#I WROTE THE WRONG FUCKING CHARACTER

[doodledrawsthings]

HAPPY NINE SOLS ON CONSOLS DAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YIPPEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!

[seventeendeer]

this isn't at all meant to be condescending or finger-waggy because 100% we all have blind spots like this, but I'm really, really hoping that the people who never found Gaiman's approach to his own fandom concerning in any way will take this all as a learning moment.

he was an older, hyper-famous author engaging directly and frequently with an online audience of largely vulnerable young marginalized people. he presented himself as cultured and worldly, and made himself approachable as someone to go to for advice, encouragement and "wisdom." his manner of speech was extremely pathos-heavy and clearly intended to be comforting and encouraging in exactly the way his target demographic needed it to be to swallow every word. the way he spoke about stories and creativity was designed to make young creative hopefuls feel special and important, while sweeping real analytical techniques under the rug - in hindsight, likely so no one would think too critically about the disturbing amount of patriarchal abuse played for cheap shock value and voyerism in his own body of works.

Gaiman saw a target demographic that was desperate for an older creative role model to tell them they were worth something, and he exploited that pain to twist a narrative around himself where he was king and any critique leveled at him or his works were the enemy.

to be clear, he could have been innocent. he could totally have been just an out-of-touch old man saying nice things to people because he wanted to be kind and he thought he was a lot smarter than he really was. red flags are warning signs, not a surefire way to tell if someone is actually "secretly shitty."

but if you used to look up to him, PLEASE take this moment to revisit the ideas you absorbed from him. did you take his words to heart because they seemed to have objective merit? or did you take them to heart because it felt good to believe what he said? do you still hold these values? does knowing he was intentionally manipulating his online audience make you less certain? do you need more information from a different source before deciding one way or another?

again, I'm just really, really hoping people on here will take a moment to reevaluate the ideas and opinions he's injected into tumblr fandom culture, because his reach is immense and he has absolutely been manipulating popular perception of relevant topics to gain further influence and control the narrative around both his own and Pratchett's legacy. please, please take this moment to notice what he's been doing - and next time someone tries to pull the same shit, hopefully we'll be able to apply what we've learned from experience.

[heybiji]

Dande says, “I can vouch for you. Do you wanna hold my hand? We can go together.” Fisik asks, “You hold Fisik hand?” Dande says, “Yeah, sure,” holding out his own. Fisik mumbles, “Tall people don’t hold Fisik hand.” Dande replies, “Well, now’s a good time to start.”

[eyestrain-addict]

I just realized why lestat marked Tom, like the big stupid idiot I am

(I know everyone else probably already figured this out, but this is MY blog and I get to post whatever deranged thought crosses my pea brained mind.)

When I watched that scene in episode 5 where they're at the bar talking to Tom, I was confused as to why exactly. Why does Lestat mark Tom? If he's marked to kill, why does he wait almost 2 decades later? Well I realized, as all realizations come, in the shower.

Lestat has been planning on killing Tom the whole time.

(Warning before you click read more, this post is a lot longer than I first intended holy fuck)

Well not the whole time. Just right when Louis realized that Anderson and Fenwick had screwed him over. Maybe even longer if he knew it was a trick ("ridiculous of you to mix human and vampire business it always ends poorly"). Notice how he's upset with louis when he kills the guy who's microaggressive with him, cus lestat wasn't there (even if he was there I have my doubts Lestat would understand microaggressions, but he would have definitely killed him for touching Louis.) But tells Louis he's proud of him for killing Alderman. I think this has to be because he witnessed the disrespect first hand. He didn't give a fuck about the money, what he DID care about was that those two disrespected not only him, but Louis.

Even with Lestats little understanding of race relations of the time in America, he did understand hierarchys. He's from 1700s France for God's sake. It's no coincidence wanted to be king of mardi gras. Lestat came to New Orleans and saw himself as the king, even if no one knew it. And he wanted Louis to be his queen. Honestly I could make an entire other post about how Lestat almost literally saw himself as if he was a King and Louis his beloved Queen, which is why he thought it was okay for him to sleep with other women (mistresses and playthings of the king should mean nothing compared to the queen in lestats eyes) but that's getting off topic. I only bring that up because I'm trying to paint a picture of how I think Lestat sees disrespect done to Louis. To him that goes beyond disrespect or rudeness, it's irreverence.

You begin to notice if you watch scenes with them together. Because while I wouldn't say lestat is good at controlling his anger, he's definitely great at concealing it until it erupts (props to Sam Reid have to be given here) lestat is always on the verge of fury when talking to Tom. It starts as a distaste then as he begins to fall more in love with Louis and become more protective of him, his anger builds. Claudia was wrong about one thing, it was no petty slight that was the reason Lestat killed Tom first, it was a loooonng time coming.

I could list every detail I think supports this but I'm sure you get the gist by now. My main point is really the layer of complexity this adds to not only the story, the characters, but also lestat and louis' relationship. Consider it for a second, Lestat saw all his violence as justified, everything he did one can see it through the lense of him punishing the disrespectful (take a shot every time I say disrespect in this post jesus christ). "I bring death to those deserving" indeed. Lestat has a god complex out the wazoo, and every attack, torture, and death he caused was righteous to him and thus enjoyable. Louis on the other hand didn't see himself so highly. He may seem confident but if you look through the cracks it's apparent Louis's self worth in near nonexistent and he's horribly insecure. I think lestat thought when Louis was made a vampire he would see himself as Lestat saw himself, and as Lestat saw Louis. But again, another post for another time.

Despite Louis' insecurities (or perhaps because of them) louis revels in the violence lestat commits for his sake. That's probably why louis is so quick to forgive lestat about the priests. For a brief moment Lestat truly said the truth to Louis and Louis could forgive him because of it. As lestat says, he doesn't kill the priests to intimidate Louis, nor does he do it just because he enjoys it. He does it because he sees them as humiliating Louis, charlatans that don't deserve Louis' sorrow. Louis didn't want the priest's to die, but he could understand why lestat killed them, simply because for once in his goddamn life lestat told the truth, and louis loved that truth. That truth being that lestat killed and mutilated and committed such horrors not just because he liked it, but because he did it out of a fucked up sense of protection. Him killing the priests was essentially a knight killing a dragon to earn the princess' hand in marriage.

The worst part is that Lestat doesn't even realize it. Not fully anyway. Let's be honest with ourselves, lestat doesn't understand Louis. Obviously there's the race, background, culture differences that lestat doesn't understand nor seems inclined to try, but there are better posts about that made by smarter people than moi. I'm mostly talking about lestat doesn't understand louis' mind itself (louis' mind in a vacuum I suppose you could say) he understands Louis' desire for violence sure, but he doesn't understand the core of that want. Honestly I'm on the fence of if he ever understood that Louis loved it when lestat was protective in the first place. I guess it can be dumbed down to Louis wants Lestat to kill to protect Louis and to protect the family (and anyone who deeply disrepects them), lestat perhaps understood a little at one point, but since he sees everyone as a threat and everything is a slight to him, he has no trouble and qualms with delighting in the torture of people Louis views as innocent. Louis' heart is a bit dark, but ultimately human, so he's disgusted by lestats violence towards the undeserving. Lestat can no longer read Louis' mind and even if he could, Louis doesn't quite understand the difference himself (that's why he tries to hunt for criminals briefly) so the cracks of miscommunication starts to form, and neither of them even realize there is miscommunication.

Therein lies the importance of Tom Anderson for season 1. Not much of a character, more of a plot device in human skin. Claudia can see that Lestat hates him, but doesn't understand why, nor does she care to get to the depths of that. (*Mr house voice* understandable) I think it's notable that Louis rarely brought him up, he didn't understand the depths of lestats love. Nor did he know about Lestats 3 decade long grudge, all because Tom disrespected Louis.

Now I'm not excusing Lestat's actions, I just think it's interesting how this one throwaway character reveals a whole level of complexity to the relationship between him and Louis, and better sheds light on not only Lestats personal philosophy but louis' as well. Even Claudia to a degree.

Anyway, uh. End of essay. Bye.

[buildoblivion]

“hey wow I loved how klaus really came into his own in s3 - still an agent of chaos but focused and interesting, taking a bit of control in his life, weaving his way through the plot and in some ways becoming the heart of the series …. I sure can’t wait to watch season 4!!!!!!!!!”

[lord-squiggletits]

Lmao I just wrote a manifesto about IDW OP but now I'm in the mood to write one about Pharma and the dumb obsessive stalker ex trope too

Actually no wait I can do it in one sentence

Fellas is it obsessive stalker behavior to want revenge on your ex best friend for stealing your hands and then leaving you to die in a frozen wasteland without even bothering to look for your dead body to confirm you died (and he calls you a horrible person and a terrible Autobot while standing next to an ex-Decepticon who killed thousands)

[shima-draws]

Seething at one of the tags on that poll saying FMA is a military + genocide apologist anime have you even WATCHED it

[choices-binglebonkus]

To whichever writer wrote Violet and Aunt Mallory’s characters and interactions in RoE…are you okay??? The toxic dynamic between these two and the isolation and emotional suffering on poor Violet’s end feels just a little too real to me. Like it’s well-written but holy shit, it feels like it’s been written from personal experience on such a transcendental level.

[lloydfrontera]

i think it fucks immensely that bk moon went out of his way to 1) establish rakiel wished to live a long life and eventually pass away of old age, 2) have him very briefly envy an immortal being only to be told very clearly to be careful what he wishes for by that very same person because living forever isn't all it's cracked up to be, 3) make the main antagonist be another immortal being who is so desperate to die he's willing to destroy the universe just to finally rest and 4) have said antagonist psychologically torture rakiel with the threat of making him live for a thousand years as everyone he loves and knows eventually grows old and dies and becomes nothing but forgotten memories.

only to then end the novel by making rakiel also immortal

like. god. it's so fucking good i love it. i'm not being sarcastic i genuinely think it fucks and it's one of the best ways bk moon could've wrapped up the plot.

it's a happy ending by all means but it has consequences and through the entire novel we've been shown and told over and over again just how heavy the consequences are and/or will be on rakiel.

he got his happy ending but it was at a price and by the last time we see him he's only just starting to pay for it.

it's great i love it

[sparring-spirals]

uhoh empire sib meta time.

Courtesy of that last rb by @iinfernal thinking very hard (very affectionately) about love in the form of, we are going to work to keep each other on track. Especially with Caleb and Beau. Because like. its not just about newfound acceptance, people who will give you the benefit of the doubt and help you improve, people who see your worst and love you anyway, people who will forgive you.

Like its about that! But its also about- i trust you to drag me back if i stray. i trust you to call me out, to push back. i am putting my back to you- you will protect it, and you will also pull me back if i wander.

The first big backstory reveal between Beau and Caleb was an exchange, not a kindness. it was, tell me why you are afraid of fire, and ill get you into the library. Caleb laid out some of the corners of his guilty conscience, to Nott, with all of her faith in him, (he is my boy), to Beau, with her skepticism and brusque curiosity, and it was not meant as a soft gesture. It was not a call for forgiveness, or absolution- it was an item for barter, a warning, an admission of guilt.

and Beau- still unsure, still rough around the edges and rude and defensive and angry, shell-shocked and out of her depth did not provide forgiveness, or kindness. She said something along the lines of- good god, you know thats fucked up, right? i didnt ask for this, what the fuck.

She said something like: you know what you need to do now, then, right? prevent this guy from hurting more people. This is what you've gotta do now, I think- this is what we'll do-

And Caleb gets into the library, and casts haste on Beau in a bar fight, and there is something to be said about love shaped like a willingness to disagree, to push back, to say things wrong but try to say it anyway.

Caleb, and Beau, arguing. Beau is suspicious and Caleb is ready to run, and "the problem with friends is you have to care about them". Running into old injuries and boundaries, working to learn them, to fight to communicate. Apologies that are awkward but sincere. Kindness that is misshappen but intentional.

Caleb and Beau, butting heads, poking fun, trusting the other person to be suspicious of them, when it really counts.

"Can we keep each other straight?"

Some fifty episodes apart: have faith in us, just a little bit? dont run.

follow your own advice. don't go.

Caleb, vision and hearing gone and flung out ahead, placing a hand on Beau's shoulder. Lead me well, lead me straight, bring me back if I stray. Caleb and Beau, going in circles about what to do as the world ends, ambition and magic and time and guilt, and entities at war. Worried about evil, about going wrong, needing the clear vision of someone who loves you and will not eternally forgive you.

"I'm worried I am exactly what he said I was."

"Not yet."

God just. Love as keeping each other on track. Beau and Caleb, as the only ones to get the eyes, afflicted by searching too hard for knowledge. what a horror, to have you and your tether tossed into an unknown spiral. what a comfort- if it was any of them, at least it was both. The Mighty Nein, making contingency plans, Yasha sticking close to caleb and cooing over his animal forms and ready, ready, for the worst. What a nightmare. Thank god. "Im glad it was us."

"You drove me insane."

"I hated you. You sucked."

What love. What immense care. Years on in, and it all still comes back to:

"You got my back?"

"What's the play, Beauregard?"

[kuuchuuburanko]

but if I say 'kaiser would rather continue the cycle of abuse than get therapy' I'd be jumped so I won't say that someone else said that not me tho

[bandagegirl]

Some ideas for past Red Crown vessels. Considering the Lamb gets to meet TOWW only in death and gains the Red Crown on their first death, does that mean every previous Red Crown Vessel died to receive the crown? Imagine how many times TOWW gave someone his crown with the promise to bring them back to life, give them another chance as long as they follow his word and free him.

Just imagine how many times TOWW has given someone another chance at life. Given them the chance to mend relationships, to kill out of revenge, out of hatred, to see someone dear one more time, to get back whats theirs, all as long as they form a cult in TOWW's name and free him. Imagine how many times TOWW ripped away everything they worked hard for, everything they cared for, because they keep failing and disappointing him over and over again.

[smallishdoggo]

The idea that Dancer didn't and couldn't have known that FCG was a person, and is thus absolved of any responsibility for treating them like an object comes up every once in a while, and, like. Folks. She knew FCG had enough capacity for thought to be worth lying to. She lied to him about having made him. She cannot have considered them basically a toaster. Like, are we imagining that Dancer is out here lying to Pussy the Second to make herself seem smarter?

She bought FCG and restored them, and knew from that restoration that a lot of the technology behind FCG was beyond her understanding. She knew FCG could talk and reason, which is something no automaton we've ever encountered is capable of (excluding aeormatons). She spent four years with him, watching him be very very noticeably different than other automatons. She didn't need to know that he was an aeormaton or what aeormatons were historically capable of; she had all the evidence she needed to understand FCG as a person, and she just didn't.

Like, I can fully believe that she understood all that, that FCG has the capacity to think and feel on some level, and just decided that none of that made them a person. Cause that's the way FCG has thought about themself since their introduction. They think, they feel, they want things, just not how a person would. Not important, not weighty enough to matter.

And I think that matters when thinking about her! Specifically when thinking about her relationship to FCG. Dancer fucked them up! She raised them, he didn't know any other life than the one she built for him till murderbot mode. And I do think she has some responsibility for that. I don't think you can just say that she didn't know any better. She knew a lot! And she could have sought out more information on ancient automatons and their capacities. And she didn't! She knew enough to know she didn't understand FCG and how they worked, and she just. Decided not to do anything about that. She just decided that the thinking feeling robot that she bought should just be a thing that she owns and makes use of, and who cares where it came from or what it might do in the future.

I don't think she's a monster or anything, but it's wild how allergic this fandom is to considering her to have profoundly hurt the person she BOUGHT AND OWNED. Particularly given how gung ho this fandom tends to be about characters having the right to enact bloody vengeance on anyone who has ever made them feel bad.

[imabiscuitinthousandworlds]

so i googled my current favourite play that i'm absolutely obsessed with and ended up on the english wikipedia site bc my browser is set to english and. it's so bad. the fucking plot overview leaves out basically everything that happens ever except for the end result. several key figures aren't even mentioned. "this guy dies for freedom" well, yes, but actually no, plus you're implying his sacrifice is actually worth it. that's not true. in some other section a dude is mentioned who claims this play is basically star wars. that someone familiar with the play but not star wars could look at a star wars poster and tell you which characters are narratively similar/equal to characters of the play. i am baffled. i have never, not once in my life, ever seen someone be so wrong. dude must have read an entirely different play. i'm tempted to dig up the english version and read it just to see how fucking wrong he is. he is *so* incredibly wrong. jesus fuck. how could you possibly say that

[tankgotstuckinthecircusgate]

late Carlo and Moretti (during vinci-moretti war) are like Luca and Clemente to me. Moretti will never raise his hand on Carlo but! will he drive him into guilt in ways that are not direct? insult him in passing? convince Carlo that he's doing everything wrong, when in fact it's the opposite? of course such a painful kick to Carlo's ego, it's unfair, he doesn't deserve it. and it's not a father-son relationship, it's a professional relationship and he can't say anything back & defense himself in any way maybe Moretti's more favorable to Eddie in this period because he's more blindly loyal and Carlo feels he's about to explode

[justgayskissinggays]

Me being physically incapable of making this oc have a happy healthy body bc it feels like im taking away smth fundamental to him, that that rotting infection from his first iteration has spread to every version. A prince or a random guy - its there, some infection to mutate and distort him.