#(but I have to admit this joke conspiracy theorizing made me think maybe the end -TTPD- prefacing the beginning -rep- isn’t that far fetche

[wavesoutbeingtossed]

“Ok in the original error message on Grammy night there’s the the code that says DPT which obviously now is the acronym for Tortured Poets Department but backwards and it’s counting down 3-2-1 from back to front IT’S LIKE IT’S STARTING FROM THE END INSTEAD OF THE BEGINNING or from the last page instead of the first chapter and the word scramble is literally a red herring and the original error is web speak for the system crashing BECAUSE THERE’S BEEN A GLITCH THE SYSTEM IS OVERLOADED so she has to go back to basics with a typewriter instead in the latest tease but also the betting Swifties are saying the Apple Music scramble is spelling out Glitch backwards too and the original error message is a black page with white font but the NEW error message is white with black font they’re like TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN and now she’s teasing 13– THIRTEEN WHAT?!—“

[nightmare-circus]

Serica | Reaction 4/4 | Ode to…

When: Second motive, when their surroundings were not these ephemeral islands but a quiet village. In the midst of suffocating fear, after she had committed to holing up in her room, before he had come to stay with her.

Where: On their mirrors. Due to aforementioned self-isolation.

Who: One conspiracy theorist, one nurse. Just friends, for now.

What:

( > seriously though i dont want to find you dead )

> then don’t go looking

( > how could i not? )

Why:

IX. Yamamoto, Deacon

Was it her fault, for trying to make concrete plans for the future?

( “Deacon Yamamoto, I will do everything in my power to make sure you and I can leave here, that I will find you and bring you home and we’ll spend days just sitting on the couch watching terrible sitcoms, riding on the subway gossiping about tourists, walking through the park hand in hand…“ )

No, that was stupid. 

Serica may have been a woman who believed in more than the average person, trusted in platitudes and jinxes where others would scoff, but even in the midst of the unthinkable she was dimly aware this wasn’t her fault. It wasn’t his fault. It was…. someone else. Someone else’s fault.

A someone else who she needed to find. But, she found herself once again incapable of meaningfully investigating. Not this time for exaggerated pain and weakness, but of a pure inability to move forward both physically and psychologically.

She’s done this before. She had just forced herself to shallowly rationalize and pack away the deaths of Miles, Juniper, Tatsuya, Elise. One more couldn’t be bad. She was great at compartmentalization wasn’t she? She was able to laugh and have drinks hours after poisoning a man, she was able to pretend to be a victim when only half an hour before she had killed one Danny Ostergard with her two hands. If she approached this from a distance, with the veneer of a woman who had nothing to do with the dead man before her, with the objectivity of a woman who simply was trying to figure out what was going on… she could do this, right?

Let’s begin.

How does she even begin to explain Deacon Yamamoto?

(Ah… he’d probably like that reference, wouldn’t he?)

u/BoysBBUGS ||  u/aviary23

Head mod of Fanatical Ravings of the Disappeared, he(?) had a lot of theories that she didn’t necessarily subscribe to, but saw his contributions interesting to pick at. Ships passing through the night on the world wide web ocean.

IX. The Hermit || XI. Justice

A neighbor of a neighbor, though she hadn’t seen him around much. Does he keep to himself? Why the mask?

Cockroach & Serica

A riot of a man, able to make her laugh to hysterics at their first meeting. Supposedly 32 years old, supposedly unable to bath for fear of chemicals, supposedly with child with a man he had just met. Willing to have himself come off as incredibly unreasonable in public. Despite all this, clearly intelligent, clearly possessed a mind that had a voracious appetite for information and was wonderful to bounce theories on. An asset, despite it all.

( “I’m Serica by the way!” )

[…]

“They gave me the name Cockroach. Fucking COCKROACH Ser. What kinda joke is this shit?”

“I have a dumb fucking gift and Cockroach might as well be my real name since I doubt I’ll ever hear my original one ever again.”

Roach & Riccy

Slippery in every way, but not so unreasonable as he seemed. Logic was a great way to combat him, and any answer often had to be weaseled with either heavy theorizing (her specialty) or with a tango with some off the cuff roleplaying (decidedly not her specialty). She wouldn’t be so cocky to say that he changed his habits for her but… she thinks she had a hand in convincing him. He really wasn’t so bad, if you gave him a chance, and he’d surprised her more than once with acts of care and thoughtfulness.

Dee & ██

A friend for sure, and one who seemed to have a genuine loyalty. No qualms at seeing her drop a stun gun in front of him, no reservations when she admitted tentatively that she slept with a knife, no judgements when she casually brought up murder once more. Morals in the traditional sense didn’t seem to shackle him, which was very convenient to incorporating him into her tentative plans. 26, not 32. A New Yorker, as well though rather than any borough, his car was his home. Given his life he had become a stranger to hugs, to positive affection, but once he had a taste he was hungry for more. For all his mock lovers and public swooning, he was dense to actual subtle flirting.

( “My middle name. Aka, no risk of harming me if a faelien hears it. ██.” )

“I don’t have a middle name. I’d tell you if I did, swear. You can call me Dee though. It’s a part of my first name and you already know the first letter of it when I fucked up that one time. So Dee is a pretty good substitute then, yeah?”

Deacon & ███

Incredibly cute. A true newcomer to being hit on, to being told he’s handsome, to being kissed, to being in a relationship. A strong backbone even as she herself wavered in the days leading up to the decisive moment. Determined, stating possibilities as if they were facts and refusing to acknowledge her agonizing over the worst case scenario. Through everything, an unwavering support, a hand on her back, a shoulder to lean on. A good singer of lullabies, in her opinion.

( “███. My name is ███.” )

“Deacon.”

Deacon Yamamoto & ███ ██ █

Did not hold himself in the same concern he showed her. Makes a fuss in the public chat about the wrongs done to him but brushes off the severity when questioned by his own girlfriend. Still a liar, still a master of faking a smile. 

( “I won’t remember much but i’ll know your name, your, that you helped me so much in escaping that, that you mean the World to me–” she’s just babbling “I probably will believe myself if, if I actually try to find your information or maybe your drivers license– maybe if I put you in as a missing person or– But oh no will you believe me? What if I just show up at your car and you just think I’m a scam artist or–” )

“My license plate is HGO789. Deacon Yamamoto. I’ll believe you. I’ll always believe you.”

( “…█. My last name is… █.” )

███ ██ █

There once was a man upon whom was foisted a change. Upon his rise to a breathing dream, he was stripped of his taste and stripped of subsequent limits. Immune not only to the aches of poison but the salve of saccharin, the burn of capsaicin. To match with his steel stomach was his mercurial tongue, not gifted but cultivated carefully. Silvery and poisonous with every other word, it was at the command of a mind that paralleled in fluidity. It was as if he was a maestro, and his instrument of choice was a dictionary, phrases and scenarios slung with such rapidity that all who listened were on guard for constant whiplash.

So, it meant something when words became actions.

Anyone can say anything. He especially was able to say anything, a master class perjurer of the highest degree. The sun was about to peek through the sky at any moment, he was a Staten Island woman in an unhappy marriage trying to hook up her hair dresser with her son, he was fine, he was going to be okay, he was going to get out of here–

…

There is a difference, between telling someone that you will take consideration for the situation, and spending precious currency to fit yourself with a weapon.

There is a difference, between telling someone that you will help them, protect them, and taking the extra mile to pull down the mattress of a woman who’s waking hell of a gift would not let her climb up the steps otherwise.

There is a difference, between telling someone that you want them to live and helping them plan and execute the death of another person.

There is a difference, between telling someone that you want to live and…

…

(She was failing miserably in this task).

…

No one who looked at his body, at the stagnant ichor dripping out of his head, could understand the potential for warmth like she would. His fingers combing through her hair, pulling out loose tangles and tucking locks behind her ear so she could look at him unfettered. A grin, not sharp and pulled taught, but gently reassuring, murmuring soothing phrases to ease her anxious hands. Irises, bright not with the promise of information to unravel but with unbridled emotion that made his eyes crinkle, a devoted gaze meant for one.

One person, who stood here alone.

“And it’s not like I need it, yanno? I kinda wasted my life away before all of this. Not sure if I want it back.”

"I won’t die. Not yet at least. I have some things that need getting done." 

“I mean I’m not gonna let myself die after I break a leg like some racehorse. I wanna be useful, not a damn trigger happy martyr. ” He had snorted. “I’ll still make a valiant effort to get out of here Rics. But if it comes down to me and you? Well.” He had shrugged. “As a consolation prize I will say, you do make me wanna become someone worth living again.”

"I was impliiiied my dear, of course I’m making it out of here with you. What would the point be otherwise. I was trying to make it seem all badass and broody, adding a technicality to it all would’ve been underwhelming.”

“You’re going to be stuck with me until the end of times.”

“You’re getting out of- we’re getting out of here. You were wonderful.”

“Yes I know. I will. I’m going to get out. With you.”

“Of course, █. We can live a life worth living together out there.”

“It’s going to be alright █.”

“I love you █, please. Trust me, things are gonna be fine.”

“One day at a time.”

One day at a time, she had repeated.

One day at a time, she repeats, staring at his face, flesh frozen in the way that only a cadaver could. She’d never forget the first time she had touched a dead body, and was forced to confront the jarring dissonance, the coldness, the stiffness, the pallor of the skin that had been warm, soft, pliable, just hours before. Only a child, forced to confront the concept of lives ending for the first time. Since then she had seen more than her fair share, from work, from this place, before her very eyes.

Joints creak and echo through her body as she moves, finally. To fold her knees under herself, sit at his side, hand hovering indefinitely, torn between not having to face that final moment of confirmation and wanting to just hold him once more. Before she would have to be torn from him for hours, before they returned from a useless trial and his body would be gone, before she’d have to trudge to their caravan, who’s emptiness would threaten to collapse on her.

“There is nothing worse than not knowing.”

( “No, there’s nothing worse than not living.” )

[rosies-batim-blog]

Android Henry Chat

This is the chat that outlined most of the ideas for the Android Henry AU and while a number of little details have stayed the same, a lot of them have also been changed.

If you want to know what’s changed, what’s stayed the same, or want to see a particular scene/idea drawn up, let me know!!!

Rose-cut Strawberry: I know this channel was probably more for RP crossovers, and I don't know much about the game Connorbot came from, but this idea for an AU of some form is really appealing to me.

http://doberart.tumblr.com/post/176386160693/this-was-the-first-idea-that-came-to-mind-for-a

https://amazingaliah.tumblr.com/post/178072662434/just-a-little-batim-and-dbh-crossover

I really like the questioning of what makes someone "human" in stories with Cyborgs or Androids. Best examples, all Megaman comics/manga and the many versions of the Cyborg 009 series Even if we don't play with this as an RP, can we play with it as an AU?? Henry being and Android, but still being the Creator for the Toons?

Adopt-A-Fusion: that would be fun

Rose-cut Strawberry: Yeah, I want to talk more about this (and learn a bit more about the Detroit Androids in the process) so can we talk about it?

Adopt-A-Fusion: maybe after work or tomorrow, gotta lotta other stuff to juggle atm

Rose-cut Strawberry: kk @anyone I know Mango finds this idea interesting, anyone else?

���'s The Heart: I like it!

Rose-cut Strawberry: I still wanna brainstorm this but I Mango isn't on yet and I don't know enough about Cyberlife Androids to start by myself.

❤'s The Heart: Yeah same ^^;

Rose-cut Strawberry: I read the wiki article for Cyberlife, but it mostly talked about the company. Holy shit, Conner can die a lot in his game. And for a lot of different reasons I have no words for that.

❤'s The Heart: Well then

Rose-cut Strawberry: I’m reading the wiki and holy shit can he die a lot. There are, like, four different ways he can die in just the first chapter

Adopt-A-Fusion: cyberlife androids are basically walking talking amazon alexas.  i recommend watching gameplay of the game to do research, jacksepticeye had a great run

❤'s The Heart: I keep meaning to ^^;

Rose-cut Strawberry: One thing I want to see is Henry completely missing the social/emotional cue for something and needing to have it explained to him.

❤'s The Heart: You just described me and that sounds adorable

Rose-cut Strawberry: For one idea for this; Henry being a Deviant and having to leave the country to escape being deactivated as why he left the studio. Like, possibly Joey hiring/commissioning him from Cyberlife as an extra animator.  Which is actually the starting point of the studio's financial problems, but Joey had thought the amount he could get Henry to work would make up for the amount of money spent to get him.

Adopt-A-Fusion: hhhhhyes

❤'s The Heart: PRECIOUS ROBOT MAN

Rose-cut Strawberry: But then he finds out Henry can actually be creative and decided he can exploit that since Henry can't actually be treated as a 'human' in terms of the legal jargon at the time.

❤'s The Heart: D: poor boy

Rose-cut Strawberry: But then Henry starts Deviating from his original programming limits (which made him 'friendly' but stunted in terms of interacting with his co-workers, good at running animation programs, and in possession of rather generic animation skills of his own) such as developing deeper connections with the humans in the studio, and even coming to understand that Joey is using him.  But, as an Android, there isn't really anything he can do.  Until he reaches the point where he does something that flys in the face of his programming.

❤'s The Heart: :0!! I LOVE THIS!!!

Rose-cut Strawberry: One of the things Androids aren't supposed to be able to do (generally) is fight or use weapons, so I want to say a fight of some kind happens and instead of sitting back and doing nothing, Henry ends up getting involved.

Adopt-A-Fusion: Henry being a custom made Android

❤'s The Heart: If conspiracy theorist Shawn was in this AU he would think Henry was human. He acts like everyone else is making crazy theories for once  What would that entail?

Rose-cut Strawberry: No, everyone is told from that start that Henry's an Android. The thing on his temple would make it kind of obvious. Shawn would be trying to figure out why Joey wanted and Android.

Adopt-A-Fusion: consider Henry being sort of a prototype for a speciality-type android, meaning a higher chance of programming errors and a greater chance of deviancy

Rose-cut Strawberry: Oooo~ I like that idea

❤'s The Heart: I still find the idea funny. Maybe Shawn was out sick on Henry's first day. He thinks Henry is just another employee

Rose-cut Strawberry: Then he spots the glowing circle on Henry's temple and is like "Holy shit"

Adopt-A-Fusion: and he's told "oh, we got a new Android" and he just starts theorizing that everyone but Henry is an android in disguise

Rose-cut Strawberry: pfft  Or "Drew is gonna replace us all with Androids!"

❤'s The Heart: Half of what's funny about him is he's oblivious as fuck. He doesn't notice for months  After ages of theorizing, he's talking to Henry about it and Henry points it out Shawn becoming really good friends with Henry while he thinks he's a human, or at least he considers them good friends, even if Henry's programming doesn't exactly allow him to make connections to the employees just yet

Rose-cut Strawberry: “What are you talking about Mr Flynn? I've always been an Android."

Adopt-A-Fusion: awwwwww yes

Rose-cut Strawberry: He's just "Is there anything else I can help you with Mr Flynn?"

❤'s The Heart: Shawn rambles at him all the time. He just thinks Henry is a good listener

Rose-cut Strawberry: Though, if we go with the "No one notices he's an Android" route, it could be that Shawn finds out Henry isn't getting paid and hunts down Grant to find out why their best animator isn't getting his damn checks. And then that's how everyone finds out.

❤'s The Heart: Shawn helps him escape when he has to leave the studio

Rose-cut Strawberry: YES  The fight, Henry gets involved when someone breaks into the studio while he and a few other employees are staying late.

❤'s The Heart: Where does Henry go when the studio is closed?

Rose-cut Strawberry: Oh, erm... Let's just go with Joey making a living space in the studio. (I don't think he'd pay to get Henry an apartment, and there was nothing in the Wiki's about Androids having their own places to live) anyways, someone breaks in and turns out to be pretty violent when he finds out he's not alone.

❤'s The Heart: :0

Rose-cut Strawberry: Henry gets dismissed because his uniform marks him as an android and therefore a non-threat, but Grant (the guy running financing and probably in possession of the keys to the safe), Shawn, and Norman are a very different story. So the fight breaks out, and the thief is armed which makes him dangerous

❤'s The Heart: Shawn gets hit pretty bad and something just snaps and Henry attacks the thief

Rose-cut Strawberry: Henry lashes out with a 2x4 and conks the guy upside the head. HARD

❤'s The Heart: Later Shawn jokes around saying how good a friend Henry is if he'd override his programming for him

Rose-cut Strawberry: Probably But, defence of another human or no, Henry still deviated from his programming and attacked a human. But it gets convoluted from there. On one hand; he saved someone's life On another; He attacked someone

❤'s The Heart: Poor guy :(

Rose-cut Strawberry: And he panics a little (again, not something an Android should be capable of) because Deviating can lead to Deactivation

❤'s The Heart: Save him

Rose-cut Strawberry: That's kind of what Shawn and the others end up doing. They help get things in order for Henry to leave the country for one with less stringent laws towards Androids.

❤'s The Heart: Comfort the robot

Rose-cut Strawberry: Joey only finds out what happened after the fact. By then Joey has noticed that Henry was becoming a Deviant but never did anything about it because he was getting even better work out of him. And he is not happy when he finds out Henry has left. But he would have been just as displeased if Cyberlife had Deactivated him. Joey gets curious about just how human Androids are becoming, and that leads into the magic stuff (but possibly more cyberpunk than in-game)

❤'s The Heart: Ooo

Rose-cut Strawberry: Henry flounders for a good long while, since he's so used to having orders and jobs, and isn't really sure of what to do with himself. I supposed this could be when Linda shows up for sure, who can be a graphic designer looking for help. She doesn't expect an Android to be one of her applicants but finds he's actually pretty good and gives him the job.

❤'s The Heart: Aww :)

Rose-cut Strawberry: Fast forward 20 to 30 years and Henry gets the Letter (and yes, it needs to be capitalized)

❤'s The Heart: Of course, it does!   It's important

Rose-cut Strawberry: Henry is feeling safe enough to come back (laws and policies have changed), so he decides he's overdue for a visit to his friends if they still live near the studio. The studio had closed down due to debt and "mysterious circumstances" but he thought that at least a few of his old coworkers probably still lived in the area.  He has no idea what he's walking into

❤'s The Heart: D’:

Rose-cut Strawberry: MANGO WHAT DO YOU THINK SO FAR?

❤'s The Heart: this is so goooood

Adopt-A-Fusion: I LOVE IT

Rose-cut Strawberry: YAY I fully admit that I picture the aesthetic being a lot like Doberart's Rise of Bendy AU f*ck, I don't know how to continue Seriously I don't know how to continue, someone give me an idea. Please

❤'s The Heart: Sorry ^^;

Rose-cut Strawberry: Here's a thought, how do the rest of the staff feel about their Android coworker? What do you guys think?

Adopt-A-Fusion: some people are probably indifferent, at least one person is a dick about it

Rose-cut Strawberry: Possibly two of them. I want Bertrum to be one, he just very set in treating Henry as a machine or an appliance. Wally kinda likes him, because if he asks Henry is willing to help him out with stuff.

❤'s The Heart: Ooo yes

Rose-cut Strawberry: What about others, we already decided Shawn likes him

❤'s The Heart: Sammy is indifferent

Rose-cut Strawberry: Yes, he doesn't mind the Android, but he doesn't hate him either. He just focusses on his work Pre-Deviant; there are a lot of coworkers who are indifferent because they find androids unsettling but have no real reason to hate them.

❤'s The Heart: Wally is one of those at first, but Henry grows on him

Rose-cut Strawberry: Like I said, he comes to like him because Henry is always willing to help when asked. What about Susie? Or Thomas? Or even Norman?

❤'s The Heart: Thomas is indifferent. He's indifferent about everyone Norman likes him

Rose-cut Strawberry: Any ideas for Susie?

Adopt-A-Fusion: I don’t know :(

Rose-cut Strawberry: Norman thinks he's a nice guy, even if he's an android. They chat with each other at times. Thomas sees him as a machine, but he generally likes machines, so he treats Henry about the same as he treats normal people. But he also makes sure the studio is stocked with stuff to help Henry if he gets injured or needs to refill his "blood" levels (they have a term for the special blue fluids used for android blood but I can't remember it right now) Susie... Let's go with her mostly avoiding Henry.

❤'s The Heart: She's a bit creeped out

Rose-cut Strawberry: Like the fact that he doesn't emote as much as a human bothers her, but she doesn't really hate him or be rude. So she tries to just avoid him. Which is fairly easy since they work in different sections of the studio. Grant has a stronger dislike of Henry, but it's not as much about him being an android and more because of how much Joey ended up using of the studio's budget to buy him. But the way he treats is more Begrudging then honestly hostile.  Eventually, he appreciates having Henry around when the android offers to help him with paperwork (computer brains are helpful for long and complicated math equations) Should Allison be working at the studio at this time? Not as Alice's Voice Actor but maybe just another female voice actor at the studio?

❤'s The Heart: Sure, why not I love the stuff with Grant

Rose-cut Strawberry: Allison is one of those people who finds androids fascinating. Like, with how close they can emulate humans She goes out of her way to talk to Henry, sometimes throwing out non-sequesters just to see how he'll respond. She supports the idea of Androids getting more rights but is quiet about it since it's not a very popular opinion.

❤'s The Heart: Shawn asks him questions all the time about being an android

Rose-cut Strawberry: A lot of them boil down to "I don't really know, that's just how I was programmed" or "You would have to check Cyberlife's policies for that." A lot of employees are of the opinion that Henry is a good robo-boy. A lot of them are mostly indifferent towards Android, but Henry's programming results in him growing on them after a while.

❤'s The Heart: More than half of the employees: PROTECC

Rose-cut Strawberry: I don't know about more than half, but definitely a good percentage of them don't want bad things to happen to their android

❤'s The Heart; A good percentage of the employees: PROTECC

Rose-cut Strawberry: I want to say Henry gets hurt at least once in the studio, enough to end up spooking the others pretty bad.

❤'s The Heart: YES

Rose-cut Strawberry: @Adopt-A-Fusion We need a scenario for an injured Android Animator, and ideas?

Adopt-A-Fusion: nope

Rose-cut Strawberry: drat.

❤'s The Heart: An accident of some sort

Rose-cut Strawberry: Yes, but the question is what? There's no ink machine at that time, otherwise, I'd say something involving the equipment for it.

❤'s The Heart: a pipe exploding maybe Not like an ink pipe, just a regular one

Rose-cut Strawberry: Or a falling project- no, tech's different the projectors would be too light to do any serious damage. Wait, Bertrum's here He uses major equipment for the theme park stuff. (he has too)

❤'s The Heart: Yes!

Rose-cut Strawberry: So maybe something comes loose when Henry is dragged off to help with something and hits him. It doesn't do enough to "kill" him, but it ends up doing some pretty heavy damage. Which takes another huge chunk from the Studio's finances, but everyone who actually likes Henry is too worried about the android's condition to be too bothered by it. Grant is worried too, but also rips into Bertrum because "What if that had been a human employee?! It would have killed them! Do you have any idea what a lawsuit would have done to us?!"

❤'s The Heart: Poor Hen needs repairs

Rose-cut Strawberry: That's where Lacie becomes really helpful (previously she treated Henry like he was a person who just had trouble connecting with people), she knows all the technical jargon to get the shit that’s needed to fix Henry and what to do to get him stable while they waited for it to be ready.

❤'s The Heart: :D

Rose-cut Strawberry: A lot of the employees tear into Bertrum, since the accident was due to him lapsing in safety protocols, which means anyone who had been at the sight had been at risk of being injured. And androids could take more damage then a human, so if Henry was that injured, it would have been outright lethal to a human. Can we talk more about the relationship between Joey and Android Hen

❤'s The Heart: YES PLEASE

Rose-cut Strawberry: I don't really know where to go with that, other than needing the relationship between the two to seem well enough (to Henry) to justify Joey writing "Your old pal" in the letter, while still leaving him scummy enough to justify disliking him. Henry didn't become a deviant because he was being abused by his... Owner (i guess), he became one because he was ready and willing to protect his coworkers who had (probably) been slowly affecting his programming by just treating him like a person and encouraging him to be more like them.

❤'s The Heart: :)

Rose-cut Strawberry: I need an idea for shit that would seem nice to an Android, but be seen as really deceitful/scummy to a human.

❤'s The Heart: I suppose being given a place to live, but it's just like a closet or something

Rose-cut Strawberry: A former storage room in the studio. (so literally never leaves the studio)

❤'s The Heart: Yep Poor guy :(

Rose-cut Strawberry: But he doesn't know any better, because he's an Android that's basically fresh out of the shop and Joey is the one who purchased him and is, therefore, his "owner" He's literally a "possession" in the eyes of the law. But Joey doesn't really treat him badly.  Like how people can get attached to their stuff (like Roombas) and treat them like little people while still seeing them as a possession. Henry gets treated fairly well, but not really as a person.

❤'s The Heart: More like a cute little pet, or a child

Rose-cut Strawberry: Pretty much, yeah.

❤'s The Heart: The fact that the employees treat him differently is a bit confusing to him

Rose-cut Strawberry: He is very confused by it. But does his best to keep working.

❤'s The Heart: Eventually, he starts to realize he likes how the employees treat him more

Rose-cut Strawberry: But just the fact that he was making those choices showed that he was starting to deviate. Android's aren't supposed to feel anything. 'Pain' was the only exception since it warned if something in their systems was damaged, but even then it only showed up if they actually were hurt.

❤'s The Heart: Hence why it takes him a while to start feeling that way To start feeling at all

Rose-cut Strawberry: It starts with him doing something because he wants to. A very minor thing that Joey never really noticed or paid attention to at the time. Like Ooo~ Like putting a Cutout in the corner he works in. He has no real reason for it. He just wants it there. Joey thinks he's using it as a spare reference, or to make his desk seem more comfortable to other workers. But no. It's there because he decided he wanted it there.

❤'s The Heart: PRECIOUS BOY

Rose-cut Strawberry: He amasses a collection of knickknacks from around the studio. A broken/improperly made clock he decided to fix

❤'s The Heart: A magpie robot

Rose-cut Strawberry: A plush toy that was accidentally made the wrong color (or a prototype/concept toy Shawn may have given him) Yes, he basically starts out as a Magpie Those are the signs of him becoming Deviant. But they're so... not noticeable

❤'s The Heart: Hhhh i need to watch this gaaame

Rose-cut Strawberry: No one even realizes it's happening

❤'s The Heart: Not even Henry

Rose-cut Strawberry: Henry has at least one toy of Bendy, Boris, and Alice; A trio of Butcher Gang toys (since Joey scrapped the idea of making official toys of them); a couple posters where the images and colors were offset during printing; the clock... OH, the others notice the slight magpie-ness, but they think it's something closer to "Make sure things are kept for the future" Shawn is the only one thinking he's becoming Deviant. It's the only time he's ever been right. He brings in a fold-up bookcase thingy so that Henry can display some of his knickknacks. Shawn gets it as a present during Christmas or something.

❤'s The Heart: Aww :') Consider: the employees treating Henry's first day as his birthday

Rose-cut Strawberry: No, they ask him what day he was actually activated and that becomes his birthday.

❤'s The Heart: Yes!! Presents for the boy!! Shawn is the first one to see him smile and he teases him about how cute it is for a week

Rose-cut Strawberry: No one who wants to get him a gift is sure what to give, and Shawn ends up 'leading the charge' so to speak. Henry just sort of blinks at the teasing at first because he doesn't really know what embarrassment is.

❤'s The Heart: He gets lots of little knickknacks

Rose-cut Strawberry: Weird thought for Shawn to ask when he sees Henry drinking Thirium (the blue stuff that's basically blood for androids) Shawn; "So... Do androids count as some kind of weird-arse techno vampires then? I mean, technically speaking, you're basically drinking your own blood." Henry; "I... Am not sure how to answer that. This is just how I top off the levels of Thirium in my body."

❤'s The Heart: Their friendship is the greatest it makes me so happy QuQ

Rose-cut Strawberry: It's kinda like Shawn and Toon!Wally's tbh Only without the psycho-vivisecting Joey.

❤'s The Heart: Yes!

Rose-cut Strawberry: Wally asks questions like to. Once he gets used to Henry, he's actually really curious about how he works. Wally; "So, since yer blood is blue, does that mean you if could blush, yer face would turn blue-tinted?" Henry; "Possibly. Though, as an Android, there really isn't anything in my systems that would cause an irregularity in my thirium levels that would equate to a 'blush', as you call it.." (Sorry androids seem to be science-sy and formal in their speech/answers so I keep having to take a moment to think about how, exactly, Henry would respond.) For the longest time, Henry doesn't understand sarcasm. He answers everything with complete seriousness.

❤'s The Heart: I love how he talks It's adorable

Rose-cut Strawberry: Ooo~ Idea He learns how to recognize and understand sarcasm from Sammy. Just by listening and watching him.

❤'s The Heart: Yes absolutely He never quite understands it entirely

Rose-cut Strawberry: Oh, there's an idea, Android Henry is one of those non-Cyberlife Androids. Which means he was/could have meant that he was more likely to deviate than any Cyberlife Androids.

❤'s The Heart: Oh neat Joey wanted an android, Grant said they couldn't afford it, their compromise was getting a knock-off

Rose-cut Strawberry: But it still took a big chunk out of their budget.

Goof Noir: I JUST READ THIS I LOVE IT SM

Rose-cut Strawberry: Thank you!

❤'s The Heart: :D :D

Rose-cut Strawberry: Deep breath  The more I think about it, the more the idea of Henry being an Android could actually fit the game. Like, in the game, Henry seems to always need to have a mission/task of some kind as he goes. And he keeps count of all the tasks given to him (like the gears and ink globs) And he has little notifications when he completes tasks, even without Alice talking to him. I know those are all just normal game mechanics, but they could be incorporated into an Android really easily.

❤'s The Heart: :0 I love it

Rose-cut Strawberry: And Henry being able to "see" missing machinery/piping/etc fits for that kind of 'construction" stuff appearing. Pre/Reconstruction. that's what I meant. More thoughts on Android Henry, it actually causes a certain amount of sense with Henry's "deaths" in game. All of the magic is built around humans, which he is not. So while he is affected by the ink it can't actually get hold over him like everyone else.

❤'s The Heart: Ooooo

Rose-cut Strawberry: The ink is like "What is this?? Is it person?? Is it thing?? Should I be trying to take this or should I be making shit like it???" (BC the ink seems to be able to actually create inanimate things/non-organic things just fine) Like the pipes and the radios and such. It only seems to have trouble making "living" things. And Android Henry, by the definition given by Joey, was not a "Living" thing.

❤'s The Heart: :0

Rose-cut Strawberry: Well, he's not made with flesh and blood; he doesn't have the organs found in humans and animals; he doesn't really need to sleep or eat (even if he goes into rest/sleep mode every once in a while to save power/kill time); he doesn't have any bone or cartilage in his make-up He's about as far from the make-up of his coworkers and the toons as one can get. Even if his appearance is hardly different from others. I kinda want to talk more about Android Henry, or even start writing for it, but I don't know what to talk about/start with...

❤'s The Heart: Same :( I wish I had ideas

Adopt-A-Fusion: id contribute but brain doesn’t want to dbh

Rose-cut Strawberry: It doesn't have to be strictly dbh, it could just be ideas for how the story would start out. I'd say the story would start after Henry got the actual letter, with the past stuff being done as flashbacks or stories. I feel like it would be best for Henry to have some kind of companion for this story... I would love to talk more about the Android Henry AU, but I have no idea what to do about it.

❤'s The Heart: Joey just... Shopping around for bootlegs is amazing

Rose-cut Strawberry: Hey guys, remember Android Henry? I DREW HIM

❤'s The Heart: I’VE MISSED HIM

Adopt-A-Fusion: Good boy

Rose-cut Strawberry: He's wearing his android jacket, but he ripped off/removed all the decals and such from it.

❤'s The Heart: I wish we could talk more about his au but I don't know much about dbh (other than apparently people hate it now??)  and I don't have any ideas

Rose-cut Strawberry: So? Who cares if we don't know shit about it, doesn't mean we can't play in the sandbox anyway. Besides, that's what reading Wikipedia synopsizes is for.

❤'s The Heart: Oh that's very true

Rose-cut Strawberry: Hnnnn... I ideas for stuff to draw for Android Henry, anyone have any? @here  Any have suggestions? I really want to make more art to show this AU off.

❤'s The Heart: I’m sorry I don't ^^; Sorry I meant to reply to this yesterday

Rose-cut Strawberry: Is okay. If something occurs to you, feel free to mention it.

[housmania]

In Defense of TJLC

A response to this Slate podcast and to general misconceptions.

Hello! Call me soe. I like cats, BBC Sherlock, and friendly online communities. I hope you do too.

I also blog about TJLC. So, when a Slate podcast came out this week portraying TJLCers in a jarringly negative light, I was dismayed. What I heard was not the community I know.

This post’s aim is to tell the other side of the story. I’m writing both for people who support TJLC and were shocked to hear of the podcast, and for people outside TJLC whose initial impressions have been skewed by the podcast or other outside sources.

I’ll address four of the most common arguments against TJLC through the lens of the argument presented by Willa Paskin, the podcast’s creator:

TJLC, as a theory, is “far-fetched” and merits no serious consideration.

TJLCers are dogmatic, ideological, and close-minded.

TJLCers have hated on people outside of TJLC to an unusual and appalling extent.

TJLC has brought more harm into the world than good.

I intend to refute these points. In the process, I hope to represent your run-of-the-mill TJLCer: not a hateful extremist, but rather someone who supports a theory, enjoys discussing it, and is happy to let those who don’t live their happy lives.

It also means adhering to the standards of a good TJLC meta writer: going through the podcast thoroughly, addressing Ms. Paskin’s correct insights as well as her failings; reading and acknowledging critics and downright opponents; citing all sources; and remaining civil and open-minded. I wish Ms. Paskin had afforded us these privileges.

I genuinely believe that Ms. Paskin meant well. Nonetheless, the biases of her sources, combined with several misconceptions and imperfect research, result in a piece that portrays TJLC inaccurately.

To understand what the podcast got wrong, we first need to cover:

What is TJLC?

TJLC is the theory that the characters John Watson and Sherlock Holmes will end up in a canonical romantic relationship on the BBC show Sherlock. People who support this theory are called TJLCers. TJLCers write analyses of the show, the Sherlock Holmes stories, and numerous other sources known as “metas”.

TJLC is short for “The Johnlock Conspiracy.” I must immediately clarify that this name is a joke. It began humorously and is always, always used tongue-in-cheek. Keep this in mind: Many misconceptions about TJLC arise from the fact that we take very few things seriously, as I’ll discuss later.

What isn’t TJLC?

TJLC is not the same as Johnlock.

Johnlock refers just to shipping John/Sherlock—thinking they’d make a cute romantic couple, without necessarily having any expectation of that happening on the show.

More fundamentally: Johnlock is about creating transformative, creative content. It’s about making something new. In essence, it’s fiction.

TJLC is about analyzing evidence that’s already there. It’s nonfiction.

Ms. Paskin frequently blurs the lines between the two and mourns TJLC for not having the same level of creativity. She explains, for example, that fandom reads into tiny elements of a show to create a transformative space. But TJLC is not transformative. That’s Johnlock.

Neither is TJLC based on wanting the show to “bend to [our] desires”—i.e., Johnlock shippers projecting wishful thinking onto the show. I’m happy to serve as a counterexample for that! I actually didn’t ship Johnlock at all before discovering TJLC. Rather, I found the theories plausible and loved the idea that a show centered around deduction and analysis could also be the subject of deduction and analysis.

Of course, people who already ship Johnlock are more likely to be attracted to TJLC. But the basis of TJLC is not to “see in the story that you have, the story that you want” (46:40)—that’s shipping—but to analyze the story you already have.

I cannot stress this enough: TJLC is analysis, NOT shipping.

TJLC and the “Great Game”

As the podcast explains, TJLCers aren’t the first analyze Sherlock Holmes. Fans of the originals have been analyzing the stories since the 1880s. These early theorists actually gave the name to two kinds of fan analysis: Watsonian and Doylist.

Watsonian fans played the “Great Game,” treating the stories like a real world. Doyle didn’t exist, so every detail had to be explained in-universe rather than attributed to author techniques or error. They’re closer to your modern shippers, creating headcanons to fill in gaps.

Doylist fans acknowledged that (no duh) Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was a real person, and therefore analyzed the stories as works of literature. They are essentially literary analysts and critics, the kind that wind up on JSTOR.

TJLCers are Doylists. Obviously, someone made the show. That means we analyze character arcs, cinematographic techniques, and rhetorical devices in the dialogue like a researcher in film studies or literature would.

Ms. Paskin warns that in the Watsonian Great Game, people kept “tongues planted firmly in cheek; TJLCers, not so much.” And yet, that’s the point! You wouldn’t expect a literary analyst to go “lol maybe The Great Gatsby criticizes society but like who knows” any more than you’d want Watsonians to really believe that because John Watson’s wife called him James, his middle name is Hamish (Scottish for James) rather than acknowledging that Doyle just forgot. A ridiculous premise entails a humorous approach. A reasonable premise entails a rational one.

TJLC isn’t quite the same as highbrow analysis, however, for three reasons:

First, we use our analyses to speculate about the future of the show. We don’t have the privilege of analyzing a complete work. In that sense, the closest analogy I can think of is that of political analysts: examining what’s already been said and done to predict what will happen next.

Second, we evolved from a fandom space. That means that the barrier between TJLC and Johnlock, between nonfiction analysis and creative fiction, is never as solid as it would be in academia. Furthermore, a significant number of TJLC meta writers also engage in fictional fanworks, making it more difficult to distinguish where hard analysis ends and transformative work begins. I’ll go into some of the nuances of meta in a bit.

Third, the people in TJLC are generally queer women and often young. And we can’t discuss biases against fandom and TJLC without acknowledging sexism and homophobia. When a film critic writes a theory, it’s deep; when we do, it’s ludicrous. Paradise Lost is fanfiction just as much as AO3, but only the former is treated as legitimate literature. Theories about straight couples are plausible; ones about queer ones are suddenly delusional or fetishization. Adult fanboys are mature content creators; fangirls are hysterical.

Conversations about the implicit biases in media depictions of fandom aren’t my focus here. Nonetheless, it’s crucial to bear in mind that highbrow criticisms of fandom that focus only on its ill effects and ignore the complexity, depth, community bonding, and social change that fandom (analytical and transformative) creates often denigrate fans as immature and delusional without considering whether that accurately represents even a significant minority of a fandom. It’s a bias that we should all keep in check.

As progressive as Ms. Paskin may be, the podcast also falls into this trap. In particular, she emphasizes sensationalist depictions of TJLC theories—highlighting far-fetched theories and glossing over deeper points—and the contemptible actions of very few TJLCers while glossing over the far more plausible mainstream theories and kindness of nearly all TJLCers. As a result, we naturally look hysterical and delusional.

So let’s tackle each of those issues: TJLC as a theory and the behavior of the TJLC community.

TJLC as a Theory

If you don’t support TJLC, I’m not asking you to be convinced by a few paragraphs. The aim here is simply to explain why TJLC is plausible.

Ms. Paskin asserts that (1) TJLC is completely unsupported by the original Sherlock Holmes stories, (2) that romantic coding in the show is simply “a knowing wink,” and that (3) TJLC “is based on an unfalsifiable premise: that the creators are lying to you.” In fact:

1. TJLC is supported by the original stories.

The Sherlock Holmes canon contains significant, documented evidence of queer coding similar to other works of the same time period. It’s also reasonable to theorize, based on biographical data, that Doyle himself was bisexual.

The extent to which the stories were deliberately coded is a matter of debate. Yet Ms. Paskin simply asserts that “Conan Doyle wasn’t trying to create a homosexual subtext when he wrote the characters, but he did write a deep and committed friendship.” As @one-thousand-splendid-stars put it:

How on earth can anyone possibly know if the homoeroticism was intentional or not, when ACD could’ve been persecuted for admitting it, or making it more obvious?

Ms. Paskin’s assertion, which does not acknowledge any evidence to the contrary, again conflates Johnlock shippers with TJLCers. Johnlock is about transformative fiction; TJLC is about nonfiction analysis.

Ms. Paskin also suggests that TJLCers are “queering” the text, except that queering generally implies a queer theory approach to something that wasn’t queer to begin with. Our whole objective is to reveal that the text was originally queer.

2. The basis for TJLC is the show itself.

Ms. Paskin supposes that TJLC is “is based on an unfalsifiable premise: that the creators are lying to you.”

But TJLC isn’t based on anything the creators have said. It’s based on analysis of the show itself.

There’s a whole lot of analysis; good summaries are here and here. Essentially, we argue that given the level of coding on the show, the most probable outcome is that there is deliberate subtext meant to foreshadow that John and Sherlock will become a couple. Elements like Sherlock being indifferent to women, yet “romantic entanglement would complete [him] as a human being” suggest that the subtext isn’t just a “knowing wink,” as Ms. Paskin asserts: it would be poor writing (not to mention queerbaiting) to complete such a setup and not follow through.

3. The creators

Ms. Paskin finds it alarming that TJLCers believe Moffat and Gatiss are deliberately lying when they say that Johnlock will not become canon.

And normally, I would agree! Except that Moffat and Gatiss have a long history of lying through their teeth about plot developments. For example, they vehemently repeated that The Abominable Bride would be a stand-alone episode completely independent of the show, but it turned out to be a drugged Sherlock’s theorizing about Moriarty’s plan. And before Series 4, they said that Mary would become a long-running character, then killed her off in the next episode.

So it’s not a stretch to think that they could be lying about one more thing, particularly when TJLC relies on independent evidence from the show itself.

In fact, Paskin argues that TJLCers, like Watsonians playing the Great Game, base their theories on a “contradiction”: “On the one hand the author might as well not exist, but then on the other hand, this person who doesn’t exist has made this perfectly explicable logical thing.”

Except that unlike Watsonians, we do acknowledge that the creators exist. We analyze the show as a work of fiction, with narrative techniques that can be analyzed just as much as plot elements.

Furthermore, the fact that the creators lie constantly doesn’t mean we don’t pay attention to what they do say. They have large incentives to keep upcoming plot twists secret, but that doesn’t mean they can’t reveal their motivations and influences. A lawyer questioning a lying witness can still gain information from what they do say.

Take a closer example: Say I went back to 1897 and asked Bram Stoker if there’s queer coding in Dracula (which is now well-documented). He would probably respond along the lines of “I’m not a sodomite; also, what???” But he might wax poetic about homoeroticism in Walt Whitman’s poetry and mention that his charismatic but domineering idol Henry Irving was the basis for Dracula.

So no, there’s no contradiction between analyzing the show and the creators’ influences while still believing that they don’t want to reveal upcoming plot points.

The Behavior of the TJLC Community

How Theories Work

Ms. Paskin rattles off several far-fetched TJLC theories that make TJLC as a whole sound ridiculous. Furthermore, she implies that TJLC is a monolithic community with a “dogmatic” belief in all of these theories, such that criticism and discussion don’t exist.

Guess what? I’m in TJLC, and I don’t believe half the theories she mentioned. That’s because TJLC is much less uniform than its detractors would believe. Furthermore, the general level of confidence that people have in a given piece of evidence depends on its strength. In other words, the more evidence for something, the more likely that TJLCers agree on it. The less evidence for something, the more likely we are to treat it as just something cool that could turn out to be coincidence.

We can divide TJLC meta into five basic categories:

1. Foundational meta

These are well-respected analysis of character arcs, dialogue, and other clearly deliberate plot elements such as this one. Pretty much all TJLCers agree with them. These are your best-researched, most widespread meta; they form the true basis of TJLC. Here are some examples. And yet they hardly show up in Ms. Paskin’s discussion, because they don’t make TJLC sound too far-fetched.

2. Circumstantial evidence

TJLC can stand on foundational meta alone, but there’s also secondary evidence to support it. This includes the “drinks code” (the theory that beverages serve as symbols on the show, supported by subsequent creator remarks) and similar theories that can’t hold up TJLC by themselves, but do provide extra evidence and add nuance to theories about character arcs and plot development.

3. Accessory meta

These are analyses of elements that could well turn out to be coincidence due to scarce evidence. If true, they allow us to establish character arcs in greater depth, but it’s perfectly possible that any given one is coincidence. These include the theories on wallpaper and lighting that Ms. Paskin reports as though they were the pillars of TJLC. They’re theories that I read and go, “Hm, interesting; maybe.”

4. Spinoff theories

These are theories that deal with specific paths the show might take. They generally have groups of supporters within TJLC, but each spinoff theory usually only has a smaller group of supporters within the larger TJLC community.

It’s important to note that many major theories don’t have to do with Johnlock at all. Take M-theory, the idea that Mycroft and other characters are under Moriarty’s thumb, or EMP, the idea that some episodes take place in Sherlock’s mind palace. If, as Ms. Paskin asserts, TJLC is about wishful thinking and wanting Johnlock to be canon, what would be the point of these? Furthermore, if TJLC is monolithic and dogmatic, why do we constantly discuss and critique these theories in constructive discussions? I had to make a whole table of theories after Series 4 because everyone’s opinion was so different!

5. Crack theories

These are usually clearly labeled “crack” and are never meant to be taken seriously. Again, TJLC contains a lot of humor. So sometimes, we goof off and write theories like this one that are clearly ridiculous, usually with an exaggerated conspiratorial tone, to have fun in the spirit of the Watsonians. Unfortunately, some people outside TJLC think we actually take these theories seriously and accordingly treat us as crazy people. Guys… Ctrl+F “crack” first.

To summarize:

TJLC contains theories with varying levels of evidence that are treated with corresponding levels of seriousness.

TJLCers are far from dogmatic. Different people have different views, and that’s OK.

TJLC is founded on criticism and discussion (here’s an example). By disagreeing on meta, we gain better insight into the characters.

Addressing Ms. Paskin: The theories she dwells on are EMP and M-Theory (40:04 and 10:37), both spinoff theories. They do not form part of the main body of TJLC, and fans are far more flexible about that stuff because it’s not nearly as firmly supported as foundational meta. She cites a clip analyzing Mycroft’s theme in the score, which is accessory meta that could well turn out to be coincidence. (By the way, I have serious doubts about all three of these theories. And TJLC is perfectly accepting of that!)

She also talks about loudest-subtext’s meta on the 2009 BBC queer representation report, whose objective was to demonstrate that it was possible for TJLC to happen from a production/permission standpoint, not to prove that TJLC was happening on the show. In that sense, it’s closer to circumstantial evidence.

She also fears that TJLCers “try to find order and logic and reason in every detail.” Again, sane TJLCers treat less solid evidence as less likely to be true. Caveat: Some TJLCers do go overboard. But they do not represent the overwhelming, sane majority.

TJLC Culture

Confidence and Criticism

Ms. Paskin finds it alarming that many TJLCers regarded TJLC as far more well-supported, even certain, than “an opinion or a possibility” or “just one ship among many” (14:50).

And yet, in an academic setting, isn’t it normal to think that the theory you researched and support is correct? Again, we hit the boundary in how the public perceives highbrow research and fan analysis. TJLC was not “just one ship among many” because (again) it’s not a ship, it’s a theory based on research and analysis. So naturally, we had a higher level of confidence in TJLC becoming canon than a shipper with an unsupported ship would.

Ms. Paskin implies that this confidence led directly to TJLC being unable to take criticism and therefore hating on people outside the community, since “denying [TJLC] was denying the truth” (14:55). But—first off—confidence does not directly lead to thin skins. Again, we debate everything. If good meta writers couldn’t change their minds given new evidence, TJLC wouldn’t exist.

Yet even when some TJLCers were more certain about TJLC than could be reasonably expected, the overwhelming majority was perfectly nice. We can, in fact, agree to disagree with others.

But this brings us to the most painful part of the podcast:

Fandom Toxicity: The Broad Picture

The podcast, having painted TJLCers as delusional, dogmatic crusaders, goes on to argue that TJLCers hated on people outside TJLC to an unusual and deplorable amount, such that TJLC’s main effect was to increase toxicity in the Sherlock fandom.

For starters:  Yes, a few TJLCers did fit this despicable mold. I universally condemn people who went out of their way to attack people outside or inside the community. They are an insult to TJLC’s values of inclusivity and rational debate. And my heart goes out to the people who suffered as a result of them.

But guess what? All the TJLCers I’ve talked to agree with that. Because the fact is that awful people form an incredibly small minority of TJLC.

Most of the TJLCers who listened to the podcast found this to be the most insulting and painful part. They’ve reiterated time and again that the community as a whole is not a toxic place.  @artfulkindoforder put it best:

So many TJLCers were never mean to anybody.

You can think we’re unrealistic, immature, delusional—fine. But at the end of the day, the overwhelming majority of us stuck to our circles of courteous people and just had fun.

In broad terms, there were several inconsistencies between the podcast and what I found. First, the podcast attributes toxic behavior to large swathes of TJLC, when in fact it tended to be a small group of repeat offenders, many of whom would attack people inside TJLC as well as outside it. loudest-subtext, a longtime TJLC blogger, discussed this here.

Secondly, the podcast makes absolutely no mention of the hate that TJLCers—often perfectly civil ones—received, which makes it easier to paint TJLC as engaging in vicious, one-sided attack. TJLCers, especially at the beginning, received shocking quantities of anonymous hate. Like attacks on people outside TJLC, I’m sure that the attacks on TJLCers were also due to a tiny minority of toxic people. But to gloss over them entirely is to paint an incomplete and biased picture. As @one-thousand-splendid-stars put it:

I’m not going to pretend that there was never nasty behavior from TJLC, but I’m also not going to say her description of us was accurate. She presented the TJLC fandom like it was a toxic cult.... She talked about fandom bullying as though we were never on the receiving end of it, and weren’t ever ridiculed, or called stupid, or sent anon hate, or harassed. To imply that tjlcers were only dishing it out is just flat out inaccurate.

The anonymous attacks on TJLCers had several results. First, TJLC developed a culture that stresses avoiding confrontation with outsiders: leaving other shippers be, unless they seek out TJLC posts. For example, some of the first things I learned were to misspell other ship names on TJLC posts so they wouldn’t show up when people wanted content promoting that ship, and not to reblog posts from outside shippers’ blogs with TJLC-related comments. Far from attacking outsiders, the whole point is to let people who disagree with TJLC do their own thing.

Second, the vast majority of TJLCers despise anon hate because they receive it unusually often. I’ve never seen a community with so many posts reminding people never to resort to it because they’ve seen how it hurt TJLC bloggers.

Third, a handful of TJLCers who got repeated and unwarranted hate did get more combative. But when looking at their later behavior, it’s important to understand that many of them became less willing to compromise on TJLC because they’d seen toxic fans remain unwilling to compromise or debate with them. And most of the conflicts I’ve seen as a result came from anti-TJLC people coming specifically to comment on TJLCers’ posts, not from TJLCers going out of their way to fight non-TJLCers.

Specific Incidents

I didn’t want to rely on secondhand knowledge about hate to write this response. In the spirit of TJLC, I wanted to be fair and impartial. That meant looking through the blogs of people who had received hate inside and outside TJLC. So here’s what I found out:

First off, it was awful. I was looking 4-5 years back to find the worst instances of hate in the community, and I wasn’t used to it because the bloggers I interact with are universally inclusive and civil.

Ms. Paskin discussed three specific incidents on the podcast: top/bottomlock, the 2015 221BCon incident, and post-Series 4 anger.

When top/bottomlock came up, I was baffled. First off, that discussion is ancient. It’s so old that by the time I joined TJLC in late 2015, it had practically died out. More importantly, a “debate” that Ms. Paskin describes as “very specific and dogmatic fanon” was—as I’ve understood—never taken seriously. Again, TJLC is not a very serious place, and people outside it are bound to misinterpret inside jokes. 99% of TJLCers saw top/bottomlock as nothing more than fodder for crack theories, and yet Ms. Paskin’s sources on this issue—none of whom are actually in TJLC—describe it as a debate of monumental importance.

The 2015 221BCon, on the other hand, was a serious conflict. As far as I can tell, people like Emma genuinely suffered, and the fact that neutral fans received anonymous attacks is shameful. But the results of this stretched to TJLCers as well as people outside TJLC, something that the podcast conveniently neglects to mention.

The end of Series 4 disappointed people throughout the Sherlock fandom. I’m not talking about Johnlock: plot inconsistencies, weird characterizations, and plot pulled from a horror movie resulted in its lowest Rotten Tomatoes rating ever. TJLC is too small to have that kind of clout, so to say that TJLCers were the only ones disappointed is clearly inaccurate.

Ms. Paskin claims that Series 4 “seemed straighter, not gayer, than before” and yet John telling Sherlock that “romantic entanglement would complete you as a human being” is uh…pretty gay. For many TJLCers, the problem wasn’t that there wasn’t Johnlock; the problem was that the quality of the show seemed to have drastically decreased.

TJLC immediately split into two groups. One group left TJLC, believing that Moffat and Gatiss had been queerbaiting. Many of them began constructive anti-queerbaiting discussions. Unfortunately, a few took their anger out on the creators.

The resulting hateful messages do not represent the views of the vast majority of former TJLCers, let alone people who still support TJLC. The fact that Amanda Abbington received a death threat is disgusting; and yet in TJLC, she’s always been regarded as a sort of beloved “fandom aunt”. In addition, Ms. Paskin cites an article that claimed that fans “dampened [Martin Freeman’s] enthusiasm.” But that interview has already been revealed as a clickbait-seeking misinterpretation—by Freeman himself.

The second group—those remaining in TJLC—were a bit desperate, and I’ll be the first to admit that several theories with scanty factual basis became more popular then than they would have in calmer times. The Apple Tree Yard theory, for instance, is clearly ridiculous in retrospect. But even I was willing to consider it. (Not my finest moment.) As a side note, however: the far-fetched “China cancelled Johnlock” theory she mentioned is by someone who’s not only outside TJLC, but also notorious for hating it

But regardless of the quality of these theories, 99% of the remaining TJLCers were certainly not hating on people—because who was there to hate, if there was no queerbaiting?

Ultimately, the podcast’s descriptions of hate related to TJLC are one-sided, distorted, and do not reflect the conduct of the overwhelming majority of TJLCers.

Podcast-Specific Errors

There’s a reason why the podcast comes off so different from reality: its research is seriously flawed.

For a podcast about TJLC, Ms. Paskin interviewed a whopping one (1) actual current TJLCer, whom she apparently interviewed after building much of her argument. Every other interviewee was outside TJLC and specifically disliked it. That will hardly make for an unbiased final product.

As a result, she culminates with several remarks that are genuinely insulting. She likens TJLC to “any other standard conspiracy where you have a Judgment Day,” suggesting that we’re irrational and fanatical. She summarizes the entire community as “people being cruel to one another because they disagree about how a fictional TV relationship should turn out,” combining every misconception of (1) TJLC being a ship instead of hard analysis, (2) blaming every TJLCers for the actions of very few, (3) TJLC being a silly fan thing rather than a starting point for meaningful research into queer representation and literary analysis, and (4) ignoring TJLC’s vast contributions to TJLCers’ lives while overemphasizing those who were harmed by it. Both remarks are in keeping with standard media portrayals of fans as irrational and immature. I expected better of her.

Ms. Paskin says that she “had a dream about…digging deeper, talking to more people, ones who could perfectly explain the allure of TJLC to me.” She had the opportunity to interview more actual TJLCers, but didn’t take it.

But the offer still stands! Come talk to us! Learn about what we’re actually like! Criticize our theories, if you think we’re dogmatic. Ask us what we think of TJLC, if you think it ruined our lives. Our ask boxes are wide open!

What the Podcast Left Out

Swimming in descriptions of TJLC as a source of hatred, the podcast glosses over one tiny little detail: that TJLC genuinely improved the lives of the vast majority of TJLCers.

I came out because of TJLC. I learned how to analyze literature because of TJLC. I discovered new parts of history and the queer people who have always been part of it. I found a community of curious, passionate, funny, and kind people who I could talk to.

And I’m just one person. I know people who found lifelong friends because of TJLC, wrote books because of it, became students of gender and sexuality studies, found a community of support when they had mental health, financial, or other personal problems, and had a blast theorizing about the possibility of landmark LGBT representation. Heck, Rebekah of TJLC Explained filmed hours of people talking about how much the community meant to them. And I even know former TJLCers who, though disappointed with the show, still appreciate how much it taught them about queer theory, queer history, and themselves.

Evaluating TJLC as a whole, it’s not far-fetched, dogmatic, or primarily a source of “darkness.” It’s a legitimate theory, supported by debate and rational analysis, that improved the lives of far more people than it ever hurt.

You’ve read this. Now what?

If you’re in the media:

This Slate podcast is now the #1 result when I search The Johnlock Conspiracy. Thousands of kind and logical voices on Tumblr and other sites are immediately silenced by well-known publications. So yeah, I care what the media thinks. Few voices have widespread effects. I want people trying to find out about TJLC to get a well-researched, less biased view of it.

Please, take your research seriously when discussing fandom. Interview actual members of the community. Be aware of the public bias of fans as unworthy of serious attention and unable to construct rational, legitimate arguments. And fight against it.

If you’re inside TJLC:

Researching for this meant a trip into the darkest parts of TJLC. We need to acknowledge that not everyone in this community is nice to everyone all of the time, and this resulted in incidents that seriously hurt some people. Remaining civil, especially when faced with disagreement or outright malice, means we keep this community friendly for everyone.

If you’re outside TJLC:

Thank you for taking the time to learn about a topic from someone you don’t necessarily agree with. We need more of your open-mindedness in the world.

If you completely disagree with me, please don’t send me anon hate. Constructive criticism is cool. Anon hate is lame. Be cool. But I welcome questions, comments, and constructive debate. My ask box is always open.

 Thank you for reading.

-soe

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

@thesaltofcarthage @devoursjohnlock @waitedforgarridebs @one-thousand-splendid-stars @garkgatiss @shinka @witch-lock @jenna221b @sarahthecoat @inevitably-johnlocked @the-7-percent-solution @artfulkindoforder @warmth-and-constancy@marcespot@whtboutdeductions@tjlcisthenewsexy @bluebluenova @heimishtheidealhusband @tendergingergirl @sagestreet @ebaeschnbliah @221bloodnun @marcelock @watsonshoneybee @victorianfantasywatson

[sepialunaris]

Viggo's master plan (and evidence proofing it or going against it)

Proof of Viggo’s ‘fake war’:

Viggo somehow knows where Ryker would strike next

When the Shellfire attacks Caldera Cay, Viggo escapes. And then Ryker surrenders in Outcast Island, as if he knew that they would go there, while the Shellfire attacks at a different island (Viggo might even be switched control over the Shellfire during that time, but that won’t add any proof).

Viggo conveniently appears to Hiccup after the Shellfire attacks Beserker Island.

We never saw Ryker commenting about killing/destroying his brother during his attack at the Edge

Viggo’s chuckle in the end (Y'know, he could’ve just remembered a funny joke and laughed about it, but I’ll add it anyway xD).

Proofs/ thoughts that are against Viggo’s ‘fake war’:

If Viggo would want to damage the riders, he could’ve just relocated his base and plan an ambush with Project Shellfire while providing them no solution and keeping the Dragon Eye safe.

It doesn’t make sense for Viggo to risk so much resources just for this mission. Ryker and the army was probably prepared to be lost. But logically, risking a battlestation as a mere tool to be lost is too wasteful, even for Viggo.

Why would Viggo unleash a Submaripper to deal with the Shellfire? (I will try to rationalize this below)

So, if we were to consider the betrayal plot was a conspiracy, what exactly what Viggo’s masterplan? In my opinion, it might be to get close enough to defeat the riders from the inside and to destroy the Edge. Though his methods using the Dragon Eye is beyond me (unless he just wants to toy with Hiccup, promising him victory but then leaving him biting the dust)

My Theory on His ‘Fake War’ Plan

So, the first step of Viggo’s plan would be to attempting to win the riders’ sympathy by helping them predict Ryker’s next attack (which is suspiciously correct) and promising them information. During the attack in Caldera Cay, he took the time to escape. While it is not seen on screen, it is most likely that he rejoined his army and predicted that riders will attack Outcast Island (because he is Viggo lol), before commanding that Ryker should make them more confused by surrendering and presenting the other side of the story. He also orchestrated the attack in Beserker Island (he might even be in the Shellfire ship), before approaching Hiccup with the Eye, to further make him believe with his story. It is indeed a risky move, but like what we’ve seen previously, he would be willing to manuever in risky waters for ultimate victory. Even if he ends being imprisoned, Viggo is sure that they won’t stand a chance with the Shellfire unless they enlist his help (But Snotlout made it much more easier by nearly killing him lol). He then summons the Submaripper as a part of his own personal plan which Ryker and the rest doesn’t know about.

About him awakening Submaripper, yeah that’s very questionable. At first, I thought he might had actually planned to kill/ blackmail Hiccup, using the presence of the Submaripper to escape blame if someone was to catch him during the act. If he was able to kill Hiccup during that moment, his game would’ve ended there, with the rider’s ‘viking chief’ dead. But I doubt he would even try that, especially above a Night Fury and a Submaripper. He’d be dead after his nemesis’ is killed.

So, I think he did it to either:

to distract the Shellfire, so he could have enough time to get the Dragon Eye back and escape

To make his cooperation convincing to the riders (which I highly doubt due to the losses in stake).

or both

Ultimately, the Submaripper allowed Viggo to be dropped by Hiccup, due to him “slowing them down”. While this action could have contradicted his plans to sink the Island, I think Viggo perfectly knew that the Shellfire would’ve suceeded in activating the volcano anyway, given the damage done to it at the last attack by the Eruptodon. He probably didn’t expect the baby Eruptodon, but it made little difference anyway. However, the baby dragon did not only help the riders, it was also inadvertedly working in Viggo’s favor instead, stalling enough time to retrieve the Eye.

From what I remember, Viggo also didn’t know where the riders were keeping the Eye after Snotlout imprisoned him in the burning stable, so I think after getting dropped off, he probably decided to search for the Eye in the base, before planning an escape. Turns out, he doesn’t find it, and Astrid unexpectedly found him out (again). He probably managed to best her “somehow” (wth Astrid, you could have kicked his ass). While he knew the gang would be willing to risk their own life for duty, he also knew that they could only be blackmailed by threatening their team-mates instead. Especially Hiccup (who most definitely knows where the Eye is compared to the others. Not to mention the Viggo’s delight of seeing his archnemesis admitting his victory) in the case of Astrid. So he forced Stormfly to fly after Hiccup to the volcano. If his plan was to be successful, maybe Viggo would even consider to kill Astrid as unlike the Buffalord, he has no use of Astrid. Plus, Astrid’s death would cripple Hiccup and the gang further more, because losing the Eye and their base is just not enough.

The one thing he didn’t expect, is Hiccup throwing the Eye to the volcano (from the look of his face, he is genuinely surprised. But I could be wrong). This small detail destroyed his plans and left him with nothing. Eventually, even his life is lost (If he did indeed die)

But this theory might not be true considering the proofs against this theory, I could also be possible that things went out more similar to what had happened in Viggo’s story.

Ryker’s Betrayal plot:

Like Viggo’s explanation, Ryker manages sway the hunters to betray Viggo and destroy the riders themselves with the power they gained through Project Shellfire. Viggo could have eavesdropped on their conversation, so he knows Ryker’s next move.

Seekng the opportunity to escape when Caldera Cay is attacked, he went to find the Dragon Eye (and some new clothes) and give it to Hiccup, deciding to work together for him until the time has come for him to take back the Eye.

If this was the case, summoning the Submaripper makes more sense. Viggo would never be able to take over the weapon anymore, so he might as well destroy it along with his brother.

When the Shellfire leaves the battle, Viggo takes the chance to find the Eye, probably by searching for it in the base (because again, he didn’t know where the Eye was). Astrid discovers his actions and probably tries to stop him, only to be defeated. He then goes after Hiccup, for his sweet victory. Still, there is a possibility that he would betray his promise kill Astrid anyway, that is until Hiccup throws the Eye to the volcano.

So, in the creative point of view, I prefer the first one, but the second one is the most logical IMO xD.

[back-and-totheleft]

“Love is the only criticism”

The big-framed, genial filmmaker joined the throngs at BIFF 2011 — taking in some films, visiting around town, and then homing in on a Vielehr statuette and a long, fascinating conversation with BIFF Executive Producer of Special Events Ron Bostwick (who intrepidly scanned all 5,400 minutes of Stone’s filmic output as part of his preparation for the tribute).

The 64-year-old director, a three-time Oscar winner (as screenwriter, for “Midnight Express,” and as director of “Platoon” and “Born on the Fourth of July”), said, of his career-achievement honor, “This is not the end. This is the middle of the middle, not the beginning of the end.”

As he moved across the Boulder Theater stage to sit and chat with Bostwick, dozens of little glowing screens popped to life in the audience, viewscreens of cameras and video recorders, snapped on to drink in the sight and sound of the honoree.

Bostwick began the discussion asking Stone about the possible internal conflicts he faced when, as Stone has, he wore the hats of producer, director and writer of a given film interchangeably.

“I am conflicted,” Stone said. He talked about his self-termed Jekyll/Hyde impulses, explaining that his first name is William, his second Oliver, and that “the last psychiatrist I had theorized that William is the good boy and Oliver’s the bad boy. And Oliver does these things that William can’t stand – it creates tremendous tension, and out of that has come some fertility.”

Of his time at NYU, studying partly under Martin Scorsese: “Terrific. To major in film was new at the time, and we were in the first classes about this new medium . . . he (Scorsese) was tough. But the fellow students were the toughest! The chimpanzee bloodbath. It prepares you for the worst – which is what we experienced.”

He cited the incessant practicums in filmmaking at school as essential to his education. Each week, a team of students would make a film, trading functions such as actor, producer, writer, director, cameraman. “It was a good and rigorous way to learn,” he said. Ironically, the older, less wieldy pre-digital technology made the experience more rigorous.

“It was expensive – we couldn’t make many mistakes,” Stone said. He recalled that it wasn’t until years after his experience as a combat soldier in the Vietnam War that he began to really to process, contemplate and understand it. During the filming of “Salvador” in 1984 the parallels between what was happening there and what happened in Vietnam were disturbing to him.

“It seemed such a repetition of Vietnam,” he said. “South America keeps coming back like a reminder, in my life.” Stone filmed documentaries on the region: “Comandante” in 2003 and “South of the Border” in 2009.

Of his political awareness and contrarianism, which has been stereotyped by the press as a paranoid, conspiracy-theory-ridden mentality, especially after the release of his 1991 “JFK” film: “I didn’t seek it out, it kind of happened. It (his war experiences) gave me a strong sense of outrage, a sense of hypocrisy, of the government’s use of violence. Even to this day I have anger – plus, I have more money now so I pay taxes to buy these fucking bombs!”

He was asked about the remarkable percentage of actors in his films who have nominated for Oscars for their performances. Stone credited the performers for the merit of their work. “Each one of those actors was at the cusp of change,” Stone said. “Actors are always dying to redefine themselves.” Parenthetically, he said, “Never tell an actor he is just not right for a part. He will hate you for the rest of his life.”

Of the Oscars itself, Stone said, “I think of it as a wonderful parade and let it go. It’s very much a fashion show.”

Stone’s credo when it comes to his work is: “Make the movie – lie and steal and cheat – make the fucking movie.” He also reserves the right to go back and improve work that he feels wasn’t up to snuff, citing his 2007 director’s cut of “Alexander” as time well spent getting to tell the story in the way he intended.

He also admitted to being scared off projects from time to time – listing one concerning Martin Luther King, and another concerning the My Lai massacre, neither of which saw the light of day.

Bostwick played a second highlight reel for Stone – one that showed Stone performing in numerous cameo roles in his films. Of them, Stone said: “It’s fun to throw myself into my films. You cross the barrier and see what things are like for the people on the other side of the camera. It helps to loosen you up.” When asked if he was ready for one more clip of one of his performances, Stone joked, “It’s not a porno film, is it?” It turned to be Stone’s brief turn as a conspiratorially-minded version of himself on Larry King’s TV talk show in “Dave,” the 1993 comedy that involves a nice-guy double for a curmudgeonly President taking his place. Stone is the only one who notices the switch. “Don’t you think you should point out that I’m the only one in the film that turns out to be right?” Stone said, eyebrows cocked.

Of his experience writing the script for “Midnight Express,” Stone said that part of the script came from his own personal experience. He stated that he had been busted for drug possession eight days after returning home from service in Vietnam. “It’s disgusting hypocrisy – busting people for grass,” he said to great applause.

Stone outlined the underlying themes of his films as interrogations of the American ethos. He paraphrased Roman satirist Juvenal, saying, “Luxury corrupts far more ruthlessly than war,” and went on say that, in many of his films, he is asking “’Who is the bad guy here?’ Who is the bad guy, Mickey and Mallory (the mass-murderer central characters of his 1994 film “Natural Born Killers”) or the state?”

Riffing on his experience in Vietnam and its relation to his film “Platoon,” Stone disagreed with the general worshipful assessment of the “Greatest Generation,” stating “These guys behaved so arrogantly (in Vietnam) . . . And don’t forget, people make money in war – the PX system is corrupt like Vegas. ‘Air America’ (the 1990 Roger Spottiswoode action/comedy that indicted the CIA for enabling drug trafficking during the era) is pretty accurate. Fuck the Wall Street Journal (which published an editorial stating that the film was an affront to the memory of the soldiers who fought and died in Vietnam).”

Stone then declared that he hoped no one was blogging in the audience. Those around me turned to me and laughed nervously. I grinned with clenched teeth and kept typing.

Stone then spoke positively about Rupert Murdoch, owner of the Journal and global media lord, as a person, though, stating that “Nothing’s black and white except maybe Roger Ailes (president of the Fox News Channel).” Stone continued, “The major mainstream media is really screwed up and has put a bubble over this country. It’s not a democracy. If someone runs for office, he doesn’t have to win us — if he wins the media, he wins the election.” How can it be changed?, Bostwick asked.

“Get the airwaves back,” Stone replied. “Don’t give licenses to the biggest barons with money. Keep the real, free airwaves for the people. Media tells you what’s good, what’s bad, what to think . . . down beneath the media, it’s another world.”

Stone stated he was delighted with his visit. “I think Boulder should secede,” he said. “The Republic of Crazy, that’d be great! And then Steamboat Springs would jump in. Before you know it, there’d be a civil war between Aspen and you.”

Discussing his 1993 film “Heaven & Earth,” Stone said it “changed my heart. It was a chance for me as an American solider to look through the eyes of the people of Vietnam. That and ‘Nixon’ were my two biggest commercial disasters.”

He described the critical drubbing he took on “Heaven & Earth” as due partly to the difficulty of reviewers to grapple with overly spiritual material.

“Critics have a very hard time, ‘cause it’s a leap of faith. If they buy into it, they risk looking foolish on a spiritual level,” he said. As to “Nixon,” he said, “A man in a terrible suit glowering on a poster with a bunch of men in bad suits and bad haircuts is not a crowd-pleaser.”

When discussing how technology has changed the practice of experiencing a film, Stone stated first of all that “I loved road shows when I was a kid – four hours with an intermission!” (Roadshow theatrical releases, particularly popular from 1952 to 1971, we one- to two-a-day showings of widescreen epic films such as “The Ten Commandments,” “The Alamo” and “Lawrence of Arabia.”) “I love big dramas, I love Vincente Minnelli.”

Stone called Blu-ray “the last hardware.”

“This is your last chance to own a movie,” he said, surmising that non-theatrical audiences will in future order films online and download them, losing direct access to the created work. With the purchase of a concrete object that contains a given film, Stone said “You’re a possessor, you’re a collector,” and spoke of that warmly, stating by analogy that owning a library of films is satisfying, akin to “having a book on a shelf.”

Stone spoke of his upcoming documentary series for television, titled “Empire: the Forgotten History of the United States.” It tracks America’s military and foreign policies from World War II to today, postulating the errors that led in the view of some to the triumph of the military/industrial complex warned of by Eisenhower.

“We veered off into this national security state thing,” Stone said, and citing presidents such as Truman for their lack of intelligence in failing to prevent the tendency.

“There’s a mythos of Truman as this smart, tough little guy,” Stone said,” but I think we’ll eventually realize that he was as stupid as George W. Bush.”

Questions from the audience followed the interview. When asked by one young filmmaker, “Can you tell me what mistakes you made so that I don’t have to repeat them,” Stone replied, gently, “You have to make your own mistakes.”

Another aspiring filmmaker, now an enlisted person, asked what he should make a movie about. “Go to the Pentagon,” Stone said. “Make a film about what you know.”

When asked what kind of comic-book-character film he might make if were so inclined, Stone reminded the questioner that he had written the original script for “Conan the Barbarian,” and then said, “Why would you want to do that? Aren’t there enough of those films already? Make something else!”

When asked what thought of critics, he said, “Some of them should die,” then revised his statement, saying that writers such as Roger Ebert were to be praised for their intelligence and constructive criticism.

However, he went on, “They’re (bloggers are) looking for eyeballs and they’ll say anything. The thing I want to ask them is, ‘Are you happy in your soul? On your deathbed, do you think how many lives did you fuck up?’ In my mind, love is the only criticism. Think like a parent – point out the ways the child can improve his behavior, don’t trash him.”

After an interlude during which various audience members tried to convince Stone to make a film supporting their beliefs or causes (“I can’t chase every cause,” he explained, again gently), he was asked about the roles of festivals in promoting film.

“I love them,” he said. “Boulder, or Cannes, festivals are great. You get to see things you’d never see otherwise. Films like ‘The Edge’ (by Aleksi Uchitel, 2010) which we saw last night. Plus, it’s a nice place to give awards to old-timers,” referring ironically to himself.

-Brad Weismann, “Stone speaks: the BIFF interview,” Boulder International Film Festival, Feb 25 2011 [x]