#Abuse does not make you a complex character or villain

[sileisce]

as a villain lover i know the pain of that lol

crowfeather's trial is a favorite book of mine but only for crow's story. it does seriously butcher breezepelts arc because while he was abused it doesn't excuse his own actions and the harm he himself caused. i was excited for breezepelt villain/possible redemption arc but then crowfeather's trial came out and just ignores the setup. as much as i enjoyed the book it was a let down with that.

and yes, the misogyny in the books are sadly a reflection of the writers themselves, even with the recent addition of frecklewish being sent to the dark forest. if anyone it should have been oakstar, he is the main reason the kits die, he sent them out in a storm. yet he is rewarded with still being around both his sons while the woman is punished for being hurt and watching maple leave. a true fitting punishment would have been oakstar being separated from his kits like mapleshade was. the fact frecklewish got a whole article making things up while oakstar gets off easy is so foul.

even with breezepelt, the coddling is seen as a negative thing and not a mother trying to make up for an absent father and wanting her only surviving kit to be loved. all she wanted was a family and she ended up stuck with someone with the emotional maturity of a brick wall. i don't want to get too deep but even how nightcloud is portrayed it has reflections on people telling mothers to teach their sons not to abuse. instead of holding the men accountable for their own actions or fathers to also have a part in teaching their sons.

personally i hate when apple(or any riverclan cat) is portrayed as skinny if they're not described as such. as canon riverclan cats are naturally thicker and fat. im pretty sure he's implied to be just as big if not bigger than maple.

and yes, i don't blame you for assuming and it made me realize how i was coming across. i appreciate that there was no malice. i have a friend that had people say things to him like 'abuse victims shouldn't have opinions on bramble and squirrels relationship'. (and he likes brambleclaw just acknowledges his abuse) so while not personally experiencing it i know some of the crazy stuff people say. the abuse apologia and misogyny is so heavy in fandom and sometimes i forget that many people that share their opinions on a male character's potential complexity are coming from that angle and not 'its fun to think of it like this'.

anyway if people are allowed to make excuses for bramblestar and fucking appledusk, I should also get to say that nightcloud did nothing wrong

[stupidlittlespirit]

Can you give me more examples of Alex disliking Ford? I’ve always kinda felt it, but I never really had much of a real grasp on it.

Okay so this is the part where I look crazy because I can't give you specific examples LMAO but I'll try to explain what I mean. It's more in what he doesn't say than what he does.

Alex doesn't ever come right out and state 'I hate Ford', but he implies his distaste for him through his treatment of him. The way he hasn't gone harder/more explicit on drawing lines about Ford's abuse, or talking about how Ford suffered terribly during the time he was alone, for example. The way he blames Ford inherently for a lot of stuff that Ford, while not blameless, isn't fully at fault for. It's little things, and I'll detail them below.

TW below: Abuse, discussions of victimhood and irl consequences.

He extends more sympathy to other characters whereas Ford is sort of an afterthought. I don't actually think Alex has fleshed Ford out very well in his own head. Remember when he said that he didn't even know that Bill was going to be the main villain? They were flying by the seat of their pants for a lot of the series and it's quite clear in some elements. Obviously, the series is wonderful, I love it, it's one of my favourite shows of all time and Alex is a true talent, but it's obvious which characters are more important to him. He favours Bill a lot, too, so when his disliking of Ford/being ambivalent about him meets his enjoyment of Bill, only one of those dogs is coming out of the fight alive and it ain't Ford.

I think Alex is a genuine talent, I admire his work and his writing. He seems lovely. But I do also think he lacks in skill when it comes to complex abuse depictions.

I see a running theme that he isn't very good at portraying it specifically via 'unlikeable' characters. I mentioned on a previous post that he did this with Pacifica until people expressed empathy with her, and then he decided to round her out. He stated that himself during an old interview; I can't source it but I remember it vividly because it flagged red in my head that he couldn't see she was just a product of her environment. She's a twelve year old girl, for god's sake, she isn't 'just a horrible person', it makes a person sound like Bill when they beef with kids like that lol.

Another thing is in TBoB, there's a really horrendous page where Ford is tortured. It is visceral and awful, and tbh I wish I'd have been able to ask Alex what his top 5 horror movies were when I saw his talk because the scene is very reminiscent of a lot of my fav horrors.

But anyway, it is literal torture and it is also communicating about how helpless Ford is. He's a victim and a 'weak one' at that. Nothing he can do will stop Bill's abuse, he's stupid for trying, he's pathetic, he deserves it.

Now, that is a take I see with Ford a lot. He deserves it. He's asking for it. And it's a really upsetting one. It's also a common narrative told by people who blame victims for the abuse they suffered.

Not once have I ever seen Alex defend Ford. Not once have I ever heard him say 'Ford didn't deserve this', 'Ford suffered as much as Stan'. Not once.

Considering that he said he took 'inspiration' from his friend's 'toxic' relationships (I also think this is a strange and slightly perverse thing to do btw), I would have thought he might feel more strongly about pushing away this narrative about victims deserving their treatment.

I, obviously, also don't know for sure that he did take inspo from friends; he could well be describing his own experiences and just not feel comfortable saying so because men do suffer a different kind of stigma around being abused. That's fine, he doesn't have to out himself or anything, that would be horrible. But it's just the way he reacts to fans and speaks about the victim (Ford) that makes me think he's a bit more removed from this specific experience than it being personal.

There are many types of abuse. Ford's experience is familial, relationship-wise (platonic, because nothing about his relationship with Bill is romantic in the most basic sense of the term, if anything you can liken that side of things to sexual abuse) and personal. Ford then abuses himself as a reaction to outside abuse. Not his fault, again, but it does happen and it's a common thing for victims to do. I did.

Ford does nothing but suffer.

I truly don't believe that if you loved and cared for your character, you would be willing to watch your audience tear them apart like that after they had already been through so much and were not actually a villain themselves.

Especially if you had, or knew other people who had, experience with that kind of abuse. He doesn't let it happen to Stan, he came down hard on people when they did it to Dipper, and to Mabel, too.

It would kill me to let my OCs be bastardised like that by an audience and I'd be damned if I did a disservice to victims everywhere over something like this.

I think his lack of care is displayed in his treatment of Ford, as opposed to him outright saying he doesn't like him.

I also understand that this analysis also comes from a deeply personal point of view and my own experience with this topic, too.

This is a TV show, it isn't real and I don't need to take it so seriously, but what I do take seriously is seeing the real world reactions of other people. That does hurt. It hurts to see someone who is (very inelegantly and heavy-handedly, btw) depicted as a victim of abuse be laughed at and made into a joke, or flipped on their head and made to be romanticised with their abuser just to make a ship happen.

Fiction doesn't need to be taken seriously except when the lines begin to blur over into real life. We know people are cruel to irl victims and we can see where these lines blur quite obviously.

I think abuse and uncomfortable topics should be depicted, but I also think that as a creator, if you use them, you have a HUGE responsibility to teach and guide your audience into understanding why these things are bad/what makes them so. You shouldn't make jokes about the topic or encourage other people to go off the rails with it.

You can't control people, of course you can't, but you can hold their hand a bit and show them towards the light. If they choose not to follow it then they're probably not bright enough to pick up what you're putting down and that's on them, but you have to try.

Maybe if I hadn't (and my friends and other victims hadn't) been subjected to exactly the same reaction, we wouldn't feel so strongly about this, but it really does feel like a kick in the teeth to see a large number of people behave so grotesquely about abuse.

And just as an aside: I am a victim, I have been/am an unlikeable one, but it does not mean that I deserved what I got and that goes the same for every other 'unlikeable' victim out there.

*deep breath* but other than that I'm totally normal about Ford and not at all mentally ill :)

[fluffyotters]

People often Misunderstand Dabi's hatred for his dad. It's not because he's abusive

The thing a lot of people confuse is that while Dabi/Touya hated Endeavor, he didn't hate him because he was (physically) abusive to others! Touya does hate Endeavor not because dad was abusive but because he stopped paying attention to him at all and thought he was replaced! Touya hates him because of how much he loves and loved him. He wanted to be like him and to be admired by his dad forever and when he took that away clumsily trying to stop Touya from hurting himself by ignoring him that was even worse. Dabi himself would encourage people to hate on Endeavor for any reason because he wants to make his dad suffer but he does not care about abuse which is what a lot of Dabi apologia and people who fan him (inaccurately) has that he hates his abusive father because he was abuisve. DABI/TOUYA DOES NOT for that reason. Enji was a terrible parent in the past as is known with Shouto and treating his wife Rei and ignoring his non quirk kids Fuyumi and Natsuo, but he was not a terrible parent to Touya until he started ignoring him. In fact while one can assume his training methods can be difficult and Shouto hated them for sure (he was a young kid what the heck) and it's possible that they got harder, but Touya is the kid who will set himself ablaze of his own choice in training so that pain would be nothing to him.

The one person Dabi truly loves and hates is Enji. He wanted his love and attention and if he can't have that he will destroy his father as well as everything he loves including his family until there is nothing left to distract him from him. Using Enji's abuse was only ammo for him! He fully admits Endeavor abused his family because it means nothing to Dabi/Touya. He confesses to kiling more than 30 people (probably because he doesn't know the exact number and lost count after that because it probably is more than 30) because it means nothing to him. This was solely a film to bring down his father Endeavor's reputation at the worst possible time with a double whammy one-two punch of not only ruining his dad's reputation but everyone's view of heroes at the same time with Hawks killing Twice (edited to seem in cold blood). Being a hero is what his dad loved so much, more than him that Dabi made sure to completely destroy the trust people had in all heroes and to make the people dad saved turn against and hate him. See if Touya actually cared about the "abuse" he could have ended Endeavor's reputation and career at any moment. And secretly holding that over his head without him knowing was a trhill for a little while. But all he had to do was well, make such a video before and show a dna test and he could have made everyone very aware that he Endeavor's dead son was alive and that his dad was contrary to his saving the public, horrible to his family. And with it being multiple figures and the clear evidence of him and Shouto being damaged, his wife having been hospitalized, and his children having difficutly with him it would have had actual ramifications. He could have pulled Shouto out. He could have reconected with Natsuo. But he doesn't. Because he doesn't care about that or them except as ammo to hurt his dad. Had things gone differently he would have never said a thing. He worshipped the ground his dad walked on. And as he makes clear with Shouto he doesn't care about Natsuo almost dying when the villain he sent almost killed him despite them having had a past good relationship. All Dabi thought was imagine what Endeavor would think if he died. And Touya had wanted to be back in Shouto's place. Not anymore now, but how dare Shouto have everything he wanted and not appreciate it. Shouto wanted to save hsi brother, Touya wanted nothing more than to destroy him, dad, or both whether to kill Shouto and/or die with him to hurt his dad, or kill his dad directly. And nothing justifies what Dabi does. One could at least understand him wanting to kill his dad, even if that is extreme, Shouto did too and S1-3 it would have been understandable. However, killing lots of random people villains and civillains that have absolutely nothing to do with them is not at all proportional or understandable. And he has zero guilt or remorse and he burns them with fire, an extremely painful excruciating death. They probably don't live long witb how hot his fire is if they don't have a heat resistant skin or quirk (and such people actually gave him trouble fighting) but otherwise it's still a very horrible way to die. He views them all as mere practice kindling and trash to be taken care of and entertainment. People were nothing more than tools in his quest to hurt Endeavor. He loves these random people more than him being their hero? Then let them burn. He doesn't genuinely care whether hero society is corrupt or not. After all, he has no problem with killing solely to spite his dad. He doesn't care about the villains and downtrodden and they were only ever a vehicle to help him enact his eventual revenge in the meanwhile. And readily willing and acting to kill his own family. There was no reason to go after Natsuo and Rei, or Shouto but even allowing extreme leniency understanding that trying to kill his dad and the brother who replaced him is understandable, there is no reason to go after Natsuo and Fuyumi and Rei. Other than that is solely to hurt his dad which is not remotely justifiable.

He got Twice killed and while he says he didn't want Twice to die, if only because he would have helped with his revenge, he very readily had the video made which is extremely convenient. Stupidly reckless of Dabi to let Hawks that close if he actually wanted Twice to survive but on the other hand, he very well could have been saying what Hawks and the others expected to hear. Dabi somehow obtains Twice's blood for Toga later and it just raises even more questions of how and when did he get that? Did he ask for it and just store it for later? (Which weird if he wasn't actually planning this beforehand). I don't see how he would have got enough to be actually in a container for Toga to use that would still be viable if it hadn't been planned for. And he just sat on it until she was emotionally vulnerable and sad and goes here use this. This wasn't about helping her grieve this was getting her even more murder serious and to stop messing about with the heroes. But there is only a small amount of time where they knew that Toga could further copy powers before Twice died so Dabi having it on hand is extremely suspicious since Toga had no idea he had it. And after him helping her and seeming a friend (which he truthfully denies and says only is for his own benefit) h gives her a way to have Twice back and honor him.

Dabi is a very manipulative and cruel And the third most evil in the series after AFO and Overhaul just ahead of Muscular because Touya is smarter, didn't get caught repeatedly and while Muscular is cruel and sadistic and takes great delight in it, Touya is readily willing to hurt and kill his own family and the people he supposedly cares about for the sole singular focused purpose of punishing Endeavor. Dabi is living purely off the extreme rage and focused obsession to make his dad pay that even as his body wounds should have killed him he's still living just to make it happen. Even AFO backed off from even remotely trying to use him as a replacement from the sheer passionate singular depths of Dabi's rage made him unable to be controlled unlike Shigaraki generic molded hatred which passionate but focused on nothing but destroying making it easier for him to take over. And Dabi chose to be like this to deliberately murder and kill people and use them as mere tools. He chooses to continue it over and over living solely out of hatred and spite. This was not created by Endeavor, this is on Touya. People try to blame Enji for creating Dabi which is not true. Did he mess Touya up? Absolutely. Emotional neglect hurts. He would be obsessed with his dad in any form naturally and he would be guilty of that. But Enji is not responsible for Dabi murdering people and becoming a genuine villain. He is not responsbile for Touya going if he won't see me I'll destroy everything he loves. And not responsible for Touya trying to murder his family. He played a role by giving anf taking away love and not getting his clearly agitated unstable son help and absolutely could have done better and is seeking atonment but it is on Toyua all the deeds he had done. And before people say the abuse messed him up, most people do not become serial killers and mass murderers from abuse. (It can contribute but also many were never mistreated or abused at all that do). All it points is that tragedy happens to everyone and that then the personal choice and how to react comes in. Especially since this was emotional neglect not physical abuse. There is a big difference and yes emotional can hurt just as much it wouldn't have turned him into full blown evil like that if he hadn't chosen to be. There were so many ways he could have done a screw you dad look at me without going I'm going to burn you and everything you love to the ground and kill a lot of people along the way. Like I saw a hilarious post about Dabi instead of going okay murder, becoming an All Might Fan and buying all the All Might merchandise such that its everywhere and Endeavor absolutely could not have missed it. And that is the type of petty energy that unironically would have probably worked at getting his dad back to get him to look at him and interact again. (or he could have ignored it as Enji could be disciplined but it would definitely be drving him bonkers so win-win). But even from a young age Touya was obsessive about his dad that he tries to kill Shouto as a baby from the thought of being replaced.

I love Dabi as a villain but it is difficult to see so many blame Enji and abuse for Dabi's choices as if he had no agency in it. And while Dabi would definitely for the public blame Endeavor too, he wanted nothing more for than him to notice and once to always see him and now to make him the only thing Endeavor has by hurting him destroying everything he loves including ultimately himself. Because Dabi love/loved him. And could really care less if he or Enji hurt them as long as it's only him and his dad.

[saffitaffi]

“What if the evil tyrant who likes to kill puppies for fun actually just needed to fall in love with a sweet naive child who redeems them through the power of love and they were actually good the whole ti-“

What if they weren’t, though? What if their life twisted them to the point that they can only love through violence?

What if the narrative doomed them to ever play their role, a role that has already been chosen by forces higher than them?

What if the sweet, gentle character didn’t love them ‘despite their flaws’, or even at all?

Why should they? Especially if it’s a case of kidnapping. ESPECIALLY if they hurt them. Or their friends. Or take away their agency.

What if that strange contradiction of love and hatred in their heart tore them apart and gave them their justified end?

What if they CAN’T be fixed?

What if they don’t WANT to be fixed?

What if we stopped glamorizing abusive relationships and started actually exploring them?

[sammydem0n64]

Constantly thinking about a conversation me and a buddy had about how people in the modern era always end up making or Headcanoning villains as homophobic or just general bigots...

[autisticrosewilson]

It's not that I hate fanon or that I think fanon is inherently less intelligent or morally wrong, but a LOT of fanon is based in racism, misogyny, and classism that I feel like a lot of you accept without question.

WHY is Duke (Daredevil, son of a god, has never once allowed himself to be defined by anyone's actions but his own) relegated to a background role, only characterized by reacting to the whims of other bats?

Why is Babs - Birds of Prey leader and backbone of the hero society, tells Bruce to fuck off and die 4 times a day and is constantly ruining her relationships by being biased and unhinged - Gotham bound, the mature responsible mom of the group who never argues with Bruce and never gets in trouble?

Why is Dick, both a tactical genius and master manipulator, a himbo only appreciated for his sex appeal? Especially when he is both Romani (group of people demonized and condemned as hypersexual by their nature alone) and an SA victim.

WHY is Damian "feral" and "uncivilized" despite being raised as a literal prince? Half of you treat him like a sociopath with no hope of redemption for an unfunny three second joke and the other half of you go full throttle into Bruce's white savior bullshit so that Damian can be "redeemed". Y'know when you're not villainizing Talia and acting like Dick is his other parent, actually.

WHY is Stephanie - extremely intelligent detective who can't stand Bruce and has a living mother she loves - lumped in as another member of the Batfam, a blonde ditz who only cares about prank wars and emotionally supporting Tim?

WHY is Cass - intelligent, a grown adult, suicidal perfectionist - emotionally intelligent, primarily existing to support the characters around her, immediately accepting of everyone she meets regardless of her own morals?

Why is Bruce the golden standard? Enough so that though everyone in the fandom could agree that he's an emotionally unstable wreck, being considered "the most like him" is seen as a compliment and not the HIGHEST insult? Everyone would agree if I said that Bruce purposely self sabotages his relationship half the time and the other half he simply does things without caring about the emotional impact it will have on people because he has to be the smartest in the room, but if I said that makes him a shit partner and emotionally abusive parent the fandom would bend over backwards to argue with me.

Why is Tim "the best Robin" when Dick Grayson invented the mantle, it is impossible for someone to embody the spirit of Robin better than him because he made it and he created what being Robin means. Maybe Tim is the best in Bruce's eyes, but what Robin means and who has the right to give it over was a significant thing they argued about. Tim the high school drop out, and yet also somehow the smartest? Tim "the most like Bruce" except no he's not, that's Cass. Poor neglected, abused, victimized little Timmy (the rich boy at the elite boarding school with loving albeit busy parents and almost every instance of him being victimized by another character has either been racist bullshit - The Al Ghuls and Rose Wilson- or a complete 180 for the character that made no sense when examined through the lens of prior characterization - Jason for instance.)

Almost every fanon trope that gets passed around like gospel seems to deliberately push POC characters and women into the background and strip them of interesting complex traits and stories, usually for the purpose of fitting them all into bite sized incorrect quote character types and uncomplicated narrative roles that are not only completely divergent from canon, but primarily exist to prop up the two rich white boys.

Also the insistence that Bruce, a 20 year old at the time, should actually be excused for how much he mentally and emotionally fucked Dick up because really they're more like siblings! While deciding that Dick at the same age was actually the perfect candidate to be Damian's new parent/guardian...have you lost the fucking plot you don't even make sense to yourselves.

Okay I lied at the beginning, I do hate fanon. You guys are so uncritical about the media you consume it is BEYOND just letting people enjoy things and have fun. I guess it's one thing if you KNOW this stuff isn't canon and UNDERSTAND why these tropes are problematic and you engage with it as such, it's fine read and write what you want, but just spreading the same nonsense around and parading it around as "better than canon" (version of the character so bland and boring you've somehow made the old white men at DC look like geniuses in the art of representation) is just infuriating.

[stardustizuku]

Unfortunately I came across a very strange and misinformed video about Black Butler.

It’s not good. Don’t watch it. Unless you wanna ruin your day, in which case have fun.

Despite it all, I watched it. What left me wondering, however, was how off the mark the person who made the video was on, well, everything.

From their insistence that the Book of Circus Arc theme or point is non existent, to reading Ciel’s character so badly they genuinely thought the Green Witch Arc did nothing for his character development.

While baffled, it also made me think on how someone could read Black Butler so badly.

Sure, you can say that there’s no real way to read or interpret something “in the wrong way” but interpreting The Hunger Games as a pure battle-royale action story would make you believe it’s bad.

“Why are we focusing so much on how the capitol preps them?” Or “Why isn’t Katniss winning everything?” Or “I wanna know more about the rebellion” All questions that miss the actual point of the story - which is criticizing (not solving or ignoring) the way that media distracts us from violence via spectacle.

The same thing applies here. While there is no “right” way to consume media, there’s things that the author makes clear they wanna focus when creating a story. Things that, if you understand, make the story you’re reading actually make sense.

And in Black Butler there’s three things that you have to understand to properly get what Yana is saying.

Sebastian is the protagonist

Ciel and Sebastian’s relationship IS the story.

And that relationship is, fundamentally, a positive one.

A quicker version of it would be:

Black Butler is a love story from the POV of Sebastian, and you have to ship it to get it

- but that’s not entirely true.

You can still look at it as a complex but ultimately positive rship and get in broad strokes of what it’s conveying. It doesn’t have to be romantic. Although, it helps much more than a platonic framing.

(That said, interpreting their rship as father and son, still isn’t the best way to go about it. Mostly because by its very nature of “soul consuming” their relationship is extremely sexually charged. And hey, if you’re into that I don’t judge. However, if you’re desperately trying to interpret their rship as NOT romantic to the point you fall back on heteronormative patriarchal ideals of nuclear familiar as framing device, I don’t think this interpretation bodes with you)

Now, having all that ground work:

Why do I say these are the key components to understand BB?

Okay so, first,

1. Sebastian is the Main Character. The protagonist.

There’s a lot of people who wanna argue against it, claiming he’s either the villain or the antagonist. Both wrong.

He does not function as an antagonist. Even if, and an emphasis on if, you consider Ciel to the protagonist, Sebastian isn’t a narrative antagonist.

If you wanna go back to Creative Writing 101, be my guest. An antagonist is directly defined by the protagonist. It’s the opposing force. If the protagonist wants A, the antagonist wants to stop them from getting A.

Sebastian’s catchphrase is “Yes, my Lord”. He never opposes Ciel, in fact quite the contrary. By the mere fact they’ve created contract, it means that they’ve both agreed in the inevitable outcome.

People want to frame Sebastian as the villain, because Ciel having his soul taken by a demon, would be a BAD END in the context of their moral compass. They see Ciel as a frail victim of abuse, who’s being tricked by Sebastian, who wants Ciel’s soul.

Which is an. Interpretation. A bad one. But still one.

The narrative (and whether the narrative fits your personal moral compass and lack of critical thinking is irrelevant) treats Ciel as an agent in his own destiny. The abuse he suffered was the moment in which he had no control. It’s only after he meets Sebastian that he can rid of both his guilt and his despair, and do what he wants.

In this case though, it’s revenge.

The famous “Asthma” scene shows this. If Ciel is taken back to his past, he becomes helpless. Swarmed with pain and memories that make it so that he can’t even react. Sebastian is his saving grace. If Ciel didn’t have him, and the power he wields to rebuilt what’s broken, he would crumble once more.

If Ciel has a panic attack, because of all the pain he has, Sebastian picks him up and says “you are not a helpless child anymore, you are not a victim anymore, you have the power to do anything. So, what do you wanna do?”

Ciel’s answer is to kill them.

A proper analogy would be to say that, if Sebastian offers a gun, Ciel pulls the trigger. They are both at fault. Sebastian, strictly speaking, is not here to directly cause Ciel’s downfall, but as a tool Ciel uses to plunge into the abyss.

If, again if, you were to frame Ciel as a protagonist, Sebastian falls closer to the “Voice of reason” character. Not a literal voice of reason, but a literary one. If you have a protagonist and an antagonist exchanging ideals, the Voice of Reason serves to engage with the protagonist on their own ideals.

That said, Ciel isn’t the protagonist. The story quickly falls apart if you interpret it as such.

Things such as Ciel’s character arc being…shall I say odd?

It’s not that his character arc isn’t there, but it’s never lineal. His goals stay the same, the only thing that happens is that we start to peel back the “why”s of his goals. Throughout the series it’s never about Ciel understanding himself better, he knows who he is, he knows what he wants, he knows why he wants it. He doesn’t ever need to uncover these, but simply remember them. Because it’s always about the audience understanding Ciel.

He knows he wants revenge.

In the Circus Arc: He knows that he needs Sebastian because without him, the pain of the abuse he suffered would be too much to bear. But WE are introduced to it.

In the Book of Atlantis: He knows that with this new lease he does not want happiness and peace, he wants revenge. The one being told this is the audience.

In Green Witch Arc: He knows that their revenge isn’t for his family, the real Ciel or guilt. It’s because he wants it. He’s angry, he’s upset, and this is entirely for him. The one being told this is the audience.

Except. Not really. The one either discovering or remembering these key moments - is always Sebastian.

Sebastian is the one who reassures him that he now holds the power of a demon to override the pain. Sebastian is the one who remembers that to override that pain, Ciel wants revenge. And Sebastian is the one who discovers that that revenge isn’t built out of grief or guilt, but for himself.

We are witnessing it all, through the eyes of Sebastian.

This is why we have an extremely vague idea of who Ciel is, Sebastian does not have the whole picture.

If you haven’t been reading this manga with your eyes closed, you’ll realize we have a better grasp at Sebastian’s character than that of Ciel. We get a lot of insight on how he thinks and what he values through light hearted dialogue he has with the servants. You even see the character development in these little interactions.

Think about how when he first arrived to the mansion he magically created food with no regards to taste, but when he meets Bard he states that food is created to see whoever will eat it, smile.

That is character development, more than you will be able to see from Ciel.

Because Ciel’s character, while not static, doesn’t go from point A to point B. Mostly, cause it doesn’t need to. He went through that when he lost the real Ciel and got Sebastian. Everything we are watching is the falling out.

Now, given the fact that I’ve told you that it makes more sense for Sebastian to be the protagonist/main character, and that he 100% isn’t either a villain or antagonist in ANY of the interpretations you can get:

Do you believe me?

If you don’t, you’ll probably believe Yana herself.

This is from the first Volume, where Yana herself describes the process of making Black Butler. The primary idea behind the creation of BB was a butler as a “hero”.

If you go back to the introductory chapter, you notice that Ciel is barely mentioned. He’s simply the one to give Sebastian impossible tasks and standards that Sebastian must find how to overcome.

Ciel is properly introduced until the NEXT chapter. The second chapter has this formula too, introducing Lizzie as a problem to overcome. Although, to Sebastian the best way to “get rid of the problem” is simply to indulge her.

The issue here being that the problem isn’t as simple as a business meeting but something directly tied to Ciel and Ciel’s past. Each time that Sebastian has to solve a problem, it chips away at Ciel. While with Lizzie he shows a persona, once he’s alone with Sebastian he acknowledges the toll it took on him. It serves to build Ciel as Sebastian’s master, and how some problems aren’t as simple as discarding a tablecloth.

The third and the fourth, are a unified narrative, with a similar premise to the first chapter. Ciel gets kidnapped and Sebastian must find a way to retrieve him without raising suspicions.

If the first chapter is to set up what Sebastian must do as a butler, the third and the fourth serve to set up what he must do as a demon.

The entirety of the volume, and up to Book of Circus Arc, is about how Sebastian tries to follow the increasingly absurd orders that Ciel has - it is not about Ciel trying to solve them.

That’s how they work, we follow Sebastian for the most part, because he’s the one having to come up with the solutions.

If anything, in early Kuro, where the emphasis was more on a slice of life conflict, Ciel is the antagonist. He’s the one creating problems for Sebastian to solve.

What’s more, in the second volume, the very first chapter is one from Sebastian’s POV. So far, we hadn’t gotten an entire chapter from Ciel’s POV. In fact, I would find it hard to point to a single chapter where Ciel is the POV throughout. The reveal of real Ciel and the flashback is the closest contender.

But once we move past early Kuro, and into Book of Circus, this set up changes.

It’s fairly easy to assume that Ciel is the main character, because from this point on the conflict of the plot sorta surrounded him. We spend a lot of time with him and with his story. The enemies start being people directly tied to Ciel and Ciel’s trauma. Rarely, if at all, we get to see Sebastian before he met Ciel.The framing device for the story, is Ciel.

This is where point 2 gets intertwined.

2.- Sebastian and Ciel’s relationship IS the story.

The story begins at the point where Sebastian and Ciel met. Who Ciel was before he met Sebastian, informs why he’s the way he is when he does. You have to know all he went through to understand why he’s a brat, why he lashes out. However Sebastian’s past doesn’t matter…because Sebastian himself doesn’t care much for who he was, before he was “Sebastian”. That’s also part of the narrative.

Unlike Ciel, he doesn’t seem opposed to revealing information from before the contract. He talks about how pets from where he is from are gross, he talks about how he knows how to dance because of other places he’s been to, and alludes to the life he's lived before.

Just that, to him, they're footnotes.

He makes allusions to a very bland, uninteresting life, up to the point he meets Ciel.

That’s why we don’t know more about his past.

As for why we focus on Ciel’s story…okay maybe we need Creative Writing lessons 102

I studied Dramaturgy for about 3 to 4 years. And something you notice is how play-writing is the quintessential story telling. It’s making it work with the bare bones of a story.

Some other mediums have more finesse, more depth, or more spectacle - all amazing things that work for whatever they’re created for. But understanding a play, how and why it works, helps understand the fundamentals of any derivative story telling medium.

Particularly, conflict.

Conflict is dialogue and dialogue can take many forms. A story, in its essence, is a dialogue between two opposing ideas.

Take Batman, for example, who embodies the ideas of justice and order. On his own, he’s not a well rounded character.

If you ONLY present him, in a vaccum with nothing else, you don’t have a character. You have a list of characteristics that you’re supposed to know.

You only know who he is when you have dialogue with another character.

I say Dialogue, but it doesn’t necessarily mean spoken language at one another. Dialogue can mean fist fighting, playing tabletop games, talking to other people about the other, or even just a competition. The idea is to simply to compare and contrast both ideas.

If you want an example on how tabletop games serve as dialogue, watch the video “Well, Someone Had to Explain the Liar’s Dice Scene” by Lord Ravecraft

Another example, were we to retake Batman, you have him fight Joker. Who’s the embodiment of chaos and randomness.

In the following picture, you get far more information than the one previously shown. While the Joke fights with daggers and fake guns, Batman only uses his fists. He doesn’t use the tricks that Joker does. His serious demeanor, contrasted with Joker’s glee at the dangerous situation. The fact that Batman has a deathly grip on Joker’s shirt, while the Joker doesn’t, which shows a desperation to catch him.

You are being shown, through a dialogue, who Batman is.

It’s so much easier and much more effective to explore a character through another character.

This is the reason why Shonen has a tendency to make incredibly good gay ships. If you want to explore Naruto’s personality, and his feelings of inferiority, you HAVE to have him interact with Sasuke.

If you wanna understand Hinata’s passion for volleyball, you have him enjoy himself the most with the only other crazy motherfucker who’s as obsessed with volleyball - Kageyama.

And I think that originally, Yana had this problem.

Sebastian was the protagonist, but she had little room to develop him as a character in the confines of the manor, dealing with random enemies.

She likely tried to create Grell as someone of the same stature as Sebastian. Someone who could be this other person to engage dialogue with and show or allude to his past a bit more.

The problem being that Sebastian didn’t care for his past. Or really, engaging with anyone. He sees everyone as below him, but when confronted with Grell who isn’t below him, he doesn’t wanna talk to her.

So you’re stuck in conundrum.

How do you have dialogue with a character, that as a character trait, doesn’t really wanna have dialogue?

Well, Grell also solves the problem. Because only the moment she gets him to start any semblance of a dialogue - is questioning why he’s serving Ciel.

And this is the moment when it’s perfectly cemented that the focus of the story is their relationship.

Why is Sebastian here? Why does he stay? What did he see in Ciel that made him want this extremely convoluted contract?

THATS the dialogue.

THATS the conversation we’re having in Black Butler.

We need to know Ciel because understanding who he is, let’s us know WHY /Sebastian/ is here.

Then slowly, with the introduction with the Undertaker, we find out Sebastian’s conflict.

Which is…

He’s scared of losing Ciel. It becomes apparent with the constant imagery of the Undertaker taking away Ciel and at some point even obtaining r!Ciel’s body, that he’s worried it might happen.

But he can only be worried that Ciel might be taken away if he wants to stay near Ciel.

And that’s his character arc.

Realizing that he actually likes Ciel, cares for him and the role he plays a butler that he doesn’t want this to end.

In the first chapters, he doesn’t feel a need to protect Ciel anymore than what’s strictly necessary. Just don’t die, that’s about as deep as his involvement in chapter 4 gets.

But by the Green Witch Arc, he feels a need to protect Ciel from ANY harm.

This is why I also said

3.- Their relationship is fundamentally a positive one.

In broad strokes, Sebastian to Ciel is the person who allows him to survive. He’s not worried about giving up his soul since he’s already dead. While Ciel to Sebastian, is someone who’s making him have fun. He’s slowly becoming more and more attached to Ciel and the life he has with Ciel.

Their relationship is not that of just a predator and prey, but also of master and pet.

In the terms that Black Butler itself would call: Sebastian is a wild wolf acting like a collared dog.

Ciel is aware that the wild beast will eat him at the end of the day, but if he clings hard to leash for now, he might just be able to have Sebastian maul his abusers.

Sebastian as a dog, currently finds that he enjoys being a chained dog.

(This is demonstrated in the Green Witch arc where he quite literally says, he doesn’t wanna be a wild beast and prefers to be a butler)

And much like the actual DOG Sebastian, Ciel constantly interprets his attempts to get close and protect him, as an act of aggression.

This push and pull of Ciel’s perception of Sebastian and Sebastian’s true motives is what feeds the story.

And the briefs interludes were that isn’t the case (what other people call the “plot”, but I would refer to as the connective tissue) such as Sullivan and Wolfram, the other servant’s past, the grim reapers and the like, serve as a parallel to Ciel and Sebastian relationship. Either to signify how they care for each other, highlight their weaknesses or fears, or explore how they feel.

It’s no surprise that Sullivan and Wolfram are parallels to Ciel and Sebastian. A sheltered sickly child who seeks the protection of a cold hearted machine that only knew how to kill, but who eventually found he cared for her genuinely.

Undertaker and Claudia’s relationship being heavily paralleled with them, even though we aren’t 109% sure what they had but heavily implied it was a romantic attraction from the undead supernatural creature and a Phantomhive.

Everything is a parallel.

That’s why, like the approach of the terrible original video, is flawed.

Trying to interpret Black Butler as action scene after action scene, with mystery after mystery with the only connective tissue being the mystery of who burned down the mansion - is missing the trees for the forest.

That’s not the point.

And if you’re too much of a prude to engage with gothic horror in its gothic horror game, I see little point as to why you even bother to engage with it at all.

A lot of people, including the person who create the video, simply refuse to acknowledge Black Butler IS the story of Sebastian and Ciel as a close and positive relationship, romantically and sexually charged. The reason for it being that they’re “put off” by it.

Part of me wonders how much that is genuinely true, and how much is just performative outrage. It’s like ignoring the fact that Cersei and Jami are in an incestous relationship and try to frame it as “platonic love”, because the idea of it is THAT off putting.

But regardless of that, if you don’t like the fact that it’s as canon as canon can get, I would reccomend you don’t engage with the story at all.

As I’ve explained, the entirety of the series is about them. If you refuse to see Sebastian and Ciel as, at the very least, a duo that cares deeply for the other - you aren’t reading Black Butler.

I have no idea what you’re reading.Perhaps your own biases and subconscious stigma with British aesthetic. At that point, watch the fucking British Royalty Gossip Magazine. You’d find more substance there.

Just don’t be like the person in the video, please? Don’t play dumb. Don’t ignore the fact that Yana is a Shotacon, don’t ignore the fact Sebastian is a hero, don’t ignore the fact that the entirety of the story is based on Sebastian and Ciel’s dynamic.

Because if you do, you are ashamed. You are ashamed of what this story is about. You don’t wanna engage with the text, you want to engage with yourself. You wanna project into Ciel whatever traumas and experiences you have, for the sake a vanity project, where you come out as the morally superior.

You don’t wanna talk about Black Butler, you wanna talk about how good YOU are. How you “don’t sin” by watching it “without all the gross unholy stuff”.

Which is the exact opposite of what BB is about.

So, if you don’t want to, save us all the humiliation fetish and leave.

[shysublimecoffee]

Marinette receiving the Ladybug mantle was an absolute mistake. I watched the special, and honestly, gurl is doing the most—and for what? A guy? One dude, and she’s ready to throw her common sense out the window. Like, how has Hawkmoth/Gabriel not used his own son more often as leverage against her by now? That’s villainy 101, and he’s just sitting on it. Like for the amount of times I've seen this show rag on ChatNoir because of his weakness in romance when that Ladybug biggest weakness not CN lol.

At this point, I don’t even care about what Marinette’s going through. Whatever emotional investment I had in her? Long gone. She’s out here spinning lies on top of lies, desperately trying to hold together her crumbling Adrien-obsessed empire, and for what? She lost. Game over.

Now, if this were a story about a girl slowly getting corrupted, spiraling into villainy, and intentionally written as a downfall arc? No problem. That would’ve been a compelling narrative with a real lesson for kids about the consequences of obsession and dishonesty. But nope, instead we’re stuck with this mess where her choices make it harder and harder to root for her.

Marinette's speech at the press conference—“Ladybug holds the truth, she holds the truth” —had me scratching my head cause it sound more like a villain then a hero. Like, did the writers forget she’s supposed to have hero-like qualities? She’s meant to be the messenger, the symbol of hope, the hero. But how often does she actually display that in her own show?

Lately, it feels like being Ladybug is more of an obligatory chore for her than something that brings her real joy or fulfillment. Isn’t the whole point of magical girls to inspire, to help others, and to grow through their journey? Where’s the sense of accomplishment, the spark, the joy of making a difference? It’s like they’ve stripped her of everything that should make her role uplifting and meaningful.

I've seen here and there about how MC was never meant to come off that way or the writers are trying to make her more complex or how dare you do you dislike complex female characters or the most used it was never her intention to come off that way it was a mistake.

I want you to picture this without the music just dialogue cause i'm going to be clearcut about this.

Ladybug went to an orphaned, grieving child—one who had been locked away in solitary confinement, surrounded by nothing but white walls and being sensory deprived—and lied to him about his father being a hero. Let that sink in. Gabriel, who systematically abused his own son, was painted as a noble martyr by Ladybug.

Adrien, a kid who was finally starting to question his father’s authority, even beginning to tear down the oppressive image of the man who controlled and hurt him, is now trapped in an even tighter mental cage. After all, if Paris sees his father as a hero, a savior, how could he possibly feel justified in blaming or resenting the man? Gabriel is now a martyr in the eyes of the world, and Adrien is left to wrestle with guilt and shame for ever having cruel thoughts about someone everyone else idolizes.

Ladybug’s decision to perpetuate this lie doesn’t just protect Gabriel’s image—it messes with Adrien’s already fragile mind. Instead of helping him heal or giving him the freedom to process the truth, she’s reinforced the very chains Gabriel used to control him. It’s not heroic; it’s delusional and harmful, all in the name of preserving some twisted version of peace in her head.

You want me to feel pity for a girl who I'm sorry if I sound harsh to yall at the end of the day just want to keep the peace to fill her delusions that everything is going to work out in her part at the end when really she's just the worst type of coward there is when it comes to confrontations lmao. Accountability? She avoids them like they’re some kind of plague. It’s almost impressive how someone can masquerade as a hero while being utterly incapable of facing the hard truths. Lmao, sure, let’s all pity her.

Honestly, in the earlier seasons, at least Marinette seemed to feel bad about her mistakes. Now? She’s only gotten worse. I headcanon that receiving the Ladybug mantle or becoming the Guardian inflated her ego, giving her a power trip. With no proper mentor to hold her accountable and everyone automatically deferring to her leadership, who’s left to challenge her? Well maybe CN if he has the guts to do so but he'd rather cower into his shell lol.

In hindsight, I don’t think Marinette should’ve become Ladybug—not because she lacks the capability, but because the role itself seems to have worsened her as a person. Instead of growing into the hero I though she was meant to be, she’s devolved, losing some of the humility and self-awareness she had at the start of the series.

Let’s be real—we’re in Season 6 now, and we all know the writers aren’t going to make Marinette face any real consequences. The whole universe bends over backward to accommodate her. If you’ve seen Season 5, you know exactly what I’m talking about.

That said, I’ll give credit where it’s due: the special was fun. Yes, despite all my ranting, I actually enjoyed it because it was funny in its own way.

At this point, though, I’m only sticking around for Adrien and Lila. Honestly? I’m rooting for Lila to be the one to drop the truth bomb and expose everything. It would be chef’s kiss poetic if she ended up being the one to set things straight. Lmao.

P.s For anyone who thinks there is a dilemma to be had about the whole thing its really not lol rip the bandaid off.

It reeks of a megalomaniac in the making, making her come off like a gaslighting psychopath. Ironically, it reminds me of Gabriel—especially with the way he used similar wording. Honestly, are we sure Marinette isn’t Gabriel’s true daughter? Because the parallels are man.

I’m genuinely angry that she is the one everyone feels sorry for, and it’s only because the show is stuck in her perspective. If we spent even a fraction of the screen time on Adrien’s pain, it would make for a far more compelling story. It’s infuriating. Marinette isn’t some helpless sheep/damsel victim here—no one forced her into this role at gunpoint. She made her choices, knowingly and willingly. How dare she act like the weight of the world was thrust upon her without her consent? When she very much messed with a grieving kid here?

And yet, Adrien’s pain—real, tangible, and far more tragic—is constantly sidelined. He’s an orphan, being lied to by nearly everyone around him, adults and teens alike, and his suffering is treated as a subplot to Marinette’s endless drama. Why should the audience feel more for her than for the boy who’s lost everything? Why is his pain has to be centered to her??

This isn't a small mistake this has far reaching consequences if the show had the balls to do it to lie to the entire world over a man who terrorized on people fear.

If Adrien ever became a villain, I wouldn’t blame him. In fact, I’d understand and give him the free ticket to go ahead and cataclysm and burned the world .

[luneemeritus]

"pilot Stolas was better!!" no, he wasn't.

"bring pilot Stolas back!!" no ❤️

You want an evil, manipulative, abusive villain with little to no redeeming qualities that is a Goetia and has cool powers? We have two of them: Stella and Andrealphus. If it's only about the 'asthetic', a character doesnt have to be evil to be cool, Stolas's demon form and powerful moments are already amazing, and although he's powerless now, I'm pretty sure he will get his status back at least for a while to make a badass scene.

What the Hellaverse doesnt lack is amazing villains. If critics were so much better and creative than Vivziepop, they wouldn't turn a complex, well written, well designed and well acted character like Stolas into a boring Valentino 2.0 just because the pilot version seemed creepier. Lmao Stella is literally what all of Stolas's haters claim to want, look how well they're handling her. Seriously I've seen people saying that Stella needs a sympathetic reason to be a fucking abuser, but when Stolas (not an abuser) has sympathetic reasons to be who he is and do what he does, it's suddenly not okay.

Stolas is the only character I've ever seen who: sacrifice his life to his lover, and is still called "selfish" and "not enough for Blitz"; is seeing being abused by his wife since EP2-Season 1, even singing about how his life with her was miserable yet he remained strong for his daughter, and people will still claim that Stella turned out to be abusive "out of nowhere"; is forced to marry someone he doesn't love, is abused by said person, spent years alone and enduring that misery, and when he finally chooses to stay with the one person that never abused him, he is an "evil cheater"; sacrifices his own safety and happiness to make his daughter safe and happy, and ALWAYS — always — take accountability when he fails her (or when she thinks he failed her) as any good parent would do, and still be called a bad father (addition: forced to have said child but loves her anyway🤡). Just say yall alergic to character development.

I lost the Tiktok now because I blocked OP, but the big argument about "how much pilot Stolas is better" is a lie basically: canon Stolas, (abuse survivor, has the best development of the show alongside with Blitz, a loving father who remained strong for his daughter), is a "loser" (also a twink in a derogatory way, which is funny like, just say the f slur, we know that's what you mean🤡 specially calling a male abuse survivor "coward" and "loser" lmao like we know), while the pilot Stolas is a "manipulative, inteligent, cold villain" uuuuh no he wasn't lol hate to tell you dude, Pilot Stolas wasnt an evil interesting genius that was sooo intimidating, nah he was just creepy and honestly as funny as the canon one. Yeah you just hate the gay owl being well written. Pilot Stolas has 2 minutes screen. Canon Stolas has two seasons of development, he is the better one, I'm pretty sure people who say this don't even remember half of the pilot.

So it's not really about Stolas's actions, or mistakes, or him being a good or a bad person (he is a good person). He could be the most perfect, excellent, flawless victim, the 'wokest' most self aware pure angel, it's still not enough. Because it's not about him, it's about a version of him that never came to be but haters love to whine about it.

[coolingrosa]

There’s a reason I don’t like the Ink and Dream fight. I don’t believe it does justice to Dream’s character and villianizes Ink too much.

Dream main arc is about coming to terms with the death of Nightmare, but also accepting that what happened wasn’t his fault and the villagers were wrong. Nightmare was killed for things out of his control. His death could’ve been prevented if he was treated with compassion and understanding. Nightmare was not evil just because he was the guardian of negativity, and his morals and values around this also did not make him evil. The judgement casted against him that caused his abuse was unfair, as Nightmare could not control the hand he was given in life and what his side of the scale entailed. Dream understands as he gets older the importance of the balance and how the judgement towards Nightmare due to what he guarded was unfair and unjust.

And yet, when confronted with Ink, who has a moral compass and a job with expectations out of his control, Dream does the very thing the villagers do and condemns him. Rather than understand Ink’s position and acknowledge that what his brother went through is similar to the morality that Ink juggles, Dream pushes him away and villainizes him. Ink sees people as concepts and lets them sit in misery in AUS because he ISN’T ALLOWED TO INTERFERE REGARDLESS. He does not ever want to disobey the creator’s and his job as an overseer, so he never would. He partners with Dream to protect them from getting destroyed and respects Dream for this. But he is allowed to not get more involved and to have his own standing with things. Dream doesn’t have to agree, but if Dream was still reeling from the conclusions he faced from Nightmare, he should understand or at least approach this with a lot more grace.

Instead, it’s written as if Ink is a villain for his views and that Dream is a sweet soul incapable of harm. Ink is painted to be a toxic friend who manipulated Dream and poor little Dream fell right for his trap. If Dream was written to be a hypocrite in this case, that would be an interesting dynamic and character flaw. But he’s written to be correct in this argument, and it stomps all over his character development towards Nightmare’s death. Neither should be correct, because both have their own motivations. If it was accurate to Dream’s characterization presented, the fight shouldn’t have even happened. If it was before his arc, then yes, it would make more sense. But the lack of apology or conclusion post-acceptance-arc shows that it isn’t about Dream’s lack of awareness. It’s just about making him the angel of the multiverse while Ink is villainized once again for things out of his control.

And before people say Ink has a choice in the matter- no he does NOT. If he angers the creators, he loses his vials which are his temporary soul. He will turn into a husk and basically die. If he does not appease them and abide by the minimum rules in place, he will lose everything. Though he doesn’t listen to ALL the rules, that’s more fanon than anything. In his canon, he abides by them (mostly) and only interacts with outcodes- which is why he’s close with Top. Even if he doesn’t, he doesn’t push his luck too much to upset them or fail at his job, and stays hidden most of the time to keep the AUS from interacting with him. I can’t see him keeping that from Dream either- especially since Ink isn’t one to form connections and if he committed to a team-up, he had to actually care about Dream enough to trust him with those secrets. If Dream still shunned him and Ink was written to STILL be in the wrong, it’s a direct injustice to Ink and what’s on the line for him, and it paints Dream as selfish with a god complex. Which is fine! You can have a character with flaws! I would be so fine if it WAS about Dream’s flaws. But it isn’t. Because Canon Dream is a Mary sue of a character who can’t do anything wrong.

And don’t get it twisted, I LOVE Dream, which is why this fight angers me. If you want the fight, have Dream apologize to Ink and Vice versa in the future and come to an understanding. Allow Dream to admit his wrongdoings and have Ink do the same. Or if you don’t want that and want Dream to have more complex flaws toward Ink, THATS FINE!! THAT IS LITERALLY FINE TO MAKE DREAM A JERK IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS BC HE SHOULDN’T BE PERFECT. NOBODY IS. Make characters with history complex instead of tools to make your character more of an angel. Or don’t have the friendship breakup at all and have it be a fight that they work through together. You don’t even need to keep them working together. Like god just give Dream more complexity besides a little smol bean angel who is manipulated by everyone he meets.

My older sister and RoseVerse Co-writer saying it best: “i think this is the thing that arcane fumbled on when it came to cait

because they thought they wrote her has a beacon of virtue that when pointed in the wrong direction is catostrophic

but the narrative spent so much time trying to make the audience understand her instead of put in the work to teach her that yes, although she was manipulated, her drive to punish the undercity over one grief made her a hypocrite her mother wouldnt have recognized

dream in the same vein is supposed to be clear and cut archetype of goodness, and by that logic, nothing he does can be wrong

oh God killed all those people in the flood? he's good, and god is kindness and therefore the death was not only justified by merciful. but dream *cant* be an archtype of goodness if you also want them to have a character arc, they need to have flaws, be multi dimensional. you cant have your cake and eat it too. dream betrays ink and himself when he's met with the same situation and enacts the very violence he swore to protect his brother from. to frame that as good because dream is written to be good is crazy”

This is why I literally chose to ignore the fight exists because Ink and Dream are way too compatible as friends to be dumbed down in a stupidly written fight for Dream to get goody points.

[spop-romanticizes-abuse]

okay so first off. what does being "full on adults" have to do with disliking a character? like?? are we not allowed to dislike or criticize fiction once we cross the age of eighteen?

secondly, i love how they imply that we hate catra because of some sexist reason, but then lists mostly women among the characters who were immediately forgiven and faced no criticism from the viewers. so maybe it's not people "hating on complex female characters" maybe we just dislike poorly written ones.

and who said people don't hold hordak, scorpia, entrapta, etc accountable for their actions? we do, it's just that catra played a more important role in the story as the main villain and adora's love interest so obviously she's under more scrutiny.

we also see her commit more heinous crimes on screen, unlike scorpia and lonnie who were just following orders and hordak whose crimes were all lipservice. it's a lot easier to like a character who only committed heinous crimes off-screen. again, not justifying hordak's behavior, i just think the writers failed to make him an actual threat.

also i don't know how the nimona comics were but in the movie, ballister and ambrosius did have a relatively healthier relationship than catra and adora. mainly because ambrosius never hurt ballister on purpose and he genuinely felt guilty for his actions. even when he turned on nimona, he did it to protect ballister. he wasn't just using all forms of abuse on his boyfriend just for the fun of it, and excusing it by saying that he had a shitty childhood.

"(...) in terms of Catra, we saw the beginning of her redemption arc but she still worked towards it. She still took time to reflect, give genuine apologies to the Best Friends Squad, and turn around for the better."

i'm sorry? when did she apologize to the best friends squad? because i only remember her giving a half-assed apology to adora. glimmer and bow never got an apology from catra. glimmer especially deserved an apology because catra's actions led to her mother's death. also, i've already talked about how catra didn't actually change for the better and kept repeating her toxic habits, so i trust i don't have to say it again.

i do agree that in azula's case, the hate was more undeserved, mainly because none of her actions were justified by the narrative. and like op said, azula didn't have someone to offer her proper guidance.

(although i have to remind you, ursa never called azula a monster. she disapproved of azula's behavior but the monster part was just how azula perceived it. but i guess you know more about these shows than me, right?)

and that's where catra's actions can't be justified because she got multiple ways out, people in her life were constantly giving her chances, and she still chose to do evil. catra had all the resources she needed to become a better person, she was given opportunity after opportunity from the very first episode, and she still chose to participate in the war and chose to abuse and hurt people.

[sepublic]

Unlocking the Sad Backstory

I find it interesting how a lot of arcs in TOH have this general pattern of…

Character hurts others -> Character is unhappy, reconsiders their harm -> Character begins to do better -> Character’s sad backstory that re-contextualizes them is unlocked

And it applies even to characters that aren’t exactly villains or even antagonists, but for whom hurting someone nevertheless is a major premise! So to look at examples;

Amity is Willow and Luz’s bully, but we see how she’s unfairly manipulated by Lilith and is ashamed because of it. Luz reaching out to her makes Amity reconsider, she undoes the binding oath she placed on Luz. Then we see Amity’s siblings and how both parties are toxic to one another, and then we get a flashback confirming her parents are abusive. In regards to Willow specifically, Amity acknowledges she’s done harm to Willow in burning her memories, and works to fix them with Luz before we get this context.

Emira and Edric are also toxic to Amity, but in their next appearance they’re remorseful about what they’ve done to Amity, they’re working to make it up to their baby sister. And while they’re not present in the aforementioned flashback, their parents being confirmed as abusive tells you everything you need to know about them.

Lilith has a petty rivalry with Eda, but we see how much she cares and keeps breaking the law to look the other way, too. Then we see how she’s pressured by the Emperor’s Coven, and even threatened by Belos, before she captures Eda. We learn of her curse, but again; We see Lilith next and it’s reiterated that she believes this will cure Eda, we remember wanting to be kinder happened after cursing Eda. We see Lilith attempt to free Eda, and then we get the backstory about how the curse was mostly an accident. We get more info later on how Gwen’s neglect contributed to Lilith’s inferiority complex.

Hunter is the Golden Guard, he threatens to boil Luz, Eda, and King to death and wants the Selkidomus dead, but won’t even do it himself. He kidnaps Palismen to feed to Belos. But then later we see how he’s unhappy over his situation, how he feels like his uncle won’t let him help. Hunter begins to show consideration towards Flapjack and later Luz when he reveals his name, and then we get context as to how physically abusive Belos is, and where that scar came from. Flapjack returns and Hunter spares him.

Alador is either a controlling abuser to Amity, or a neglectful one. But he does hold his wife accountable when she tries to betray their daughter by going back on her end of the deal, and later shows genuine love for Amity when Alador isn’t more concerned about the family’s socioeconomic status. Amity admits how unhappy she is, Alador realizes he truly is hurting his daughter, and promises to talk with his wife over this. We later see him try, and then we see that Alador is also abused, and it’s implied his neglect comes from overworking himself in exchange for his children being spared the same.

Boscha is a bully, through and through. She torments everyone for purely petty reasons. But she also admits to feeling similar pressure as Willow, and then confesses to being lonely without Amity, Skara, Amelia, or Cat. Amity acknowledges that Boscha is lonely, but points out that Boscha needs to respect her for who she is. Boscha listens, and helps stop Kikimora. In the credits we see fully that she really was a miserable, scared child being manipulated by a grown adult.

The Collector is aiding Belos’ genocide, and (seemingly) knowingly. But they’re also fretful over the nature of their ‘friendship’ and are left betrayed and hurt. They meet King, and after being freed by him, we see how they try to be a good friend to King and are slowly listening to him bit by bit, which is why King vouches for rehabilitation over imprisonment. The Collector is already against harm to a certain point, defying what the Archivists mandate. And then we learn that they were unjustly imprisoned by the Titan, and didn’t even know about death in their childish, simplistic view of the world, seeing people as only broken and unmoving yet capable of being fixed at any time, if all the parts are there.

Gwen makes Eda feel ashamed of her curse, she neglects Lilith. But she does care for at least one daughter, and is horrified when she realizes the harm her antivaxxer actions have done. Gwen makes things up not only to Eda, but Lilith especially in taking her back home, even as Gwen explains during her reconciliation that she honestly saw Lilith as self-sufficient. And then a few episodes later, we find out her husband was mauled and left disabled by the curse, unable to continue his life’s work. And we get even more context for Gwen’s obsession in curing her daughter of the condition that gave her so much guilt.

Camila made Luz feel unwanted at home, going along with the camp, and her outburst later on was the wrong call; But she’s not punished for it, that’s not necessary. Instead she apologizes, we see Camila worry about the camp taking away Luz’s passion by salvaging her daughter’s weirdness for her, we see her be accommodating to Luz and her friends when she returns, having reflected in that time, and offering support. And then we learn that Camila was just like Luz, she fit in to survive, and she lost Manny, someone she needed to stand up for herself.

Bump is introduced as a principal willing to dissect Luz, but he also appreciates Willow’s magic and vouches for her to her parents. We see that he’s actually open-minded and cares about his students, he lets Eda enroll Luz on the fair grounds that Eda clear her own messes; Bump insists on following the coven system and places students into the detention track, but when those kids save the day, Bump owns up to a mistake he clearly didn’t like anyhow and changes things. And then we see his past, and how he’s been improving things this whole time, challenging Faust and looking out for Eda!

Even Steve technically qualifies; He’s a covenscout, he’s a jerk who knocks over someone else’s books to express his cop enthusiasm. But Steve forgives Skara for punching him in the face because he kidnapped her, and then admits to Hunter that what they’ve done is wrong, and he’s now reconsidering. Afterwards Steve has his introspective interactions with King, and then we see his face; Implying (and eventually confirmed by Dana) that he is the older brother that Mattholomule spoke of, who gave him the map to the Looking Glass Ruins that Adrian, in the previous episode, admitted he couldn’t find; Because Steve gave away the map to make his kid brother happy.

Likewise, I want to discuss two characters who don’t exactly fit this sequence, and don’t mature or get better, not of their own volition for one:

Kikimora is Belos’ assistant, she’s complicit in his executions. She tries to murder Hunter out of nothing but jealousy, helps bring Raine to Terra, goes after everyone at the Knee, etc. But then we see Kikimora is miserable because of her unsympathetic mother, who is probably abusive; She has no consideration that her daughter is obligated to their dictator, who demonstrated on live television that he’ll execute even his own high-ranking officials if they don’t go along with him, and Kikimora was there in-person. And is now expected to help with a major event involving other high-ranking officials and the dictator himself.

So we get Kikimora hurting people, being unhappy, and having a sad backstory; But we don’t have Kikimora reconsider the harm she’s doing. She accepts Luz’s help for her own sake, and instead of empathizing with Luz as a result, Kikimora betrays her when she sees a potential promotion. Kikimora is let down, we see later that she’s been demoted to the Crate Coven.

But then she attempts to bring Hunter to Belos, and it’s revealed later that she knows what happens to Grimwalkers like him, and has known about the genocide and still went along out of obsessive devotion. Despite this, Kikimora does not warrant Belos’ callousness, it’s not triumphant it’s just cruel because he was going to kill her just for being a demon, villain or saint it didn’t matter. So Kikimora is given her revenge when she helps free the Collector, who splatters Belos, an injury that leads to his eventual death, and stops the draining spell, saving Kikimora’s own life in the process!

At which point, you think she’d learn, right? But instead Kikimora does the exact same thing as Belos, which Luz calls out, despite having had her pedestal shattered because Kikimora doesn’t care about the harm to others, only herself. And so she can only temporarily be an ally, before going back to being an antagonist; The system is fine if she’s in charge, she doesn’t learn anything from what happened. And Kikimora is captured by rebelling students, and forced into community service four years later.

There’s also Belos, whom… Okay do I even need to explain??? We learn that he is upset by his brother’s death and misses him, too. And he does feel guilt about murdering Caleb and even the Grimwalkers, they weren’t purely replaceable in his eyes! But he never reconsiders his harm, he keeps repeating it, he never changes. Belos doesn’t even acknowledge that he’s doing witches and demons wrong. And while we do get his backstory, it’s clear from his priorities, the details, and Masha and the Titan’s own takeaways that he fully chose his misery, and that his backstory is not so sad with this in mind.

I wonder if the takeaway is that these characters can’t truly get better because in the end, they won’t acknowledge the harm they’ve done; They won’t admit it, they won’t do anything about it. And so they can only be counted on to care about making themselves feel better, but that’s it. And so on a pragmatic level, co-existence has to be forced.

Because with Kikimora, she’s made to do community service, and with prisons being abolished for hospitals, she’s likely on house arrest because the alternative is execution and no state should have that power. And with Belos, he proved himself too dangerous, he was well past his lifespan and dying anyway, and they were not going to sacrifice even a single, unwilling Palisman to keep Belos alive.

As for all the other characters, for whom things do work out with? I find it interesting how Sad Backstory is something for the protagonists and viewers to unlock. Maybe the idea is that the protagonists aren’t prepped to forgive a character simply over what happened in the past, just what’s happening now, and what they’re trying to do about it. You can still empathize when they’re sad, even without a backstory for context because look at Luz during Covention!

But as a whole it makes sense for the takeaways of those around them, because why should I care that you were sad, if you’re still being a jerk anyway? Now I know your sad backstory, but you’ve known it the whole time you were hurting me, so what difference does it make about you if you’re not changing; Do you just expect me to keep forgiving you out of pity?

It could be a consideration for what characters around them might realistically feel. The sad backstory, the re-contextualizing for why they’re like that, is the cherry on top to their arc; Yes this person sucks, but maybe they aren’t having a great time either. They give people a reason to be sympathetic. And then those people get to really appreciate their side of the story when they don’t have to worry about still being hurt.

Maybe it’s also a message to the audience, because with other characters showing that you still need to be careful in extending a hand, and given the toxic and abusive relationships we see, maybe this could be the context for that? An abuser’s sad backstory is the last thing on your mind; Your first thought should be that they’re hurting you.

But if they’re looking for help and actually want to improve, then you can offer it, and if they accept, then you can let yourself be caught up over their tragic past, instead of making excuses for them from the get-go because of that, RIP Hunter. When it comes to Willow, she was allowed to be angry well after learning Amity’s Sad Backstory, when she felt Amity wasn’t pulling her weight in making up for everything.

By contrast we have Eda not really giving a damn whether the curse was an accident, because Lilith still took knowingly took Luz hostage and threatened her, captured Eda. So her present actions are being unaddressed even if Lilith thinks her past one is. And when King vouches for Lilith, Eda refrains from taking vengeance; Lilith saving the family and taking the curse, past and present actions made up for, culminates in forgiveness.

It’s not enough that Lilith felt bad about it, she needed to tangibly do something about it, something genuine that doesn’t miss the point (unlike a certain emperor), and so to a no-nonsense adult like Eda, that’s when she can be forgiven. That’s when her sad backstory resonates, just as for the audience, that’s when we learn it so we can even appreciate it at all.

Some of this may just be basic storytelling conventions, like of course you’re going to get the character first and their characterizing actions, and then their backstory. But then again you could just as easily mix things up. Or it could just be an extension of this show’s larger fascination with re-contextualizing previous scenes and details. I just think it’s an interesting pattern to dwell over, and I wonder if it was intentional, how much was intentional, etc. Because with a show wanting to help kids understand abuse, to avoid it and/or realize it’s happening to them, to get help and heal, and finally figure out if they should forgive their abusers, if they want to… All of this could work in that regard.

[explodingchantry]

when anders tells Hawke One Lie to Literally Protect Them against repercussions of what he does, and then kills like 13 people all actively partaking in a genocide (which is what he was protecting Hawke against the repercussions of by lying), via blowing up a building that ONLY had these people in because he targeted it specifically at night when there would be no service, and when he literally offers to die for the lives that he took, and shows remorse even though he is literally trying to (and succeeding, btw) save defenseless mages about to get butchered. then hes a monster and a murderer and irredeemable and "lost to his rage" right. but when solas uses spirits as cannon fodder and literally turns titans tranquil for his own gain and literally creates the actual fucking blight and then when he comes back a thousand years later and regards every living being, but especially elves, with disdain, refuses to help them, murders his most loyal friend and ally for thinking modern elves should be treated as people, when he lies to and manipulates literally everyone he comes in contact with, when he decides to tear down the veil KNOWING it will kill an inconceivable amount of people, when he decides to ally with one of the magister sidereals to do so and causes the catastrophe that was the breach, when he manipulates the main character of a game via blood magic to puppet a dead friend for his own gain, when he literally uses everyone that ever comes in contact with him whether its felassan or mythal or the inquisitor or varric or rook . then hes "sensitive" and "will cry over killing a flower". then he's "complex, flawed, but with good intentions". and he gets to be the face of the franchise.

but anders is a twisted monster who ruined kirkwall and the southern mages and is to blame for all the ills that have befallen the mages/chantry since da2 and even a hawke who romances him will never say anything actually kind or positive or even just sympathetic about him, and varric will only ever trash talk him. then anders is just as bad as his abusers and oppressors. then he deserves to literally never be mentioned in a good light ever again.

okay

Reading comprehension test:

is OP saying you are not allowed to like Solas?

is OP attacking solas likers and solasmancers?

is OP saying that you cannot make a complex character/villain?

is OP saying anders is perfect and has absolutely no flaw whatsoever?

should OP be shot for expressing his frustration about the writing bias in dragon age?

[breathlesswordsbloodyknees]

Narrative Doom

Introduction

I've been playing around in and exploring this space where Sauron as Halbrand was genuinely seeking redemption, trying not to manipulate events but merely nudge them.

In my view, at this point he's in survivalist bed-rotting mode post-goo-form when he meets Galadriel. (I think he's more of an opportunist than a schemer in this era. Not that he doesn't have those schemes, but I think he's pushing those bad bad urges down. I have a web of scenes that I consider in this view for some other day)

I’m building much of this piece on these previous work: (link) (link) (link)

It's led me down some interesting philosophical rabbitholes, and I'd like to share.

Now, important to note, Sauron is a Maia—not a 'human' by any means. He's an ancient spiritual being who doesn’t feel the way us teeny tiny mortals do.

But on a broader scale: Tolkien’s work, like fiction as a whole, reflects and explores the human experience, so we’re riding that train.

All this with the framework of not absolving him for anything that came before or comes after. I plan on expanding into his evil alongside Morgoth and his actions in Season 2 at a later date.

But right now, we’re just exploring this blip of a moment where I consider Sauron could be genuine in repentance.

This is more an analysis of Sauron, but I feel like it has a lot to explore for Haladriel fans. There's some critique of Galadriel's choices here, but I want to make it clear: I'm not assigning blame. More just digging into the complexities.

And, well, I don't think this ship would be as compelling if it didn't have complexities.

Spoilers:

All of TROP S1

Vague themes/lines in TROP S2, mostly from S2E1.

The Good Place spoilers for overall theme and a few season 4 lines, but nothing outright about the plot.

Trigger Warning:

Be warned, I’m going to delve into some dark themes in a very personal way. Including but not limited to abuse cycles, personal trauma, harmful behaviors, and empathy within all of that.

I won’t lie, this work was hard for me. Painful to untangle. I would encourage you to have empathy and compassion for yourself, as well as me, while you read. I tried to put warnings before I go into these themes. Please take care of yourself.

---

To start

Sauron’s narrative, at its simplest, is a cautionary tale: If you let your ambition and drive for power go too far, you turn to evil. Higher values over sinful pleasures. Pride goeth before the fall.

But on a deeper level, being solely a cautionary tale, an overarching villain, a lesson to learn, what does that mean for the complexities of Sauron in The Rings of Power?

Charlie Vickers puts so many layers and so much emotion into his character. Yet he keeps it to a lot of imperceptible movements that, I found out last night, get almost completely lost in low resolution. I can see that being a part of some of the stricter interpretations of Vickers' Sauron. But there’s a vulnerability there that touches on some deeply raw thoughts.

—

So the relentless question in fandom: Does he mean any of it with Galadriel or is he just the Great Deceiver?

I'd like to ask, how much of it is just some deeply relatable ‘human’ behavior? Deflection, defensiveness. Half-truths, twisted truths, fibs.

Because as he says on the raft, he did tell her the truth, that he had done great evil in service of Morgoth. He never lied to her.

(An aside: I personally don’t give the “my ancestor” thing much weight as a true lie, I mean it’s his backstory and he had more reason for it than the Darkling did imho)

But really, who doesn’t try to hide and smooth over the worst ugly evil nasty bits of themselves and their past? We want to shine in the eyes of others—it's a fundamental desire to most.

—

On the other side, touching on influence and ambition:

Aren’t we all trying to sway events and leave an impact in whatever way we’re capable? Don’t we all attempt to sculpt the world like clay? Isn’t that really all we can do in this world?

And don't we often tell ourselves that we’re doing it for a better outcome? Even actions deemed ‘good’ and ‘heroic’ create ripples that have negative impacts, if only just for the orc babies.

I’ve been thinking a lot about orc babies.

—

Galadriel, from their first conversation on the raft in S1E2, backs him into a corner. She’s relentless in her quest for revenge against him and he’s whoops—sitting right there, doing the side eye meme. He’s gotta be self-preservational. And that rings true to me more than outright deceit. (At this point)

But I think over the course of the season, playing as Halbrand, “Lost King of the Southlands”, he’s trying. Trying to be “the hero she seeks”. Trying in the only way he knows how, which is…well, not great, he really toes the line. But he’s trying to ‘choose good every day and choose it again tomorrow’, while he’s on the path she set him on. So it’s a step by step journey towards the light, but the path is ever slippery.

And inevitably, as we know, he fails.

—

TW

So what does that mean for those of us who feel like we’re trapped in the narrative, hurtling toward a doomed end through harmful behaviors we can’t escape? Tied onto the train tracks, staring down what feels like an inevitable fate.

When all you’ve known for ages is subjugation and torment and abuse, what do you become? (Which makes Mairon even more painful, with his origin of beauty and light. Like a whisper of I was once admirable too)

I keep coming back to the image of grooves, well worn. And well, under the influence of an abuser and beyond, I too have done evil.

Holding the good you’ve aspired to and the evil you’ve done in one space; it’s a sharp, heavy feeling like holding coals, like touching a hot pan, something to run and hide from. And looking at my deeply ingrained behaviors from childhood, along with trauma that’s happened throughout my life...I see those grooves echoing in jagged bloody ways that feel comforting, even natural.

For a long while, it’s been the only way I knew how to self-soothe, these behaviors that can cause harm to myself and others. So I’ve been twisting around the question: Can we ever truly be free of the evil we’ve done? If it’s all we’ve ever known, baked and beaten into our bone marrow?

In Sauron’s case, the answer is no. His story unfolds the way it was written. The bad guys perish, the good guys win.

(though there’s the “they meet in Valinor” after canon theory, hope ever shines through)

—

That all brings me into The Good Place and that show’s moral thesis.

Spoilers for The Good Place:

More or less, the show states “people improve when they get external love and support. How can we hold it against them when they don't?” and “What matters isn't if people are good or bad. What matters is if they're trying to be better today than they were yesterday.” (S4E8)

Scanlons’ What We Owe to Each Other and the rabbithole of contractualism that I haven’t fully delved into.

I resonate deeply with what The Good Place says. All with the understanding that you have to put on your own air mask before you help others, don’t set yourself on fire to keep other people warm.

But I do believe we should help each other in what ways we can, rather than writing people off entirely.

So, I struggle with Galadriel’s moments of “shutting the door” being considered wholly empowering. Light prevailing, resisting the allure of darkness and the draw of power. It is indeed all those things, especially for her journey. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t blame her.

But there’s an itching here for me and I have to scratch it.

—

In S1E8, if we’re assuming he’s genuine, he put it all out there in the raft illusion. It was his biggest, his all, his hope. A leap of faith. Real vulnerability with an internal truth that was like holding coals.

He did what was ‘right’. He reached for support, for understanding, for community, What We Owe to Each Other.

(though we can’t ignore the scene before that where he’s wearing Finrod’s face. But I haven’t followed that thread yet).

He made a play for a better future.

And she—light and goodness and holiness in her hair, denied him.

“You are Morgoth’s friend”, “There is no such future.” Boiling him down to his worst parts, reinforcing his worst fears.

Is that all we ever can be?

---

TW

When do we write off people like Sauron, with all his history of wrongdoing? People like my abusers or even myself? When does the potential for redemption become irrevocably lost?

How much empathy should we show, and what are we obligated to offer? What do we owe to each other? All of this while carefully balancing the line of not condoning or becoming an apologist, along with taking care of yourself first.

It’s mind-boggling.

---

The answers are out there: self-compassion, self-forgiveness. Change comes from within. Balance. But it's the same way people say go outside, exercise more, drink more water to fix depression. When you're in the throes of darkness, those words feel hollow, trite. And that glossy sunlit path is more than treacherous when you walk it, especially alone.

So again, I say, I scream: Should we not still help each other?

It's not just internal and external separately, we need both. I have to believe that. Internal change and external support.

—

Conclusion

In the end, I'm really only left with more questions. This barely scratches the surface of what I've been brewing on, I could go round and round for days. I mean, that’s what I’ve been doing this week.

Regardless, all the typical takeaways feel hollow. Choose light, choose hope, every single step, no matter how hard.

It’s never quite that simple, on a very visceral level. And for some of us, like Sauron, it never materializes.

It all just eats and scratches and twists inside me. Ultimately though, I think Caitlin Seida said it best about hope and redemption and the struggle in her poem, Hope is Not A Bird, Emily, It’s a Sewer Rat. Which I greatly hope you’ll read and find what I have in it. (link)

So I guess we keep being scrabbly little sewer rats, hoping to claw our way out of the dank dark cave. And y’know, it may not mean much, but I’ll be here, down in the muck. Right there with you.

Maybe that’s all we owe to each other.

Follow-up

[merwgue]

Tamlin is one of the most misunderstood and controversial characters in the ACOTAR series, and while some of his actions—like locking Feyre up—were inherently wrong and abusive, they stem from deep-rooted trauma and manipulation, making his story much more complex than people give him credit for.

1. Trauma from Amarantha – 50 Years of Hell Tamlin spent 50 years under Amarantha’s rule, being groomed and manipulated. He was powerless to save his court and the other courts from suffering, and that burden fell squarely on his shoulders. For half a century, Tamlin lived under the constant pressure of being the one to break the curse, with everyone’s freedom hanging on him. He was traumatized, broken, and desperate, having endured endless torment. This trauma shaped his every decision when it came to Feyre, and while his actions—like locking her up—were wrong, they were driven by deep-seated fear and an overwhelming need to protect her, which he saw as his only chance at redemption.

Tamlin’s fear wasn’t just about control; it was about trying to keep Feyre safe after having lost control over everything else for decades. But, of course, that doesn’t excuse his abusive behavior. It was wrong, but it’s important to understand where that behavior came from—trauma, manipulation, and the belief that if he failed to protect her, he would fail once again.

2. Reactive Abuse in ACOWAR – Feyre Deliberately Provoking Tamlin In A Court of Wings and Ruin, Feyre plays a dangerous game of provoking Tamlin to make him react in ways that paint him as the villain. This is reactive abuse. She comes back to the Spring Court with the intention of tearing it down from the inside, manipulating Tamlin’s emotions and pushing him to his breaking point. She does things deliberately to make him angry and hurt him, knowing he will react out of frustration and heartbreak.

While Tamlin’s actions in earlier books were abusive, Feyre’s calculated manipulations in ACOWAR cannot be ignored. She deliberately enrages him, knowing exactly what buttons to push, and when he reacts, he’s painted as the bad guy. But let’s not forget: Tamlin was already mentally broken and reeling from losing Feyre, and she intentionally took advantage of that vulnerability.

3. Feyre Destroying His Court – Overkill Feyre’s decision to destroy Tamlin’s entire court is a massive overreaction. Yes, they broke up, and yes, Tamlin made mistakes, but wiping out his entire kingdom because of a failed relationship? It’s spiteful and malicious. Feyre didn’t just want to hurt him emotionally—she wanted to ruin his entire life, his legacy, and everything he had worked to protect. And for what? A breakup? The level of destruction she brings to the Spring Court is wildly disproportionate to Tamlin’s mistakes. She knowingly and willfully destroyed the home and people he loved, leaving him with nothing but ruin.

4. Tamlin Saving Rhysand’s Life in ACOWAR – And Still Getting Trashed Tamlin’s good deeds get completely overlooked in favor of villainizing him. In ACOWAR, he literally saved Rhysand’s life during the battle. Rhys was on the brink of death, and despite everything, Tamlin stepped in to rescue him. Tamlin put aside his grievances and his heartbreak to do the right thing, proving that despite his flaws, he still cared enough to save someone who had wronged him.

But instead of gratitude or any kind of recognition, Rhysand continues to trash Tamlin in ACOFAS and ACOSF. He makes snide comments, mocks him, and even invades Tamlin’s court just to taunt him. It’s infuriating when you consider that Rhys wouldn’t even be alive without Tamlin’s help. How can someone who owes his life to Tamlin continue to treat him like dirt? It’s an example of how skewed the narrative is in Rhysand’s favor.

5. Rhysand’s Hypocrisy – His Own Crimes Ignored Let’s not forget that Rhysand literally murdered Tamlin’s family. Yes, Rhysand’s family suffered a great loss, but they initiated the blood feud by attacking first. Tamlin’s family was killed in retaliation for Rhysand’s father and brothers attacking them, and yet, all the sympathy is directed at Rhysand’s loss. Tamlin’s pain and trauma from losing his entire family is brushed aside, while Rhysand’s grief is front and center, as if only his loss matters.

Rhysand is glorified, and his family’s death is framed as this great tragedy, but Tamlin’s loss? Barely a footnote. It’s a double standard, especially when you consider that Rhysand’s family brought the conflict on themselves. Tamlin’s trauma from losing his family is completely ignored in favor of building up Rhysand as the hero.

6. Rhysand Telling Tamlin to Kill Himself – Beyond Cruel Rhysand’s treatment of Tamlin post-ACOWAR is downright despicable. Tamlin is left broken, suffering from depression, having lost his court, Feyre, and his family. Instead of showing any empathy, Rhysand invades his court and tells him to kill himself. This is someone who is already at his lowest, and instead of being left in peace, Rhysand shows up just to make his suffering worse. It’s not just toxic—it’s cruel beyond measure. For someone who has supposedly suffered so much himself, Rhysand shows an astonishing lack of empathy for someone else in pain.

7. Tamlin as a Victim of Trauma – Deserving of Understanding In the end, Tamlin is a victim of years of trauma, manipulation, and immense pressure. His actions were wrong, but they were driven by fear and desperation, not malice. Tamlin suffered from Amarantha’s grooming, lost his entire family because of Rhysand’s blood feud, and had his court destroyed by Feyre’s revenge. He is not a one-dimensional villain; he’s a deeply flawed character who was broken by his circumstances.

While Tamlin’s mistakes should be acknowledged, it’s unfair to completely vilify him while Rhysand gets away with far worse. Tamlin’s trauma, pain, and losses are real, and they deserve to be treated with the same understanding and empathy that Rhysand’s story receives. At the very least, Tamlin deserves recognition for the good he has done—saving Rhysand, fighting for his court, and suffering through immense trauma without any support. Tamlin deserved better from both the narrative and the characters around him.

(This took me an hour to write I better see NO ONE discrediting me🤣)

[ladonnaalata]

I've seen somewhere an HC that Astarion lied to Tav about the extent of Cazador's abuse and that in reality Cazador was a caring and affectionate master.

Can we not do that?

Can we not woobify a villain just like we woobify Astarion?

I think there can be a middle ground between victim blaming Astarion and seeing him as this defenseless little flower who could never hurt a fly.

Cazador is an abuser. Period. Even if he tortured his spawns once in centuries, that is still abuse.

Even if he forced them to sleep with strangers once, that is still rape and it's still abuse.

Even if he entered their minds to control their bodies or thoughts once, it's still abuse.

Even if he gave them rats once, that's still abuse.

And we are quite sure he didn't do any of those things only once in several decades or centuries, as the game shows us.

Even if one doesn't want to believe Astarion (and it's weird because he has zero motivations to lie as the outcome of his life would still be the same: be free from slavery), there are plenty of other testimonies in the game that do that for him.

The servant speaking of the "horrible things" Cazador will do to him once he gets back, the fact that if you handle him back to Cazador he gets skinned alive and turned into a zombie, the siblings who hunt him who are completely subjugated to Cazador's mind control, the kennels and the rough torture instruments scattered around, the simple fact that this man carved personally an infernal mark on the back of his spawns for them to be "consumed", as that is for his own admission their ultimate purpose. He forced his spawns to fetch children as prey for mere revenge reasons and killed the daughter of one his spawns and left the corpse to rot in an abandoned bedchamber. He has a diary in which he records his "special obsession" and punishments he reserved for Astarion. He imprisoned 7000 people and left them to starve in a cage for centuries.

Now, if we want to HC that Cazador still has humanity left in him, and that he doesn't always have gorish violent outbursts we might indeed do that. Two hundred years is a very long time and probably even a Vampire Lord gets tired of the same sadistic routine.

There is no doubt that in his own mind Cazador is doing the right thing and is convinced he was spoiling his spawn, because he probably had it worse during his spawn times. He was impaled for eleven years, he had one of his friends killed under his eyes, and he was probably the only spawn of Vellioth, meaning he was the only one his master could obsess over and torment relentlessly. But his idea of "kindness" is his own perception of himself. It's his own point of view which is completely narcissistic and does nothing to take in consideration the torments of his spawn, even for a while.

We might also think that sometimes he understood pain and suffering and used to comfort his spawns via affectionate gestures but that would hardly be any retribution for torments he himself has inflicted. If anything it would indicate a personality disorder in which sadism and guilt mingle together to create this unpredictable ambivalent monster who acts sweet and caring one day and might skin you alive the next.

Cazador is not good, Cazador is not caring. He is a turbulent, complex, disturbed man with his own demons and painful past, we might feel sad for him, feel compassion for him and appreciate his character without forgetting that overall he's still a sadistic vampire lord who genuinely takes pleasure in others people's pain and treats his slaves as objects to satisfy his whims.

Astarion might be a liar and a manipulator but he lies to bring Tav on his side, seduce them and obtain protection because he's scared his vampirism might get him killed. And overall because that's what he's been taught to do in order to fetch dinner. That's in itself already proof of abuse and trauma response behaviour. But it's obvious when he's lying and when he's not, the game makes it super clear he's only playing with Tav about sleeping together, and Tav is equally amused at his attempts (you get the opportunity to tell him he's silly and a liar).

When he speaks about Cazador, there is no hyperbole in his words. He stops at describing some very specific episodes and vague suggestions, but he never gets overboard in trying to spur compassion or horror in Tav about his past abuse. He casually speaks about his scars when Tav sees them for the first time, and his demeanour is falsely lighthearted, like he's forcing himself to talk about them only because Tav asked. ("Now let's go, if I can't see them you certainly can't"). As a matter of fact, he's reclutant to speak about his past and we can only get him to open up if we choose the romance path and get to deepen our bond with him.

Astarion is selfish and arrogant, he comes from a noble background so it was certainly tough for him to accept and adapt to some things. He's an instigator and a yapper so no doubt he did what he could to annoy Cazador and get on his bad side from time to time. We can even HC he knew the Szarrs and always wanted eternal life without considering the cost, but in my opinion this shouldn't invalidate what Cazador did and how it impacted him. Trauma is also subjective and different for everyone, if for Astarion 200 years of enslavement have been a lot, another would be scarred for life at the mere thought of hunting a victim or at mere touch of a rusty knife on skin.

I think that simplifying this gothic horror which is Baldur's Gate 3's vampiric lore does a disservice to the player and we should take it for what it is: an horrifying story of power, corruption and control, maybe even envy, obsession and sexual attraction but please don't throw in feelings like "care", "gentleness" or "love" because those aren't present if not in the shape of another form of control and psychological manipulation and its still a completely toxic and abusive relationship.