#I accept any parody mary sue

[tlaquetzqui]

I don’t have a problem with fanfic in principle, but fanfic as a real-world cultural phenomenon in the present day has had nothing but horrible effects on any aspect of how people create or engage with literature.

Writers have always started out doing what were essentially fanfics, and often literally were. But the specific way we write, and especially share and talk about, fanfic, pretty much only started with organized scifi fandom in the postwar era, especially Star Trek fans. That’s why “Mary Sue” was the protagonist of a parody of Star Trek fanfic.

A whole subculture dedicated to fanfic of a work, rather than dedicated to the work itself and producing fanfic along the way, produces a feedback loop. The fanfics such a subculture produces are ever more self-conscious and artificial about their trope usage, ever more self-indulgent and pander-y, and ever more prone to mistaking widely-accepted fanon for canon.

[the-evil-duckling]

And now that Pride Month's over, Let's Talk About Pratchett.

The companies have taken down their flags. The marches and rallies are fading away. Rainbow colours are melting back into grayscale. And now that all the hubbub is dying down, let's talk about an author who did perhaps more than any other to introduce gender-and-sexual minorities to the public (and not just as a cute oddity to be cooed at from a distance, either).

Let's talk about an author whose works are perhaps the most representative, hard-hitting, and wholesome, in all of well-written English literature.

Let's talk about Pratchett.

Before we dive into the lovely little nitty-gritties, I want to just take a quick look at what Pratchett's writing really is, and what makes it so very exceptional. It's pretty simple, really.

He's funny.

That's the "secret" formula to Terry Pratchett's success across the global; he's funny everywhere, everywhen, across multiple generations and multiple decades and multiple geopolitical borders. You don't have to read Discworld with a lot of effort, thinking deeply after every line about the message the author is trying to convey. You don't have to analyze every character and every situation to see how the author is sculpting a crystal-clear mirror and holding it up to the face of Society. When I'm feeling down (cause college and life and pressure and dreams) and wanna start gouging out my forearms with my nails, I can just curl with one of my comfort books (like Men At Arms, or Unseen Academicals) and laugh and chuckle and just feel better. You can just enjoy it.

Now, I think, I can get to the fun stuff; analysing all of my favourite characters and the roles that they represent in mirroring Pratchett's view of People. (I should mention at this point that I am mainly going to be focussing on the Sam Vimes novels, and what I will be writing are my own thoughts and opinions. Anyone who knows more - or has just read/interpreted the books differently - is of course free to add their own musings.)

Fred Colon: Sergeant Colon is that rarest and yet most typical of things: Fred Colon is an ordinary person. He is no hero, or genius, or leader. He is not evil or even mildly malicious. And that is the very point that needs to be understood. People (most people) are not deliberately evil; they are, on the whole, fairly decent people who treat their friends well and try not to make enemies. It is just... petty selfishness, petty prejudices, petty apathy... all summated in every single member of the populace, and suddenly everyone knows that dwarfs are just money-grubbing bastards who'd bite your kneecaps off for a copper coin and trolls are dumber than the rocks they're made off but they'll as soon smash you to pulp as look at you and you can't trust a vampire cause they're too dead to be alive and-

Carrot Ironfoundersson: Captain Carrot is a cliché. Captain Carrot is a cliché wrapped inside a trope hidden in a Mary Sue, all turned on its head. Captain Carrot, rightful heir to the throne of Ankh, leader of all manner of beings, man who once beat Detritus in a fistfight... is not the hero of this story. In any other series, the story would have been of a brave new cop (who is also the king) standing up to the corruption and lawlessness of the Patrician while taking advice from his grizzled old half-drunk commander who dies four chapters into the first book with some vaguely portentous words that the hero remembers at the very last minute to give him the tools/strength/motivation necessary to keep fighting. But this is Pratchett. And the hero of the story, if there is one, is very much the grizzled old commander. Two other points have also always struck me about Carrot. The first is the matter of identity. Biologically, Carrot is very much a human, but in all other ways that matter he is entirely a dwarf - his name is Kzad-bhat, and even the deep-down dwarfs do not question his dwarfishness - and yet that does make him any less a human. In this is reflected the multiplicity of identity (not just of gender, which is what most people immediately jump to, but all identities). The second point is of the relationship between Carrot and Angua, which seemed to me a representation of a healthy dom/sub relationship. Unlike the twisted shit we find on ao3 (and in some published books that I don't feel that I need to name), Angua is at no point portrayed as lesser, weaker, incapable, dependent, or deferent. She is her own person, and the two of them just happen to have this kind of chemistry.

Samuel Vimes: Ahhhh. His Grace, His Excellency, The First Duke of Ankh, Blackboard Monitor Samuel Vimes, Commander of the City Watch. The protagonist, if not quite the hero, of the series. He is not perfect, not even close. He is casually discriminatory (species-ist?) and thoughtless in most of what he says. his saving graces are that his discrimination is universally applied at all beings living and dead, and that he has never, not even once, allowed his personal feelings of prejudice stand in the way of justice (which is at times, all that separates him from Fred Colon). Does that mean that it's all okay, and everything is now fine and dandy and hunky-dory? No. Not even fucking close. Words matter and actions matter and even how you feel deep inside - all of it matters. Prejudice is prejudice, and it is always wrong. there are no mitigating circumstances, no 'yes, but...' that can make it acceptable. But only an idealistic idiot would say that it is not better than the alternative. And this is the reason that Vimes is one of my favourite protagonists; he is not a hero. He is real.

Leonard of Quirm: A parody of the public perception of a genius (perhaps of Roundworld's Tesla and da Vinci), I have loved Leonard as a character ever since I realised he was gay. Allow me to elaborate. As I was recently re-reading Jingo, I noticed a line that went something like 'He started drawing how The-Going-Under-The-water-Safely-Device could be improved, piloted by a muscular man who was not overdressed'. And just like that, a couple dozen other off-hand comments slotted into place and I realized the homosexual truth. And I love this portrayal of homosexuality, because most books or movies or tv shows or fanfictions with a gay MC (or even sidekick) tend to have a storyline roughly equivalent to 'hey my name is [insert name here] and I'm GAY and I have a destiny to save the world and my family and my GAY boyfriend whom I'm dating cause I'm GAY and before I go outside I have to pick my outfit really carefully better go with salmon-rose-flutter pink cause I'm GAY and now I'm outside and I'm not very popular and this is my tragic backstory cause a lot of people don't like me cause I'm GAY and-' Yeah. This is not good writing. By barely mentioning anything, Pratchett somehow still managed to emphasise that a) homosexuality is one of your identities, not all of them and b) just because a story has a character who is gay doesn't mean that the story becomes about a character being gay.

Trev Likely: One sentence. Just one sentence. 'Hating people was too much work.'

If you actually made it this far, you are obliged to reblog. I'm sorry, but I don't make the rules. (Please?)

[another-mexico-oc]

The most used Mexico´ cliches in fanfiction and comics (And surely this can apply to any other OC)

Traducción en Español: AQUÍ

DISCLAIMER:

This post DOES NOT intend to throw shit and attack specific authors or their work, so out of respect we will not mention names. If you have read my other posts you will know that this only has the purpose of entertaining and to give a personal opinion.

Also, this does not intend to be a manual or guide on how to write a good comic or fanfic. It is only a compilation of repetitive elements found throughout these works.

Now, let's continue ...

Hi! How are you doing? I hope you are safe at home, and in case you have to go outside take your precautions.  

I have been in Hetalia's fandom for more than a year, and the Countryhumans' less than a year, and both my cousin and I have seen and read enough material from Mexico's OCs, enough to compile in a list the most popular cliches when reading a fanfic or comic which involves this character. As I said at the beginning, this is not a guide of what to do and what not, but we invite creators to find new ways to tell the same stories (or even new ones) differently and to not fall into the predictable.

( Perhaps it is because in my university career one of my teachers was very demanding with coherent scripts and stories, and that she tended to review them 10 times before giving the approval, that I became very demanding with the creation of stories and characters. But that's my personal issue! )

Sarcastically, this should be called "The clichés that cannot be miss for your Mexico´ story" :

1. The Mexico´OC was created ONLY to be the love interest of another character (the author's favorite):

In the same way, the author´ comics and fanfics will be of the romantic genre, and it will involve his favorite ship (or his various ships if he/she is a multi-shipper). Making a brief conclusion, there are few works in which Mexico stands out as a character, without having the love interest, or the famous harem, as the main plot.

And if you were curious, here is a chart that shows the most used ships in the Hetalia´ case, although in 2020 it may have slight changes:

(Denmark and Norway?! I have never found any fic about them being paired with Mexico)

2. María Sue and Gary Estuardo:

More cliché this could not be. Even when I´m mexican myself, I realize that the representation of my country has received the Mary Sue treatment by the fandom, both in Hetalia and in Countryhumas, and mostly by the latino and mexican community. I already talked about this HERE, but I'll summarize it:

Regardless of whether Mexico is a man or a woman:

- They will be the center of the universe, all the characters will kiss the ground they step on, they will be the most cute person in the world, without flaws, and their greatest virtue will be his or her ethereal beauty that will make everyone to fall in love with them, with just an eye blink.

- It´s never their fault and they will never face the consequences of their actions, e.g. causing WW3. What's even more, he or she is just a poor victim of the evil countries that want to take advantage of his/her territory.

- Having got laid or dating half of the world will not cause them serious consequences or a negative reputation.

- Personality? Oh my, that´s very complicated to write, instead I will narrate how my female Mexico arrived at the restaurant with a dress that highlighted her feminine attributes and how her long and abundant hair made more than one person to sigh; Or how my male Mexico wore tight pants that showed his perfect toned legs, and that when he smiled he made blush every country.

If it was a parody, I'd accept Mexico to be a Mary Sue or a Gary Stu. But usually the authors want you to take the story and the character seriously. So... nope.

3. Plots taken from soap operas, or telenovelas:

Believe it or not, there are authors who have admitted that their Mexico´ fanfics are based on mexican telenovelas. And the worst thing is that telenovelas have the most cliche stories in the world! Think about it, you have a good and humble, but kind of dumb person, who in this case is going to be Mexico, who falls in love with a handsome and rich person, who will obviously be a first world country, but there is someone who wants to finish their romance. You also have forced marriages, fights, misunderstandings, slaps, super dramatic scenes, passionate scenes, cheesy titles...

Mix all this elements together, and you will get:

For comedy purpose, we will be using my OC)

4. The fanfic or comic always, ALWAYS, has to start with a world meeting:

I propose a challenge for you and your friends. Gather together and search for Mexico fanfics, no matter the fandom where you all came from. Take a shot, or put a coin in a jar, for every time the first chapter begins at a meeting.

And almost always it is here where the author builds the romantic story, examples:

“It was a normal day in the boardroom, everyone was arguing while Germany (United Nations if it is a Countryhumans fic) tried in vain to put order and discipline. Only a nation was waiting for a certain person with brown skin and delicate features, to enter through that great door… ”

“Suddenly, a brown skin girl with black and curly hair (Seriously guys, where did you got the idea your average mexican girl has natural curly hair?!) entered the room, and the entire room went silent. Everyone who was there had something to do with that young lady, and seeing her there, turned into a full woman, left them stunned. She was gorgeous.”

Another cliché, but this one can be in any story, is: "Realizing that it was getting late, he got up, took off his pajamas, groomed, combed his hair, and put on his yellow shirt with his ...". There are several ways to start the story without the famous world meeting and the character's morning routine.

5. The harem and love triangles (or any other geometric shape):

This cliché could not be missing either. There are a lot of Mexico x TheWorld´ fanfics. As I said before, I am not against the shipping and the harem of Mexico, each one is free to ship whatever they like, as long as there is respect between the community.

But even when an author wants to focus on a single couple, let's take for example Canada x Mexico, he necesarily has to include USAMex and RusMex as secondary couples, and at some point it gets exhausting and reforces the Mary Sue treatment. It seems that for many authors, Mexico's international relations automatically translate into a “romantic relationship”, and not into a friends or business partners one.

And also, the construction of the relationship it feels sometimes very empty. The author doesn't give time to show how they become a couple or how they found the chemistry in the other. In the third chapter they are already making out!

6. The toxicity:

Oh yeah.

I don't blame this clichá, my cousin and I concluded that healthy relationships are rare in Hetalia and Countryhumans. Practically all countries have one or two flaws that at first sight makes them look toxic. And in Mexico's fanfics and comics, particularly those involving USAMex, the character gets involved in a possessive and codependent relationship.

If Mexico is not a dominant male or a femme fatale, it will be a submissive character who will allow all kinds of abuse. Or in each chapter he or she will doubt about his/her relationship, and will make their partner jealous.

To write a healthy relationship, you must work on the characters' strengths and make them both face their flaws, but instead, the authors take these flaws and make them the basis of the relationship.

7. The party´ chapter in which things get ... heavily crazy:

Okay, so we have our first chapter at the world meeting, where we establish the main couple. Now what we need is the stage for the lovebirds to confess their love ... while being drunk. In many works we will find the countries gathered at a party (usually a Latino party), and the author will narrate all the crazy events that occur, including how Mexico and his sweetheart, will confess their feelings after having taken a few bottles, and sometimes this gets to ...

8. The chapter (or chapters) + 18

This is almost a requirement for many fanfic´ writers, and is always written in the same way. The author will narrate you in detail from the moment they begin to undress until the climax moment.

9. Spain will never stop calling Mexico "New Spain", despite the fact that more than 200 years have passed since the country's independence and its recognition:

And in the case of Hetalia, Mexico must have the same last name as Spain: Hernández Carriedo. Yes, in the same way that United States last name is not Jones, but Kirkland, like its ex-colonizer England; or that Belarus last name is Braginski as his brother Russia, and not Arlovskaya.

Also, although Spain continues to call Mexico "New Spain", he will never call Argentina "Rio de la Plata" or Colombia "New Granada". Similarly, England and France will never call America and Canada "13 Colonies" and "New France" respectively. It seems to be something exclusive for Spain and Mexico.

10. Repetitive references and jokes, or lack of knowledge about the country.

Paco the chihuahua dog, Mexico and Sudamericans fighting over the avocado´s name, Mexico having flashbacks of his/her past with the Aztec Empire and with the USA when they were colonies, Mexico complaining about his/her rulers and corruption within the country, Mexico crying over Texas, Mexico demonstrating his/her beautiful culture to other countries …

Not to mention when someone makes an Mexico OC and his knowledge of the country is very basic: tacos, sombreros, Day of the Dead, always hot climate, the wall issue with America, Aztec and Maya as the only ancestors of Mexico, Texas, burritos... Sorry if I sound rude but, those people need to read and investigate more, and watch less movies where Mexico has that yellow filter.

11. Bad translations

Okay, this is something exclusive of the spanish speaking fandom, but I´ll tell you what´s their issue.

Some author had the brilliant idea to make the dialogues of the countries in their respective languages, followed by placing the Spanish translation in parentheses, and from there many followed suit. The problem is when you notice that they don´t speak or understand the language, and instead they use the Google translator, obtaining results like this:

There have been several occasions when I am reading America and England´ dialogues, and it makes me want to write in the comment section: “DON´T USE THE GOOGLE TRANSLATOR! ” I wouldn´t know what to say from the rest of the countries, since my French is very basic,and I have hardly learned one phrase from the others languages.

My advise for these authors is to find a person who is fluent in the language and who can help them with the dialogues. Or even better, try to avoid this cliché, because at the end of the day people will only read the translation, and it is already implied that each country speaks in its respective language. Also doing this is very pretentious.

The less you can do is to add in the dialogues well know words, like adiós, hola, bonjour, ciao...

12. Changing the canon personalities. Or worse: turn a loved character into a villain.

I already said this HERE too. Basically, for the author to make his Mexico an empathic character and to make other countries to fall in love with him or her, they must conveniently change their canon personalities. This applies more in Hetalia than in Countryhumans, since this last one belongs to the community and nobody can establish what is canon and what is not. On the other hand, in Hetalia the characters already have their own personalities, and neither plays the role of villain. And there is a big difference between being an antagonist or a villain, but I´ll let you to investigate it yourself.  

This cliché is closely related to the Mary Sue treatment, because if I want readers to empathize with Mexico, I must turn another character into an evil person who is going to put him through hardships. And normally this character is the United States or America, whatever you call him.

If I want Russia or Germany to fall in love with Mexico, I must rewrite their characters and throw out the unstable part of Russia, and Germany's little experience regarding romantic relationships, just to make them the most romantic and sentimental people in the world.

✥   ✥   ✥   ✥   ✥   ✥   ✥   ✥

There you have it! I think I already roasted 80% of Mexico fanfiction and fanart, but is not like they are going to dissapear with this post. On the good side, for every time I cringed reading some of these works, I have saved a good amount money, you must try it. I should try an aside blog where I criticize bad fanfiction... But at the moment, that´s all for today! See ya!

[itsclydebitches]

How do you define a power fantasy? Is it inherently no flaws I am the ideal representation of X? Or are they're varying levels to it? Is Geralt a power fantasy for men since he is strong, has women falling before him (bonus can't impregnate them), and saves the day? Or is he not a power fantasy since he also has flaws as well?

I personally believe that there are varying levels. That it’s subjective. Just like people are drawn to different types of fiction for different reasons, what functions as a power fantasy and a form of escapism is going to differ from person to person. Traditionally, the power fantasy indeed involves perfection, or near perfection, but that “perfection” is defined in very particular ways. As you say, game!Geralt is in many respects a classic power fantasy because he’s physically powerful, intellectually formidable, beloved by all (depending on how you play him and most who don’t like him are evil), and has women falling all over him with the added bonus of not having to deal with an impromptu family. Despite Ciri’s presence, we can’t deny that in American culture that’s a powerful and supposedly sought-after situation for men: “You have two super hot sorceresses fighting over you plus a hot doctor on the side and another hot sorceress on the side and a hot sword fighter who is down to bed you after you beat her (of course) and access to brothels and any expectations all these women might have about settling down (like Shani) doesn’t keep them from sleeping with you.” However, all that depends on the audience actually wanting all that and considering it to be perfection. What if you hate physical activity and are much more of a craftsy person? What if you despise violence? You’re not attracted to women? I think the most successful power fantasies are also the broadest, not trying to claim that this kind of power or this kind of intellect is clearly The Best. That’s usually not the case though. Traditionally, power fantasies say a lot about what a society considers not just acceptable, but the expectation that everyone should strive for. Yet sometimes it’s not a matter of the fantasy being impossible for you to achieve (I’ll never get that six-pack) but simply unwanted (I actually prefer having a stomach). So the less pigeon-holing the better, but that’s damn hard to pull off. And if you take it too far people will start crying Mary/Gary Stu because we recognize that someone with absolutely no flaws isn’t easy to latch onto. We can’t imagine ourselves in their place because that level of talent and good luck becomes downright comical. There’s a fine line between making the viewer frustrated with a character and making them want to be that character, but even then I think that varies wildly from person to person. 

Now, with all that said I have to give a plug for one of my favorite parody series: Ensign Sue Must Die! Spock realizing that Ensign Sue can literally bend reality to her whim and that is how she achieves such perfection is just priceless 

[the-citrus-scale]

In Defense Of... Mary Sues

written by @robinwritesallthethings

When I began participating in fandom in the 1990s, Mary Sue was a huge, nasty dirty word. You did not want your original characters to be described as Mary Sues. It was basically the ultimate insult, and it told anyone who read it that you didn’t spend enough time making a realistic character. While originally confined to the realm of fanfiction, the word has branched out and is now used to level accusations at primarily female creators.

In case you don’t know, Mary Sue is a term that describes a character who is basically too perfect to be real. Often, Mary Sues are seen as a thinly veiled version of the author, though they shouldn’t be confused with the practice of self-inserts, a term that is separate and has its own definition. One example trait Mary Sues have, that is often seen as ridiculous, is an unusual level of skill or training, especially in contrast to their age. In fanfiction, they may also often outshine the canonical characters, whether in ability or by usurping that character’s role in important events.

The name itself comes from a Star Trek fanfiction from 1973. It was a parody meant to take these types of characters to task. Quite frankly, I wish that fic had never been written and the term had never been popularized, but let’s be honest. The term disappearing would not solve the problem. Because the problem is that men think any character written by a woman must be part of a silly fantasy that is frivolous and worthless, even though they’ve been writing Mary Sues since the beginning of time.

Yes, there are joke terms for male Mary Sues. Gary Stu is a popular one, for instance, though there are several others. But these terms are rarely used as much as Mary Sue, and it seems to be exclusively applied to male characters that men simply don’t like, rather than every male character in existence. Wesley Crusher, for instance, was seen as a character who was meant to be a stand-in for Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry. For one, Wesley is his middle name, and Crusher, who was played by a very young Wil Wheaton, was a Starfleet prodigy, which mirrored Roddenberry’s youth as a pilot. Fans didn’t like Crusher because he consistently saved the day on the Enterprise, despite his young age and the fact that he was surrounded by skilled Starfleet officers.

But there are plenty of other Gary Stus who aren’t hated by fans. Luke Skywalker, for one. Seriously. He was created by George Lucas, and his name is Luke S. Think about it. Bill Denbrough is an obvious stand-in for Stephen King in his popular book It. Neither of these characters is criticized by fans, but they clearly fit the definition. That’s because the problem isn’t the type of character they are. The problem is that when those characters are women, men just cannot deal, because they feel like they’re being overshadowed, and we all know that that just isn’t okay.

And here’s the thing. I don’t think that women or men should have to stop writing them. Whether they fit the definition of Mary Sue or not is really inconsequential. What I really want is for people to stop getting picked on for it. Creators make characters people do or do not like all the time. It’s quite subjective. And you can be critical of the realism of a character without resorting to what is nothing more than calling them a name.

When someone throws around the term Mary Sue, what they’re really doing is trying to bring a character and that character’s creator down. Fandom, and entertainment in general, should be about fun, of course, but also about discourse. It’s what we stand for here at The Citrus Scale and what I stand for personally, because discourse is part of what makes fandom fun, and it’s also a part of being a responsible consumer of entertainment.

The term Mary Sue is not going to go away. So let’s take it back. Let’s make it something positive instead of negative. Let’s stop using it as a content warning. Let’s stop making nervous jokes about how, gosh, we hope our characters aren’t Mary Sues. Own your character, defend your character, and graciously accept critical criticism of your character from other perspectives. But stop apologizing. Your character isn’t hurting anyone. It doesn’t matter if they’re a blatant self-insert, the most perfect character on the planet, or the most flawed one ever written. If someone doesn’t like them, they can be critical and then move on without the vitriol. It’s not a hard thing to do.

At the end of the day, Mary Sue is just a convenient insult that allows men to throw female characters in the garbage unnecessarily, and the worst part is that’s fandom bought into it. Other women are deriding Mary Sues and celebrating that that’s exactly what their characters aren’t. But they’re only shooting themselves in the foot, because when their characters are the only ones left, guess what men are going to say about them? That they’re “just Mary Sues.”

Don’t fall into the trap. Be critical, but be supportive. Be constructive and respectful. Because no one else is going to fight for the Mary Sues. It’s up to us.

[bakudomaster]

Hot In Cleveland

Greetings to literally no one! Hopefully that will change....

I’ve had this account for a while now and I’ve finally thought about what I want to use it for.

Starting today, this will be a literary analysis of some of the entertainment media I have consumed over the years. Why you ask? Hmmmm, that’ll be for a later post. I hope that you enjoy reading this!

WARNING: THESE POSTS WILL UNASHAMEDLY CONTAIN SPOILERS!

Today, we’ll begin with a sitcom that’s very close to my heart - Hot In Cleveland

[cue title music - ba ba ba baaaa... ba ba baaa... dwing dwing HEY!]

PREMISE

Hot in Cleveland first premiered in 2010 on TV Land as their first ever original production. Up until that point, the network was well known for airing reruns of previously ended shows, such as The Cosby Show and The Golden Girls. One of the producers of the show was Sean Hayes of Will & Grace fame.

The show revolves around three middle-aged women bound for Paris to forget their troubles of broken hearts and struggling careers when their plane makes a emergency landing in Cleveland, Ohio. Deciding to explore the city, they find it a more compassionate and welcoming than the glamorous, youth obsessed Los Angeles and decide to relocate there. When they rent a house, they find it comes with a decidedly snarky housekeeper.

CAST & CHARACTERS

Valerie Bertinelli as Melanie Moretti - a recently divorced one-time author, she has known very little beyond her roles as mother and wife. She tends to be very optimistic and romantic, often to the annoyance of her friends. Out of the younger trio, she takes the most to Cleveland and tries new things to broaden her horizons. She is the most compassionate out of the three, often being the glue that binds them together. Though she’s a very nice character to watch, she lacks true grit and comes off as a pushover at times. I don’t know much about Valerie’s work before the show, but she does do quite well, with her natural warmth and friendliness coming through.

Wendie Malick as Victoria Chase - an ambitious but ditzy soap opera actress, she has just had her show cancelled and falls into despair at not being in the public eye anymore. Self-centered and willing to do almost anything, Victoria is the least enthusiastic about moving to Cleveland due to the lack of botox and paparazzi among other things. Over time, she takes on various projects to try and revive her career, resulting in an Emmy & Oscar win. Wendie Malick is best known for her role on Just Shoot Me as well as her voice acting in various shows and movies, such as The Emperor’s New Groove and BoJack Horseman. She’s an absolute delight to watch here, completely immersing herself in the role and surrendering to Victoria’s insanity.

Jane Leeves as Rejoyla ‘Joy’ Scroggs - a beautician with a business that’s starting to fail, Joy’s real problem is being unlucky in love. From being abandoned by her teenage sweetheart when she fell pregnant by him, to being left at the altar on her wedding day, Joy’s endless parade of bad luck has left her cynical and just a tad yandere for any man who dares cross her (watch out boys...). She’s neutral to Cleveland, but secretly longs for romance and eventually settling down to start a family. Jane is best known for her work on Fraiser. She’s initially a bit frigid over the first two seasons but warms up to the role as she gains more prominence in the show over the later seasons.

Betty White as Elka Ostrovsky - an escapee from WWII Poland, she is a widow who lives in the house as a caretaker. Though she finds the LA trio’s obsession with glitz and glamour very strange, she quickly makes friends with them to varying degrees, often dispensing advice and acting as a voice of reason when the others get a bit too crazy or feel despondent. She is very proud of Cleveland, eventually becoming its mayor and is not averse to doing things outside of the law. Betty White has a career in television spanning over 80 years. She was initially only supposed to appear in the pilot episode but the audience response was quite positive so the producers upgraded her to series regular.

STRUCTURE, WRITING & DEVELOPMENT

The series plays out as a typical slice-of-life sitcom. The idea of older women living together and going through life isn’t new - think Golden Girls in the modern era and you pretty much have the gist of the show. However, is that such a bad thing? I think every TV era needs a show that focuses on the challenges one faces as the march of time proceeds; something that feels comfortable without pushing the boundaries too much and HiC was that for a generation who missed out on Betty White’s previous hit show. It wasn’t cerebral watching and it didn’t need to be.

In line with this, many of the plots are taken out from well known tropes that have developed over the years. Love triangles, a vapid rivalry in Hollywood, false pregnancies and lost loves returning all play part in the show’s six season run, edited and polished for character context. This is a big part of why the show felt so familiar to many viewers. Script structures followed one of three methods:

Characters A & B take part in subplot 1 whilst C & D take part in subplot 2 - this proves most effective for humor, balancing out the plot and giving each character something to work with

Characters A & B take part in subplot 1, C in subplot 2 and D in subplot 3 - this proves most effective for character development but can feel too scattered at times

Characters A, B, C & D take part in the main plot - this is most effective for plot lines, usually occurring at season premieres or finales

In terms of character development, the main trio of ladies find fulfillment in each other’s status. I’ll explain:

Melanie was an author but didn’t really have much experience in the working world, choosing instead to derive her satisfaction from being a mother and a wife. Now that her marriage is over and her kids are in college, she feels lost and doesn’t know what to do with herself. Over the course of the show, she has a series of meaningful relationships but develops the most in her career;becoming a column writer, a public relations assistant, a radio show host and a restaurant manager. This is what Victoria was trying to achieve at the beginning of the show.

Victoria is an out of work actress who has to resort to all sorts of tricks to get back into the public eye. Her approach is hit and miss, but she eventually goes on to win an Emmy and an Oscar, along with some work in critically acclaimed stage plays and a brief period as a news reporter. Despite this, she finds more satisfaction in her love life (despite being married EIGHT times!), eventually marrying her one true love at the end of the series. This is what Joy was trying to achieve at the start.

Joy is struggling as a beautician who looks for love in handsome men and one night stands, but never seems to catch a break. Her love life goes from bad to worse and her relationships fail due to a combination of her own issues with trust and the fact that the men she loves aren’t that great to begin with. She eventually puts her cynicism and stalking tendencies (I told you to watch out for her!) to good use, studying criminology and becoming a private detective. She also reconnects with her son that she gave up for adoption and gleefully accepts when she finds out that she’s a grandmother. Long story short, she’s looking for stability and finds it in the most unlikely man, becoming a wife and a mother at the end of the show. This is what Melanie was looking for at the start of the show.

Over the first three seasons, a heavy emphasis is placed on Elka due to the show trying to capitalize on Betty White’s resurgence in popularity at the time. This is in spite of the fact that Elka kind of feels like a lost puzzle piece. She doesn’t really fit in to the whole cohesiveness of the other three characters. This is changed in season 4, when the character of Mamie Sue (played by Georgia Engel, Betty’s costar from The Mary Tyler Moore Show) is promoted to a recurring character. It not only gives a nice chemistry to a previously ill fitting character, it creates a parallel with the LA trio: Mamie Sue is a combination of Victoria’s airheadedness and Melanie’s kindness to Joy’s cynicism found in Elka.

The show starts off quite shakily, despite its hype, but takes a turn for the better around the fourth season. The frivolous story lines from earlier episodes are eschewed for more long term plots with more emotional impact. Themes of loneliness, love at middle age and returning to correct past regrets are explored quite deeply. The show also loses some of the LA stereotypes as it goes on.

Some really big names are booked as guest stars, some notable ones being:

Susan Lucci as a parody of herself, being Victoria’s arch-nemesis

Joe Jonas as Will, Melanie’s son

Craig Ferguson as Simon, Joy’s first love and babydaddy

Jon Lovitz as Artie Firestone, an eccentric billionaire who takes an interest in Joy

Heather Locklear as Chloe, one of Melanie’s bosses at her PR job

The entire cast of The Mary Tyler Moore Show as G.L.O.B. (Gorgeous Ladies of Bowling)

Alan Dale as Sir Emmet Lawson, a renowned actor and Victoria’s sixth husband

Rick Springfield as a parody of himself

BULLSEYES & IMPROVEMENTS

What the show gets right:

Exploring the crossroads many women face at middle age, in terms of the main aspects of life: family, love & career

Great acting, especially in the later seasons

Wendie Malick - she deserved an Emmy nomination for her acting here

Jennifer Love Hewitt as Emmy, Victoria’s eldest daughter. Seriously, watch her episodes and tell me they aren’t funny

The general lack of pressure - you don’t need much attention to cycle in and out of the show, it’s easy watching

The consistency and plot development post season 3

What I think should be improved upon:

Melanie can be TOO nice, something that’s actually picked upon by other characters. Her cancer subplot was a nice opportunity to get some grit, but most of it was just by the way and not fully delved into

Victoria’s job as a news reporter was forgotten as soon as she landed a part in a Woody Allen movie. It would have been nice for her to be in that occupation a bit more or go back to it after her Oscar win and give her a chance to be on the other side of fame

Elka’s love life - every boyfriend seems to be a copy of the other and there are way too many of them

CULTURAL & PERSONAL IMPACT

This article from the A.V. Club goes into detail about the show and I have to say, I agree with it wholeheartedly agree. HiC was a reminder of what was before the more intellectual comedies came along. It shamelessly pandered to an older generation who wanted something familiar in an ever changing landscape. The fact that it didn’t take many risks in its approach was a risk in itself. It was clearly one that paid off, given the six season run. It wasn’t a darling of the critics, but it didn’t need to be. This was a show that could be watched to generate a few laughs without the need for in depth discussion with a coworker in the break room the next day.

A few years after the show’s cancellation, Valerie Bertinelli expressed her anger at TV Land for the decision, calling it sexist. I can’t really comment on that, given that I’m not too familiar with TV Land’s other work, but I will say that HiC did what it had to do. Six seasons in an age where you’re lucky to get more than three is amazing. The plot lines tied up quite nicely at the end and in the end, that’s all that everyone wanted.

Personally, I watched this show at two very difficult times in my life. The first was at college during my final year, when deadlines loomed and twisted my stomach in anxiety. The second was a few months ago when I had quit my job and needed something to distract me from the depression. On both occasions, this show has really made me laugh and fall in love with its simplicity. It’s undemanding and solid, just what I need to get through a trying period.

WHERE TO WATCH IT

Seasons 1 to 5 are available on Amazon Prime Video

Seasons 1 to 4 are available on Hunnyhaha’s channel on Youtube

If you’re in Southern Africa, the entire series are available on Showmax

[musesofconstantchange]

We Have To Talk About Batman

So, I just read The Batman Who Laughs #3 and Detective Comics #998, and I can’t hold it in anymore. We need to talk about how Batman is the worst character in comics right now. 

For those unaware, the previous holder of this title was Deadpool, but previous luminaries include Cyclops, Wolverine, Hal Jordan, and many others. Rather than talk about all of them, let’s focus on Deadpool and why he held it, and you’ll likely grasp why the others did as well. 

First, Deadpool at his best is a humorous, witty character who swaps between moments of humor with striking, honest takes on serious topics. He is both comic relief and the character that points out the moral incongruities in the protagonist’s actions. As a protagonist, he is well suited to commentary on many things, because of his nature as an outsider sort of character. At his worst, he’s the signal to the reader that nothing that follows his appearance matters, because his existence is akin to throwing the stakes out the window. At his worst, he’s the character that derails anything resembling tonal consistency, and at his worst, he’s the character to whom all others are sacrificed in order to keep him from coming off as a psychotic madman that ruins everything. At his worst, he’s the character that all others must prostrate themselves before, no matter what he’s done, because to accept that this character is flawed is to call into question the writer’s ability to actually write a nuanced character, and we can’t have that. 

You can probably tell already how all of the other mentioned characters have fallen into this trap whenever they become extremely popular, as writers with more interest in being attached to a hot property than writing good stories use them. So it was when Wolverine was the hottest character in comics, so it was when Hal Jordan was the next hot shit, so it now is with Batman. 

Of course, the problem with Batman is that Batman is a character whose main flaws have been around so long that they are now parody; everyone jokes about the ‘i’m the goddamn batman’ line, and laughs at the ‘who wins in a fight, x or batman with prep time’ joke, but these hide the fact that the character of Batman himself has become the biggest mary sue in comics today. His entire character has been so flanderized, so utterly lost inside the infinite layers of parody and lack of self awareness, that all joy has been lost from the character. 

Let us be honest here: the core idea of Batman is not the problem. There is a reason that there are so many Batman cartoons, and it is in no small part because Batman as a character is an almost universal one. A child suffers a great tragedy and uses that as the moment where he begins his heroic journey towards making things better. This is neither dumb nor uninteresting. 

The problem is that writers of batman have, for a very long time, been very uncomfortable with the idea of who Batman is. Batman at his best is a detective, a man of science and reason and restraint, a man who resists his darker urges in comparison to the obsessives that make up his rogue’s gallery. He is a mortal man, a flawed man, but he is always a man, in that he is human and not a god. It is why he is a member of the “trinity” and the Justice League, because he is the mortal element. He is the perspective of the common man compared to the near godlike beings ( Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Martian Manhunter ) and cosmic focused heroes ( Green Lantern, Hawkgirl ) that he is surrounded by. He is the one that can say ‘look, you all mean well, but remember how you look to the normal guy.’ 

But this Batman is not popular with writers. Indeed, ever since The Dark Knight Returns, the version of Batman that has become the most common is the paranoid, near psychopathic, almost godlike messiah figure who is always right, who is never wrong for taking immoral actions, whose character all others are sacrificed to in order to ensure we all know how great he is. This Batman isn’t a mere man who uses his inherited wealth and sense of right and wrong to try and make the world a better place. This Batman is someone who is the best at everything, who constantly treats friends, allies, and family members as disposable or hindrances, who sees nothing wrong with spending his time planning on how best to kill all his friends and family, and who must constantly be shown to be smarter and better than all around him. 

This Batman is a super rich mega genius who has been trained by all the world’s best people, who can never be physically defeated by anyone or mentally outwitted by them. This is Batman, invincible ninja playboy billionaire genius. 

It has always been rather egregious on some level, but as time has gone by, successive writers have only deepened the problem, incrementally moving further and further towards the complete mary sue he is today. The fact that Batman needs a giant robot suit, the fact that Batman could put together such a thing somehow despite it requiring genius level knowledge in robotics and electrical and mechanical engineering, speaks to the levels of broken the character is. When movies are made where the concept of Batman vs. Superman is created to justify the existence and need for a giant robot suit so that Batman, a mortal man, can fight godlike beings, you are fundamentally failing to grasp the character and what that character is supposed to be. 

Example, from the recent and aforementioned Detective Comics #998: 

Ah yes, because you know what Batman needed? A giant robot suit that was put together by the Justice League with all their powers because he wasn’t awesome enough. Also, that ‘weakness’ that’s described? That’s not a weakness, which we the reader find out about it when he literally pushes it to the extreme and he’s completely fine from doing so. 

But I can understand how this might come off as just me being mad that Batman has his own Iron Man suit. It’s not. The suit itself is not the issue. It’s what the suit represents that is. Because the whole reason that this exists in this is because Batman can’t stop going to people who trained him, which is basically half the known DC universe. It’s not just that he studied under Wildcat, best fighter alive, and Zatara, best escape artist alive, and Jason Blood, best fear creator alive, and Dr. Stone, one of the greatest inventors in the DC universe. The list goes on. Batman has a staggering amount of former tutors, who apparently imparted upon him near infinite knowledge of all things. 

And it’s not just this near omniscient knowledge of everything either. He’s also physically better than everyone. He’s a master martial artist of a dozen styles who also knows every weapon style known to man. Oh, and apparently he’s also one of the best marksman on earth. From this week’s The Batman Who Laughs #3: 

Because that’s what Batman needed, more skills! 

And make no mistake, all of this makes Batman extremely boring, which is not something Batman should be. A lot of this can be chalked up to writers literally having no idea how to write a challenge for him anymore. At first, the plan was simply to make all of Batman’s villains overwhelmingly overpowered as well. This is why the Joker is somehow also a super ninja genius of everything who can conjure impossible chemicals and defeat the entire legion of doom on his own because he’s just so powerful and smart and crazy! It’s why most of Batman’s villains don’t even really fight Batman any more, it’s usually Batman fighting himself. As we saw in Kings of Fear, the entire series is nothing but Batman in his own head, the Scarecrow didn’t actually do anything. 

Speaking of Batman fighting himself, let’s talk about Batman: Metal. 

Look, I love me some multi-verse. I love Elseworlds. I think one of the greatest tragedies in comics was the decline of the multiverse concept in comics. But Batman: Metal goes from being about the return of the multiverse to being the latest in a long line of resignations that the only person who can compete with Batman is... Batman himself. 

All the villains are various versions of Batman who, you guessed it, killed all the other members of the Justice League. Now, if you were a crafty, or moderately smart writer, you might realize that having a universe where all your nightmares are real means that this is a great way to show how wrong your character is! After all, it’s made of their beliefs in what things are, not what they actually are, which is why Batman’s idea of him becoming Green Lantern involves him using a hard light ring to make darkness and the like. 

What this should do, is provide the writer with some ability to show how Batman isn’t a one-man show. That when Batman’s idea of what makes those other heroes strong runs up against the real thing, his ideas lose. But no, Batman wins, because Batman always wins, because heaven forbid Batman be wrong about other people. Apparently, Hal Jordan being the greatest Green Lantern means nothing compared to Batmans complete and utter bastardization of the concept of the ring, just as Wonder Woman being a near immortal godlike warrior who’s trained for centuries means nothing compared to Batman in what he thinks is the helmet of Ares. And it’s the same as Batman also clearly being better than the greatest Flash that ever lived because apparently Batman also has complete knowledge of the speed force now. 

But almost all of what I’ve talked about could be reasoned away or excused if the moral center of Batman’s character wasn’t utterly corrupt. Consider this mentality for why Batman has contingencies and plans for every possible outcome, and why he plans for the possibility wherein he’ll need to kill all his supposed friends. The world is a dangerous place, and those people have powers, and you never know what might happen that might cause them to go over the edge. We don’t know what might cause Superman to go rogue and kill everyone. Or what might cause Wonder Woman to destroy the world of man. Or what might cause Aquaman to flood the world in the name of Atlantis! All it could take is one bad day! 

Is that possibly true? Sure. But that’s not the mentality of Batman, that’s the mentality of the Joker. Joker is the one who believes that everyone is just one bad day from turning into a psychotic monster, who believes civility and decency are facades that people use to hide the fact that deep inside we’re all animals and monsters who will eat each other given half a chance. He’s the one who believes that people are all naturally bad, that people aren’t really decent, that anyone can be made into a monster and will give up their morality at the first opportunity. That’s the entire concept of his character and why he opposes Batman. It’s also why Batman opposes him. 

Because Batman at his core is not meant to be an agent of vengeance. He’s not the Spectre. He’s not the Punisher. Batman is supposed to be someone who believes that people are ultimately good, that people are not all one step away from committing atrocities and war crimes, that people are, by virtue of their humanity, good people at heart. Not everyone is good, but people aren’t all monsters inside, and the reason Batman needs to exist is because someone has to stand up for the fact that there are still good people in the world. 

If Batman doesn’t believe that people are good, if Batman believes that everyone is one step away from committing mass murder, then Batman is no different then the Joker. When Batman does things like make spy satellites to gather information on other hero’s weaknesses and bugs the rooms of his supposed family members, he’s not just not being Batman, he’s behaving exactly counter to the very values that Batman should be representing. 

If Batman cannot trust his allies on the Justice League to be good people, then how is he any different from Amanda Waller? If Batman cannot trust his ‘family’ to the point where he feels the need to bug their homes and spy on them, why exactly did he train them? If Batman cannot believe that there is any real good in the world, then why exactly is he Batman? 

Hopefully I’ve demonstrated that the problem with Batman as a character is more than skin deep. The issue of him being an overpowered superhuman being are problematic. The issue of him being a near psychopathic figure whose mental state reads like an episode of Making a Murderer is problematic. The issue of him being completely unmoored from any sort of heroic morality is problematic. 

Taken together, the character represents the worst of mary sue writing. He is a character who routinely commits morally and ethically objectionable actions and suffers no fallout for them; he is a character that all others are constantly made to seem inferior towards; he is a character whose very nature and concept must constantly be revised and changed because the writers cannot bear to let the character whose defining trait is his humanity actually be human. 

He is a character whose jokes have become the reality; where the exaggerations are now the baseline. Batman now is little more than a patchwork of skills and gadgets, of psychosis and grimdark man pain. It would be comedic, perhaps, if Frank Millers All Star Batman and Robin, from which the iconic ‘i’m the goddamn batman’ arises, was some kind of outlier. Yet for all the jokes and derision that comic gets, and rightly so, very little distinguishes it from the mainstream depiction of Batman in comics more generally. The flanderization of Batman is complete, and this is why Batman is now the worst character in comics. 

[bells-of-black-sunday]

🔥

Send me a “ 🔥 “ for an unpopular opinion | accepting

Can we stop complaining about characters being too overpowered or being mary/gary sues/stus god I hate those term’s so much. 

Both are methods of gatekee.ping seeing as how any time anyone’s fucking using those terms is to throw them at an oc that’s barely had any development. Because guess the fuck what? Once someone who has a large following hurls harassment at someone like “OH THIS CHARACTER’S A MARY SUE AND YOU SHOULD FEEL BAD FOR MAKING IT HAHA” people are going to attack that person. It’s why I hate devi.antart “ranters”, because absolutely none of them offer constructive criticism and just throw their audience at people who are more than likely fucking children.

Here’s a neat fucking idea, offer constructive criticism instead of complaining about characters that are hardly ever fucking real. I’ve literally never seen a real “mary sue” aside from the main girl from twili.ght, because every single “mary sue” is a fucking parody. This is coming from a person who was on de.viantart for 5 fucking years, before I moved to tum.blr.

As for “over powered” characters ahem

THERE 👏IS 👏 NOTHING 👏 WRONG 👏 WITH 👏 A CHARACTER 👏 BEING 👏 A 👏 GOD 👏 OR 👏 BEING RIDICULOUSLY 👏 STRONG

[the-real-tc]

Review Ep. 1101: Baby On Board

(Cross-posted over on Facebook.) Loving the ultra-widescreen opening sequences, as always. I think my heart was in my throat at that near-miss with the Briar Ridge trailer and the big rig truck and pickup. Yikes. Glad there was no actual collision (like in the Season 3 opener, ‘Miracle Girl’.) Nice CG with the reflection in Flame’s eye as the rig flew by: it gave a visual impression of the traumatic experience being imprinted on the horse’s memory. (I like that the same effect was utilized later when Georgie was first trying to bond with Flame.)

I liked seeing Amy’s unabashed joy at riding Spartan again, and Spartan looking as handsome as ever.

First look at five-month-old Baby Lyndy, and it’s precious, as expected. She’s sitting up, alert, and getting some solid foods (though we learn later she’s still getting bottle-fed with milk Amy’s been pumping.)

It quickly becomes clear Ty is not keen on having Grandma Lily come see Baby Lyndy. It’s already been five months, and she still hasn’t made an official visit? That’s not normal, Ty! It’s not like your mom’s living on another planet. Vancouver really isn’t *that* far away. We soon learn that Ty is highly over-protective, irrationally unable to relinquish care of the baby to his mother, whom he considers unstable and unfit to look after an infant, even for one evening.

 I loved the exchanges between Lily and Ty in this episode. It’s never been smooth sailing for these two, and Heather Conkie gives Graham Wardle and Megan Follows some good lines to chew on. Harsh words are spoken, and hard feelings come to the surface, forcing both mother and son to confront long-buried events from the past. Was Lily a “bad mother”, as Ty seems to infer? Is that why he won’t trust her, or take her advice, or accept her gift of a harmless lamb blanket?

 Another powerful scene was Tim and Lily having a heart-to-heart about their respective addiction problems. It’s these details about the characters the fans know, but it’s the first time these two have acknowledged this commonality, and it was great. Further, I like that they schemed to put up a baby gate. That baby gate later leads to a funny scene that partially defuses a very tense moment between Ty and Lily. It’s the kind of scene that seems like it could have been ad-libbed and was left in because it worked so well, but was probably scripted.

 Staying with Ty for a moment, there’s his need to buy a new truck. We can recall Jack went through similar pains in Season Three’s “Man’s Best Friend”. Ty, eschewing all help from well-meaning (but pushy) Tim, decides he’s going to buy a used truck from a guy who claims he’s selling it because his wife wants a van, instead. (Ten-to-one that was a line and he’s probably not even married.) The truck predictably breaks down after the deal has been made, leaving Ty with a truck he can’t fix, and a previous owner who won’t give him a refund.

 It’s Jack to the rescue this time (isn’t it always Jack to the rescue in these matters?) He secures the refund for Ty; it’s only later we learn Jack threw in one of Ray Phillips’ old longhorns to sweeten the deal.

 Ty ultimately ends up buying a truck from Mitch (his father’s truck), something we knew from the very beginning would happen. Mitch, it seems, has got himself a job in Calgary. Lou is apparently unaware while she’s off in New York with Katie. (Mitch, buddy, I love the beard. I wish you’d keep it; alas, I know you do end up shaving it off. Also, stay away from Lou until she sorts herself out and learns to be less petty and self-centered. You deserve a woman who knows how to be compassionate and less hypocritical.)

 It wouldn’t be a great episode of Heartland without something to do with horses, and we get that box checked off in the form of Flame, the traumatized horse that belongs to (the much-maligned) Val Stanton. My, she’s come a long way since her Season One sneers and doubting ways. Not only is she confident Amy can work a miracle on champion jumper Flame, she pretty much demands it! Luckily, she also has Georgie on the case, as the plucky teen wants to see what she can do to help. Somehow, she manages to form a bond with Flame, obviously having learned some techniques from Amy over the years. Georgie fortunately has that “fearless” gene that grants her the ability to tackle the challenge of this unruly horse who refuses to jump. Going bareback, Georgie “The Natural” manages to do what the Briar Ridge trainers couldn’t: she takes him over the jumping course, impressing Val Stanton enough to grant her the opportunity to ride Flame in an upcoming competition. (This ticks off Flame’s original rider, Chad, who couldn’t get him to do squat except squeal and skitter around the jumps.)

Now, time for some “opinionating”:

 I know there’s a portion of the fandom that absolutely despises Georgie for seemingly usurping Amy’s position. I could see Georgie’s bond with Flame as being another reason for folks to hate the kid even more, but I think it works well for the show to have someone other than Amy who’s able to jump horses well. Otherwise, Amy just turns into some mythical Mary-Sue who can do everything right and everything well, and nobody else can or should, because Amy is the best! (Look up the definition of a “Mary-Sue”, if you don’t know the term. You don’t want Amy to be a Mary-Sue.) I’ve said in the past that unless the show takes risks and is willing to change, it’ll become a parody of itself with repetitive story lines. Amy has already “healed” crazy-expensive jumpers that won’t jump. I’d like to think of Georgie as Amy’s protégé, and now she’s getting a chance to show what she can do. It doesn’t diminish Amy’s gift by any means (in my opinionated opinion) and gives the writers a chance to explore new avenues. Young kids who are only now discovering the show can appreciate Georgie more readily than they might appreciate a grown-up Amy.

We know from tweets from the set that the Georgie and Flame thread runs through the season, so expect more of this duo. Hopefully, Val’s investment starts to pay off, because as she pointed out, there are a lot more experienced riders who would jump at the chance to be in Georgie’s position right now.

 Side notes:

 1) They acknowledged that Lily wasn’t at Ty and Amy’s wedding (Val meets Lily for the first time and she comments on the absence; Lily claims she was “ill”. Val says that’s a shame since the wedding was beautiful.) As viewers, we knew Lily and Wade were not present; a valid reason was not forthcoming. To hear from Lily’s own mouth a sort-of reason was interesting, indeed.

 2) I *loved* the heart-to-heart Jack had with Ty about how he's been treating his mother. Jack brought up that dream Ty had back when he was nearly dying of pneumonia, along with his own latent fears about not being a good father. Jack points out that Ty's overcompensating, and that he needs to let go and enjoy these precious moments with his daughter, because they go by far too quickly. (And just as I write this, I'm struck by the fact Jack has had to deal with the loss of his own daughter, Marion.) They are words Ty takes to heart, because there's this amazing bond of trust and respect between Jack and Ty that's been fostered through all these years.

 3) Amy got to ride Spartan not once, but *twice* in this episode! And one of those times was on the jumping course

So check off “Amy works with horse(s)” and “Amy rides Spartan” in your little “Things I Expect to See in Each and Every Heartland Episode”.

 Final thoughts: Glad Ty learned to relax a little. Hopefully he’s dumped that goofy “Baby App” for good. Amy seemed a little reluctant to go along with Ty’s obsessiveness with regimenting Baby Lyndy’s every move, but she humoured him, something I thought was a nice touch. Since it wasn’t really doing the kid any harm, new mom Amy seems content to roll with whatever her crazy husband deems necessary for their first child’s development.

 If you didn’t feel even the slightest tug on your heartstrings at that final scene of Amy, Ty, and Baby Lyndy slow-dancing on the back of the “new” truck, then I have to conclude that A) You actually don’t have a heart; B) You haven’t seen “Man’s Best Friend” to get the significance of that dance, or C) Both A and B, or D) You’ve never seen an episode of Heartland before now and you’re not at all invested in the characters.

 So a huge "Welcome Back!" to Heather Conkie, cast and crew of Heartland; it's a delight to have you on my screen again. I'm looking forward to what else Season 11 has to offer.

[frostbite883-archive]

DBM Bra hating

These comments won’t be in order. With that said..let’s do it to it.

Tregrenos

So, is it Hyukhyuks turn to eat a Senzu in the middle of the match?

#GetGudBra

Me:...I doubt that would happen seeing as that hulking monster never did carried senzu beans after it’s ‘birth’.

A Poverty-Stricken Antelope

@Tregrenos

Now I understand another reason why I hate Bra: she heals mid-match like a little bi***. She wouldn't last 10 seconds in a Dark Souls duel.

Me: So you say.

Itsarge (gamergater or former GGer) and snowflake exchanging some words with each other.

snowflake:

My view on Bra: She's an awkward character. Literally. She's an entitled princess of a Deity-God-Warrior and Bulma, so she's a overpowered brat with a genius level IQ, and obsessed with strength and being better than everyone, which makes her relationships very one-sided and binary. She literally divides the world up into people stronger than her and not stronger than her, and only acknowledges one person as legitimately stronger than her. No, seriously. It's a problem. Try writing like a tomboy teenage girl would talk, who's obsessed with beating everyone she comes across. At best it would come out as parody. It is hard to find that voice, and harder still to make it resonate with a predominately male audience, and yet harder STILL to do it within the confines of traditional shonen story-telling, from which DBZ is inspired. So Salagir took cues from cocky, pre-redemption Vegeta (not a bad idea). But I believe it only jarred the readers more. The gender-swap seemed obvious and artificial and distracted the reader from the story. The same problem occurs in superhero comics. Iron Man? Everyone accepts that a white dude of indeterminate age can be of genius level intellect, have his own company, and be a superhero/playboy in his copious spare time. Riri Williams? A 15 year old black girl who reverse-engineered Iron Man's tech? Whom he then decided to fund and sponsor? UNBELIEVABLE, according to the backlash. Not a real Iron Man/War Machine, it was obvious that the writers simply "made her up." X-23, Laura Kinney? Not a true Wolverine. "Just created as fan-service." Dr. Jane Foster? Not a real Thor. "Just a writer gimmick." This begs the question, why not? What dissolves the suspension of disbelief with these characters, while the suspension of disbelief is limitless with traditional characters? People claim they want new and interesting stories and challenging plots and characters, the same way they claim they want to lose weight. But they really don't. They want the old chestnuts, the familiar, the predictable. The sugar and the salt. If a story is predictable, you don't have to think about it too much. It won't upset you. People dislike being upset. Shonen style stories are the most predictable on the planet. Good always wins. Evil is punished. Virtue is rewarded, and sins are rebuked and/or reprimanded. Good guys and bad guys are obvious and look the part. So Salagir set himself up with challenge in U16 Bra: an unsympathetic, one-dimensional character who happens to be a girl whose cockiness and obsession with strength is/was rewarded, not punished. Her morality is questionable. It's a deliberate inversion of the typical shonen character. But plot-wise, U16 is integral to the story. So she had to wear Plot Armor from the beginning, as well. Also DBM is moving along, plot-wise, at the pace of Freeza's kitchen timer. And there's also a peanut gallery of readers dissecting everything you do every page? Uh-oh...

ltsarge:

Regarding their statement people could buy iron man cause he is a white male... You know I take issue when people bring this line of thinking up. I think their iron heart girl, being a 15 year old black girl is a total cash grab gimmick appealing to their xtreme social left. In the same way that female Thor was a giant feminist spectacle that literally went around beating up misogynists. I don't think it's unreasonable to call out this type of pandering where it's seen. If marvel really wanted a black female heroine to take up the reigns of them iron man, they could have gone with this character. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misty_Knight It would be way more believable for an previously established in comics older black lady who has personally designed by tony stark tech, to take up the Ironman mantle than some 15 year old prodigy made up whole cloth. Same with female thor. If she - hulk or black widow went around welding his hammer (them latter which has occured), I would totally buy it. Having some super powered feminist be the new thor, and telling thor to check his privelege seems almost a parody of sjw influence in comics, yet it's played horribly straight. Sorry for the digression in this thread

snowflake:

But the entire superhero genre is pandering. Captain America punching Hitler? Meek and Mild-Mannered Clark Kent becoming Superman beating up anyone and anything with complete moral justification? Batman being the God-Damnned Batman? Itsarge - In the same way that female Thor was a giant feminist spectacle that literally went around beating up misogynists. That's a totally legitimate power-fantasy. It's just not aimed at you. At least you can console yourself it's likely to fail commercially. And just wait until the Enchantress gets her hands on her! As for Misty Knight, they were probably wanting to avoid anything smacking of blaxploitation. In fact, since Riri Williams looks like her exactly, she'll probably end up being a clone or something. Anyway, my point is that female superheroes are a challenge. They're a challenge to draw (how sexy is too sexy? how muscular is too muscular?). They're a challenge to write. They're challenging to present in an appealing light, and they're a challenge to plot for. And then there's the audience predisposed to hostility against such characters, and then there's the fact it's on the internet, which simply makes everything worse!

ltsarge:

1st up, female superheroes are not a challenge.  Just focus on making a good character, that happens to be female.  Black Widow, Ripley, Sarah Connor, Lara Croft, Rukia, Riza Hawkeye, Winry Rockbell, Bulma Fucking Briefs... (I can go on but you get my drift.) 2nd.  Anyone complaining about them being too sexy is either a prude or hypocrite, considering the over masculine features of male heroes which gives plenty of fanservice to people who like men.  And before anyone says any Anita Sarkeesian-esque excuse about how male superheros having amazing body appeal to the male power-fantasy, go do a cursory google image search on any male hero, ESPECIALLY if they anime, and take off your parental filters.  You will see endless fan art of male characters from Ichigo to wolverine to Raiden who are all in sexually explicit poses, if not flat out porn of them.  Probably the latter. Hell just look at fucking Twilight series if you want an entire series dedicated to the female gaze upon appealing strong masculine figures. The point is, if you're overly concerned about the sexual imagery of a female character, you're in either fear of the rabid feminist crow, or possibly the overly conservative crowd.  Considering their are female characters throughout comics and anime that are sexually appealing but renownly well written speaks volumes on how little an artist or writer should give a fuck about whether they are too muscular or sexy.   3rd.  Regarding superhero pandering like Captain America punching Hitler (or similar heroes punch insert political villain) in the face.  You may note that is something that is often mocked by comic book fans for how politically charged and nationalistic it was.  If that low bar is what we are setting as defense for female thor, than sure, well than I guess those examples of bad writing justifies absurd levels of feminist pandering.

4th.  Most of the arguments brought forth in the discussions regarding all this since the comment about "people are more willing to allow for a white male Iron man, but not Insert minority character" that have emerged as defense of bra, seem to be desperate attempts of justifications for an overall badly done character.  You don't need testicles or white pigmentation and blue irises to recognize the Bra for the most part has not jived with the fan base.  I've made a hefty list in this thread of why her character has problems, and none of them are because she has a vagina.  In fact, I have criticized many of Salagir's Original Characters for the same reasons, but Bra has either more or all of the flaws of the others such as Gast or King Cold. Let's be real.  If Bra was not a female character, people who defend her would not have certain cards in their arsenal.  If this character was Vegeta, and I was defending her, you wouldn't see me saying "Oh you vegeta haters dislike Vegeta because he's a male.  You are all sexist!"  or "its difficult to right an arrogant MALE character from space" I don't give a fuck that Bra is a strong female character.  I give a fuck that her blatant mary sue traits are not addressed, and in story she's not criticized for being a bratty person. Just because there is a lack of "strong female" characters in DBZ cannon (not complete absence, as there are still many in DB/DBZ), is not a good excuse for building a shitty one.  We don't need affirmative action in comics or fan comics.  If people want to make a strong female character, that's good, that's fine!  But if there is one that's made that has HUGE FLAWS, we shouldn't say "Well, there are no other strong female characters, so thank god for BRA."

snowflake:

Well, on the flip side, if Bra was male, I doubt we'd get as much demands for PUNISHMENT!1!11 or "Punch me harder, Daddy" jokes. At this point, we'll just agree to disagree. We're talking past each other. I have faith that all of your complaints with U16 Bra will be addressed in the story eventually. U18 and U16 have had limited interaction since the beginning of the story. There's a reason for that.

ltsarge:

I'd be happy to argue at length over female portrayals vs male, so if u'd like to merge some of this over to a new thread that be fine with me.

Me: Hopefully, they don’t do that. Not because I think they’ll lose any argument or whatever you’d have with them, but out of the fact that whenever they DO point out flaws in your arguments and show you evidence you’ll just conveniently ignore them. You’re def. not someone worth conversing with.

Me: And seriously, why would you liked their last post to you?

prphd and ltsarge like this

Me: I mean with the way you went after them, I’d rather they didn’t get a like from you let alone anything else (although, this could be your way of respecting your opponent or whatever you would refer to them as, still, it doesn’t make it any less awkward seeing as how antagonistic you had been towards that person, a stranger no less...who you try to inject your thoughts and feelings towards while replying to their post when it wasn’t warranted).

Me: And some Anti-SJWs wonder, bitterly, on why some social justice advocates don’t take them seriously. Let alone obligate themselves to even talk things out with them.

[backofthebookshelf]

WisCon Day 3

Sunday, despite being hung over and not going to bed until 4am the night before, I staggered up early enough to catch the end of the 10am panel slot "How Lazy Writing Recreates Oppression." There were some really good thinky panels at that slot, but I knew I wasn't going to be up for anything more than listening to Tempest and Nico and Mark yell about stupid stories and stupid characters, and I was right. It was pretty great though. I did not take notes in this panel, which on reflection is a goddamn shame, but the Twitter hashtag gets a lot of the highlights. (Tempest made Mark blush with her description of the male ejaculation story arc, which alone was worth the price of admission to the entire con.) I needed some vegetables for lunch, so we walked all the way around the square to the remodeled Brocach, which used to be an Irish pub and is now a super-trendy restauraunt that serves a lot of Jaimeson. Food was good, but I can't see going there as often as we used to (even if I were in town). I'd intended to go to the "creating alien sex organs" panel at one, but the general atmosphere in the room beforehand was putting me off just slightly (nothing super offensive, just being a mildly sex-repulsed asexual person means there are some atmospheres I'm not really comfortable in), so I went to a reading instead - "AIs, Wendigos, and other Teenage Worries." Theo Nicole Lorenz read from her YA-novel-in-progress Wendigo Summer, Marianne Kirby read from a story narrated by a ghost who lives in a mall and falls in love with a mannequin (and talked up her Dustbath Revival series, which I then had to go into the dealer's room and purchase), and Naomi Kritzer read from the YA-novel-in-progress followup to her Hugo-award winning story "Cat Pictures, Please," narrated by a teenage girl and by an AI who set up a social network whose price for entry is pictures of cute animals. Because the AI likes cat pictures. Wound up spending more money in the dealer's room, because of course there were many books I was interested in, once I went looking for one, and also Dylan Edwards's feeping creatures are exactly my monster aesthetic (I recommend them to everyone). At 2:30 I went to a panel on Moral Ambiguity in Fiction, which turned out to be the followup to the villains panel I'd been to last year, where we ended up talking about the difference between moral ambiguity and "this person is evil but I'm attracted to them." There was some of that in this panel, too, but also on the difference between a text that is morally ambiguous (like, say, Watchmen, where the ending gives you several options for how to interpret an event but doesn't actually encourage you to lean toward any one of them) and a text that is morally chaotic (where the hero can do whatever he wants because he's the hero, which makes all his actions morally acceptable *coughSGAcough*). There was also some discussion of what kinds of characters are interesting when morally ambiguous (characters who grew up without a moral compass and attempt to build one; characters who do bad things in service of a higher good) and what characters are painted, either by canon or by fanon, as morally ambiguous despite not really deserving a redemption arc (Snape, Loki). (I mean, I might fight you on Loki-in-the-text, but Loki fandom really is the worst sometimes.) Sadly, no one mentioned the next logical step: people whose actions are hardly morally ambiguous but who you have a hard time arguing with anyway (see: The Ballad of Black Tom). Lots of good examples in this panel; check the book list when I get it up. At four I went to another monster panel, which turned out to be a horror panel instead: "When the Monster Isn't the Monster," which despite the panel description turned out to be a lot about how horror works and how it doesn't. Most of what I have written down is an endless list of recommendations, but a lot of the discussion wandered around the general idea of otherness (which is what monsters are about) and ways things get projected onto that and how it's handled. There was a lot of talk about some of the big recent horror movies - The Babadook, It Follows, The Witch - and what exactly their monsters are doing. The most interesting point that was brought up was about universality - while the idea of monsters generally is a universal one, individual monsters are culturally and even personally very specific, which is one reason why American remakes of foreign horror can be so bad. And some stories can't be universalized - Get Out is a movie about the experience of being Black in America, and while it might give white audiences a taste of what that's like, it's not the same thing. (We didn't talk much about Get Out, because the whole panel was white, and I appreciated that. Also, I still haven't seen it, which I need to fix.) After that it was time for dinner and getting ready for the big event! We ran back to Hattie's apartment because she'd accidentally left her dessert ticket there, came back and had Ian's Pizza for dinner, then got all fancy. (Last year I went super-girly to the Dessert Salon, the one semi-formal-if-you-want-to part of WisCon; this year I didn't get to go as butch as I wanted to but I did wear pants and the General Leia vest I'd bought on Friday, which was pretty good). Dessert Salon is always amazing; they have a good pastry chef at the Concourse. Kelly Sue DeConnick gave an amazing speech about taking your place in the pantheon of feminist writers, and about the debt owed by people with privilege to those who have less of it; Amal El-Mohtar gave an amazing speech about being strong enough to be kind, coming together and understanding one another in good faith, and Steven Universe (which I really need to suck it up and watch). The Tiptree award was presented to Anna Marie McLemore for When the Moon Was Ours - and look, the Tiptree ceremony is my absolute favorite award ceremony in all the world. The award is a tiara to wear all weekend, a check, a box of chocolates, and a piece of art inspired by the work (this year a gorgeous glass sculpture), and then we all sing a parody song based on the winning work. "And that's how you present a dignified award," Pat Murphy said when it was all over. It's the best. And then they announced next year's guests of honor, which I have yet to be less than overwhelmingly excited about, but next year it's Tananarive Due!!!!!! and Saladin Ahmed!!!!!! which is incredible, I am so excited, this is going to be amazing. After the celebrations I tried to party again, this time slightly more successful, not least because I've been following Alexandra Erin on twitter for months and had already managed to talk to her on Friday night, so I was much less intimidated. Also, they were doing virgin cocktails, and I was not going to miss a party with virgin cocktails. The party was semi to celebrate the ten-year anniversary of her first major serial, Tales of MU, and mostly to launch her new one, The Secret Sisterhood of Superheroes, featuring realistic elements such as happy queer femme superheroes, and fantasy elements such as competently evil presidents. Everyone read it, it should be great, I got a promotional button with the title of the first chapter, "Only G*sh Can Judge Me." And then I came back to the room and took a shower and went to bed. (Monday and wrap-up thoughts later tonight; hopefully book lists by next Monday.) comments from the wicked king of parody http://ift.tt/2rZetlV via IFTTT

[bigguywithredhand]

Dumbing of Age. Webcomic Sins

 Comic is here: http://www.dumbingofage.com/

Automatically giving Willis 10 sins for using an genre that has been already touched in webcomics for years. In the setting which is college students. If AppleGeeks did it. What makes you special?

 Willis basically uses his characters from his own works instead of making another set of characters with different ideas. It's like painting two cups the exact same and exact shade of  color except one has a red dot that is small and insignificant about the cup. Way too many protagonists, I lose track about almost all of these characters. Megatokyo feels more structured than this and that was a weeaboo nightmare.   

Joyce is put as way too sheltered for her character, even when I was in elementary school and out of private school. I still at least had common sense. Joyce basically is so sheltered that she seriously believed her room mate played with toys of actual action figures. I know that Joyce is basically you Willis, but it seems so far fetched that you are this racist, this naiive, and sure as hell has not at least learned about the dangers of date rape drugs or basically the rules of don't let anyone give you a drink at a party. I'm not blaming the victim, but I am blaming the creator of the fictional victim. I understand that rape prevention doesn't help as much as we think it does. But basically having your character being so naiive at this is not only mindnumbing, it's practically jaw dropping cringe.

 Walky is a gary-sue, nothing of his character makes any sense whatsoever. If you don't study, you don't pass a test. That's basically common knowledge, this could had been a real good opportunity for Willis to break the whole notion that kids who don't study don't go too far in college. But instead of that, Willis is too focused on the political standpoint that Walky has to have every single damn moment from Joyce.

 Dorthy tries her best to have her own future which is understandable. -4 sins for just having that character development and wanting growth. But it kinda destroys the whole formula when Dorthy basically dumps Danny for not having an aspirations in his life and dates Walky for doing the same thing that Danny currently is doing.

Ruth is a shitty RA and would had been fired already in so many cases at this point. Willis keeps her around for Billy. 20 sins for this horrible viewing of lesbianism, no woman would seriously date another woman if they were abusive and bullying at this point. Ruth is at this limit of being a clossal cunt because her world is fucking falling over the place and she takes it out on Billy.

Billy basically is trying her best to be popular again, but doesn't realize that people don't give a rats ass about your shitty high school life. They only care what you do now as a college person.

Sarah is... ugh. It's horrendous on how this author treats this character. But HERE WE GO. Sarah is basically the typical black sistah best friend stereotype. No matter where we go in the story, Sarah never really changes and this angers me as an African American. I feel like this author really doesn't have black women in the form of what they are supposed to be. And I'm pretty sure not all black women are this mother-hen stereotypical big momma/madea ready to throw down their earrings. Sarah is violent  and always angry for whatever reason. She alienates practically everyone around her for her no nonsense bullshit.

Roz basically can do wahtever Roz wants because she's a democrat. And it shows greatly. I don't know if Willis is trying to put her as a parody but pretty much Roz doesn't listen to anyone. She thinks that because she's right that means she is pretty much in the right. But that's not correct. Because you are right, it matters up to you to use that correct answer you have in the most ethical way possible. And sleeping with someone to cause controversial movement against your sister is not right. It's not ethical. And frankly we all take it as a grain of salt. Which is understandable. (No. It's not.)

Amber is basically an emotional tramuatize idiot who thinks that she can do anything. Amber is such a mary-sue as well is that she believe she can be batman. The reason why she's a mary sue is because the character is not really in shape. She's overweight and she basically doesn't do any form of exercise whatsoever. Instead of going out to the local campus gym and work out like Batman has actually done (he has a gymnasium. The guy is fucking ripped for a reason.) and actually has done some form of martial arts. Amber just dons on a cape and say “I AM AMAZI GIRL!” and does a deep voice but she doesn't even cover her head. Because you know. Who else would recognize Amber. Right? RIGHT!? RIGHT!?!? 40. Fucking. Sins. For the whole thing on that.

The antagonists are not really diverse, they all come into the typical jockstrap/white privilege idiots. Because you know black or people of color can never do bad. I'm sinning this because despite what white people has done. People of color attack their own people. They have done it before. I'm a victim of sexaul assualt from my own family cousin who was dark-skinned. Tell me in my face that we are all so not criminals. Please Willis. I want you to. 20 sins.

Sal is a mary sue as well who can't wrap her head that her family hates her because she's dark skin. (By the way. She's basically the same color as Walky.) And she blanantly ignores her constant behavior. Sal has even robbed a liquor store once. But oh definitely it's the darker skin that's the issue. Mary Jane Watson didn't accept my request to the prom. It was totally not because I asked her while  I had no deordant and acne. It's totally because I'm brighter than normal black people. (Sarcasm by the way)

Art style is shit. Same faces. EVERY FUCKING WHERE. THE COLORS OF THE  SKIN IS SO LIGHT I CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE TO GIVE A FUCK ABOUT SAL'S ISSUE WITH WALKY. AND WAAAAAAAAAAH (translation: Same face syndrome is bad. It's bad because it shows no creativity. 1 sin. Because graphics aren't everything to an art form as long as the message really sticks)

The author will probably call me an transphobic or whatever homophobic or whatever he can pull out. I so want him to do so. Please call the person who has trans friends, homosexaul friends, bisexual friends, asexual friends, and even many more people who of different religions and races as friends. And by the way, Left leaning independent. Take your best shot.

Sin Count: 101 sins.

Punishment: Sunday School.