#(( this makes the plots make more sense when i post them ))

[studyinglogic]

SIMPLICIO: Indeed, what god could possibly forgive a duck eating a duck?

PROTAGORAS: Could be a chicken. Also you don't know if he's going to eat it. Maybe he's plotting revenge on the person who cooked it. Assuming it was a person.

ALCIPHRON: That it is a duck about to eat a duck is evident. But considering what ducks do, that's probably not the biggest concern of the gods. Assuming the gods have meticulous providence and hence pre-ordained what Moeliker saw.

SOCRATES: Here you are anachronistic, my dear Alciphron, for you have brought in Calvinist notions of a Christian God into your previously Greek notions of gods. In any case, the question is not whether a god could forgive a duck eating a duck, but whether a god would forgive us for imagining a fictional duck about to eat a non-existent duck. Are we not the guilty ones?

NIETZSCHE: You seek the flame outside yourself while simultaneously extinguishing it within. Fools and slaves of long-defunct theologians, do you not see how crooked and warped your thoughts are by this focus? If you wish to speak about morality, do so honestly and without hypocrisy, rather than pretending to the divine and assuming that you know the nature of God.

KEYNES: Did you anachronistically steal my line about economists?

NERO (with FAT TONY): Economists schmeconomists. This is the ludic fallacy times twenty. If you like watching ducks, enjoy ducks. If you like watching cartoon ducks, enjoy watching cartoon ducks.

DORFMAN and MATTELART: A ridiculous notion, and one that could only be put forward by a caricature of a caricature. It used to be that ideology was spread by education; now it's spread by cartoons. In the Donald Duck comics, "all objects arrive on parachutes, are conjured out of hats, are presented as gifts in a non-stop birthday party, and are spread out like mushrooms. Mother earth gives all: pick her fruits, and be rid of guilt. No one is getting hurt." No wonder people act like nature is inexhaustible.

TOLSTOY: I am a writer who enjoys polyphony, but let me tell you, this dialogue is a mess. No repeating characters, no chiasmus, no arc---how could this end well?

WITTGENSTEIN: End? Those are the words of a writer detached from a reality they can control. The riverbed of thought in which we carve our grooves never ends. We are caught in a language game about ducks, cartoons, and morality. The question of forgiveness presupposes rules about what requires forgiveness, and even presupposes a setting in which the concept of forgiveness makes sense. But can a duck transgress against these rules if it does not participate in the language game that created them?

LAOZI: Speaking about language games misses the point, for the duck that can be named is not the eternal duck. To put it more bluntly, to pin down a concept of a duck is to impute to it a stability that does not exist. When we cease trying to categorize the duck as eater or eaten and instead see the two as intertwined, we may glimpse the true Dao of duckness.

SANKARA: I may agree with your Way; I cannot agree with Duckness as primary, for to speak of Duckness is misconceived. The duck, the meal, and the eating are all maya, mere appearances. In ultimate reality, Brahman alone exists. The wise one sees through this illusion to the underlying unity.

ZHUANGZI: You speak of unity; I speak of change. Once I dreamed a bird became a fish which became a human who became an ambiguous poster on social media, for just as a fish spawns roe which may be birthed or eaten, these humans spawn ideas which may be neglected, or take on a life of their own, or be eaten themselves. The posts written by this human took on lives on their own. This is called the endless transformation of discourse.

[verboselocket38]

I'ght, imma just say it. I did not like the newest episode (shocker)

Its just Stolas man, why????

Stolas just gets away with everything not evening acknowledging the fact that he forced Blitz in a coercive relationship and instead spewed that he was "ThE mAsTeRmInD".... AND HE DOESN'T EVEN DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Like I was actively cheering until they said he'll live and only get his powers taken away and his home and other stuff! The only reason why he lived was because "PLOT ARMOR"

And you know what's worse? Stolitz stans are going to use Stolas's "sacrifice" as an excuse to why Blitz should get with Stolas.

"Yeah Stolas forced Blitzo into coercive rape, but he sacrificed himself BLAHBLAH BLAH!"

I saw someone mention this so I will just put it here: When it comes to toxic relationships, victims will often be reminded of the "good" parts of the relationship so they'll stay with the person who treats them wrong. This is called "Breadcrumming" (according to google) By emphasizing the "good times they had together," they try to make it harder for the victim to focus on the ongoing harm and leave the situation.

Whether or not Stolas is sorry or didnt know he was doing was wrong, these two should NOT BE IN A RELATIONSHIP PERIOD. Its toxic.

"But its hell-"

Stfu. This show (even Hazbin) portray most stuff as harmless despite the fact being HARMFUL. The excuse is used only when its convenient to make the characters we are suppose to like (Stolas) and un-convienet for the characters we are suppose to hate (Stella)

The writers are on Stolas's side despite Viv lying and claiming that "they are both in the wrong" which she only said when people realized that Stolas was a hypocrite. The show ALWAYS tortures Blitz with his past and WE GET IT VIV CAN YOU NOW GIVE PILES OF TRAUMA DUMPING ON STOLAS NOW??? YOU DID IT WITH BLITZ, DO IT WITH THE OTHER DUDE SO IT DOESNT SEEM ONE SIDED! Yeah I might make a post that makes more sense when I am less frustrated but yeah thats it :(

Also just a reminder, I do not like Blitz. But Stolas makes me want to kms

[kalinara]

(All-New X-Men #6)

I've kind of blogged something about this before but I never get tired of seeing posts about Logan/Scott/Jean as a throuple (I will literally die of spite before I use a portmanteau) that talk about them as two godlike, immortal beings and "just some guy".

Because on some level, of course, it's absolutely true. Jean is the living embodiment of a Universal Cosmic Force. She can sneeze and wipe out entire star systems.

And Logan is basically immortal. There are a good number of timelines that go forward hundreds, if not thousands of years (see: Powers of X in the Krakoa era) that still show Logan at the prime of his life, always fighting and surviving.

Scott, is, by that standard, just some guy. He's got lasers coming out of his eyes, which is kind of cool admittedly. You could do some interesting analysis on the fact that they seem to be infinite - the only time we see them give out is when HE gives out. Or doesn't get enough sunlight or whatever. But for practical purposes, they've got one real use, the guy's just a very decorative portable cannon.

But what makes Scott special, and on level with the other two, isn't what he is, but what he does.

This is a dude who's led the X-Men since he was a teenager. And as a teenager once talked an entire fleet of Sentinels into attacking the goddamn sun.

This is a dude who co-led a guerilla war against Apocalypse in the future for 10-12 years (admittedly with his goddess wife), then came back as though nothing happened.

He's also the reason for his own last name, because in ANOTHER time traveling bout with the goddess wife, he managed to inspire his own orphaned ancestor to take the name "Summers" in his and Jean's honor.

This is a dude who got possessed by Apocalypse, and repressed him to the point of amnesia, got a sliver of the Void stuck in his head, and repressed that too. Even Phoenix possession took a while to shake that guy.

This is a dude who became the "Boy King of Utopia", uniting the entirety of the mutant race under one banner. Magneto KNELT to him and named him Caesar.

There's also that time he stared down Dracula. Was it a bluff? Dracula thinks so. But he still backed the fuck down. And for a brief period of time, even Namor followed this guy's lead. NAMOR.

This is a dude who, after becoming possessed and ostracized, led a "mutant revolution", becoming a household name among bitter college students everywhere.

He's the kangaroo trial symbol of the entire mutant race, sentenced to death, and his only response is a call to arms published through his lawyer, She-Hulk.

This is a man who's slept with Jean Grey, the Phoenix (back when they were considered separate entities), the Goblin Queen, Emma Frost, and Frenzy, and every single one came back wanting to fuck him again.

Speaking of Frenzy? That dude's sub game redeemed a fucking acolyte!

"God took less time than that to make the world!". Okay, take a fucking breath, Joanna. (X-Men Legacy #248)

His kids are practically gods in their own right, and he was only involved in the conception of one of them. The others just kind of showed up one day with a DNA test and got invited in for dinner.

The closest thing he has to a hobby is plotting how to kill dinosaurs:

(Uncanny X-Men #495 - and he's fought a LOT of dinosaurs.

Sinister's been obsessed with this man's DNA for years, and yeah, if you're just looking at it in terms of powers, it doesn't make a lot of sense. There are much more powerful mutants out there after all. But when you start thinking about the rest of this, yeah, I kind of want to put him in a petrie dish too.

Heck, he's even argued with the narrator! In another timeline, he could have become an incredibly boring variation of Deadpool!

(Uncanny X-Men #96).

I'm just saying, yes, by one point of view the Moon Throuple is two godlike immortal beings and dude who is "just some guy".

But on the other hand, if you had a chance to fuck the unholy combination of Mr. Rogers, Alexander the Great, and the Death Star wouldn't you?

[archivists-decay]

I've been playing Great God Grove from @limbolanegames over and over again recently (If you're seeing this, go give @yugsly and @daylane some serious love! It's a wonderful experience) and I have a very tiny headcanon that the ascended gods actually have very little influence over the world in the traditional "god power" sense.

Some story and ending spoilers under the cut.

My headcanon is that they have some influence, like Miss Mitternacht's crying leading to flooding, Cobigail's vines (which, I'm not entirely sure were even intentional to begin with,) but rather, the benefit of Godhood comes from being given immortality (read: an infinite amount of time to further develop a skill) and notoriety (read: everyone believing you are THE subject matter expert of the namesake you embody).

When Bauhauzzo talks about being only being able to assist you in BuzzHuzz with his voice, I don't think that's just because he's "only" the God of Memory – I think it's because that's about the extent of their greater influence as gods.

Their eternity spent honing their crafts makes their opinions on the subjects infallible to the people - even if we know they aren't.

Click Clack's last few scripts have been terrible? Well, we think they suck, but we have to get them to post anyways – he sees something we don't.

Bauhauzzo wants innovation banned from BuzzHuzz? Seems out of character, but he's remembering something we don't.

Their voices, or what the people believe are their voices, are listened to with reverence when it comes to their field of mastery — and I think that's one of the reasons King might have said some things to Inspekta that he interpreted as "disrespectful."

In the 30+ years of his godhood, Inspektas ideas of Leadership have clearly severely regressed from his time as a human – mostly due to his insecurities, granted – but he didn't spend any of that time polishing up what leadership meant, or helping others grow in their own leadership, instead, resting on his laurels of being adored and keeping his men down so that they continually lift him up. King probably caught on to this and tried to have a heart to heart with him, one that just...was poorly received.

My headcanon makes me think that, tragically, Inspekta had the potential to become one of the most influential and beloved gods in the grove overtime anyways if he had spent as much time working on his genuine leadership as he had plotting and being envious of the others. Not being tied down to a specific location in the grove, having a loyal group of activists willing to spread his ideas about leadership, on top of his skillset being just, a really good general aptitude that anyone can benefit from. Just some thoughts.

Addendum: Also, I think it's interesting that it almost seems like mortals have more power over the pantheon in this Universe. Sure, the gods close the rift, but the rest of the time? Mortals can exile (Huzzle Mug), abandon (Cobigail was left alone for 20 YEARS), and twist the words and intentions (Pretty much everyone) of the gods like it's nothing with very little consequences from the gods themselves — it's a refreshing approach to a fictional mythology and something I'd like to see explored more in fiction.

Anyways, thanks for letting me ramble! I've been thinking about these silly queers all week.

[cynthiav06]

Annabeth stans and Percabeth shippers are talking about how ooc Annabeth is in WOTTG with her thinking Percy is stupid as if she hasn't constantly made fun of Percy's intelligence since the very beginning. As if she doesn't do it in every book, multiple times. Rick's characterization of Annabeth isn't changing, people are finally just growing up and realizing their fave ship when they were 12 isn't healthy. But instead of actually acknowledging that it's a bad ship they just blame the author.

Warnings: This is going to be a rant; bear with me. People from the "take everything as a personal offense" group stop reading. Will give us both the luxury of a peaceful mind.

It's easier to blame Rick, I think, given his series of shit decisions. The Wrath of a Triple Goddess is a complete abomination, and so is Chalice of the Gods in many ways. But at least it has helped readers understand the glaring flaws of Percabeth as a ship. How Percy's character is butchered to hype up Annabeth.

And I am completely exhausted of trying to get any of them to think rationally and in an unbiased manner. I can't make a willfully blind individual see sense after all.

But yeah, Annabeth has many, and I mean many character flaws throughout the series. The number of times I have made a post on Annabeth's flaws or even why Percabeth is incompatible.... At this point, I believe open-minded and careful readers are going to see and make their own conclusions, and the blind shippers will keep doing their own thing. This , I think, was my most recent post and will probably be one of my last ones on a similar topic. Unless I get newer asks that have some different viewpoints that I can actually explore cause, all has been said so far, I think.

I had a feeling that things would get better as they got older, more mature, you know, an Annabeth character arc of some sort. Maybe exploring the positive and negative nuances of Percabeth or even Percy's suicidal thoughts, non existent self esteem and how Annabeth has been unknowingly feeding into those.

She is one of the more iconic characters to people even outside the fandom. One from a very, very , and exclusive pool of actually strong female characters and the way her character is devolving isn't helping anything.

-------------------------------------------------------

All of Riordan's characters have such high potential, and the amount of plots he could explore is staggering, and yet he still dishes out the same generic plot again and again. He is in it for the money now, has been for a while, and so there's no hope there.

This might be a very hot take, but I think romance ruined the series. Rick kept slapping romantic relationships on every character as if that would suddenly make things better. Give them a relationship rather than explore their trauma. I guess it's the easier of the two.

But seriously, Caleo? Jiper? Solangelo ? (I can see the hate comments already). Whatever he was doing with Reyna, but at least she wasn't completely butchered.

Rick's problem is that he keeps giving more importance to romantic relationships and makes that the entire personality of a character.

He butchered Percy, even Jason at times, Leo bloody Valdez and Nico more prominently.

The way Percy and Nico's very deep and volatile bond and heavily dynamic relationship was butchered and distorted to feed into Solangelo and Percabeth, and I can't possibly understate how highly that's been going on.

Then Luke and Thalia's relationship was completely butchered for no absolute reason. I have no idea why. They were in love or at least had romantic feelings for each other, and Thalia just woke up and wanted to kill him? He literally gave all the angst to Annabeth even though Thalia had known him longer, and they had a more nuanced bond.

Jason's relationship with Camp Jupiter individuals was completely scrapped, his and Reyna's dynamic completely watered down, or even his and Leo's great friendship discarded all for Jiper or whatever else was shoved at him.

-------------------------------------------------------

As opposed to this whole shit show, I loved the relationships in the Magnus Chase series and Kane Chronicles. That was good stuff. Both character relationships and romantic ones even though I am pretty sure he got a lot of diverse representation wrong or so I have read recently.

Then there's the stupid, blind, bigot part of the fandom that just can't help themselves. I mean dumb Percy takes, Annabeth stans ruining Percy's character arcs and overinflating Annabeth's character, which in turn made Rick do the same.Then the boring Jason thing? What the hell was that? It's like everyone missed the point of why Jason is the way he is. I am going to make a post on that soon, but seriously, the shit that's been going on.

Then the shippers. Solangelo stans and Percabeth stans. They have single handedly ruined the ships for me with their distorted ideas of character dynamics. And their blatant and brutal hate against other Percy or Nico ships is just ridiculous and heavily toxic.

It's a fandom, not a monopoly. Everyone can have their own little thing as long as you don't meddle in someone else's own thing. Let everyone enjoy their own thing.

And for all our sakes, at this point, just pick your own version of canon. Choose which books to stop at. Trust me, it's less frustrating that way.

[lemotmo]

Just wanted to ask you and Ali, you guys claim Lou was fired, what do you think is the reason he got fired.

Oh Nonny, you are not catching me at the right time for this question.

I have had it with the man and his evil minions. They just do not know when to quit and I've had enough of this inane nonsense.

Listen, I had a really lousy workday today. A full day of pouring energy into a job I love and getting NOTHING in return. Only to get home and to read how these sheep and their evil Overlord are once again trying to be cool and are -once again- missing by a mile! All they are succeeding at is being extremely cringy and highly embarrassing.

Anyway... I feel like our fandom has written novels by now about all the many reasons we think he got fired.

Here's a few of them though:

A plethora of racist, sexist and ableist posts found on his social media.

Giving away too much inside show information in one of his first interviews. Like the fact that it was actually supposed to be Eddie in that storyline, instead of Buck.

Creating thoroughly unprofessional Cameo videos filled with bullsh*t headcanons about how T was loving and sweet and never racist or sexist, oh no... of course not. He was just a sweet misunderstood woobie summer child.🤦‍♀️

Creating thoroughly unprofessional Cameo videos telling people BT were thriving and they would stay strong together. All of this while he KNEW from the beginning that T was only there as a plot device for a short period of time, to serve Buck's narrative.

Creating thoroughly unprofessional Cameo videos on set, effectively SPOILING some things the public wasn't supposed to know yet.

Creating thoroughly unprofessional Cameo videos and charging his disciples loads of money to hear him talk nonsense out of his *ss.

Creating thoroughly unpro... you get where I'm going with this right? But there's more. Let's see. What else? Oh yes!

Not a reason this time, but a consequence: he suddenly stopped making his thoroughly unprofessional Cameo videos from one day to the next, going completely silent on all of his social media for months. BIG RED FLAG THERE! Either his own team stepped in and told him just how unprofessional he was or ABC stepped in to make him stop being so f*cking unprofessional. It's very likely it was ABC and Tim.

Let's find some more reasons now... Oh yes. What about the fact that he obviously did not want to film any kind of intimate scene with another man? He talked about this in one of his first interviews when he was still sane. He felt that 'making out' wasn't necessary in this story or some BS like that. Well, seems like he had no trouble making out with women in other projects. Hmmm... 🤔 They didn't even touch anymore in season 8.

Oh hey, did you notice that there was no love lost at all between the main cast and Lou? There were pictures of everyone BUT him. Again.. I wonder why? Hmmm... such a mystery. Might it be because no one on the cast or crew really liked the man. After all, he was the cause of his fanbase going completely insane, running around threatening and harassing other fans, calling them homophobic, accusing people of doing terrible things by creating fake evidence, harassing the cast and crew to the point that they had to block them and the showrunner had to step in and call them out for their toxicity!

Last but not least that terribly embarassing last interview that he did. Man, I have never felt so much second-hand embarassment as when I was reading that article wannabe article. In this trash article the man praised himself for being a wonderful actor who made some really great choices in those BT scenes. How full of yourself can one possibly be? It's gross. He talked about how he didn't see the ending coming, even though in his first interviews he clearly stated he wasn't going to stick around for long. Make it make sense!🤷‍♀️ In this article he basically says that 911 and Tim did him dirty, causing Tim to have to state -in no uncertain terms- that the BT relationship is over and done with. Aka 'the final nail in the BT coffin'. Aka 'the best day of my life'.

All of his (badly executed) rethoric made sure that his minions started turning on Oliver, calling him homophobic and biphobic, accusing him of all sorts of terrible things. And what about the racism towards Ryan? Can't forget about that horror. I know I'll never forget reading those comments.

Even now, after they finally got rid off him, he is still making his toxic cameo videos spurring his loyal fiends on to keep on hoping that Tommy will return. He knows full well that he is never coming back, but as long as they keep paying him, he'll keep saying what they want to hear. But you know what? All those dumb hashtags won't change the fact that he isn't coming back.

Bottom line? He is gone. Was he fired. Probably yes. We'll never be completely certain, but it's pretty obvious they didn't part in good ways.

Everyone in this fandom is tired, exhausted and depleted of energy because of this man and his cult. We are mostly free of the toxicity now and are slowly returning to the great fandom we were before, theorising and talking about Buddie. Let's keep doing just that: moving on without looking back. Great things lie ahead for us in 8b and season 9. Let's enjoy the win!

As for Lou? I wish for him a main role in his own crappy very unsuccessful TV-show (that will get cancelled after one season). Then all of his stans will follow and we'll finally be fully free.

Well, I have to say... that was cathartic. I needed to get that off my chest. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to rant Nonny. I feel so much better already. 😋

[mashmouths]

so i started this show and it just gets worse and worseeeee not only did it lift the romance subplot directly from twilight (and not well) but they also are trying to play the forbidden love angle hard in the fantasy racism vein except it's a "cross-species" relationship between the two whitest people i've ever seen in my life and there are three people of color in the whole (first season of the) show who aren't villains and it seems that every other episode (and sometimes ebery episode and sometimes twice an episode!) there is a man physically or magically subjugating a woman and i keep waiting for the big reveal at the end to be stolen from fucking rainbow rowell

[dreamingaboutsakuratrees]

Dear God how I fucking hate when people dismiss s character's traits because "that's just a facade! you as the reader have to see underneath it!!" like yeah no fucking shit Sherlock, a well written character has more than one (1) defining trait but that doesn't mean their most prominent one or the one most recognized by fandom ISN'T there

yes this is about people thinking dick grayson isn't actually a ray of sunshine, that it's just a mask. he's much more than the happy one, of fucking course, all batfam members (when written well) are, but that doesn't mean that being happy and bright is not a crucial part of his personality. he brings light to people's lives, he's a beacon of hope, that's what Robin was born for, as a light to Batman's darkness. That's what Nightwing is. He can be serious, sure. He's smart, an amazing strategist, incredibly good at fighting, he can be manipulative and morally gray and sometimes an objectively bad person. But he's ALSO funny and quippy and bright and sunshine. BECAUSE HE'S WELL WRITTEN.

Like Jesus stop making him so sad and wrong all the time just because you want so bad to go against "fanon". It's not fanon if it's literally his core trait. It's not fanon if it's what the character was BORN AS. God.

[randomnameless]

Genuine question, not trying to start a fight, why do you get so upset about gods and churches being presented in a negative light in fictional works?

No pbs!

I guess it's a mix of being too common, too forced and having, in general, the cast use common tropish arguments to fight /defeat them.

I rant a lot about this game, but take TS where we have three sort of factions opposing each other, and each are supposed to suck. Who is the faction who never receives any "positive traits" or "pet the dog" moment?

The game force fed us a scene where an Aesfroti soldier - when Aesfrost is depicted as a highly militarised nation with a cult of personality towards their current ruler, that invaded the protag's home and slaughtered several civilians and NPCs in the process - say goodbye to his wife and kids before going to "war" to defend his land against, well, the protags who are invading it to kill their warmongering leader.

As force-fed as this scene was, it, I believe at least, tried to tell us that even the Aesfrosti who pillaged villages and killed their inhabitants are humans, and care about their loved ones, sure it's corny, but it's all about not deshumanising any party.

When we attack Hyzante? Niet, zilch, nothing. No similar scene where random soldiers, or NPCs, worry about what is going on and if they're going to die when their wall has been breached. They just, don't exist in this context.

I think the cherry on the cake is the Golden Route scene, where, apparently, nationalists Aesfrosti decide to turn back against their ultra charismatic leader because, uh, he "lied" when he declared the war and used a false pretense, so the soldiers and people who were butchering babies and invading a city where people were preparing a marriage apparently now have morals and rebel.

There's no similar scene for Hyzante when the cast reveals that the teachings of their Goddess were made up and salt wasn't exclusively given to them by divine intervention, because rock salt exists everywhere. Sure it would be a bit weird and forced that people thinking they're chosen ones and looking down on everyone else suddenly, hm, don't break down when their entire system of belief is shattered, but hey, if the Aesfrostian Gregor can have morals after washing his hands of all this Glenbrookian blood, why shouldn't religious npc #55 not make the same heel face turn?

And then, we have the slavery/human experimentation plot - in general, when TS tries to give nuance, they more or less explain/justify why something that "sucks" is done, it's basically Silvio's character.

Aesfrost' Gustadolph manages to push his "freedom" mentality because his land is a harsh place where people are desperate to survive, salt smuggling is reprehensible, but it's the only way to give some to the ones who cannot afford it. Of course is everyone is free, no one is because, as Gustadolph puts it, they're basically free to die for his ambitions.

Hyzante? Follows a racist creed where Rozellians have to pay for some great sin, and are slaved away in a lake to recover salt until they die. It's, later, justified by Hyzante wanting to keep its salt monopoly else they don't have anything, and wanting to curb down the Rozelle people because they know about the exitence of rock salt (and I guess getting free workers to harvest salt from the lake + having state enemies make his own population docile/not willing to rebel ?).

And then, we have the human experimentations, that are just done for, uhh, Idore's lol. When Hyzante is known for its "advanced medicine" and we could have had the usual dilemna of, idk, having those humans experimentations used to develop this medicine that is reknown in the world (idk, sacrificing a Rozellian to save someone else's life?) - it's not the angle the devs picked. Rozellians are sacrificed to power up an idol, Idore wants to control the world through his idol and soft power (compared to Gustadolph's hard power) and manipulates his people (just like Gustadolph) to do so.

The two are very similar, but who is the final boss? Complete with a transformation in an eldritch monster? The war-mongering imperialist or the jaded old man who is leading de facto a religion?

Hopefully there's the entire "human experimentations for no other purpose than the lols" to settle them apart.

---

I recently watched Dune, and even if I have some issues with the adaptation, the Bene Gesserit isn't portrayed as "comically" evil-er than the Harkonen Empire, I reckon the comparison isn't adequate, because Dune is multi book series when I'm mostly talking about video games.

Symphonia's church of Martel is a font for the Big Bad (tm) to put in motion his nefarious plans, and yet, through the game, we see how random clergymen use their, uh, religious buildings to help people around. Ultimately Martel herself is reincarnated through plot device and tells the big bad to stop being an ass and the story is less about "church and gods evil" but "big bad distorts Martel/church's teachings and role for his plans because he has a tragic backstory"

(but then Symphonia ends with the biggest whitewashing from every Tales I've played for its big bad so I'll stop talking about it because otherwise I'm going to be salty).

Abyss' church is more or less the same thing - the Church is supposed to help people deal with the fact their verse has "predestination stones" where the future is already written, and in the course of the game, we see how it has several factions and one opposes the group (who has the pope as a NPC!) - but it's not a story about "gods bad church BaD".

I remember playing Suikoden Tierkreis a long time ago, and while the game seemed to go through familiar "church bad gods bad" route and we end with defeating a god-like entity... I pretty much loved the twist that, in a game that relied on alternate dimensions/universe, the god-like entity was actually the protag if he made different choices!

In those games, if you fight a religious body and someone pretending to be a God or what not - it's not because people fight against an eldritch creature who wants world domination and to erase puny insects, or is the reason why everything goes wrong, but because, at the end, the conflict/fight is ultimately caused by someone, generally a human or at least a non "god like" entity, wanting to destroy the world.

I don't remember if FE was my first JRPG series or not, but I always liked the idea that if the world is doomed in those games and the heroes must prevent said doom, it's not because a god-like being wants to destroy the world, but because people, humans/randoms are the most shitty ones out there.

---

As for the "tropes" often used to deride fictional churchs and religious people, well, I will again point to TS - which did a splendid job in the Benedict Route where you smash Hyzante after allying with Aesfrost.

There's one battle where out protags diss Hyzantese because they worship a goddess and have no free will, listening to Her teachings and Her says (the traditional "religious people have no free will and listen to their churches who tell them how to think!") - which is immediately countered by one of those Hyzantese characters asking Serenor if he's not the same, but instead of blindly listening to a Goddess, blindly follows Benedict. And it ends with the final chapter title referencing automatons/puppets : who is that title talking about ? The fake "idol" Idore created, or the fake "king" Benedict created?

Anyways, the usual "religions people have no free will because their church/religion tells them how to think" trope reeks of r/atheism and the double standard - bar in this route of TS, but I guess, in TS itself in the Roland route! - is never called out, blindly following a charismatic leader is okay, as long as charismatic leader isn't religious?

Regardless of my IRL thoughts about religion, usually those tropes are presented as a "gotcha!" when they are... not at all, but the games/books leave it at that and we're supposed to roll with it.

I'd say it's lazy writing or, as we saw in Naruto, a quick way to end a story without having to dwelve in characters and their motivations : "you're a god/alien/other being and you're bad, so let us do what we want!" - end of the story.

Hopefully some fillers and to an extent, Boruto gave her more meat bar being the 11 hour villain we had to defeat quick and who manipulated the previous sad'n'lonely antagonists - but it still felt rich from Naruto, known for his famous "talk no jutsu" and trying to understand people he's fighting against, to drop the ball with Kaguya, calling her pure malice and ending with some "let us live the way we want" to wrap up the plot so he can wrestle with his boyfriend later on.

In the end, we often end up with "religion bad bcs the big bad manipulates people through it", as if those mangas/animes/vg never have other examples of charismatic people not using religion to manipulate their randoms/people or "gods bad they should let humans do what they want" when we've read/seen/played through various, uh, really fucked-up shit humans did - but on their own! and ultimately, but it's more in fandom spaces, with have Projection 101.

TLDR : church/religion/gods are too often used in those works as the ultimate scapegoat to either wrap up a story in a rushed ending or to pretend to have "nuance" but still have a common enemy where all the "nuanced" characters can grow/be whitewashed and side together against that "common enemy".

Just like in all things I guess, I prefer when something isn't painted as purely negative and all of the positive traits are erased because there is a need for a perfect scapegoat - sure, bring out too much "nuance" and writing/designing a game/manga/anime becomes harder because there's no "clear cut" antagonist, and yet, the one who always gets fucked in this scenario is the religious/church side.

Want a generic stock villain who will destroy the world so the heroes have to fight against them? Just create a "religion" in your setting, and have the big bad either hell bent on resurrecting Chtullu to destroy the world because Chtullu BaD, or have them be the most corrupt piece of shit who manipulate everything in the shadows, so the rest of the world, even the ones who slaughter others bcs they feel like they must start a war, can be whitewashed at the end.

I mean, there's a saying about diverting attention from a fire by starting a bigger one near, or a trope of "aliens made them do it" : who cares if Madara started a continental war and targeted a village full of random civilians he swore to protect because he lost the elections? Did y'know he was manipulated by a woman, I mean, an eldritch thing created by a woman, regarded as a God, who ultimately wanted to get out of her fridge to kill everyone?

Roland must get over his hatred for Aesfrost for barging in his kindgom and killing hundred of his people while they were preparing for a wedding, because hey, Idore is evil and plans on ruling the world through his sham religion!

I'll forever be salty at TS for not giving Kamsell the occasion to rise against Idore, or not even have minor NPCs get the same treatment as Sycras suddenly going all "u lied to me gustadolph so i won't listen to u anymore + sad goodbyes to my wife'n'kids".

Extremism of all kinds can lead to wars/tragedy/fucked up shit - Sure I don't want to get my History lessons in video game medium when I play lol, but what I really don't like is how it feels like depicting "they're extremists because they're religious" feels like the default/easy answer : want a bunch of brainwashed people the heroes must fight against and can't talk no justu their way out of this fight/will fight without looking too BaD? Depict those people as "misguided" members of a corrupt church/believers of a religion, no one will givea fig. If they are instead supporters of a charismatic leader who throws them through the meatgrinder to further their goals? Well, there's no automatic loyalty so either you have to show/depict it on screen, else it can be challenged at key points to demonstrate how those people - who follow the charismatic leader - aren't completely "mindlessly listening to their leader" or how their leader "isn't that bad after all".

[moonstandardtime]

i want to put link in isat. im sure hed do fine. the heros spirit endures

[thatonecrookedsmile]

["So what can you expect in the coming months?"] ["…you never know!"] ["He’s always watching me..."] ["-I saw Mister Drew the other day…was meeting with that Connor fellow, holding some papers."] ["I think they saw me looking though…"] ["Just too many secrets being cooked up in the kitchen!"] ["If I didn’t know better, I’d say there was magic there."] ["A well calculated understanding between creation-"] ["-big things are coming!"] ["-and creator."] ["Massive things!"] ["That smile…"] ["..you just learn to go with it."] ["He’s always watching me..."] ["You just watch…"] ["I’ve got a good feeling something great is going to happen…”]

...

…How very interesting,such… knowledge.

{A message from Wilson Arch}

-----

Yoooo, guess who is having a birthday today. Me,obviously. :D

Oh, and Wilson too, I guess. If you wanna be THAT guy.

Remember when this video came out there were people who heard the voice at the end and thought the voice was either Sammy or the Ink Demon? Man, those were the days. However with all due respect, I'm glad neither case was right in the end lol.

On this day 5 years ago, "Unknown - April 14th" was posted on YouTube, which means it's been 5 damn years since we first heard from Wilson...

man, what a damn BABY MAN, am i right folks

It's interesting to think that even though it's been 5 years, we've only known who Wilson really is for 2 years now (or more appropriately, 1 year and 5 months of those 5 years). Of course, now, after BATDR was released, we know who he is and what his place is in the Bendy universe. But between April 1, 2019 and November 1, 2022, all we knew about him was that he…existed. He was someone - someone bad apparently - who sounded old and who would have some relevance in the plot of Dark Revival. And that's it. We had no name, no appearance, nothing. He was someone, but we didn't know who.

It's no wonder he was only referred to as "Unknown" by fans during these 3 and a half years.

In the end, I would say that this drawing is a mix of 2 things. The first being the result of an idea I've had for a while, which is basically making a drawing in relation to the original video/"unknown" tape, but this time with Wilson, since now we know it was recorded by him. Plus it's been 5 years since the original upload,5 years of Wilson. I think this would be the perfect time to do this.

And second, a strange kind of redux/homage/"final chapter" in this kind of "collection" of drawings I did between 2019 and 2022 all based on the idea of "the unknown weirdo from BATDR saying How Very Interesting Such Knowledge" and so on. All of them having other characters in mind in the role of the Unknown. And now, here I am, redoing this idea again, only with The Man Himself this time. The real Unknown. Now as the Known, so to speak.

Going back to what I said before, you can see this drawing as a kind of farewell to this particular idea that I've kind of repeated over the years, as I've now done it again only with Wilson this time. (Does this mean I'll never draw this concept/line of thought again? I mean, I assume so. But there's no guarantee I can't make something similar again down the line. Who knows what the future holds. We will see what happens in the next 5 years.)

But,yeah. 5 years of Such Knowledge™.

Have a good April Fools' Day.

(Also, there are still a few hours until the day ends where I live, so for me it's still April 1st, so yeah, this still counts)

[sskk-manifesto]

(*・ω・*)b♪

[acrobattack]

i think it’s fun that blossom and buttercup butt heads the most vs brick who targets boomer and more or less gets along swell with butch

[sci-bax]

Does anyone else find that music gives them inspiration for stories? Im working on my first game's story rn and quite a few songs have helped me figure out what i want some of the places/characters to be like

Spider Girl and 1000 Doors helped so much with thinking up a certain part of the game😭

In terms of dialogue, Ive got some dialogue options for a shopkeeper but nothing past that💔

[britneyshakespeare]

So yesterday I read "Slimed with Gravy, Ringed by Drink" by Camille Ralphs, an article from the Poetry Foundation on the publication of the First Folio in 1623, a major work without which most of Shakespeare's plays might very well have been lost today, possibly the most influential secular work of literature in the world, you know.

It's a good article overall on the history and mysteries of the Folio. Lots of interesting stuff in there including how Shakespeare has been adapted, the state of many surviving Folios, theories of its accuracy to the text, a really interesting identification of John Milton's own copy currently in the Free Library of Philadelphia, and the fascinating annotations that may have influenced Milton's own poetry!!! Do read it. It's not an atrociously long article but there's a lot of thought-provoking information in there.

There's one paragraph in particular I keep coming back to though, so I'm just gonna quote it down here:

...[T]he Play on Shakespeare series, published by ACMRS Press, the publications division of the Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Arizona State University... grew out of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival’s plan to “translate” Shakespeare for the current century, bills itself “a new First Folio for a new era.” The 39 newly-commissioned versions of Shakespeare’s plays were written primarily by contemporary dramatists, who were asked to follow the reasonable principle laid out by series editor Lue Douthit: tamper in the name of clarification but submit to “do no harm.” The project was inspired by something the linguist John McWhorter wrote in 1998: “[the] irony today is that the Russians, the French, and other people in foreign countries possess Shakespeare to a much greater extent than we do … [because] they get to enjoy Shakespeare in the language they speak.”

Mainly it's the John McWhorter thing I keep coming back to. Side note: any of my non-native-English-speaking mutuals who have read Shakespeare, I would love to know your experiences. If you have read him in translation, or in the original English, or a mix of both. It's something I do wonder about! Even as an Anglophone reader, I find my experience varies so much just based on which edition of the text I'm reading and how it's presented. There's just so much variety in how to read literature and I would love to know what forces have shaped your own relationships to the stories. But anyway...

The article then goes on to talk about how the anachronistic language in Shakespeare will only fall more and more out of intelligibility for everyone because of how language evolves and yadda yadda yadda. I'm not going to say that that's wrong but I think it massively overlooks the history of the English language and how modern standard English became modern standard English.

First of all, is Shakespeare's language completely unintelligible to native English speakers today? No. Certain words and grammatical tenses have fallen out of use. Many words have shifted in meaning. But with context aiding a contemporary reader, there are very few lines in Shakespeare where the meaning can be said to be "unknown," and abundant lines that are perfectly comprehensible today. On the other hand, it's worth mentioning how many double entendres are well preserved in modern understanding. And additionally, things like archaic grammar and vocabulary are simply hurdles to get over. Once you get familiarized with your thees and thous, they're no longer likely to trip you up so much.

But it's also doubtful that 400 years from now, as the article suggests, our everyday language will be as hard to understand for twenty-fifth century English speakers to comprehend. The English language has significantly stabilized due to colonialism and the international adoption of English as a lingua franca. There are countless dialects within English, but what we consider to be standard international "correct" English will probably not change so radically, since it is so well and far established. The development and proliferation of modern English took a lot of blood and money from the rest of the world, the legacy of which can never be fully restored.

And this was just barely in sight by the time that Shakespeare died. This is why the language of the Elizabethans and Jacobeans is early-modern English. It forms the foundations of modern English, hence why it's mostly intelligible to speakers today, but there are still many antiquated figures within it. Early-modern English was more fluid and liberal. Spelling had not been standardized. Many regions of England still had slight variations in preferences for things like pronouns and verb conjugation. We see this even in works Shakespeare cowrote with the likes of Fletcher and Middleton, as the article points out. Shakespeare's vocabulary may not just reflect style and sentiment, but his Stratford background. His preferences could be deemed more "rustic" than many of his peers reared in London.

Features that make English more consistent now were not formalized yet. That's why Shakespeare sounds so "old." It's not just him being fancy. And there's also the fact that blank verse plays are an entirely neglected art nowadays. Regardless of the comprehensibility of the English, it's still strange for modern audiences uninitiated to Elizabethan literature to sit there and watch a King drop mad poetry about his feelings on stage by himself. The form and style of the entire genre is off.

But that, to me, is why we should read Shakespeare. We SHOULD be challenged. It very much IS within the grasp of a literate adult fluent in English to read one of his plays, in a modern edition with proper assistance and context. It is GOOD to be acquainted with something unfamiliar to us, but within our reach. I'm serious. I do not think I'm so much smarter than everyone else because I read Shakespeare. I don't just read the plain text as it was printed in the First Folio! The scholarship exists which has made Shakespeare accessible to me, and I take advantage of that access for my own pleasure.

This is to say that I disagree with the notion that Shakespeare is better suited to be enjoyed in foreign tongues. I think that's quite a complacent, modern American take. Not to say that the sentiment of McWhorter is wrong; I get what he's saying. And it's quite a beautiful thing that Shakespeare's plays are still so commonly staged, although arguably that comes from a false notion in our culture that Shakespeare is high literature worth preserving, at the expense of the rest of time and history. It is true that his body of work has such a high level of privilege in the so-called Western literary canon that either numerous other writers equally deserve, or no writer ever could possibly deserve.

The effort that goes into making Shakespeare's twenty-first century legacy, though, is a half-assed one. So much illustrious praise and deification of the individual and his works, and yet not as much to understanding the context of his time and place, of his influences, forms, and impacts on the eras which proceeded him. Shakespeare seems to exist in a vacuum with his archaic language, and we read it once or twice in high school when we're forced to, with prosaic translations on the adjoining page. This does not inspire a true appreciation in a culture for Shakespeare but it does reinforce a stereotype that he must be somehow important. It's this shallow stereotype that makes it seem in many minds today that it would be worth it to rip the precise language out of the text of a poet, and spit back out an equivalent "modern translation."

[apocalypticdemon]

man. i really thought i knew where this was going and now. i once again realize i have no idea what i'm doing