#Good Lord I'm so sorry

[take-it-all-out-w-me]

I'm just deeply unstable. Every emotion ends up manifesting in an overwhelming way.

[drawsmaddy]

[ID: A digitally illustrated two panel comic of Martin Blackwood and Jonathan Sims from The Magnus Archives. In the first panel Martin is stood at a counter preparing a cup of tea. He is smiling softly with his eyes closed and a thought bubble next to his head shows a small image of Jon with some hearts around him and text reading "ah... Jon...". The second panel shows Jon sat at his desk with the mug of tea from the first panel in his right hand and papers in his left. He is growing and saying "Martin's such a fucking idiot I hope he dies". End description.]

Stupid season 1 jonmartin dynamic ily forever

[corundumyuri]

Everytime The Captain say "Good Lord"

[mohntilyet]

okay this is actually just bias now so before you read what i have to say i did warn you. yes illario would never be able to beat lucanis at being a crow or an assassin but you know what he would beat him at. being a lord of fortune. hold my hand as i take you through my mind palace and introduce to you my ideal post-game vision for illario dellamorte

[essektheylyss]

One thing that I feel is really interesting and often forgotten about Essek is that fundamentally, his characterization has been from the start based upon his desperation for external perspectives and connection, which, along with much of his narrative and mechanical positioning, means that he actually has an extraordinary and almost (but not actually, as I'll show) counterintuitive capacity for both growth and trust.

(Buckle in. This is a long one.)

In particular, I would argue, knowing now that many places where the plot touches Ludinus have long been marked for connecting back into the current plot, that he was quite possibly built as a prime candidate for radicalization by the Ruby Vanguard. He felt isolated from his culture, he was desperate for other connection, and he was certainly of the type to believe he was too smart to be drawn into such a thing, given his initial belief that he could control the situation and the fallout. If things had gone any other way, he easily could've been on the other side by now.

As such, he has been hallmarked by being fairly open to suggestion, perhaps for this reason, but the thing about that kind of trait is that it is both how people are radicalized and deradicalized. This is certainly true of Essek, who experienced genuine kindness and quite frankly strangeness from the Nein and was able to move from the isolation the Assembly had engendered to meaningful and genuine connection, largely propelled by his own internal reflection. By the time Nein are aware of his crimes, he's already begun to express regret to an extent and, furthermore, doubt in the Assembly, including explicitly drawing a line against Ludinus, even in a position where he was on his own and probably quite vulnerable.

Similarly, when the Nein reach the Vurmas Outpost some weeks later, he has moved from regret for the position he's ended up carrying a heavy remorse. This makes sense! He's fairly introspective, seems used to spending a lot of time in his own head, and was left with plenty to mull over. It's not some kind of retcon for him to have progressed well past where the Nein left him; it just means he's an active participant in the world who has done his own work in the meantime.

This is another interesting aspect to him. I've talked about this a bit before but I cannot find the post so I'll recap here: antagonists in D&D have significantly more agency than allied NPCs. Antagonists are active forces, against which the party is meant to struggle; allies are meant to support the PCs, which means they tend to be more passive in both their actions and their character growth. Essek was both built as an antagonist, in a position that gives him significant agency, and also was then given significant opportunity to grow specifically to act as a narrative mirror for Caleb's arc. Even when he becomes a more traditional D&D ally, he still retains much of that, though he occupies a supporting role.

I believe that this is especially true because of the nature of Caleb's arc, which I've already written on; the tl;dr of this post is that Caleb is both convinced that he is permanently ruined and also desperate to prove that change is possible. Essek is that proof, because he is simply the character in a position to do so. But this also means that his propensity for introspection and openness is accentuated! He has to do the legwork on his own, for the most part, because that's where he is in the meantime.

But he still ends the campaign necessarily constricted; he is under significant scrutiny, he's at risk from the Assembly, and he goes on the run fairly soon after the story ends. He spends most of the final arc anxious and paranoid, which is valid given the crushing reality of his situation. It would be very easy to extrapolate that seven years into this reality, he would be insular, closed off, and suspicious of strangers, even in spite of the lessons he's learned from the Nein and their long term exposure.

So seeing his openness and lightness now is surprising, but at the same time, given this combination of factors in his position in the narrative over time and his defining traits, it's not by any means unreasonable.

But one thing that I found so delightful is how much trust he exhibits, which is obviously a wild thing to say about Essek in particular, given much of what he learns is both earning and offering trust, which was something he says explicitly in 2x124 that he's never really experienced: "I've never really been trusted and so I did not trust." It makes up much of the progression of his relationship with Caleb, and the trust that he is offered by the Nein in walking off the ship is the impetus he needs to grow.

But I think it's easy to talk about trust when it comes to people who have proven themselves to you or to whom you've ingratiated yourself, and that's really the most we can say about Essek by the time he leaves the Blooming Grove. There is this sense in a lot of discussion of trust (not solely in this fandom) that it is only related to either naivete or love, but there's far more to it. Trust at its best is deliberate—cultivating an openness to the world at large is a great way to combat cynicism and beget connection instead. It allows a person to maintain curiosity and be open to experience, but it can be incredibly difficult to hold onto.

It is clear that the Essek we meet now is a very pointedly and intentionally trusting individual. He trusts Caleb and by extension Caleb's trust in Keyleth, as he shows up and picks up a group of strangers from a foreign military encampment and walks in without issue. He trusts the Hells to follow his lead moving through Zadash and to exhibit enough discretion so as to avoid bringing suspicion upon all of them. He trusts that Astrid will respond well to his entrance, but he also trusts himself and the Hells enough to execute a back-up plan in the case that she doesn't. In the end, he even trusts them enough to give them his name and identity.

He doesn't scan as someone who has spent half a dozen years living like a prey animal, afraid of any shadow he runs across in an alley, withdrawn into himself and an insular family, which would've been an easy route for him to take. He scans as someone who has learned the kind of trust borne of learned confidence and a trained eye for good will and kindness, which are crucial weapons one would need for staving off cynicism in his circumstances—as if he has survived thanks more to connection and kindness than paranoia and isolation. (If we want to be saccharine about it, he scans quite poignantly as a member of the Mighty Nein.)

So it is easy to imagine this trust and openness as a natural progression of his initial search for perspectives external to his own cultural knowledge. Though he makes those first connections with the Assembly to try to vindicate his personal hypotheses, he finds in them exposure to the deepest corruption among Exandrian mortals, which could've—and did, for a time—turned him further down that same dark path.

But it's also this same openness to exposure from the wider world that allows the Nein to influence him for the better, and in spite of the challenges he's certainly faced simply surviving over the past seven years, he seems to have held onto this openness enough to move through the world with self-assurance and a willingness to extend the kinds of trust and good will that he has been shown.

(I would be remiss not to mention that I was reminded about my thoughts on this by this lovely post from sky-scribbles and their use in the tags of 'light' to describe Essek's demeanor this episode, which is really such an apt word for it.)

[vaggieslefteye]

CHARLIE MAGNE from HAZBIN HOTEL (2019): Pilot - "That's Entertainment" ↳ "So, I've been thinking: Isn't there a more humane way to hinder overpopulation here in Hell? Perhaps we can create an alternative way to change souls through... redemption?"

[sunsetsover]

i know i'm late to the party and most of these points have probably been touched on already, but i said i would make a post about why kant safewording in episode 8 was so impactful and i am nothing if not a man of my word so here we are

(under the cut bc this got completely out of hand)

tbh i feel like i could write 10,000 words and i still wouldn't be able to fully articulate the way it completely turned me inside out when i first watched the ep, but i still wanted to pull this scene apart anyway bc as i said at the time, there were (and perhaps still are) people who think kant safewording in that moment was silly or out of place or whatever, and so for my own sanity i need to list all the reasons it was not only not stupid, but actually incredibly powerful for both kant and bison's characters and their relationship overall

bc think about the context. think about how shy bison had been when he had introduced the idea of a bdsm dynamic to kant, how he had admitted it's something he had wanted for a long time but never had the opportunity to actually have that with anyone. think about how reluctant he had been to actually hurt kant, and how enthusiastic and happy he was when kant told him he was into it too. how careful he was with kant, how thorough he was about consent (excluding the scene in his bedroom obv, considering he was drugged and couldn't consent nor dom properly). how insistent he was that they have a safeword despite kant's dismissiveness bc he knows how important it is that they're safe, and that they trust each other completely. to have it and to use it.

and then think about how gutting it must have been thinking about all of that in the context of a lie. a complete farce. this thing that bison wanted so badly, a thing he was so happy to finally have w someone, to trust someone with that part of him after a lifetime of keeping it inside. think about how vulnerable and exposed bison must have felt in the wake of that realisation, esp considering he doesn't have really any experience actually domming someone fr. how used he must have felt, knowing that this really deep and personal desire had been used as nothing more than a tool to manipulate you by someone you thought you were developing a genuine bond with. kant betraying bison is one thing - imo, it was the sheer depths that kant had seemingly gone to just to use him that was what really hurt bison (which in turn made him angry). like think abt it from bison's pov: why would kant make a point to project the northern lights all over the walls for him, sit and make all these plans together so that bison's dream come true? and why the hell would he go so far as to let bison dom him when bison had tried so hard to basically talk him out of it? that's not just betrayal. it's sadistic and it's cruel. it's like kant didn't just want bison arrested, but also to break him from within.

so that's the context. keep all of that in mind. and then think about kant, tied down, completely at bison's mercy. following bison's every instruction. taking all his abuse. and then think about him safewording. he could have said anything, could have done anything. but he chose to safeword. why? why that word? why right then?

well. the use of a safeword is obvious right? it's someone's way of telling their partner 'that's enough, i don't like this anymore'. and that is the very surface level of what kant was saying by safewording. but obv the context is very, very different here. and i think it goes back to the conversation that they had when they agreed on the safeword in ep 3: kant doesn't understand then the importance of what a safeword is and what it represents. he thinks he can just tell bison to stop and that he will, and bison is obviously like 'well no, that's not how it works'. he basically says to him 'how am i supposed to know you're not still enjoying it? how will i know you actually want me to stop? what if i get confused and hurt you more?' and kant says he gets it, and to a degree he obviously does, but i don't think he got the depth of what a safeword represented until it was tumbling out of his mouth on that beach.

bc as i said, a safeword is about trust. it's about two people (or more! but we're just talking abt these 2 rn) trusting the other that if this word is said, then everything stops. no ifs ands or buts. the sub obviously has to trust that the dom will stop if they safeword, but it's just as important that the dom trusts that the sub will safeword if they're unhappy with whatever's going on. the dom has to trust that the sub trusts them.

and so kant safewords. and yes he's saying 'i don't like this anymore, i want to stop'. but he's also saying 'i paid attention, i listened, i remembered. i know you meant it and i meant it too. what you told me was important to me. i value what is important to you. i didn't just dismiss it, i didn't just dismiss you. this was never just a tool. it was never fake to me. i never used this against you. i really am telling you the truth and here's the proof.' (which, for the record, is also what he was saying before the safeword when he was like 'i know you've never trusted anyone before, i still haven't forgotten our plans, i still want to go to iceland together' - it's all reassurance that he hasn't forgotten and that it wasn't fake, that he meant all of it and it's all important to him too). and he's also - maybe even more importantly - saying 'i trust you. i trust you to stop because i'm telling you stop. if you will listen to nothing else i say, i trust you to listen to this. i'm trusting you because this is important to you, and it's important to me. i trust you to keep me safe. i trust that that if i say this word, you won't hurt me anymore.'

which is exactly why one of the first things bison says to kant afterwards on the beach is 'you think i can't kill you, don't you?' because he knows. he knows exactly what kant using that word meant, what he was saying. it's why he froze, why he was so thoroughly devastated, why he briefly lost his shit then completely fell apart afterwards - because even though it was just one word, he heard everything behind that word, and what was underpinning all of it, which was basically kant saying this isn't over for me yet. i'm still in this relationship with you. i'm still yours and you're still mine. i still trust you. and though you might not trust me right now, i know you'll trust this.

(and that's also why he repeats it so many times imo. by saying it over and over, he's proving that it isn't just a desperate or panicked plea to get himself out of that situation - he says it again and again, making a point to look bison right in the eye each time, bc that's acknowledgement that he's well aware of what he's doing and saying by using their safeword, and he wants bison to know that too: this isn't an accident, this isn't a mistake, this isn't a last ditch effort to live. i'm saying this on purpose, because i know what it means for you and me both.)

which yeah, is kind of a kick in the guts if you're bison. he knew he couldn't hurt kant. he knew he wasn't angry the way he was pretending to be angry, because the hurt was just too visceral (which i'll expound on in a second). and here was kant basically sticking his fingers in a fresh wound. here was this man he shouldn't trust at all, telling bison that despite who bison was and after all things bison had done to him (deserved or not is irrelevant here), he still loves him - not just with words but proving it in a very tangible way. a way that was theirs and theirs alone.

that was what gutted me on my initial watch. i obviously didn't think about all of it consciously in that moment, but i still knew it was there. i still felt it, the same way bison did. kant safewording in that moment was never just about him saying 'stop, i don't like this, please stop hurting me' and bison knew it, which is why he reacted so strongly to it (and why i did too lmfao)

so that was my initial thoughts, but liz @ropebunnykant brought up a really interesting point that i hadn't considered at first which is that kant was also safewording for bison's sake. which, while it hadn't been my first thought, definitely wasn't the first time i've heard of something like that happening either - a sub safewording, not bc they necessarily need to, but bc they've noticed that their dom isn't enjoying it/isn't in the right headspace to continue etc. and when i went back i could see it so clearly, esp as kant started to repeat it.

bc what happens immediately before the safeword use? kant pushes, and bison says shut up. kant continues pushing, and bison keeps telling him to shut up. the back and forth of bison and kant's safeword discussion is once again so important to the context here - kant asking if he can just say bison's name to stop him, and bison telling him no, that they need a way to differentiate when 'stop' is just a word and when it's genuinely meant.

bison telling kant to shut up was his stop. and kant pushed, because he didn't realise it straight away, because he had so much to say and for the first time bison was listening, because sometimes stop doesn't mean stop. but at some point kant realised that this stop did. and what did bison teach him to do when he really needs to stop?

and so kant safewords.

i do think kant could have kept playing that game for as long as he needed to. as long as bison was angry, kant would have stayed chained up like a dog. he didn't have to - he proved he could easily get out of his restraints in their very next scene. he could have asked the caretaker to help him get away. but he didn't. he chose to stay. maybe he wasn't on the boat, but at that point kant was a willing participant in what was happening, he was consenting. why? bc kant deserved punishment. bc bison deserves to punish him. bc to him staying there is it's own kind of proof. bc if bison's angry then he's still talking, and if he's talking there's hope. apathy is what was going to kill kant and he knew it - if bison's angry, that means he still cares.

but then we get that shot of kant's pov, of bison staring down w the gun pointed at him, barrel shaking, tears in his eyes. and it's not fun anymore. neither of them are gaining anything from this. bison's anger has finally given way to hurt, to heartbreak - kant knows in that moment that bison isn't getting any kind of satisfaction out of making kant squirm, and likely never was. which literally goes back to the core of a dom/sub relationship, doesn't it? you engage in that kind of dynamic bc both parties are getting something out of it. kant was getting the flagellation he thought he deserved after what he'd done to bison, the punishment he wanted (and to a degree needed) as payment for his wrongdoing and the sense of absolution that provided him. bison got the satisfaction of providing that punishment, of letting out that anger, of making kant hurt for what he did - or so kant thought. bc the reality is that bison wasn't getting any satisfaction out of punishing kant. no matter what he said or did, no matter how he hurt or degraded him, none of it made him feel better. and kant hadn't noticed that until that moment (which i think he can be forgiven for, given everything that he was going through). but then he does notice.

bison wasn't getting anything out of the hurt he was inflicting, and was inflicting pain upon himself in the process. and if one of them is not getting anything out of it - if one of them is actively hurting themselves in a way that doesn't feel good - then they need to stop. someone needs to safeword. kant knows this. and so he safewords - not so bison doesn't kill him, as some people have said, but to stop bison from hurting himself any further.

and so kant safewords immediately. retracts the consent that perhaps bison hadn't even realise he'd given willingly. he ends the game. he uses his safeword just like bison taught him to, bc it matters and he trusts him and he loves him. that hasn't changed, not even like this. and he repeats it so many times for that very reason.

and believe it or not, i feel like there is still so much more to it i could pick apart even beyond this. bc god there are just so many layers!!!! like there's fear in it too, bc as much as kant is unconcerned abt the gun and is sure that bison won't hurt him, he's still human. some degree of fear is normal. i also think kant sensed an opening in bison's defenses that he wanted to get at just so that bison would just listen to him - bison wasn't really in the headspace to listen to anything before then, which is exactly why kant hadn't really tried to explain himself properly. it would've been pointless. and as much as he loves bison, kant is still kant - he still knows how to work people. i also think kant was tired and hungry and emotionally exhausted and while i do think he would've played along for as long as he had to, i think he also needed bison's anger and attention to fuel him. faced w nothing but his sadness, he lost all steam. kant's own sadness and overall feeling shitty probably hit him full force in that moment too, and he didn't have the strength not to fold under it. and so he safeworded.

however, if i start picking apart all of that i really will end up writing 10,000 words and no one really wants that, least of all me. but the point that i really want to make is that kant safewording in that moment was never really abt him not wanting to die. it was about care and it was about trust. it was about acknowledgement. most of all it was about love. and we'd all be doing the story and these characters a disservice to simply go 'hehe he safeworded out of murder' while not also addressing what it really was! which was kant acknowledging their bond, showing bison care in the only way he could while telling him he loves and trusts him all at once!! it was him claiming ownership of the ownership bison has of him!! he said penguin bc there was literally nothing else he could have possibly said in that moment that would have had the depth and significance than that one little word did!!! he said more with that one word than he could have said with a thousand other ones!!! and it drives me crazy whenever i think about it for more than 5 seconds at a time!!! thank u for coming to my ted talk!!

[catz4ever]

This is a Joseph Mawle and Sam Hazeldine appreciation post!

I'm going to be completely honest and admit when I heard my beloved Joseph Mawle's Adar was being recasted, I was utterly heartbroken. Seeing Sam Hazeldine's cast photo along with the announcement made me so angry. Like "who is this guy and how dare you replace my Joseph!" Adar was and still is my favorite character from the Rings of Power series and when something you love changes, it's difficult to accept that change. I began to realize that whatever events led to this recast (eventually Joseph advised he was moving on to other roles), that it wasn't Sam's fault.

Still salty about it, I went back and forth of whether or not I really liked the recast. Once I got over my personal preferences and saw in online interviews how much Sam praised Joseph on his work and complimented him as an actor, I softened up to him a little. Soon new photos of Sam as Adar were released and then the trailer. It was clear Sam and the crew stayed true to Adar and what Joseph brought to this character. He looks fantastic, sounds wonderful. The fact that he,like Joseph, also advocated with the linguists on set for more black speech in the script, won me over. It is so apparent to me that Sam loves this character as much as Joseph and I have no doubt he will give a phenomenal performance as our favorite uruk this season!

It took me a while, but I've grown to trust Sam and his ability to successfully and carefully continue the work that Joseph did in the first season. I am so excited for him to make his first debut as Step-Dadar and am cheering him and the rest of the cast on!

[shaadowmilkcookie]

I love ur oc

OIJSNFKDL;ALKFJNG'DKNJLHG????????????????????????????????????????? OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH MY GOD OH MY GOD HELLOOOOO PRETTTY LITTLE BLUE PRINCE HWO I HATE. SO DEARLY. SO MUHC. right in my inbox... oh my gawd.. oHHH MY GAWD u draw him so nice it makes me MAD bc he does not DESERVE this. 5 billion nukes to his location!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[spaceorphan18]

More thoughts on XM97 - because of course I have more thoughts...

Doing some more reflection, because this is what I do during hyperfixation, apparently.

It helps to write things down and get them out of my head, I suppose. Honestly, it'll be nice to get past the last episode, because then I can compartmentalize and just push the thing away until season 2 (if the finale gives me any reason to want to come back).

DeMayo went on another tweeting spree (I just keep an eye on these things because I get curious) and during this particular bout, I feel like I've got somethings clarified. And I think my own personal frustrations come down to - the ideas of writing and creating vs fan expectations.

Overall, I do think that XM97 is a solidly good (or at least entertaining) show. The animation is good. The voice cast is good. And the ideas they are using, in theory, are more adult and mature and nuanced than the original kids' show ever was (which, I'll give TAS some credit - dug deeper a lot of times when most kids' cartoons of the time didn't).

One of the biggest issues for me has been execution. First of all, the show is way too short for the amount they're trying to pack in here. It almost feels like they wanted to do everything on their wishlist because if they didn't, they wouldn't get the chance to do it. And it feels, muddied... They really needed a full season to unpack a lot of this.

The thing about Rogue and Gambit's story.... I get the 'kill your darlings' strategy of writing. In fact, I agree that good stories are messy and have conflict and you should always put your heroes through the worst. I feel like there was a better way to do the story (I believe) they're telling.

I don't think Magneto needed to be a part of it at all, and the triangle just feels... forced in a lot of ways. I understand that they went there to give Remy some heartbreak along the way, but I truly believe the two of them, with their own issues, and the two of them being in an undefined relationship with complicated issues over touch -- still could have resulted in compelling TV, and still would kept the devastation of Gambit's death.

Episode 5 is still my favorite, and despite my distaste for the whole Magneto side of it, I think the writing there was top notch, and still the best this show has been. I get, though, that they wanted to have Rogue and Gambit "break up" for the impact to hit harder, for Rogue to feel much more guilt once he died, for that last line to be even more heartbreaking.

So, the easiest route was to add the Magneto of it all. Episode 5 is brilliant in a vacuum. But in greater context there are other ways you can get there. And, no, Magneto wasn't ultimately needed. Rogue still could have had regrets, there still could have been heartbreak, there are always things you just don't say before a tragedy.

The thing about it, had they set this up correctly, and in a way that was more satisfying and didn't involve third parties? You may have gotten way more of the Rogue and Gambit fans on board. (And I'll get to the fan side of this in a second.)

See, TAS flirted with Rogue and Gambit's romance but never pushed it too far. Not only was it a kids' show, but Rogue probably would have never had her powers under control and it just was never going to go that far. Meanwhile, the comics have moved way beyond where TAS was. Rogue and Gambit's relationship has evolved a lot in thirty years - way past the tragedy, past the will-they/won't-they, past the break ups and reunions, and in the comics, Rogue and Gambit are a relatively healthy (for a comic book couple) couple of best friends and old marrieds. They're story is so far beyond what they once were that going back to TAS feels... odd.

So, the show starting in this place where TAS left off feels awkward in a lot of ways. There's a lot of expectations layered onto this show, but the show -- being limited by external factors, can't really handle all of it.

I don't think the first few episodes of the show did enough to show the sheer strength of Rogue and Gambit's connection and relationship. And part of that was time and part of that is because it's a sequel to a show set thirty years ago and part of it is time compression and part of it is the writing wanting to leave some vague open-endedness to the relationship so that Episode 5 could work.

And thus Episode 5 feels a bit jarring. It's way more a mature script. There's much more going on in those relationships that we haven't seen set up. Not really. And it's almost relying too much on - things that were mildly set up in the original and the heavy history of the comics.

Which leads me to what has happened afterwards. I think that in a world sans the Magneto of it all, you still get a Rogue who is absolutely heartbroken over the loss of her love. She would still go dark. She would still seek vengeance. She would still wrap herself up in that trench coat and wreck havoc on everyone until she ultimately succumbed to her own grief and eventually dealt with it in one way or the other.

(The part that I just don't agree with -- besides giving up the trench coat, which I know is symbolic in gesture -- is her running off to play Colossus in Fatal Attractions. Which, again, is why they did add the Magneto of it all, but I'm digressing.)

Anyway, this leads me to the fan expectations, and why it does feel so raw for a lot of us. Rogue and Gambit have never really had their time to shine. The films are full of mischaracterizations and limited (very limited) appearances. The other TV shows never let the relationship shine. And even in the comics it felt like forever for the X-Office to take them seriously.

This TV show felt like an opportunity to start fresh. To be excited about something. To get behind the characters we love and celebrate them. We can still break their hearts. We can still even kill them off. But give us a reason to care!

But instead of building that relationship with us fans, it went a different route. And now we feel heartbroken and angry, instead of just heartbroken. Gambit fans - who get shit on so often - get one bright of moment of glory before a death that feels somewhat hollow when you start to realize it was in purpose of someone else's story. Rogue fans - have the internet hating her with a passion. It feels like once again - being set up only to fail.

It feels hurtful, even when, I truly believe, that was not the writers' intentions. Make your characters go through hell - yes, but you have to have your audience on your side to make it impactful.

I don't really know where the show goes from here. There's either going to be closure or a cliffhanger. What I'd really like, though, is some sort of hope.

Because I get real life sucks. And I get that we often reflect in our fiction that it does. But we're talking about a cartoon about superheroes. We're talking about escapism at its finest. I love complicated and messy and nuanced and sometimes even heartbreaking stories -- but I also want something that makes it all worth while.

There is still one episode left, and I'm curious as to where it's going to go. Because at the end of the day, X-Men has always been about hope, too.

[poreyneel]

They don't know... oh my god they don't know

[asfodeltide]

not sure if you're a p3p fan but if so could i request the femc in the Him. pallete ?

[queerofthedagger]

Thank you so much for the tag @thebitchkingofangmar ! <3

Rules: Make a poll with five of your all-time favourite characters and then tag five people to do the same. See which character is everyone’s favourite.

I am bisexual how dare you make me choose /o\ this was physically painful good grief

No pressure tags: @emryses @kairenn-n @magicinavalon @glamdolf @swanhild and anyone else who'd like to, just say i tagged you! <3

[sculkshrieking]

dude your hoffstrahmdon is changing my life! have you ever thought about including adam in the mix for the au? ship thing or not i'm just curious about if he gets to live :-)

teehee i'm glad you like them :D!! I had to think about this for a little bit. Adam generally stays dead in my head because i love the guilt and haunting and also because i don't think John with his barbed wire grip on all three apprentices would ever allow his freedom. HOWEVER we love to self indulge in this house and throwing Adam into the mix sounds so chaotic.

Maybe Hoffman plays a part in getting Adam out which is what makes Lawrence feel indebted enough to come and warn him not to go after Jill (which just makes me think of Lawrence and Adam in the makeshift jigsaw hospital room getting tended to by Hoffman while John and Amanda are off getting bloodboarded).

Lawrence and Adam are insanely codependent because I wouldn't have their post-bathroom relationship any other way. They will bite, kick and scream like frightened dogs if you try to separate them.

With Hoffman, Adam probably has some mixed feelings in a "You're horrible and I can't stand you, but you saved me" type way. Mostly the first part, really. Meanwhile, I think Hoffman just finds him annoying and grating as hell, he wants that twink obliterated and all that.

The Strahm and Adam roasting matches are insane. It's a constant PvP zone in there and absolutely no one is safe. There are parallels between them that they're both doing their best to ignore. Also they can smoke out on the balcony together as a treat <33

I don't know what kind of situation would force them all to have to spend a bunch of time together but i personally would love to see the resulting carnage. I also would love for them to kiss, i just have a hard time imagining all of them liking each other </3. Hate sex is absolutely still on the table however <33. Adam how come your mom lets you have THREE big hot middle aged men around you etc etc.

In conclusion:

[clownakai]

Do you think Akai will find out that Conan was the last one that got to see akemi?

Ooo good question... Let's see.

On the one hand, my heart says that it should happen. Drawing from my own experiences, I feel like a lot of people would rather know what their loved ones' last moments were like, and while Akemi's were definitely not peaceful nor devoid of pain, I think knowing that she didn't die alone would be somewhat cathartic to know for Akai: he wasn't there when he needed to be, but, as horrifying as it was for a teenager to experience, there was someone by Akemi's side when she died— someone Akai knows for a fact would have cared and done all he could to prevent her death.

He did fail her, he did leave, but that didn't mean she was completely alone. And for someone like Akai, who I think is the kind of person who believes they can make a lot of difference with their actions/skills/etc. (in Akai's case, this is true as far as helping take down the organization goes; the problem emerges when this line of thinking— "I am important, I am a focal piece of this puzzle"— bleeds into contexts where it doesn't apply that well, and I believe this is true as far as Akemi's life choices after Akai was extracted go too. The matter of responsibility re: Akemi's decision to try to leave the organization with Shiho is something to be discussed elsewhere though, or I'll never get to the point here fjsjfjsk), it would actually be beneficial to know that what he probably considers to be one of his greatest regrets— accepting to leave without Akemi as he didn't have the means to bring Shiho along as well—, which could have been internalized as "I left her alone and in a bad position within the organization, therefore she died alone", didn't actually reflect reality. Not all the way, at least: the takeaway here is that Akai isn't the be-all, end-all of things.

Crudely said, the world doesn't revolve around him and his actions. That could be basis for one more step towards properly processing Akemi's death instead of solely using his mostly repressed grief to fuel everything he does.

(I hope I explained myself decently fjdjgjd, I personally tended to focus a lot on conjecture re: how Akai could have subconsciously internalized events rather than going for narrative significance because I'm a sucker for things visibly and concretely impacting characters when they happen.

DetCo doesn't do a lot of that in-depth, though, which is why I specified that this is what my heart says.)

Now, on the other hand, my head says.... Ehhhhhhh. It might happen just like it might not. From a solely plot-focused perspective, the additional information wouldn't really serve a purpose if it was Conan telling Akai this. The latter is plenty motivated already, and the nature of what would be shared wouldn't really add to that unless we count the confirmation that it was indeed Gin who killed Akemi (I looked around, but as far as I've seen it was never specified whether Akai actually knows she was shot by Gin. He's sure she was executed for trying to leave the organization, but anyone could have been dispatched to do it): in that case, I can see Akai being adamant in wanting to be the one to apprehend Gin, but seeing as his approach is fundamentally different from, say, Furuya's, there wouldn't be any significant enough changes in what he'd do story-wise, I think.

For that reason, I don't really see this reveal happening anytime soon, and if it does happen, I think it'd make more sense for Shiho to be the one telling Akai about it. She herself found out through Conan's recollection of the events, and we got to witness her externalizing her grief in that one incredibly visceral scene (my beloved).

There could be a tie-in to that, even: "someone as smart and skilled as you... how come you couldn't save her?" is what Shiho asks Conan, and it's easy to apply that to Akai as well (that's what Furuya wonders re: Scotch's death too, funnily enough. Akai really b out there collecting failures like Pokémon /silly). Someone like Akai, so skilled and with the FBI's resources at hand, somehow still left Akemi behind and didn't foresee a scenario that could result in her death; he is certainly less justified than Conan in this failure.

Now, I don't think that particular question was ever answered at all (understandable, as what the hell do you even say to that when the one asking is actively having an emotional breakdown?), but as far as we've seen, Shiho seems to have concluded that Conan didn't fail to prevent her sister's death for lack of trying. When someone shows again and again how much they value human life (to the point of endangering themself in order to preserve it, and showing genuine distress when they fail) you're less inclined to believe they actively decided not to help your sister specifically for some obscure reason.

What I'm trying to say is that Shiho would thematically be the more appropriate pick if Gosho wants Akai to know what truly happened to Akemi, and depending on where he wants to take it, he could even use it as a sort of starting point from where Shiho and Akai can begin to find common ground and bond with each other (either before a hypothetical final showdown™ or after everything is said and done and the bad guys have been defeated), as they're probably the only two living people who knew Akemi well enough to mourn her so strongly.

Still, this option hinges on whether or not Gosho intends to actually develop (or even simply hint at) any interpersonal relationships between Shiho and what family she has left: something like that would be incredibly complicated to portray properly in a story where this kind of thing isn't the focus though, so it might just never happen.

(sidenote: I've been actively ignoring the cousins thing until now bc I have genuinely no clue how either of them would react to that knowledge. From what little I know, marriage between cousins is legally allowed in Japan, although the incidence is very very low nowadays. So on that front it's mostly a matter of culture I guess? I don't think Gosho is going to actively address it anyway fjdjgkd)

TLDR: I have serious doubts on whether it'll happen at all due to the nature of DetCo and what it tends to focus on, but if it did there could be a way or two to give the moment some narrative significance.

[crossbackpoke-check]

"Bees" [remixed, abridged], Claudia Emerson // "Letter to Someone Living Fifty Years from Now" [remixed. abridged], Matthew Olzmann // "Letter to my Great, Great Grandchild" [remixed, abridged], J.P. Grasser | Len Redkole, Nina Weiss, Brian Babineau, Christian Peterson, Mitchell Leff, Dave Isaac, Megan DeRuchie