#I cannot put them into words right and really this isn't even directly related to shippy stuff

[sporkarts]

Rio and Subtext

I'm pretentious and I love media analysis so I wanted to break open the scene where Rio and Agatha fight, right after Agatha has broken out of the spell. The fun part about media analysis is that I could be 100% wrong!! and that's okay lol

SO! AAA uses something called re contextualization, where almost every interaction has a layer that is given a greater context later on and i LOVE it. It's not 100% perfect but the biggest moments work so so well. I think one of the best examples of this is the first fight between Agatha and Rio. Looking back, especially during eps 4 and 5 it's really hard to see what the hell Rio was even doing there. But I firmly believe that Rio showed up to warn Agatha that the seven were coming. YES OBVIOUSLY her showing up was also a vehicle for exposition, but diegetically, I think it was Rio's way of warning Agatha.

Sources:

The beginning of the fight, it's obvious even from a first watch-through that Rio is holding back. She easily overpowers Agatha multiple times and at first we're meant to interpret this as someone 'playing with their food' so to speak. On a larger scale, I believe this is a test. "oh hey, you really are out, but you're also so vulnerable"

next, Agatha yields, something I think Rio isn't used to seeing her do. It's here where Rio confirms that Agatha 1. has no power and 2. has no idea what's been happening while she's been trapped.

Then, Rio concedes. She can't kill Agatha, but the Salem Seven can. On the first watchthrough, it sounds like she's tangentially related to the Salem Seven. She's dressed similarly to them, she's the one that mentions them, and she also specifically says she'll "tell them where to find you"

However, in Episode 5, we get context on a few things.

Who the Salem Seven are

Rio is very defensive of Agatha ("when her own mother tried to have her executed" "where is she?")

Rio doesn't particularly like the seven, in fact she seems to, at least in part, dislike them ( "they became a feral, hive-minded coven bent on revenge")

Rio doesn't like Evanora Harkness ("yeah well, her mother can't have her")

At no point is Rio ever shown to command or work with the salem seven, but she is shown protecting Agatha (verbally) from anyone who tries to take her away

When Rio is revealed as Death, it re-contextualizes a lot of the rest of their interaction. Rio cannot kill Agatha because it's against the cosmic rules (which we also learn she follows STAUNCHLY) but she also cannot directly save Agatha. If the Salem Seven were to attack her, Rio could not save her from dying. This also puts a lot of emphasis on their final battle, wherein Rio is so distraught that she's more than willing to break the rules of her existence just to bring Agatha closer to her.

SO!

her parting words from ep 1

"I am not the only one who wants to see you dead. Wants to see you burn, or hang, or drown" ... "Okay Agatha, but I'll be sure to tell them where to find you." ..."the worst of them, the Salem Seven, I expect you'll see them at sundown. After all these centuries, Agatha Harkness will finally meet her end, it really warms the heart" ..."yes I do, it's black and it beats for you"..."te veo"

translation: I love you. I cannot kill you (because of rules), I'm upset with you, but I cannot kill you (because it would kill me). And I'm obsessed enough with you that I cannot let anyone else kill you, but I cannot save you. So I am warning you, they aim to kill you and they can kill you. They will not hesitate and you cannot escape this if they find you, so find another solution. I love you so much my Very Being is devoted to you. I love you, and I see you.

again, yes, so much of that is exposition (antagonist setup, inciting incident etc) but I really and truly believe that this was a warning above all. feel free to disagree! i just love love talking about the deeper meaning behind things :3

[yujeong]

So, there's this fic I want to write for months now about the first time Pete says "I love you" to Vegas and it made me want to make a post about it as well. I truly believe saying that phrase is a huge deal to Pete and I want to explain why.

Starting with the fact that I loved, loved, LOVED that in the show, he never said it. Not directly, anyway. He didn't shoot Vegas when he had the chance, he shot Vegas when it was necessary to save him, he told him he was right there, he told him he was hungry, he told him he's following his heart. All of those things are different ways of saying "I love you" but it's not the phrase itself. And that's important because it truly showcases the core aspects of Pete's character.

Pete isn't like Vegas. Both of them are very emotional but the way they express their emotions is almost the complete opposite. Vegas is letting them get out of control, spilling out of him, while Pete is keeping them deeply locked up inside him until they eventually explode and he can't contain them anymore. Both of them at first are unwilling to recognise how they feel about the other, the changes that are happening inside of them but Vegas comes to the realization quicker than Pete and tells him so. All of this is why Vegas saying the phrase out loud in contrast to Pete never saying it makes perfect sense in the narrative.

I truly believe that Pete has this feeling in his chest which he isn't even sure what it's called or even if it's what most people would call it but it's so strong for Vegas that he knows he can't live without it so he decided to chase after it. There's this incredible fic by LuckyDiceKirby called "even the clearest water" that has an exchange between Vegas and Pete, in which Vegas asks him if Pete loves him and Pete replies with this:

"I don’t know. How could I know what that feels like? I’m not that kind of person. You make my teeth ache. You make the world bright, like it’s real. It hurts. It’s hurt since I met you, but that means I can never forget I’m alive."

I cannot tell you what I even felt when I read that. It was a mix of pure awe and enlightenment, because it was what I had been thinking after watching the show but was unable to put into words.

Now, as I was writing this post, a thought popped into my head related to this and I want to express it. I think the fandom unanimously agrees that Vegas has the capacity for kindness and softness due to Macau, the wonderful, perfect, sweet little gremlin angel of my heart. Macau is the reason Vegas even knows what love is, otherwise starved for it because no one else in his life gives it to him in any way, share or form until Pete comes along.

This got me thinking: who does Pete have in his life to show him what love and affection is?

At first glance, Pete's environment seems fine and way better than Vegas'. He has people that care about him, he has friends, he has a nice room, his grandma sends him meals that he's allowed to eat in his room. Is this actually true though? Is the main family as kind and sweet and full of affection as it seems?

Well...no, it's not. All of this is superficial. Pete got forgotten the moment Kinn had Porsche in his arms (and bed). No one remembered him except Tankhun, who we could argue also loves Pete superficially and doesn't really view him as a person (I love Tankhun and I say that affectionately. I think post canon he has the potential to change his way of thinking and behaviour towards his bodyguards).

But what about Pete's grandma?, I hear people say. Well, she is the only person Pete says "I love you" to but is this enough to claim that he knows what love is? When he doesn't live with her, doesn't have the ability to physically touch her for comfort whenever he needs to, can't talk to her freely without surveillance? He only gets a glimpse of it and if we also include the fact that he works for the main family for years, he's been deprived of love almost all of his life. No wonder the poor man is confused and doesn't realise what he's feeling for Vegas. He wasn't even a person until the safehouse.

The environments Vegas and Pete grew up in shaped them into who they became and it's evident if you think about it in the way I described above: Vegas' environment is cruel and unforgiving with a speck of actual love in the form of his brother and Pete's is presumably kind but devoid of substance. I'm oversimplifying this of course but I think the core aspects of how he lives in the main family play an important role in Pete's character.

All in all, Pete is a brilliantly written character and I want to thank the writing team and Build for giving him to me. I truly hope that when I manage to write this fic, I'll do his character justice.

[leonardoeatscarrots]

Sorta related, but not really, but I haven't had another opportunity to say it at all. Sorry for hijacking your post. I just agree that there's some discomforting subtext that I've noticed. This probably deserves a post of its own, but I know it just won't get the views and I haven't gotten around to it.

It's worth mentioning that I think they were pushing some views about disabled people. I'm specifically talking about the scene with little James.

The whole "ur the only one who would understand James. I didn't heal ur disability (even though it's been shown that I could just do it rn and it's not even a slight inconvenience) because u can use it as a sign that u trust God or some shit"

Watching this scene as a disabled person just felt fucking disgusting and out of character for this Jesus that they worked so hard to humanize. This felt like someone else's opinion.

It made it feel like Jesus was just dismissing James or taking advantage of his condition for his own gain. And thus spreading that lesson to the audience.

It's especially disgusting because Christians can and will try to do this to disabled people. Comfort them by saying, "God wanted you to be disabled, just trust him" or "its not God's plan to heal you right now 🙏". Then fucking make you look ungrateful or put you down for even complaining about it. "Hurr durr, there's no suffering in heaven, so just deal with it for now" "EVERYONE has a cross to bear"

Then, they expect you to use your disability as a means to show off their religion. They try to prayer heal you or use you (or your recovery if you had one) as an inspirational story to convert more people. They turn you from a person into a spectacle. "Wooww, look at me, I'm disabled! My lot in life was so bad, but I still trust God, so you can too!" "Isn't it such a great story?"

And if you reject this treatment, they blame you. Accuse you of having self injurious intent or *wanting* to be disabled. Tell you you're just not believing hard enough, or repeat that shit about it "not being God's plan", and that "he has something better in store for you" or "you're missing the point". Even gaslight you, say you aren't disabled anymore or never were.

This has all happened to me. And it is very, VERY harmful to disabled people.

It tells us we're not loved as we are.

Tells us we're broken. That we are defects.

Treats us like objects or infants or performers.

Tells us we can't live alongside our disability or find community in the label.

Teaches us that God picks favorites.

Teaches us that we can't possibly understand God, so we can never trust him.

This is why I fucking left the church, JUST SO YOU KNOW.

This is the message The Chosen has decided to go with. A show FULL TO THE BRIM with disabled characters. Each one used as a tool.

No matter how delicately worded this scene was, it will ALWAYS be ableist at its core. Jesus could have said anything else. They could have had a disabled person who'd experienced ableism in the church write this scene. But no. This was the message they chose.

Palestine is one very, VERY big, and VERY important reason to boycott The Chosen, but it's not the only one. As much as I genuinely love this show, someone is trying to push something fishy, and that cannot stand.

And PLEASE share this. This is a serious topic that is so frequently ignored.

I'm aware it's not directly related to Palestine (Though the argument could be made that there are plenty of disabled people in Palestine. But really, you should care about Palestine regardless of whether or not they're disabled.) but his might be a good point to bring up @boycottthechosen

Even with my knowledge about cults I should've been more careful when watching the show.

Whenever I saw certain scenes with Jonathan's Jesus, it looked like I was watching a cult leader forcing himself unto others rather than optionally inviting. Those scenes didn't sit right with me, even with the soft, funny Jesus he portrayed, the cultish side was still there.

I cannot assume that everyone in the production team is a zionist or racist or is involved in whatever Angel Studios' agenda is, but it is worrysome that so many people are involved and could potentially be brainwashed by these assholes.

A few of the actors don't seem so bad, George, Giovanni, Luke, Paras and some seem like genuinely good hearted human beings. They spoke up in favor of some staff with pride flags when conservative christians tried to get the show cancelled. Then they also helped do a fundraiser for a fan who had a terminal illness.

Luke even mentioned being pro Ukraine in a video on TikTok. (Lightly mentioning of course). So it's baffling to me that he's not speaking up about Palestine. He's Arabic and a very proud one, always speaking up about how Arab representation matters, his parents are from Egypt, which I believe was also being bombarded by Israel a few weeks ago too (probably still is and will continue to be). Paras I believe is Indian and he's also on the same track.

I can't speak up against the rest of the cast who haven't made any statements because I don't know what's going on behind countians. Luke had been struggling a bit with his starting career, so I fear they're twisting his arm on the topic. Maybe the others too.

In Luke's specific case, I know damn well that if he realized the mistake he's making and went to make his own things, he'd be incredibly successful! He's incredibly funny! If anyone who was a Markiplier fan, or a Game Grumps fan or Unus Annus fan who's reading this, know he's a fan of those people too and his sense of humor is right up there with them. He has SO much potential that it's baffling he's even working for Angel Studios right now.

And this is something seen in cults a lot. Good intentioned people being manipulated without them even noticing because of people in power, integrating them in activities, situations, jobs,etc that could help them or other people on large scales, but ultimately it just benefits whoever's in charge.

A lot of the cast members come from different backgrounds, religions, etc, but If I found out most of them turned to Christianity during or after this is over I'm going to be incredibly heartbroken...

[heartbeetz]

Thoughtssssssss

[cisthoughtcrime]

Girl, so, I am also a lover of all things gay history and I saw your post talking about how Sappho was a lesbian. And while I totally agree, there is another poem of hers that people use to claim she is bisexual entitled "Of course I love you", what are your thoughts about it?

Ah, thank you for bringing this up! This requires a bit of a lengthy grammar dive, so I’m adding a cut:

It took me a while to find which poem you meant; I'm used to refering to them by number (the 'titles' in English are just the first line of the poem), and at first I could only find this one in English with no number. It turns out that the 'title' of this one is hard to connect to a numbered poem because it's actually two poems mushed together by a translator who thought they might be related (so the starting line/title 'Of course I love you' is a theory that many people reject):

^ This review provides the Edmonds translation as a contrast to Barnard's, and you can see one translates it as "I cannot submit to live with one that is younger than I" and the other translates it as "I couldn't stand it to live with a young man, I being older". For another conrasting example, Russell translates this part as “I will not suffer to live with you, as an old woman with a young man.” If you're trying to use this poem to talk about ancient Greek attitudes towards marriage, for example, it makes a big difference whether Sappho is saying "stand it" or "submit to it" or “suffer it” or something else, so it's necessary to go directly to the Greek text and understand Sappho's own word choice rather than interpreting the word choices of the modern translators. 

Part of the difficulty with ‘going directly to the Greek text’ for Sappho is that the text only survives in fragments, multiple versions of some of the poems survive, and she wrote in a very specific dialect of ancient Greek with lots of grammatical irregularities. 

This particular fragment of Sappho (numbered: Lobel-Page fr. 121; Cox 72) has all of these difficulties:

I know this is an eyeful, but bear with me. At the top in the two black boxes, there are two different versions of the Greek text (Cox 1924 on the left, Campbell 1982 on the right; the differences are underlined in red). Underneath each box, I’ve made the different Greek texts bigger and put the English meaning in red underneath each Greek word. Some words have multiple meanings; as an example, I underlined one in green and put its many meanings in the green box at the bottom left. On the bottom right, I’ve done four different English translations of the poem; when you compare them to the red word-by-word English vocab, you can see that all of these translations had to massage the Greek meaning to make it make sense in English, but fundamentally they’re all conveying the same thing. 

In both versions of the Greek, Sappho is talking to a male addressee (we can tell because the word φίλος, ‘friend’, is masculine). Typically, this poem is interpreted as Sappho rejecting this guy's marriage proposal and telling him it’s because he’s younger than her. Even just from that, it doesn’t make sense to use this as proof of Sappho’s bisexuality -- all she really says here is that she doesn’t want to marry this guy and she doesn’t want to marry anyone younger than her. She says nothing about who she would want to marry. Even if the Greek very clearly said 'young man' in the last line, it would still be describing someone she wouldn't marry. Some people infer Sappho's bisexuality from this because she says that his age is the reason for her rejection, not his sex. However, that's not the same as saying age was the only reason; age was just the justification she gave here in a short fragmentary poem. It looks like she's letting him down gently, calling him a friend, appealing to his fondness for her in order to convince him to pursue someone else, citing his youth (a positive trait that won't insult him and isn't criticism) as why she wouldn't marry anyone his age (so it's not personal). The core gist of the poem is Sappho saying politely that she's too old to be interested in a young man like him, or any young man for that matter, so he should go off and find some nice young woman to consummate his marriage with, because she herself could never suffer doing that with a man... because she's older, of course ���.

The hypothetical 'young man' (again, whom she says she wouldn't marry) only appears in the version of the Greek I've taken from Cox 1924. The important word here is νεῳ (literally '[with a] young [one]’). νέος/νέα/νέον (masculine/feminine/neuter) is an adjective meaning 'young' or 'new'. Adjectives can usually stand alone in Greek because their number and gender can imply a noun without having to say it; as an example in English, think about The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (you don't need to say 'the good [men, people, guys, characters, cowboys]' or whatever to know that they are using these adjectives to mean nouns). Greek adjectives and nouns change the way they look depending on their gender, number, and 'case' (what their role in the sentence is), so using adjectives to act as nouns is a bit clearer: for example, ἀνήρ καλός can mean 'handsome man' but just saying the masculine adjective καλός means 'handsome [male thing]', thus implying 'handsome [man]' on its own without needing ἀνήρ.

Here are all the singular forms for νέος:

As you can see, νεῳ could be either singular masculine dative or singular neuter dative; the forms of the word look the same in this case. In the previous image, I offered four translations of the poem; translations 2 and 3 of those four include the word νεῳ and show how it could be translated as 'young partner', 'young man (masculine)', 'young marriage-bed (neuter)', 'young one', or just generally vaguely 'young [thing]'. If Sappho had instead used νέᾳ here to specify that she didn't want to marry a young woman, it would screw up the connection between this clause and the first clause; it'd be like saying "I won't marry you (male) because I don't want to marry a younger woman".

Instead, she either says "I will not subject myself (οὐ τλάσομ) to joining housholds (ξυνο��κην) with a young [man] (νεῳ, masculine)" (the more likely version) or "I will not subject myself (οὐ τλάσομ) to joining households (ξυνοίκην) with a young/new [marriage-bed] (νεῳ, neuter)" (the less likely version). In the less likely version, the neuter νεῳ invokes the most recent neuter noun, which here is λέχος (marriage-bed); this would mean that she tells him to find a newer marriage bed (λέχος νεώτερον), then tells him she doesn't want a new one [marriage bed] (νεῳ [λέχει]). Either way, there's nothing here that indicates Sappho's romantic interest in men other than that she might have only said she would hate to marry a young man.

In the other version of the Greek, the Campbell 1982 one on the right side of the earlier image, you can see that the final line does not even have the word νεῳ; without that word, Sappho just says that she doesn't want to get married while being the older partner. I'm also more inclined to trust this version of the Greek text because it's the one the Loeb Library chose for its edition, but since the other version has νεῳ and that's relevant to your ask, I figured I'd just go through both like this. I'm sure there are also other versions of the Greek text with slight tweaks and variations, but νεῳ is the only variation I know about that could conceivably be used for a bisexuality argument.

Anyway, hope that answers your question enough. Happy to field follow-ups if you have 'em :)

[idw-sonic-fan-blog]

The Mandates

Just wanted to share my thoughts on the pro-ported mandates because they cast a shadow on this comic.

“Game characters cannot have relatives unless they were estabilished in the game canon, i.e. Cream and her mother.”

This one is understandable and you can blame Penders for this. Mind you that most licensed comics of gaming franchises don’t actually delve too much in personal family relationships or expand on them. So this is expected and honestly Sega should have put the screws on Archie decades ago about this.

“Game characters can not die. There are workarounds for this, such as being Mistaken for Dying or "Mistaken For Dead”

Again. Yes. Not a big deal.

“Game characters cannot have wardrobe changes unless approved. Chao Races and Badnik Bases has some characters (mainly the female game characters) wear different clothes for extreme conditions. Male characters remain the same.”

This is a useless rule but whatever. I mean Sega, you are the ones putting bad wardrobe choices on the characters so again it’s whatever.

“Sonic can't be shown getting too emotional (i.e;cry)”

This is one that it complained about because it really wouldn’t matter unless it is called attention to. A lot of superheroes don’t cry. But that doesn’t prohibit them from expressing themselves. IDW Sonic has been sad. He has been pissed. He has been furious.

Is this not too emotional?

Is he not expressing himself appropriately?

I don’t even know why this is brought up. When in this comic has Sonic not been expressive or displaying the appropriate amount of emotion? When did Sonic needing to cry be necessary?

“Game characters cannot enter in a relationship.”

Oh GOD YES. Don’t threaten me with a good time.

“All major Character Development must be approved by SEGA.”

Yeah, of course. Let me remind you that Penders and Archie ruined any strand of trust Sega could have in comic media. They played loose at first and all of the sudden, they are involved in a lawsuit about characters in a Sonic comic that they didn’t even know about. They probably lost a video game business relationship because of it. If they want to be involved in the comics, fine. That means that they are now forced to World Build. They have to invest in it now and not just be like Lucas Films and let anybody do anything with their flagship title.

“Much like the post-reboot of the Archie comic, the words "Mobius" is banned—the planet is simply called "Sonic's World". Unlike the Post-Boot, which allowed the names "Mobian" and "Mobini", anything related to Mobius is banned in this comic.”

…Of course but how about you throw the writer’s a bone and I don’t know, name the fucking planet. If it is not Earth, give it a name.

“Sonic must always win at the end. Even if he and his friends are at the losing end in an overarching story (the Metal Virus arc, for example), they must come out on top when it concludes.”

I don’t even get this rule and the knee jerk hatred for it. Why even have it? Why even share the existence of this rule? Archie Sonic didn’t really lose too bad. It’s more on how you frame a victory. The fact of the matter is that Eggman is still actively trying to conquer the planet. Sonic stops him but Eggman still has control of land and has military installations all over.

This rule is offset by this. While Sonic can’t lose, Sonic can’t completely win.

“Characters and material from other licensed properties (Sonic the Comic, Sonic the Hedgehog (Archie Comics), Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog, Sonic the Hedgehog (SatAM)', Sonic Underground, the OVA, Sonic X and the Paramount films cannot be used. This rule extends to characters and redesigns done by the current writers. The only exception is Sticks from Sonic Boom, and that's because she was created by SEGA themselves and showed up in non-Boom media, but any ideas regarding her use still need to be okayed by SEGA.”

First off I am glad that Sticks was spared by this rule and I look forward to her eventual inclusion. Second, again, this is not much of a big deal as it was expected. Sorry Freedom Fighter fans but honestly deal.

“Male characters, sans Eggman, can't wear pants, which was also a thing in the Post-Reboot, albeit never explicitly stated. The inverse is also true; female characters have to have some form of lower clothing.”

Okay this is a pedantic rule. It is so weird with how precise it is. Like…huh?

“Classic characters such as Mighty, Ray, Nack/Fang, Bean, and Bark won't appear in non-Classic issues, as Sega doesn't want Classic and Modern Sonic to mix.”

One of the most bullshit mandates fueled by the nostalgia boner fans created. Like this is stupid because Archie Modern Sonic has added more character and depth to all of these mentioned characters than any of the Sega Sonic games they appeared in which only amounts to 1 or 2 at most. Why neuter your own potential stories with this stupid limitation?

“According to Ian Flynn, a specific incident involving Shadow's characterization when he's exposed to the Zombot infection was written in a specific way because of Sega mandating that he be written as an "overconfident asshole rival" character, similar to Vegeta. He later followed up with an explanation that out of every character, Shadow has the most mandates and notes attached to how he's portrayed. According to the podcast, Sega says that Team Dark is no longer a thing. The three members are not a team and they have never worked for G.U.N.; Shadow also doesn't even consider them friends.”

This is my opinion is the worst rule. First it’s contradictory to the character Sega introduced us to. Stop trying to be like Dragon Ball for once and actually be your own thing. It’s one thing if we are changing it because Shadow was unpopular because of his personality. But no one likes this Shadow. People miss the somber but reserved Hedgehog that continued to fight in spite of the world betraying him. Hothead Shadow is a cheap Knuckles. And I don’t even understand why Shadow even has so many mandates when he wasn’t the most egregious offender. Knuckles was.

Also, Team Dark aren’t a thing and Shadow doesn’t even consider them to be his friends. First off that doesn’t even fly in your own games. Who outside of Sonic does Shadow interact the most? Rouge. They have teamed up and were a packaged duo since their inception. When Shadow appeared, Rouge appeared right next to him. If Rouge was in a game, so was Shadow.

Team Dark or just Rouge has fought alongside Shadow in every game they appeared in. Who else does Shadow talk to if not Rouge?

“Sega has stated to Flynn that only male hedgehogs are allowed to go Super with the Chaos Emeralds.”

Except in Sonic Mania.

“Ian isn't allowed to directly reference a game, since the comic is supposed to be its own thing.”

Okay. Not only is this rule stupid. But it’s untrue.

This references the end of Sonic Forces.

The first page of comic.

It has referenced Sonic Adventure, SA2, Sonic Generations , and Sonic Unleashed.

This referencing Shadow the Hedgehog.

I don’t believe this rule exists and even if it did, it is dumbest rule since the whole point of this comic is to base it off the games more. The dumbest rule.

“Knuckles is not allowed to leave Angel Island unless he has a very good reason to.”

For decades, people have complained that Knuckles routinely leaves the island. For decades. Now does this mean Sega is going to 1. Use Knuckles and 2. Amplify the importance of Angel Island and the Master Emerald? No. Again, this criticism should be levied at Sega because they often conveniently forget Knuckles purpose and just hand wave it instead of giving Knuckles more to do on the island like I don’t know, have other entities invested in attacking him.

In summary, here is what I think is going on. Do I think most of these mandates are real? Yes. Given what happened to Archie, I do think Sega is doing some brand alignment. I think they got the clamps on.

But what I think is going on is a Japanese cultural thing called Power Harassment. It is normalized abuse of power. Sega of Japan is normally laxxed about their brands. They don’t mind blatant rip-offs of their mascot nor do they get stiff about fandom creations or mods. The comic division, however, is getting tough love because not only did it cost them a publishing deal, but ruined a relationship with a high end developer. So the IDW writers and staff are being subjected to intentionally hypocritical rules and strict mandates that they know don’t make sense until they’ve shown to be obedient.

A lot of the mandates aren’t strict. But some are so asinine that I don’t think they aren’t aware with how stupid they sound imposing those rules. Like Shadow is the most narratively complete Sonic character and yet, Sega puts this tight mandate as if Archie Shadow was the most egregious thing. Archie Shadow was overpowered. He wasn’t out of character like Sonic, Knuckles, and Tails were. They can’t be that stupid or be that intentionally dense. So they want to see if the writing crew can follow orders. That’s it.

But that’s just my take.

[gofancyninjaworld]

Why do you think Genos isn't weak? I agree that he can fight monsters but he won't stand a chance against strong monsters. He has been with Saitama for the longest time but he never learned anything. His naivety is the reason why he is weak, he is still consumed by the "normative awareness". His reaction to Amai Mask's transformation is a proof of that. His mindset never grew. He respects Saitama but does not understand him, which is why he is weak.

Please let me apologise in advance. First, this is long. Second, I do have a lot of thoughts.

Yeah, But

There isn’t a character in this series where the fanbase disagrees with the writer so deeply as this guy.  When interviewed, ONE insouciantly said ‘Genos is rather strong, even for a Class S hero,’ and fans went, ‘huh? You could have fooled us!’  It’s not without cause.  No matter how well his fights go, ONE always makes sure that we can append an asterix to it, that we can go yeah, but*

Right from the get go, every victory is downplayed. He thrashed Armored Gorilla, but we had no idea how strong Armored Gorilla was. Not for many, many chapters, until a much-shrunken, unarmored Armored Gorilla killed a tiger-level monster with one punch.   He clears a city and defeats two troublesome demon-level monsters in a matter of minutes? Yeah, but look at the state of his arms and oh! see, see, he just got flattened by that other monster!  Bang needs to save Garou from his clutches?  Yeah, but what if Garou was well?  He’s turning monster after monster into Cubist expressions without getting a speck of blood on him? Yeah, but it’s not like we can see what’s going on – the camera pans everywhere else.  He does the unbelievable against Elder Centipede?  We start going wow, followed quickly by – yeah but the monster regenerated, he’s fated to always lose.  He destroys G-5 without effort?  Oh My GAWD!  The Honour of Atomic Samurai [1] Has Been Besmirched!  (me: huh how does that follow? No, don’t explain – I do understand. Because Genos is seen as weak, if he does what another character couldn’t, then it’s seen as a disgrace to the other character, not an achievement for him.)

battle without honour – if he beat Garou, then he’s a bully, if he didn’t, then he’s a wimp

Of course, the converse is also true. If Genos is having a bad time, the camera lingers in 4K with extra slow-mo. And if the action switches, like when he went from struggling against G-4 to working out how to shut the robot’s lasers down and pull it into punching range, the camera pans away, returning only to feast on the grisly aftermath.

The final clincher is Genos himself, who never reacts with the slightest sense of celebration or triumph no matter how well a fight goes.  His lack of joy in fights is something that ONE has emphasised to Murata.   Being able to celebrate with characters is half the joy of watching them fight.

by contrast, hell yeah, Metal Bat! The story leaves no room for doubt that Metal Bat’s to be found awesome. And he is!  :)

The reason I go into all this is that I get it: Genos is presented to us in a way that gives us cause to doubt his strength.  In that, he’s like the opposite of Saitama, who is presented to us so we can have no doubt as to his strength, but to the internal audience in a way that keeps raising doubts in their minds.

But Genos is strong. He’s physically very strong, very fast, and versatile.  And he’s far less fragile than he is popularly made out to be. There is no reason he shouldn’t be able to take on very strong monsters, subject to match up (like almost every other hero [2]). However, ONE will make damn sure that Genos does not get to appreciate how much more powerful he has grown. What’s it going to be? What’s it going to take this time to knock down Demon Cyborg? Are several cadre going to attack him at the same time? Or will the super-insane monster that looks like the lovechild of Smaug, better-looking Sauruman and a hydra perched at the top of the mile high tower do him in first?  What’s going to *keep* him down? Place your bets, folk: the outcome is sure to be gruesome.

Which actually brings me directly to addressing your assertion: “…but he won’t stand a chance against strong monsters.“  Because it presupposes that Genos MUST be weak, any monster he defeats can’t possibly be strong.  A more honest rephrasing would be ‘I’m not prepared to accept that any monster that Genos could defeat is strong.’

No mental growth? Really?

That’s the physical part.  Let’s go onto mentality.  Annoyingly, I have to treat the manga and webcomic as separate entities at this point.  If you like the detail, I’ve written an extensive side-by-side comparison essay: link. You can skip it for this answer. :)

You know what would have made me think Genos weak?  If Saitama’s fears for what might be happening to him the morning he caught up with Garou had come true:

Before Elder Centipede showed up, Genos had told Garou that he’d finally begun to understand what Saitama had been saying to him about strengthening his spirit.  And then ONE put that to the test when he put Genos in the worst pinch the latter had ever been in: chopped in half and about to be devoured by a monster, with the only heroes watching those who’d proved impotent [3] to do anything to the monster.  Instead of giving up the way he had against Mosquito Girl, Genos dug deep and not only saved himself, but counter-attacked and burned the monster from stem to stern.  That is excellent: there is no place for a character who cannot find self-efficacy in a pinch.  

Without doubt, Genos has further to go, but in the manga it is wilful blindness to claim that he hasn’t developed mentally.

Now, let’s move onto the webcomic.

Even though ONE has done far less with his character in the webcomic than he has in the manga, Genos is back and fighting when most of his classmates are still rolling on the ground, unable to come to terms with losing. There is a real strength to getting up again and moving forward. 

It’s not that Genos doesn’t have any doubts: he does.  From his crushing realisation that he had made a mistake in giving up his human body to asking if he can really become stronger by changing his parts, Genos is very aware of a sense of stagnation and appears very worried by something.  But still, he’s not giving up and he’s not stopped looking to make progress.

even as Saitama despairs of being able to help, he cannot fault Genos for his determination

Still, why cheer for a loser?

There’s a real cognitive dissonance in fans who praise to the high heavens and write as inspirational Saitama’s words to keep trying and moving forward, no matter what, and yet are happy to mock Genos for doing exactly that.

There’s no honour for you if you laugh at characters taking Saitama’s advice

It’s amazing.  Does anyone imagine that before Saitama became too strong, he never failed? Really?  Saitama himself will disagree with that!  Sometimes success looks like reaching the summit of a mountain, but often, it’s only visible in the rearview mirror.  We saw it took Saitama a long time to finally accept that yup, he was just the strongest.

Something I came to realise a while back, people say they love seeing struggle, but real fights don’t sell well in mass media (yes, I have more extensive thoughts on this, here). We like the struggle, but we want the assurance that the underdog has something in their favour that will guarantee that we’re backing a winner.  At one level, we know we’re just watching *how* Garou is going to succeed… at least until Saitama body-checks him to great dramatic effect.

Goodness knows that everything is arranged against Genos and success. I’m sure you’ll have no trouble recounting most of them:

His lack of a biological body to train up.

His dependence on a mechanical body with its set in stone limitations.

His dependence on the cleverness and resources of others.

His lack of innate talent or heritage (and if he had any, they’ve long since been binned).

His stubborn persistence on a pathway we’re sure cannot possibly succeed.

His mentality, which is getting better, but isn’t there yet.

His persistent psychological problems that put him at high risk of turning into a monster instead.

The unresolved mysteries surrounding him, which make lots of fans think there’s a devastating revelation at hand from which he cannot recover.

And oh, he’s not the most likeable or relatable character out there. It shouldn’t be a factor, but it totally is.

And yet, Genos hasn’t stopped moving forward.  No idea how far he’ll get, but so far, Genos has not set himself a limit to the number of times he’s willing to get himself up and try again.  Not only that, he’s raised his sights higher, not lower.

For that and more, I’m not only happy to call Genos strong, but I’m willing to follow along with him however far or short his journey ends up being.

The risk of heartbreak is worth the excitement of seeing a real fighter working out his uncertain destiny.

no one can accuse him of lacking ambition. Gambatte!

Asides

[1] I know there’s a meme going round about Atomic Samurai being weak, but it’s as much in jest as the one about King being strong.  Anyone believing Atomic weak has piss-holes for eyes.

[2] There’s a reason Phoenixman highlights four heroes in particular – Blast, Tatsumaki, Metal Knight and King (Saitama).  They’re the heroes who are so strong that they’ve broken out of the tyranny of match up.  Everyone else has something they can’t deal with.

[3] You’re calling two old men impotent? Have you no shame?! In general, no, I haven’t much shame.  In this specific instance, it is entirely warranted.

[jlf23tumble]

Hi Jen, I just saw your rec for Star Wars fic, and it bothers me because there isn't any good larry fic lately. So many authors have left!!!! Is there anything you read lately that you love? Even your favorites are gone, it's so upsetting!

Oh, man, don’t despair!! Yes, two of my absolute faves have left this fandom (and let me just say, they left because people are fucking ASSHOLES), but they still write in other fandoms, I still get to bask in their beautiful words (and at least one of them would write in this fandom again on commission), but that aside, I truly do hate this notion that all the best have come and gone, especially with the sheer volume of material around the D, month in and month out. You just have to be willing to read new things, and you really have to support creators if you ever want them to give you free stuff on a semi-regular basis. Maybe I should make it a monthly feature, but here’s what I posted in January with my faves of late last year/early this year…and here’s what I’ve loved from the last few weeks (most of ‘em are hella short, too):

from a bandit to a baby, by @dykes4louis, T, 1.5k. “Tell me something,” Louis murmurs. (hima’s writing, HELP, but the fact that this is less than 2k, and still manages to pack in nonbinary harry, implied mpreg, so much yearn, n*ce)

Watermelon Sugar High, by @rosemarianthyme, E, 2.2k. Resting right between his legs, the long slice open and juicy and red and his fingers pressed just so, it looked to his wine-hazy brain like a cunt. Like it could be /his/ cunt. (my fave new author, getting into some genderplay)

her only hope is what she did she’ll soon forget, by jaerie, E, 2.2k. Harry is a single parent desperate to make ends meet and Louis is there to make it better (NOBODY is out serving lactation kink like Jaerie is; this one is supposed to have a sequel, I’m hopin’ and prayin’, angst city)

Strange Side Effects, by jaerie, E, 2.5k. Louis was drunk the first time he saw, but he couldn’t stop thinking about it. Had he just imagined Harry squeezing milk out of his nipples? (SEE THE FUCK ABOVE, only no angst)

Did you let him leave a necklace? (Yup), by @sadaveniren, E, 2.5k. Harry’s pearl necklace is a day collar. (the truest part of this fic? oli running sex-related errands)

Always Be Prepared, by @vondrostes, E, 2.6k. “I have a surprise for you,” Louis informed him. “To make up for not remembering your toys.” (the irony of anyone saying Terran won’t write larry fic when a) his mega larry fic is #9 on last year’s masterlist, b) second spring is RIGHT THERE, and c) one-offs like this one, commission him if you wanna see more!)

Hoist the Colours High, by @kerasines, M, 5.2k.  A Girl Direction Pirates of the Caribbean AU featuring Harry as Will Turner, Louis as Elizabeth Swann, swords, and my obsession with girls in men’s period clothing. (KIMMMMMMM, it’s so good, and if she wasn’t in the midst of writing in five other fandoms, sigh)

To Wear Your Love series, by @haztobegood, E, 5.9k. The pearl necklace was bolder, so pretty, and undeniably feminine. (the love i have for that pearl necklace being a collar, it knows no bounds)

Gentle Sin, by userkant, E, 7.5k. Louis discovers a few things about Harry. (if you’re really stuck in earlier-era fics, this one truly harkens back to those days, so encourage this author if you miss it!)

But When We Kiss…, by @indiaalphawhiskey, E, 8k. “Are you really going to let a…” he assessed Harry. “Twenty? Twenty year gap,” he confirmed. “Be the reason you get hypothermia?” (this fic is so fucking GOOD, jesus, I love silverfox Louis, and before you get all weird in my inbox about it, Harry’s 30, I would k word someone to see every single timestamp between chapters 1 and 2)

i cannot reach your heart, by HappyPrincess/ @pattern-pals, E, 10k. Harry flees like he always does, leaving a basket of fresh fruit and the prospect of his imminent heat. Somehow, Louis still ends up running after him. (LISTEN, nina has achieved national treasure status for me, PROTECT, and this fic, the angst, the entire series, christttttttttttttttttttt, it kills me in the best way, I hope they keep writing in this verse, but even if they don’t, swoon)

So, tl/dr, if you wanna see good fic, you gotta encourage fic authors and stop being a fic pillow princess, put some effort into it, and by effort, I’m talking bare minimum, give some kudos, give some comments, show some praise, do some reblogs, message them directly, DO SOMETHING, hand-wringing is useless, always. God, I gotta have some wine and calm down, lmao