Nazi experiments as mindless infected fantasy vampires.

Vampires are a pretty broad pulp category though and there are WAY wackier enemy similarities, like, both comics I mentioned last section end with a giant Worm-that-looks-like-a-caterpillar erupting out of the ground?

Every time I think about the overlap, particularly in the early volumes, I remember this (Q&A with Clevinger on somethingawful)

I don't know if this is funnier if he means the '04 or '08 movie, since Scott Wegener is doing such an obvious Mignola pastiche on the first couple issues. Like, was that resignation, or a "oh I just assumed we were on the same page about that" moment. Also, interesting to cite Shadow from Beyond Time as the point of divergence from Hellboy, since that's the most Lovecraft that Atomic Robo has ever gotten. But I'd say the same thing. Maybe the similar enemy makes the differing approach that much more obvious.

Right, this question was about vampires. Pour one out for every Hellboy enemy with a world-takeover plan who got interrupted by Rasputin's Kaiju Ragnarok Hell World Extravaganza. You know, it really takes guts to end your world and mean it.

I like it a lot!

I'm not 100% sure what "genuine" means to you. "Authentic" in style? The Lobster and Jack Tarot are such direct homages that I'd only have a miniseries' worth of interest in them alone before I hit the "why am I not reading an actual period comic, again?" point. But they're quite fun as archetypes of genre history for our main character to look up to.

(I almost said "to have as a role model", but maybe not. The Lobster and Jack Tarot are definitely played as shooting in the face first, asking questions never.)

To extend their adventures to the modern day, the Hellboy/Atomic Robo/Tom Strong style of neo-pulp protagonist ends up a bit super-human. (Really, they're just continuing the pulp tradition of constantly surviving things that should definitely kill a normal person.) But they avoid the kiiinda condescending attitude some superhero authors have towards unpowered pulp-homage mentors, maybe because they're inheriting not just an aesthetic or idealized sense of justice, but the whole adventure philosophy. Their new abilities aren't here to make the old guard obsolete.

Not that they don't get a bit of genre shock. Lobster Johnson the proto-superhero dies trying to stop a crazy Lovecraft fantasy Nazi scheme—but death in the world of Hellboy is not as simple as "failure", and becomes a part of the fantasy-horror landscape himself when he helps out Abe in the 21st century. Jack Tarot the crime-fighter spends an embarrassed climax scene tied up and dumbfounded by the sci-fi nonsense he stumbled into, but Helen picks up right where he left off. Actually, Robo's world is friendly to a number of genre heroes—the Sparrow, the She-Devils, and the Science Team Super Five.

Maybe by "genuine" you meant "real in-world"? In that case, I actually like that they play both sides. A bit of the pulp magic is stored in the medium and the funny ways that kids latch onto fiction before they know how to sort it out from reality.

I also appreciate that the net is thrown wider than just comics: Hellboy reads pulp periodicals and was in a crappy B movie once (though that's not exactly a happy memory), while Robo as a 1920s kid is into radio plays. (I wonder how he feels about the rise of podcasts?)

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I don't think my brain really reads things "out loud". I can say if a voice sounds wrong to me, but I never know what's right until I hear it. I can at least say that pre-WWII Robo has a more boyish golly-gee-willikers tone in my head.

Weird side note, but half this post has been weird side notes so I might as well say it: I found the Atomic Robo Nuts and Bolts podcast and was not prepared for what either artist or writer sounded like. Based on online presence alone (and, okay, maybe my personal stereotypes of comic writers vs artists) I would have guessed they were the other way around entirely. Even knowing now, Martin and Louis still don't have "voices" in my head!

[junebugwriter]

Loki Season 2 Doesn't Understand Loki

The fundamental flaw in a season that means nothing

Spoilers below.

I think we need to talk about Loki.  

People who know me know that I don’t like superhero and comic book movies. I love them. And that’s why I’m so critical of them. I can blame my brother on getting me into comics in high school, but the fact that long after that I keep coming back to the well speaks to what I love about them. Comics are the blending of prose and visual artistry, of character and medium. Every comic is a conversation between artists. Television and film, likewise, are another variation on that same theme.  

However, like any other kind of media, its greatest strengths can also fall victim to their greatest enemy: the companies that own them. 

Marvel Studios and the Marvel Cinematic Universe began as a simple concept: translate the idea of comic book universes onto the big screen. Let the comic company own the movies that bring their stories to the masses. When Disney bought Marvel, lock stock and barrel, it also brought truckloads of cash and prestige with it. This proved to be a Faustian bargain in the end, because what happens when the infinite money machine begins to grow too large to handle? Things begin to break down. 

Loki Season 2 is this metaphor brought to life. 

Everything Will Be The Same Ever Again 

The first season ended promisingly enough. Loki and his alternate timeline gender swapped variant Sophie finally find He Who Remains, the man behind the curtains that the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been building up to. He’s the one who pulls the strings, paves the road, and decides the Sacred Timeline ™—in other words, this is the man who decides Marvel Canon.  

Season 1 ended exactly as I hoped it would: Sophie, tired of being controlled, did the thing that gods of mischief and chaos are supposed to do. She killed the man behind the curtain. In so doing, she unspooled the Sacred Timeline ™ in the name of free will, allowing for infinite universes to be borne from the infinite choices made every moment by every being in existence. She gave birth to the multiverse. She broke the system.  

Obviously, this could not last.   

Loki season 1 promised that the universe would be forever altered by the actions of Loki and Sophie, and for a while, this seemed to be the case. Most of the recent phase of Marvel output has revolved, for better or worse, with the introduction of the concept of multiple realities. This has been used somewhat as more or less a vehicle for Brand Integration ™ and less as a vehicle for, you know, good storytelling. Yes, we’ve been promised Fantastic Four and X-men movies, but those aren’t even really in the works currently. They’ve been stuck in development hell for years since acquisition. All we’ve gotten is a couple of winks and nods, a musical sting, and N’amor, which all things being fair, was great, but N’amor has always been his own thing and a mutant in name only, story-wise. Otherwise, it’s been fine, but far from the promised chaos that Loki season 1 alluded to. 

Additionally, there’s the problem of character. Loki in mythology is less a villain but more of an antagonist, a trickster character that causes problems and meddles in the affairs of others for little reason else besides “he wanted to.” He’s mercurial by nature, and that works very, very well for mythology. It works for the purposes of “this is how the world is, this is why things are the way they are, and this is how the world will end.” Loki’s presence is not malevolent, but rather genuinely chaotic. He will do what he wants, and usually only to satisfy himself. He often seems unable to really control himself, let alone anyone else. He does things because he loves just making things happen, and if he winds up with what he wants, it’s all the better.  

In the comics and the films, he’s much more cast as a villain. In the films, he desires the throne of Asgard, to be the rightful ruler of people. Failing to win Asgard, he seeks out Earth as an agent of Thanos. Failing that, he meanders long enough in the background to have fun when dealing with Thor, and that’s about it. He finally dies an ignoble death by Thanos, and that was to be the end of him. Loki the TV series is not the same Loki we saw die. This Loki is an alternate timeline variant, and after having his ego broken by the Time Variance Authority, he seeks out another variant, Sophie, who has been causing problems for the TVA. 

If all that gives you a bit of a headache, don’t worry. That’s just the comic fan experience. Comics, and superhero stories, are of a kindred spirit with Soap Operas: not only are they highly melodramatic, often made up on the fly, and filled with colorful characters, but they’re also designed to go on FOREVER. That’s the beauty of them. The characters, and the universe, frequently default to a certain status quo. Sure, every few years, something comes along that promises to Change the Universe Forever, but that often amounts to one weird tweak and then it's back to the races as usual. The bad guy comes along to challenge the hero, hero must thwart whatever plan the villain has, and all is well. That’s the rhythm of the comic book story, and that works quite well for executives... to a point. So, what happens when people start to get tired of the same old story? They change the status quo on paper, and hope nobody notices that the structure of it all is still intact.  

That was the promise of Loki Season 1. See? We have a multiverse now! Please, be distracted by this CHAOS long enough to not realize that we are still in control of everything, and everything is fine.  

That last sentence? That’s the plot of season 2. See, Sophie killed He Who Remains, and the multiverse exists. The TVA is designed by HWR to maintain the Sacred Timeline ™. With the Sacred Timeline ™ now in chaos, everything in the universe is going haywire. That means timelines are unraveling. The plot now follows Loki, his hetero life mate Mobius, and a cast of fun, colorful characters, racing against time to keep time from unspooling, and the multiverse from completely falling apart. 

Mr. Loki’s Wild Ride 

“Loki” is a show meant to turn Loki from the god of mischief and chaos to... a hero, somehow. One who wants to fight to maintain an autocratic, bureaucratic organization that wasn’t very good at its job in the first place because the alternative is... chaos. According to the plot, this chaos takes the form of nothingness. Lack of existence. See, without an imposed order, nothing can exist! Therefore, reality NEEDS someone or some entity to maintain order in some way so that everything can keep on existing.  

But why is this the case? Why does reality need a temporal loom or a man behind the curtain? The show doesn’t do a very good job of explaining why everything ceases to exist the moment that the Temporal Loom, the machine that maintains the Sacred Timeline ™ other than “that’s just how it all works,” and really, it doesn’t even tell us that. It just shows time unraveling, sans explanation. How did time exist before the Temporal Loom, you ask? Loki, for all its technobabble and endlessly recurrent exposition, is not actually interested in explaining that bit. You see, it was chaos and war and death before, or it’s nothingness. Which is it? Why is it? It’s a nihilistic and frustrating bit of worldbuilding that leads to nothing.  

This nihilism is a kind of narrative reinforcement technique. By the end of it, Loki has figured out how to control time itself, after much trial and error, as well as another conversation with He Who Remains. Yet in that conversation, he learns a fundamental truth about the MCU: He who makes the difficult decisions gets to sit on the throne. He Who Remains is supposedly one such person. In his stead, at the end, Loki does the same. He wrests control of the timelines, bundles them up into a cape, and seats himself on the throne of He Who Remains. As such, he recreates Yggdrasil, the world tree of Norse mythology, the tree upon which all the realms rest. You see? Everything goes back to normal, now that someone is in control. 

But wait a minute. Why would Loki ever make this choice? Loki early in the show figures out he doesn’t want a throne. He doesn’t want control. All he ever wanted was to be loved and known and understood. That is the true desire at the heart of his character. It’s beautiful, and poignant, and speaks to my own heart. In Sophie, he found someone who does know and understand him. Is it narcissistic to love a gender variant of yourself? Probably! But it makes sense for him. Because he is a mercurial person. He doesn’t really understand even himself, and because of that, it results in mischief and chaos. That’s who he is. He is a chaos god.  

By the end of the show though, he’s learned and grown... what? To love order? To love bureaucracy? To love control? That’s what it’s saying when he takes the throne! I understand that this is Loki learning what it means to be a hero, but is that really what it means? To let go of your defining characteristic? To lose what makes you... you? To undergo true ego death so that the world itself can keep on spinning upon your skeleton? For all its over-explanation, Loki the show isn’t interested in answering much of anything. It’s poetic that he gives up his life so that reality can continue, but this seems rather pointless, in the end. Instead of embracing himself, he denies his identity to sit on a throne he doesn’t want. That’s no god of chaos and mischief. That is the god of stability, order, and the status quo.  

That’s not Loki.  

Pay no attention to the executive behind the curtain 

I understand the mercenary reasons for these choices. I understand that the universe must keep spinning, and the infinite money machine must keep on making money. But to do so, they need to kill the defining characteristics of their beloved characters, and that just makes it all so thin, flimsy and frustrating. There are some amazing moments in this show! Everything with Sophie, Mobius, and Ouroboros is excellent. The characters make this nonsense story shine, long enough to make you hopefully realize that it doesn’t even make internal sense. 

As someone who analyses stories for a living, it’s impossible to see this apart from the concept of capitalist realism, whose central maxim is this: It’s easier to believe in the end of the world rather than the end of capitalism. Substitute “capitalism” with “the underlying bureaucracy upon which the world rests and runs itself” and that becomes just the text of Loki. It’s easier to imagine the end of reality than the end of the TVA, and the end of the autocrat who sits on top of the pyramid. The Universe is run by a corrupt pyramid scheme, but it’s that or nothingness! So, you NEED someone to run things like this, otherwise it’s all void.  

That’s what this story is saying—but why does it need to say this? Why do we need someone sitting on a throne? For a character like Loki whose entire character is anarchy incarnate, this simply just rings hollow.  

And so, I am frustrated. I want to like “Loki.” It has some great moments and is a lot of fun. But at the end of the day, it does the character of Loki wrong but having to reinforce the status quo, and when your central character who is defined by causing mischief, maintaining the status quo is a terrible way to end your series.