#I LOVE CHARACTER CONSISTENCY AND CONTINUITY

[the-crooked-library]

Blurred Lines: Agency and Victimhood in Gothic Horror

Seeing as Robert Eggers' Nosferatu has just breached a cool $135M at the worldwide box office, it might be as good a time to talk about this as any. I believe I echo the sentiments of most diehard fans of gothic horror when I say this: while we are glad to see this masterpiece meet with well-deserved success, these numbers also mean that a significant proportion of its audience has been previously unfamiliar with the hallmarks of our beloved genre; and the resulting disconnect between the viewers and the source material has been the driving force behind the great majority of the online discourse that surrounds it.

The tools and conventions of the gothic, as a genre, are essential to Nosferatu's primary narrative arc. Its central character, Ellen Hutter, cannot be discussed outside of her literary context. Textually, she balances between heroine and damsel in distress - blurred, in many ways, from mainstream understanding.

That is done entirely on purpose. There are numerous reasons for it; I could go into heavy detail about it; and I will - under the cut, of course.

The main thing I must make absolutely clear (before delving any deeper) is that the gothic genre is fundamentally non-literal. It deals heavily in metaphor, allegory, allusion, obfuscation - and, indeed, the blurred lines that have recently caused so much controversy online. This is by design. It is not a flaw of storytelling or interpretation. The gothic affronts the rigid, black-and-white, mainstream forms of morality because that is what it has always been designed to do; and the newer installments like Nosferatu do the same, being built upon those traditional foundations.

The historical background is therefore essential to the understanding of a gothic narrative. In this, the film does provide the viewer with a relatively easy starting point; its period setting amplifies its connection to its predecessors, as well as the societal pressures and systemic violence that it aims to challenge. It allows the audience to perceive the story through a historical lens that comes pre-installed, as a sort of short-cut to the genre's original social context.

The context, in this case, consists of misogyny, queerphobia, xenophobia, and ableism - which, while rampant even in the modern day, were that much more blatant in 1830s German Confederation, where/when the story largely takes place. Every human character, regardless of who they are, is influenced by these oppressive aspects of their society; and Ellen Hutter is hopelessly entrapped within all four.

Her social situation, as we are given to understand, is precarious. Though she was originally born into wealth, she married down to escape her abusive father. She is an eccentric - her "wild" inclinations (such as having a sense of dignity or loving the outdoors as a child) are enough to cause almost vitriolic disapproval; but on top of that, she was born with a psychic gift, which manifests in a way that is not dissimilar from a mental (and sometimes physical) disability. She and her husband are also English immigrants, and thus perpetual outsiders in Wisborg (this is also one of the reasons Thomas is so anxious to prove himself at Knock's firm, and so keen to emulate Harding in all things); and, finally, she implied to experience queer attraction - which, though non-explicit, repressed, and never truly indulged, still affects her and the way she is continuously treated throughout the film.

Overall, Ellen's existence is perceived, at best, as an inconvenience - and at worst, a scandal. With that, she fits seamlessly into her story's genre.

The "immoral," the forbidden, the taboo is a cornerstone of all gothic fiction. It exists in the doubt between light and dark, harm and desire, love and abuse. It is the domain of sympathetic villains (e.g. Heathcliff, Wuthering Heights), of imperfect victims (Bertha Mason, Jane Eyre), of heroes who are deeply flawed, who cause their own tragedies, and often fail to save anyone at all (Victor Frankenstein, Frankenstein). Within the gothic genre, there are no absolutes; and its contradicting balance of dichotomies provides a reference point - or, more accurately, a cultural triangulation - for exploring the same complexities that a binary puritanical mindset strives to eradicate. These include sexual desire, female autonomy, physical and mental disabilities, classism; in short, anything that gets people wincing.

The popular discussion of these topics is frequently cruel, often avoidant, and rarely straightforward or productive. As stated above, it makes people uncomfortable. It's not pleasant. However, for Ellen (and many people in the real world), it is, quite literally, impossible to avoid. It defines every aspect of her daily life.

What this means for her and for the story is that within a narrative that refuses to gloss over the imperfections of her surrounding society, her victimhood is not thrust upon her by a shadowy figure, emerging from the night. Instead, she is a victim - of an ongoing and systemic, rather than individual, abuse.

This aspect of Ellen's characterization lies at the core of her behaviour throughout the film. She is an unstable chimera of Brontë's Jane Eyre and Bertha Mason - in the sense that her actions are informed, in great part, by her acute awareness of her own disenfranchisement. She alternates between anguished raving and phlegmatic practicality, used to her pain but unable to entirely ignore it; and, the same way that Jane sees all the rage she feels (but cannot afford to express) manifested in Bertha, Ellen finds her counterpart in Orlok.

This is where the ambiguity begins.

Even though Orlok is most certainly a gothic villain, his relationship with Ellen cannot be interpreted as strictly adversarial. Naturally, it would be easy to ascribe their dynamic to grooming and PTSD; however, as previously mentioned, a gothic narrative is never surface-level - and the film itself never furnishes any information that would definitively limit it to that.

Firstly, to get the primary discourse point out of the way - yes, when Ellen and Orlok first meet within the ether, she is indeed young; and later, she is said to have been a child. However, at the time, the term "teenager"did not yet exist; Ellen's younger self is not portrayed by a child actress; and later, in 1838, she is referred to as a child multiple times - despite being an adult, married woman. Overall, within the film, the term is more often used to describe innocence and inexperience, rather than age; and her initial age is never specified. Granted, a multi-century age gap is not exactly "healthy" anyway - but this is a vampire story. It is per the course; and it complicates their relationship beyond a simple victim vs abuser narrative.

Secondly - and perhaps, most importantly - the overall impact of Orlok's coercion tactics falls flat in comparison to Ellen's human-world alternatives. Yes, he argues and threatens; but her social circumstances have never allowed her agency in the first place. Her father abuses, isolates, and threatens to institutionalize her; Thomas dismisses her concerns as "childish fantasies"; Harding and Sievers tie her down and drug her; Harding again kicks her out of the house. Her marriage, her friendships, are therefore all transactional; they grant her an escape from her father's house, relative financial stability, social support - on the condition that she represses her true self, pretends to be normal, doesn't threaten anyone's masculinity or heterosexuality, and acts like she's happy to be a deferring, obedient, settled wife. Being a daughter of a landed gentleman, she would never have been given a working woman's education, and evidently has no income of her own; and so, she has no options except to upkeep her end of the bargain - which means that her continued survival within mainstream society relies on constant background coercion.

Compared to this mundane, socially acceptable horror of her existence, the vampire actually offers her more autonomy than she is ever otherwise accorded. The terms of his covenant never threaten Ellen's own well-being; so on one hand, she has benevolence - and on the other, the dignity of choice.

This contrast lies at the heart of her dilemma. Ellen is torn between what she believes she should be and what she knows - and Orlok knows - she is.

One is "correct," moral, Good; the other is "wrong," sinful, Evil. However, at the same time, the first is manufactured; it is artificially designed, and must be continuously enforced. The second is primal. Natural. In accordance with gothic tradition, the appeal of Orlok is that he is forbidden, yet instinctive. By design, he is a reflection of everything that Ellen is forced to repress on a daily basis. That includes her rage, her ostracism, her abnormalities; but also, her desperate need to be respected, understood, and desired. He is both grotesque and alluring, both a lord and a beast, both cruel and reverent.

"He is my melancholy!.." cries Ellen.

"I am Heathcliff!" whispers Cathy.

Still, while Cathy and Heathcliff are primarily divided by class and racism, Orlok and Ellen are separated by moral considerations. In the explicit sense, Ellen cannot choose the Evil that Orlok represents. Within the surface narrative, she is obligated by her society, her morals, and the story to choose Good - in this case, by nobly sacrificing her individual expendable life to save her husband and a city full of people. Her primary storyline, like everything else, has already been decided for her.

For the Trekkies among us, this is Ellen's own Kobayashi Maru. A no-win scenario. As such, within the context of character analysis, her destination does not matter as much as the little things she does along the way; and it is no accident that, as the film progresses, the subtler, seemingly insignificant choices she makes within that framework just happen to bring her closer - and closer - to Orlok.

All of them are just innocuous enough to almost pass. She places a lock of perfumed hair in a locket that she gives to Thomas - and upon his arrival to the Carpathians, the same locket is immediately claimed by Orlok, who recognizes the scent of lilacs. Before making her sacrifice, she puts on her wedding dress and finds a bouquet of the same flowers - which is the sort of effort she didn't have to perform, especially given that he cannot resist her blood regardless. When Orlok arrives, she chooses to undress them both, and leads him to the bed, even though her previous sex scene with Thomas was entirely clothed; and in the morning, she pulls him close and holds him through the sunrise - even though he was already dying, and would not be able to escape. There was no need for her to touch his rotting flesh at that point, much less caress it.

There can be a "moral" explanation for all these actions; but the lack of direct obligation involved in them becomes increasingly blatant over the course of the story, and the doubt festers.

This sort of lingering ambiguity is precisely where gothic horror thrives - and intersects, scandalously, with romance. Gothic horror, much like bodice-ripper novels, noir thrillers, or "dark romance," builds much of its romantic intensity on the dichotomy of shame and desire. Imagine it, if you will, as a loom; warp and weft. It may even be described as literary BDSM - a continuous, mutually-agreed-upon act of roleplay between the author and their audience, and sometimes the characters themselves (though that depends). The point is to create an outlet for female, queer, or disabled sexualities, all of which are still heavily medicalized and restricted, derided, or denied entirely; and within these often intersecting genres, the violent or coercive intensity of the dominant lead (be it a vampire, a mafia don, or simply a more experienced lesbian) provides their repressed, seemingly passive counterpart an excuse to act upon their demonized erotic urges.

Between the page and the mind, everything that normally complicates a romantic or sexual encounter in the real world (subliminal hints, aggression, repressed and involuntary responses) becomes set dressing - serving to place a particular scene or dynamic within its fictional universe. The resulting Watsonian uncertainty is, naturally, part of the appeal. It is what allows the viewer/reader/listener a sincere emotional and sensual immersion; and for Ellen and Orlok, it provides an appropriately dramatic pretext for a night of tender vampire sex.

The discourse around their joining is painfully similar to the same that drifts around online every winter - in regards to the classic holiday hit, Baby it's Cold Outside. The song, written during an era in which extramarital sexuality was heavily restricted, follows a couple brainstorming excuses for the lady to stay the night; this intention was explicitly stated by both members of the original duet; but that hasn't stopped thousands of people from interpreting it as a "rape anthem." It is unsurprising, then, that an element of horror (guilt, shame, repression, coercion) muddles the water even further.

It's oddly apt, considering that the film premiered on Christmas Day.

Granted, I am not denying that there is an abusive aspect to Ellen and Orlok's connection, romantic or otherwise. However, to reduce Ellen to merely his "victim" is extremely inaccurate to her actual portrayal - because, within the framework of the film, her interactions with Orlok are the few in which she is actually able to exercise some form of agency. She never defers to him, their wedding-death hinges on her free will, as coerced as it may appear; and, in a fascinating subversion of a popular vampire trope, she is the one who summons him.

In gothic media, "Come to me!.." is invariably spoken by a vampire (or a vampire derivative like Erik, Leroux's titular Phantom of the Opera); their counterpart follows helplessly, without question; and giving these lines to Ellen is a dramatic deviation from tradition that fundamentally alters the underlying context of their power balance. By maintaining this call-and-response dynamic throughout the story, Eggers asserts that Ellen isn't helpless; and neither is she "in over her head." She is intelligent, powerful, and she has a tangible influence over Orlok, who is her only equal - which is why, ultimately, she is the one deciding where that relationship is headed.

That is not to say that any alternative readings of the film are entirely incorrect. As I have stated above, the abusive/toxic narrative is definitely present, and even essential, in gothic media. On the Doylist level, it is the equivalent of a whip, or a solid pair of cuffs - essentially, a divestment of responsibility; though, to continue the metaphor, not everyone shares the same kink - and those who do might not all enjoy it the same way, so there's definitely significant variation. What I am trying to say, however, is that each story does come with a central conflict; and Ellen Hutter's victimization - much like Jane Eyre's, like Thomasin's (The Witch, 2015) - is systemic.

She is ostracized, disrespected - infantilized if her oppressors are feeling benevolent, demonized when they are inconvenienced - and still expected to always prioritize her husband/friends/community by default, regardless of how she is treated by them. Her surrounding society, morality, religion, culture all insist upon the same; and this is why, despite knowing that she has done nothing wrong by following her nature, she carries an enormous amount of guilt in regards to those "unacceptable" aspects of herself. It is also the same reason why Orlok - the sensual, cruel, utterly devoted monster - is the answer to her lonely call; and the reason why everyone around her is so eager to see her as his victim, rather than a victim of anything they may have perpetrated themselves. Ellen's is a rich complexity, fed upon centuries' worth of gothic tradition, and she cannot be forced into a flat, genre-inappropriate simplification.

Like The Witch, like NBC Hannibal, like Interview With the Vampire before it - Nosferatu (2024) is a story of self-indulgence being so unfamiliar that it feels like a sin; or, like dying.

I, for one, would not deny her that.

[ri-writes-if]

First Anniversary & New Free Stories

TAS is one year old! Wow!

This has been a wonderful year. I want to thank everyone for reading my story, commenting, and sharing it with others. I can't even describe how much I appreciate your interest and support. Before I published TAS, I couldn't imagine having so many amazing readers. There are already 2K followers here alone, which is a terrific number I can't comprehend.

Creating something I love, being able to share it with you, and meeting such a kind reception is like a blessing. Sometimes I just can't believe I've reached this point; it was so far away before, unreachable, unreal. You truly bring joy into my life and motivate me to continue writing. So thank you from the bottom of my heart 💛

This is also a personal achievement for me. Writing so much, so consistently. Knowing there are people who are waiting for new chapters definitely helps with that. Here's to an even more productive year! 🥂

I wrote new year stories, which are now available for everyone for free. It's a scenario with an alternative holiday (what if demons celebrated the New Year like we do?). Each story is 1K words for every character, wish established relationship with the Oracle.

LINK

Enjoy! 💛

[fairandfatalasfair]

A few years ago I ran across a post talking about flood gifts - things that come out of a terrible experience that are nonetheless good and valuable to you.

I think about that a lot in relation to Charles, because Charles very much strikes me as someone who has made a life (or an afterlife) for himself out of flood gifts. I'm fascinated by the contradictions of him, the way so much of his character consists of things that are fundamentally good and valuable and beautiful, and that come from such heavy and tragic experiences.

His protectiveness, which grew out of the experience of never being safe at home, of being determined to protect his mother even though he was a child and deserved to be protected himself. But that protectiveness is something he's proud of and should be proud of, something that keeps him and his friends safe, a gift that he gives to the people around him.

His skill with people, which he needed to survive in a house where things could go south at any moment, and to navigate a friend group that ultimately turned on him for being brown and working class and daring to step out of line. But that skill is still worth having. It makes him good at the work he's chosen to spend his afterlife on, balances Edwin's brusque manner and puts people at ease, allows him to create warmth and family and safety with people who push others away without even trying.

His relationship with Edwin, who only met him because he was dying. Charles didn't want to die. He had a life to live, dreams and goals and joys yet to be attained. That he died at sixteen, with so much of his life still unlived, was a tragedy. And also, his death was the start of the most important relationship of his life, with someone who means everything to him and loves him in ways he never was while he was alive. He can grieve his life, and still know he wouldn't give up his partnership with Edwin to have it back.

There's a lot to love about Charles Rowland as a character, but this is one that I keep coming back to in my head, the way he made and continues to makes good things out of the horrors and tragedy of his life.

[casscainmainly]

Hope this is okay to ask but do you have any comic recs for people new to dc? I've seen some of the mainstream TV shows and movies but I've never really read any of the comics, so most of my "batfam" knowledge is limited to Bruce and Dick's storylines.

Of course it's okay!! I love recommending my fav comics, feel free to ask for any and all things :). In general, a great place to start is by picking a character you like and finding a rec list for them. Here's a great one from fantastic-nonsense that covers just about every Batfam character! (It also has a list of great whole Batfam runs).

If you want my opinion, here are my recommendations:

Batgirl (2000): This is where I personally started, and gives you a great overview of a lot of Batfam characters like Bruce, Cass, Babs, Tim, Steph, and Dick. You might need a little background info (if you don't know who these people are it might be a little tough), but it's fairly accessible and easy to learn as you go!

Gotham Knights (2000): A book that spotlights basically every Batfam character at the time, so a great place to get acquainted with everyone. The quality is not quite consistent, but there are gems in here and you get the whole Batfam experience.

Batman: Year One / Robin: Year One / Nightwing: Year One: Since you mentioned you know Bruce and Dick, these are great places to start for both of them! Year One stories are meant to be introductions to the character, so they're fairly accessible. Also check out Batgirl: Year One for Babs.

Batman: No Man's Land: A huge crossover event that shakes up Gotham (as events do), NML features a ton of Batfam characters and serves as Cass' introduction. There are a heap of events right before this, but a quick wiki search can help get you up to speed; it's still alright to jump in here.

Tynion's Detective Comics (2016): Post-New 52 (which was an event that wiped much of previous continuity), this run by Tynion does a great job at re-establishing Batfam characters, and serves as a good intro to many characters such as Tim, Cass, Kate, Luke, and Jean-Paul.

For out of continuity stories, you can check out Li'l Gotham and Wayne Family Adventures. These are great for getting used to the characters before jumping into heavier arcs, and WFA features basically every current Batfam member (the portrayals are not necessarily the most accurate, but this is a good starting point).

Of the current core Batfam, the above list misses Damian, Jason, and Duke. For Damian, read Batman and Robin (2009) (also a hefty amount of Dick!); for Jason, you can watch the Under the Red Hood movie if you haven't already, and the comic is also a good intro; for Duke, We Are Robin (2015) is a great intro and his best run.

[alltimefail]

Happy fifth day of Character Appreciation Week to Jenny Green, The Night Nurse, and Esther Finch!

I'm not going to lie—it was quite difficult to summarize my thoughts on THREE icons in one post, but I did my best! 🧡

Transcript below the cut

For a show called Dead BOY Detectives, there is certainly no shortage of strong, nuanced, witty, captivating women in this show. Perhaps no characters display that range better than Jenny, The Night Nurse, and Esther Finch. Not only are they played by some of the most talented women I've ever had the pleasure to see on my screen; but they're also vastly different, showcasing a spectrum of personalities and motivations. Amidst the wacky teen antics they bring something to the table: Jenny brings protection and emotional guidance, the Night Nurse (despite technically being an antagonist) brings structure and rules in excess, but also is crucial in helping Charles retrieve Edwin from Hell…

…and Esther Finch? Well, she brings unapologetic and consistent revenge schemes, continually challenging our heroes, and a myriad of quotable one-liners that live in my head rent-free forever. All that to say, none of these women have cookie-cutter personalities or are resigned to background noise, and I loved every morsel of characterization we were given for them. I was left wanting more background information, quick to dream up future scenarios with them in the story because they're just that compelling. Today and every day, I'm thankful for these three women who helped enrich the Dead Boy Detectives universe! 🧡

[azurityarts]

(slides in here) 3, 9, and 11 for the PMD ask game!! >:]

3. Which final boss and/or final dungeon do you like the most (whether from a narrative or gameplay perspective)?

Across the games, I think Temporal Tower's duality of being the final dungeon in the main game and the final dungeon in Special Episode 5 is super engaging!

But in terms of gameplay, I gotta give the best final dungeons to both Gates and Super on OST alone—I'm sorry, but you can't beat Glacier Palace: Great Spire or Tree of Life: Roots/Trunk. Those tracks are some of the most atmospheric, moving songs in the entire franchise, and perfectly capture the sense of the impending challenge ahead, while still spurring you onwards in spite of it.

9. Are there any soundtracks you think are underrated or overlooked, or are there unused tracks you wish were in the game?

I've sung my praises for the 3DS PMD games' soundtracks before, and my opinion still stands!

But I'll give a mention to this little unused alternate Goodnight track for Explorers!

It just gives off a totally different feeling than the used song! Super charming and fun.

11. Any headcanons that take place after the games that you want to share?

I don't think this is necessarily an uncommon headcanon, but I like to think Medicham, Gardevoir, and Ekans in Rescue Team end up as the same Medicham and Gardevoir in Team Charm and the now-evolved Arbok in Team AWD! I'm a big sucker for continuity in media, so having previous characters continue to appear and develop across the games is a super fun concept I like!

[xxplastic-cubexx]

i just gotta stop drawing after this im never drawing an erik this nice ever again

[shorthaltsjester]

i contain multitudes and can say that i am a little :( about vex and percy being teammates with benefits because i think there’s something particularly heartbreaking about the dynamic that was neither of them ever said a thing even though they both were aware of it and it took losing percy for vex to finally admit it and Even Then, she couldn’t say it to percy’s face when they got him back, percy was the one who had to make the first move (that they were both alive for at least) and he was only able to do that because he’d heard her confession, because he never would’ve thought otherwise. to be clear, i also very much enjoy the story being told, i think i just wish they’d maybe committed more significantly to This Is A Campaign-Inspired Story Rather Than A Retelling sooner in the show so that maybe there would be a bit more grounding or set-up for the storylines the narrative is focusing on (and i understand why they wouldn’t), because i think they’re doing very well with percy’s arc for example, because they started with focusing on his and keeping his beats mostly the same and that seems to be much the same case as some of his second wave of meaty character stuff has arrived. but with vex they’ve aimed for the same character beats but it doesn’t always feel as earned or really feel like much character at all; i think saundor particularly was a bit of an :/, since in the campaign it was really a catalyst for vex interrogating her role in the party and her morality and something she struggled to get over and that haunted her far beyond the walls of that tree, but in the show it hasn’t really had a clear impact on vex beyond the scope of the episode itself — syldor certainly has, but the challenge that saundor presented didn’t really have much weight beyond its moment. and obviously a large part of that’s also probably just, 7 protagonists and wanting to expand the perspectives to antagonists and give more room for side characters is a lot of things to cover. and, i say with love, perhaps a bit too ambitious for a 12 episode per season, ~22 minute runtime show if they want their characters to have the kind of depth that really makes campaign 1 shine the way it does.

[itspileofgoodthings]

I don’t even fully know why but “what do I do when I miss you so much?” / “Just wait, and pray desperately” was a knife to my heart in the best way.

[5hrignold]

yea

[ohsweetflips]

on the one hand i love harping and moaning over missed opportunities for previous dragon age companion cameos bc sometimes bioware really whiffs it (i long for the world where merrill is the eluvian expert instead of morrigan) but. on the other hand. sometimes it’s like. why would that character show up. answer quickly. the answer can’t be that it’s because you like them. it feels very reminiscent of having to accept that our wardens will never make another appearance.

[icewindandboringhorror]

Various images of things

[mimzaucracks]

Silly little Oz AU

I wanted to create something silly for Spooky Season, so I did.

(Click for better quality)

Leonardo is not Dorothy. The idea is that this would be like an actual episode of the show; he'd get Wizard of Oz'd into, well, Oz, and the episode would play out like an abridged and heavily toned down version of the The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (1900). Which in turn means that the others are not the other three Turtles, either. They are, however, styled after and voiced by the other three. So, instead of saying something like "Donatello", I'll either use "Donatello-as-the-Tin-Woodman" or simply "the Tin Woodman" (which of course also applies to the other two).

The idea of the Scarecrow, the most intelligent character in the main cast in the book, speaking like Michelangelo does in the show was too funny not to implement!

I imagine the dialogue in the scene where Leonardo and Kiki meet him would go something akin to:

“I'm going to the Emerald City to find the wizard to help me back to New York.” “You suppose that wizard dude could give me some brains?" "Yeah, I'm sure he can!" "Mondo tubuloso!”

Not sure if I want Leonardo to be outed as knowing the fact that the wizard is a fraud, though...

I put Leonardo in the silver shoes from the book, since I heavily doubt anyone would've cared for fighting MGM for the rights to use the ruby slippers. On Discord while sketching, we did joke that I could put him in silver Birkenstocks or ruby Crocs. Sadly, Crocs weren't invented until 2002 😔

I debated a lot who to cast who as. Leonardo in the role of Dorothy and Raphael as the Cowardly Lion were easy enough, but which one of the other two brothers to cast as the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman? Both Michelangelo and Donatello work for either, since the book characters' main traits are intelligence and empathy respectively, but I finally settled on the casting that I did. Like mentioned above, the Scarecrow with Michelangelo's speech pattern is absolutely hilarious, but I don't think that Donatello-as-the-Tin-Woodman's hilarity should be understated, either; especially since his canon name when he was human (turtle?) was Nick Chopper, which does fit Donatello's general strategy of repairing things in the TV show by hitting or kicking machines strangely well.

While sketching, I also joked that Raphael-as-the-Cowardly-Lion looks like Raphael just finished a Cats the musical rehearsal but hadn't told anyone and just got busted sneaking back into the Lair. I also accidentally coloured him piss yellow when I coloured the flats, which I suppose is fair. Yellow is actually a colour associated with cowardice (even though the Lion wasn't actually a coward at all, but we'll set that aside).

Speaking of colouring mishaps, when colouring the Tin Woodman's base colour, I decided to look up images of tin to find a good rough match. Well, it then hit me to double check whether tin actually does rust or not. And guess what, it doesn't. Thus, I got around the problem by making his bolts, screws and joints made of iron instead. He has to rust somehow; you cannot have a Wizard of Oz "adaptation" without [Dorothy] and the Scarecrow oiling him upon meeting him.

The Toto situation was a tricky one, since TMNT isn't really known for its prevalence of dogs. The only actual noteworthy canine characters I can think of in any iteration are Rahzar and Dogpound, and as funny as it would've been for me to cast Rahzar as Toto, truth be told I had honestly forgotten him and Tokka even existed in the cartoon. I briefly considered having April be Toto (somehow), but I refused to entertain that idea even more than I already had. Instead, I got around the Toto problem by just drawing a dog (here a Scottish terrier, like how I pictured Toto in my head) and then renaming it. And thus, Kiki! And I love her.

Also, fun fact, the Scarecrow actually wore blue in the book!

[lord-squiggletits]

Some of ppl's refusal (or inability) to write IDW OP isn't bc of annoyance or cowardice but just bc they like... don't know his personality? Yknow very "only read MTMTE syndrome" that's so common in this fandom.

Maybe it's bc I'm an IDW OP enjoyer/simp but I really don't get what's hard to write about his personality or why ppl feel the need to throw in continuity soup elements with him (while maintaining every other character in the fic meticulously and lovingly accurate to IDW lore). Like dudes IDW OP is already interesting even if you only need him as a side plot or character you just need to know how to write him.

But I guess people trying to write IDW OP and failing/writing an extremely watered down IDW OP is an improvement from not writing him at all and being annoying hating him in every single public space related (or not related) to Optimus, so it's meh

[awesomestarfighter]

#the difference between season one of mha and the vast majority of season eight that I will not watch when it airs

you get a different kind of grief when you finish a show that holds a special place in your heart, but its final season not containing the elements that made you fall in love with it in the first place.

[orcelito]

Finished ep 402. Could do without the fatphobic caricature I will be honest