#I feel like some writers don't understand the complexity of this type of characters

[elliequeen777]

Soo, today it came to my mind this dream I had like a year ago. I remember I was reading something about Damian Wayne and the Bat-family, an his character really caught my attention so I did a bit of research and found out that there is not a lot of people who like him. And I get it, he is not precisely original or charismatic and his arcs are very weird. But something that I found very interesting was the fact that every single time he has a very tragic ending, like super dramatic. He's some short of sacrificial lamb, the only way he becomes a "true" hero is by sacrificing himself. Because, for some rason, there is no way he grows up as a happy, semi-stable, sensible person. I remember thinking that was really depressing, is like he is destined to be an unstable, unhappy kid forever.

I also remember comparing his situation with some other characters that had gone through a similar situation than him, like the other robins, Cass, Raven, Terra (the one from the animated series) and even Bucky Barnes (from the comics) and Natasha. One thing led to the other and I started wondering how different could be the life of Damian if he was on the Marvel universe, specially since they are experts on rescuing children from assassin's schools (Natasha and Bucky have done it at least twice each and there is a lot more arcs around it even in the MCU, if you ask me, a little too many times, I really hope we're done with that trope).

And then I fall asleep, I don't remember the whole dream now, but I remember two things clearly: 1) Natasha was in Gotham City and 2) she was friends with Alfred. When I woke up I tried to make sense to all the information and finally I came up with a story.

I had this on the back of my brain since last Christmas and I never came to anything more than just the idea. So I resolved to put this in here and see if someone else is willing to take this idea and make something with it. If not at least I'll get it out of my mind. So please don't judge me too harsh.

Here we go:

Valerie and Franklin Richards have combined their super-abilities to create some sort of spaceship that can jump to every multiverse. Fascinated with their discovery they want to make some sort of map of the multiverse. But soon they realize that only the two of them don't give avast to such a big task. They need explorers that can help them track record of every single universe, and they have to choose them carefully. One of the chosen ones is Natasha Romanoff, who's well known for her clean and discreet work, the spy, willing to take a break of her crazy life, accepts the invitation with enthusiasm. That's how she gets to land in Earth 2, there she meets a young Alfred and their friendship starts (they keep in touch somehow).

Time passes, and at some point Nat finds herself in Gotham city again, for business. She's staying with Alfred who introduces her to Bruce and Damian. At some moment she has a conversation with Bruce where she ends up revealing something about her past in the red room. He is very intrigued by that and starts asking som questions, but she is not very comfortable sharing more information with him, so he tells her about Damian, he's very worried for his kid's future, and doesn't know how to help the kid. She sympathizes with him, but is still reluctant to open about her past and tells him that the best he can do is to love his kid and show him he cares (very basic but helpful advice, I specifically recall this dialogue: "It's great you are trying to help, Bruce, but we are not a club of «reformed trained assassins», we are not precisely happy to find more people like us").

Bruce keeps thinking about that conversation and gets to the conclusion that Damian needs someone like Nat to guide him in his healing journey. So he goes to her and asks her a favor: to please help his son. Natasha is not very sure about getting involved, but after a long conversation with Alfred and Bruce, they decide to let Damian go with Nat to her universe for three days, she will show the kid her life and the life of other "reformed trained assassins".

So that's what happens, Bruce tells Damian he's going to learn new spy skills with a professional and then leaves him in Nat's hands. They travel to the Marvel universe and Damian learns that fate is not written and that he can have whatever life he wants.

And that's it, this is all I came up with. I will really appreciate to know your thoughts about this, so please say something. Anyway thank you for reading this shit. ❤️

[3hks]

How to Write an IMPACTFUL Backstory

Honestly, writing and reading about backstories is probably one of my favorite parts of a character's story! It's a strong foundation for a character's goals, motives, thoughts, and actions! Its most powerful effect, on the other hand, is its ability to change one's view on a character. So, then, how do we write such an impactful past?

For beginners, the more tragic the backstory, the better. While this does hold some truth, let me re-iterate that it's for beginners. The idea behind it is that a pure, devastatingly pitiful backstory is unique and pulls at your reader's heartstrings. Unfortunately, instead, we're left with an origin story that feels superficial, overly-dramatic, unnecessary, and shallow. However in this post, I will give you some tips on how to avoid creating such 2D backgrounds and actually bring your character's past to life!

First, your character's backstory can be made with whatever components you choose, but the key is that you must balance them out correctly. Additionally, the majority of the time, you do want their story to stick out, so I suggest trying to come up with something original! It's much harder than it sounds, but honestly, every other protagonist has dead parents at this point. Be creative, add details, and don't be afraid to let your character go through things if you feel that it's fitting!

Second, don't extend their past for too long. The point of introducing the backstory is to elaborate on a (few) certain event(s) that affected your character the most and forever changed their lives. Keep it centered around one, or at most, a couple events.

Next, most writers tend to use sadness and/or to fuel the character, but it should not be overbearing and excessive. Alternatively, it should feel GENUINE. Not dramatic, but genuine. Different genres do form different types of backstories, yes, but the core concept behind it should be something natural. It should be something that your readers will be able to understand; something authentic. They should feel some sense of relatability, even if it's just a little. This could be like family issues, broken friendships, betrayals, leaving someone, mental struggles, loneliness, etc. Complexity can surround these concepts, but the basic, fundamental ideas should still be present.

Furthermore, be sure that their backstory makes sense. Even if you're introducing it through quick, brief flashbacks, ultimately, you want the reader to have all the pieces to solve the puzzle.

Last but not least, make your backstory feel personal to your character! Build it in a sense that if it were to go to any other character, it wouldn't have an effect that's as severe. Make it targeted to its owner. While this is something that can be difficult to execute, it really provides insight to your character, and is an easy way to add some intricacy to a simple backstory! A good place to start is thinking about the things personal to your character. For instance, this could be their past before the event, people they care about, their morals, etc. Then, add it in said event so that it pushes and/or challenges your character in a way that makes them re-evaluate that value.

There you go! Here are my personal tips on how to upgrade your character's backstory and have it really impact your reader! Be creative, keep it centered around a couple things, make it genuine, and make it targeted to the character!

Happy writing~

3hks <3

[thewriteadviceforwriters]

any tips would be appreciated, thanks! :)

hi, i was wondering if u could help me with writing a specific type of character? i have a character who’s a man with insecurity issues and he ends up acting weird towards the women around him (basically, he’s internalized the idea of “getting the girl makes you more of a man” without really realizing it). i want him to realize what he’s doing during the story and go thru a kind of “redemption arc” but how do i:

1. make it believable that he doesn’t realize what he’s doing/the harm he’s causing bc he grew up learning that message of toxic masculinity

2. make the “redemption arc” realistic and feel earned?

Hey there, fellow writer! Thanks so much for reaching out with such a thoughtful and complex character question. It's fantastic that you're diving into the nuances of toxic masculinity and character growth. This is a challenging but incredibly important topic to explore in fiction. Let's break this down and dive deep into crafting this character arc.

Understanding Your Character's Background

Before we get into the specifics of your questions, it's crucial to fully understand your character's background. This man's insecurity and internalized toxic masculinity didn't develop overnight. Consider factors like:

Family dynamics: What messages did he receive from his parents or guardians about masculinity and relationships?

Peer influences: How did his friends and classmates reinforce or challenge these ideas?

Media consumption: What movies, TV shows, or books shaped his view of male-female relationships?

Cultural context: How does his broader cultural background influence his beliefs about masculinity?

The more you understand about where these beliefs came from, the more believable his initial lack of self-awareness will be.

Now, let's tackle your specific questions:

Making it believable that he doesn't realize what he's doing/the harm he's causing

The key here is to show how deeply ingrained these beliefs are. Here are some strategies:

a) Normalize it in his world: Show other characters, especially male friends or family members, exhibiting similar behaviors without consequence. This reinforces the idea that it's "normal" or even expected.

b) Internal justification: When he acts in problematic ways, give him internal monologue that justifies his actions. For example, if he makes an inappropriate comment, he might think, "She'll appreciate a confident guy who speaks his mind."

c) Misinterpretation of reactions: When women react negatively to his behavior, have him misinterpret their responses. He might see discomfort as shyness or rejection as playing hard to get.

d) Positive reinforcement: Occasionally, have his behavior "work" in superficial ways. Maybe he gets a phone number or a date, reinforcing the idea that his approach is effective.

e) Backstory reveals: Gradually reveal moments from his past where these beliefs were instilled or reinforced. This could be a father figure praising him for "manning up" or friends mocking him for not being "alpha" enough. (I hate that word.)

f) Contrast with "worse" behavior: Show other characters behaving even more egregiously, making his actions seem mild in comparison.

g) Good intentions: Highlight moments where he genuinely believes he's being helpful or chivalrous, even when his actions are problematic.

h) Cognitive dissonance: When confronted with the negative impacts of his behavior, show him struggling to reconcile this with his beliefs. He might dismiss criticism as overreaction or make excuses.

2. Making the "redemption arc" realistic and feel earned

This is where the real challenge lies. A believable redemption arc for this character needs to be gradual, challenging, and multifaceted. Here's how to approach it:

a) Incremental realization: Don't have him suddenly "see the light." Instead, show small moments of doubt or discomfort with his own behavior building up over time.

b) Consequences: Let him experience real, significant consequences for his actions. This could be losing a friendship, facing professional repercussions, or a moment of clear rejection that he can't misinterpret.

c) Mentor figure: Introduce a character (could be male or female) who challenges his views in a way he can't easily dismiss. This person should be someone he respects or admires.

d) Empathy building: Create situations where he's forced to see things from a woman's perspective. This could be through a role reversal, a close female friend sharing her experiences, or even him witnessing clear harassment of someone he cares about.

e) Internal conflict: Show him struggling with his changing views. He might backslide or have moments of defensiveness as he grapples with his ingrained beliefs.

f) Active learning: Have him actively seek out information and perspectives on toxic masculinity and healthy relationships. This could involve reading, attending workshops, or having difficult conversations.

g) Apologizing and making amends: Show him genuinely apologizing to people he's hurt and taking concrete actions to make amends. This shouldn't be easy or immediately accepted.

h) Ongoing process: Make it clear that this is an ongoing journey, not a destination. Even towards the end of the story, he should still be learning and growing.

i) Paying it forward: Have him start to challenge toxic behavior in others, showing that he's internalized the lessons he's learned.

j) Redefining masculinity: Show him developing a new, healthier concept of what it means to be a man. This might involve exploring traditionally "feminine" interests or expressing vulnerability.

k) Setbacks: Include moments where he falls back into old patterns, but now recognizes and corrects himself. This shows the ongoing nature of change.

Tips for Writing This Arc Effectively:

Show, don't tell: Rather than having your character explicitly state his growth, show it through changed behavior and reactions.

Avoid the "savior" trope: Be cautious about having a woman "fix" him. While female characters can play a role in his growth, the work should ultimately come from him.

Balance sympathy and accountability: While we want readers to sympathize with your character's journey, be careful not to excuse his harmful behavior.

Use multiple perspectives: If possible, show how other characters perceive his behavior and his changes. This can provide valuable context and contrast.

Intersectionality: Consider how other aspects of his identity (race, class, sexuality, etc.) might intersect with his views on masculinity.

Research, research, research: Dive into academic and personal accounts of toxic masculinity, its impacts, and paths to change. The more you understand, the more nuanced your portrayal will be.

Sensitivity readers: Consider using sensitivity readers to ensure you're handling this delicate topic respectfully and accurately.

Micro-changes: Focus on small, specific changes in behavior and thought patterns rather than broad, sweeping transformations.

Realistic timeline: Give this arc the time it needs. Real change doesn't happen overnight, so don't rush the process.

Internal and external changes: Show both how his thoughts and his actions evolve throughout the story.

Example Arc Outline:

Introduction: Establish character's problematic behavior and beliefs.

Inciting incident: An event that first makes him question his actions, even if he dismisses it.

Rising action: Accumulation of experiences that challenge his worldview.

Turning point: A major event that forces him to confront the harm he's causing.

Crisis: Internal struggle as he grapples with changing his deeply held beliefs.

Climax: A moment where he must choose between his old ways and his evolving understanding.

Falling action: Actively working to change and make amends.

Resolution: Showing his ongoing growth and new perspective, while acknowledging the journey isn't over.

Remember, writing a character like this is a delicate balance. You want to show the reality of toxic masculinity and its impacts while also offering a path to growth and change. It's challenging, but when done well, it can be incredibly powerful and thought-provoking.

Throughout this process, it's important to treat your character with empathy while not excusing his behavior. The goal is to show that change is possible, but it requires genuine effort, self-reflection, and a willingness to challenge deeply held beliefs.

Lastly, don't forget to take care of yourself while writing this arc. Exploring topics like toxic masculinity can be emotionally taxing. Take breaks when needed, engage in self-care, and remember that by thoughtfully addressing these issues in your writing, you're contributing to important conversations about gender, relationships, and personal growth.

Happy writing, 📝💖 - Rin T.

Before you go, why not join us at The Write Right Society? We're a supportive Tumblr community where writers lift each other up. Whether you're a newbie or a pro, we'd love to have you! Share your work, get feedback, and connect with fellow wordsmiths, writers and aspiring authors. 

[autumnslance]

In reference to this post I reblogged earlier, but don't want to muck up UC's activity:

#i think it's more important to see that redemption is in the eye of the beholder #not everybody (characters or real people) will accept the same type or amount of repentance for the same sins #some people might not care at all if the person who wronged them feels sorry; only if they materially repaid their crimes #others can feel the opposite #and either way that's their prerogative #you can disagree with the characters or the fans or the writers about who “deserves” OR has “achieved” redemption and that's okay #because it's ultimately a complex philosophical issue #like i agree with OP!!! but there's media literacy in accepting that not everyone will

I'm going to disagree with many of these tags, especially it being "in the eye of the beholder" and would argue it's more media literate to recognize when a character has a workable redemption arc even if one disagrees they "should" get one. It took me a long time to learn this cuz of how we're usually taught redemption = forgiveness in Western (especially very Christianized, and especially if explicitly raised Christian) culture:

It doesn't rely on anyone but the person seeking redemption.

Yeah, it's the wronged party's prerogative to never forgive, to think the perpetrator's atonement (and/or punishment) is not enough and never will be. Anyone (characters and actual people) who sympathize, and who are on their side, can agree it's not ever enough and that character/person's sins are unforgivable.

And that still doesn't matter to their redemption.

We have an example of a workable redemption arc that not all accept in Final Fantasy XIV with Fordola's situation, through the Endwalker healer role quests. She was raised a collaborator of Ala Mhigo's imperial occupiers, and thought the best way to help her people was to soldier for the empire, becoming their Butcher.

In the Stormblood patches, Raganfrid says he will never forgive her; he thanks her for the aid she gave in the throne room that day, but that's all. And even in the EW healer role quests, their interactions are complicated. He still can't forgive the collaborators, even as he works to reintegrate them into Ala Mhigan society. He recognizes many thought they had no choice. He can't, won't, forget the pain of losing his own loved ones to them. This is stated multiple times.

And others, like M'rahz, Sarisha, and M'naago also struggle, also say they won't forgive...but reluctantly agree they can understand how for the sake of their families, the collaborators felt pushed against a wall, and what lengths have they themselves gone to for their own families? M'naago even scolds Fordola: she doesn't get to give up, she has to keep working--or she dies as exactly what everyone said she was.

Fordola starts out as the one punished for her sins. Through the story, she makes her choices to change and fight and work for her people as a free woman. There are still those who despise the Butcher, and always will. Redemption comes from Fordola's actions, Fordola's choices. Who forgives her and who doesn't can't change that she has changed, and continues to do so.

And in the interest of fairness, for the opposite of Fordola, we have Laurentius. In A Realm Reborn, he collaborated with the empire, selling out his nation. He came out of his punishment wanting a new chance, so joined the Crystal Braves...and immediately fell under Ilberd's sway. While others remained loyal and stuck to their morals (and paid for it with imprisonment or even death), Laurentius went along with all of Ilberd's plans. And in the end, the player gets an opinion in the punishment he and his comrade face, but it's clear from talking to Raubahn there isn't much hope. Laurentius had his chances, but he didn't make any effort to actually change--so faced the consequences.

For Reference for the Healer Role Quests: Garland Tools Healer quest text starting with "Far From Free", and my own saved text in Gdocs (raw, not very organized compared to my later saved/updated docs).

(Nero's the war criminal who...didn't even get a slap on the wrist, he just waltzed into a leadership meeting 15 mins late with Starbucks and has been helping us save the world since. Gaius is the war criminal that went through traumas, saw his privileged preconceptions torn apart, and is starting down that road in the wake of Werlyt to clean up his mistakes and not let his children's sacrifices be in vain. None of these characters "need" punishment to decide to change; some of it simply happens as part of their stories, but they make their own choices and actions toward atonement.)

(Also redemption is usually an ongoing process, which is why "Death Equals Redemption", like how Yotusyu's situation is framed, is so dicey and often unsatisfying; are they actually changed, or they just getting out of putting in that effort to? Nothing indicated Yotsuyu actually cared to change, as sympathetic as she was in the end! But she has her redemptive moment for her fans, and the people who hate/won't forgive her also "win"--the trope is a "have your cake and eat it too" writing cop-out IMO at this point.)

[theprismyyy]

Honestly, I read on several different platforms, both here on Tumblr, and on Wattpad, ao3 and others... and so, in general, they are all great apps with great stories to read, but there is one thing that bothers me about all of them, mainly and especially on Ao3, and the amount of disgusting content involving serious subjects like incest, rape and others that I won't bother mentioning here; What irritates me most about this is the lack of filter in the app.I'm only saying all this because the following happened, I was simply reading some stories about Gwen Stacy on the said app (ao3) when I came across atrocities like a fanfic whose plot was literally an incestuous relationship between Gwen and her father....man , I just wanted to read some fluffy fluff and not come across unnecessary and unsolicited material, I didn't bother opening this (obviously) and I didn't even want to, I was honestly disgusted... Also, I came across another whose plot idea was even more horrible... I don't know, it all just made me think that maybe these apps need more serious and firm rules and punishments in the face of these things; such serious and criminal topics being written in a sick manner to normalize and entertain more disgusting and sick people is still dark, it's even darker how little we talk about it and how little the developers seem to care, I imagine dealing with demands so big ones must be extremely difficult but we don't even see a movement to deal with these things...IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S JUST A CHARACTER, IT DOESN'T MATTER HE OR SHE DOESN'T EXIST, FUCK YOU AND YOUR SICK SHIT THAT USES THIS AS AN "ARGUMENT" TO WRITE CRIMINAL THINGS AND FEED YOUR FANTASIES DISGUSTING!!!! WHAT WE WRITE AND CONSUME SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE TYPE OF PEOPLE WE ARE AND IF YOU CONSUME IT AND DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS TYPE OF CONTENT THEN PLEASE FUCK YOU

Anyway, this was just me venting because honestly I was extremely uncomfortable, I just wanted to read some nonsense and I had to come across something so sickening.

Edit: Apparently this is necessary as I may not have been as specific on some points and some people don't seem to understand (or don't want to understand)

It wasn't a personal "attack" on the Ao3 platform, I just used it as an example because that's usually where this type of work ends up appearing more.

2. Yes, I know and use the filtering system, Still, I think they are very often very flawed... besides, many of the people who write this type of content use tags that have nothing to do with the plot of the story to achieve greater visibility.

3. Yes... teenagers have sex 😱 wow what an incredible discovery!!! I know a lot of movies, shows, etc. portray this openly, I personally don't feel comfortable writing smut in general and everyone has their own opinion about it, but I understand there are a lot of writers who do this normalization and trivialization of a CRIME!

4. I know that many people use writing as a coping mechanism, but I think it is very unlikely that a person who has been through a situation, such as rape, for example, You'll write about it like it's something sexy or the best experience you've ever had in your life, like a lot of these types of writers do.

5. Yes, one of the joys of writing is that we can explore the deepest, most complex aspects of humanity without directly hurting anyone, and I love that, but we need to take responsibility for that.

6. There was a guy here who literally said that it's because of people like me that you can't have porn on Tumblr anymore...but why would there need to be porn here? Why just not open on an adult site like pornhub or xvideos?

7. I was indirectly called a facist through a Hashtag.... not supporting the normalization of rape, incest, etc. apparently makes me a facist😍

(I really am completely willing to hear opinions and comments, but I will not tolerate disrespect in the comments. That's it and thank you)

[pkmnirlevents]

How do you go about getting ideas for arcs? I’m struggling to figure out what I want to do with my character :(

Great question! This happens to be one of my absolute favorite parts of writing and pkmn irl itself. I've always been more of an ideas guy myself. I hope you don't mind but I decided to turn this into a bit of an overall tutorial for planning and writing arcs. Feel free to ask for any specifics because I could delve into my personal process for arc brainstorming, but I was admittedly writing this before getting ready for work and this post was getting kinda long haha

Knowing where to draw inspiration from can be a good place to start. It's wonderful to be inspired by music, a movie or tv show, a book, or even other people in the community and their writing. Ask yourself what elements of that thing draw you in. What do you like? What would you maybe do differently? I must mention though to be respectful of the work other blogs have put into their writing. Being inspired is a wonderful thing, lifting exact details or passages is not. If you're unsure, there's no harm is asking!

The most helpful thing I can tell you right off the bat is that you want to find out how to brainstorm. In schools they'll often try to teach you ways of brainstorming and outlining to structure your essay writing, if you're lucky they might even mention that there are multiple ways you can do this. The ones in school never worked for me personally, so for a long time I assumed brainstorming and outlining was a complete waste of my time and would launch straight into my writing drafts. But as I wanted to write more complex things and I wanted to indulge in more creative writing, I found myself getting stuck all the time. The truth is brainstorming is a helpful tool, but you have to know what type of brainstorming works best for you. Flowcharts, bullet points, stream of consciousness, word clouds, moodboards, drawings, whatever it is that gets your creative juices flowing. In my experience it works best to remember that not every one of these elements will make it into the final arc. You want to get your ideas down first and trim the excess later. I personally pay for a program (Milanote) that allows me to brainstorm in the methods that work best for me, but by no means do you have to pay for a program to do this. Pen and paper works just fine.

The next thing you wanna do is establish what you want your arc to do. Not every arc has to be a grand character development, but all arcs do something. No matter how small that something may be, something has to change as a result. Maybe your character meets a new person, obtains a new Pokemon, gets a new scar and a story to tell their friends, or maybe all they got was a t-shirt. If you already had a loose concept for your arc this can help you hone it. You can start asking yourself, "how does my character reach this point?" and work up to that. Map out what you think your character would do when dropped into a particular situation. This can also help you to establish the tone you want your arc to take. Is it silly and lighthearted or is it more serious and high stakes? Refer to the stakes tag post about proper tagging.

It can help to conceptualize your arc as a series of events rather than a single event. This allows you to understand how many posts you may need to split the arc up into, how much time the arc may take, or other hard to sort details.

These things ramp up when you start to incorporate more people into your arcs. Planning with your fellow writers is extremely important and that requires a lot of communication. Some writers prefer to do what we call pre-writing, which is typically you and the other writers get together and write out the posts in advance. This gives people the chance to look over each other's writing and make edits before the posts go live. Planning discords are useful for keeping things organized, but google docs or other collaborative writing programs can work just as well if those better suit your needs. Organize who is posting what and generally at what time, especially if the post involves other people's characters.

Remember all of this is for fun! These are not hard rules you need to follow. You should not force yourself to write things you do not like for the sake of others or for an imagined audience. Write what you want to write.

[pterobat]

I’ve realized I’m not as invested in House of the Dragon as I wanted to be, and I mostly feel the strongest emotions when I'm annoyed at other fans— like those who are way, way too invested in the patriarchal ideals of the Seven Kingdoms and those who use the term “girlboss”.

I do enjoy the show, but I'm not feeling strongly except for the dragons.

And I knew dragon material would be minimal, both for budgetary reasons and because the human story is the real meat. But despite the series depending on an Elric homage it turns out I’m just not that interested in high fantasy politicking or that sub-genre in general.

I will say I'm fine with making “teams” out of an ESH narrative, because it’s human nature to make “teams” regardless, and it’s rare to write a story where the author truly sides with nobody—even when their favorite side doesn't "win", the author favors someone.

Funnily, it was GoT that helped me understand that, as I watched this allegedly “neutral” story merely shave away important characters till the true MVPs were left--probably the same ones that GRRM intended.

And while it's hard to believe these days, there was also a time I really did believe the Targaryens were an ironic swipe at stereotypical fantasy and not GRRM's favorite children. Wow.

Anyway, my impression was less that the TV series favored Team Black but that it was doing a slow burn on everything because of adult complexities. The same need to be grounded was why we didn't see the direct aftermath of Luc's death.

And that just because characters don’t literally say things aloud (Daemon sanctioning some child murder) or intend bad things to happen (Ser Steffon getting toasted wasn't on Nyra's order but it was "for her") or point out something is bad (did viewers really think the prophecy was supposed to mean the Targs were the good guys all along?) doesn't mean the narrative’s been sanitized.

However, I was ready for something fun to read when word of Martin's dislike of HotD came out, but when I expected to "popcorn" (remember when that was a verb?) I found out I _could_ get invested.

For some reason (maybe it is her NA aspect) I have a bee in my bonnet about perceiving TV Helaena as less caring simply because of her flat affect, and that was ultimately what this was about.

To be blunt, I don't find the changes to Blood and Cheese to be defanging anything--the original actually seemed a bit over-the-top by comparison.

And I'm having a bit of trouble seeing how what's in the TV series is //not// horrible enough that (WATCH THIS SPACE).

And TV Helaena first offering a necklace--dear God, that doesn't mean she only thinks her kids are worth that much. It's the heaven-forbid-characters-act-irrationally canard again. And freezing up is just as gut-wrenching as breaking down.

In short, I do not see this as the Le Epic Dunk but instead a writer being a bit precious.

I took a lot more issue with Alicent surrendering, since I thought she was the type to double down on her ideals when they start to creak. And sometimes mature storytelling includes characters _refusing_ to change. That is what might cook the show’s goose, but we’ll see in two years.

[orange-s-mario]

thinking about how the superman family (like the ones related to him) dynamics would be if I put them all together. hmmm a few of these are slightly changed to either make more conflict or to make a character have more character (looking at you Dik-Zee) also splitting kon into kon & conner simply because I can

Gregor would be a dust phantom in these which informs how he interacts with some characters. He and Chris are the only ones who can directly converse with Mon whenever. Gregor would still have an edge to him and have the whole complex he had in the original story - amplified by the fact that he is currently in some half-dead half alive state due to his powers

Johny would be jealous of other people still having their powers. Johny and Gregor would argue the most out of all his siblings but he's closest to Gregor

Cir would mostly be how she acted in the original run. No Mia though since they were somehow able to split apart so Cir tries out different secret identities but she's not very good at it despite everyone's help. She's probably the most positive one here

Jon Lane. he's mostly the same, still has some edge after development, Cir and Jon Lane found themselves in the same plane of non-existence and were somehow brought back idk. Anyways he mostly keeps to himself since he feels guilty about his past

N52 Kon: i haven't read n52 kon

Tommy; he visits occasionally. he's just kinda there

Jimmy Olsen: he's Jimmy Olsen. In this the whole sun/son thing happens right before all the Hal Rand thinking he's Mark Olsen stuff. but he's basically same jimmy as always. Family friend status. also mark and hal are married in this continuity. knows a lot about Cadmus stuff

Secundus: give him all of Kon & Jonathan's insecurities multiplied by 10. Since he's kind of a combination of both AND there's plenty of other people who'd accept being Superman

Chris Kent: he still has abandonment issues. Due to Nightwing powers he can directly talk to phantom zoners without the phantom zone viewer.

Jonathan Samuel Kent: feels a bit awkward about all this. The Ultraman thing happened so he has trauma from that. the others don't understand why he went with Jor in the first place. Jealous of the twins the most

Otho & Osul: still have Warworld trauma. still a bit worried about the old god thing. they tend to get along with everyone well, but all their siblings have hangups with how Clark handled being a parent or how Clark wasn't able to be a parent to them, which leaves them a bit confused on how to feel about their siblings

Conner Kent: an adaptation of YJTV conner, so he's a bit quicker to anger

Clark's kryptonian relatives (cousins & their kids)

Van-Zee; looks up to Clark, has a close bond to Ak-Var

Sylvia DeWitt, trained a bit in Klurkor; has powers under a yellow sun due to Van-Zee's serum. She's more reserved than Lois

Lyle-Zee and Lili Van-Zee: absolute menaces, drive their parents a bit mad.

Dik-Zee: generally a chill dude but a bit of a slacker, but it doesn't really affect his job much due to the thought type writers. he's a bit of a romantic as well. Generally wears a superman suit whenever though because of Van's twins

Ak-Var, married into the family. Happy that most of them accept him since the red K incident.

Thara Gem-Zee; likes learning about Kryptonian history, which is why she likes talking to Ak-Var who lived on Krypton before it blew up

Don-El; he's more serious and tries always being professional. Unfortunately he's also the first to suspect Ak if there's any a slightest chance of Ak-Var becoming a criminal again, which is unfortunate for Ak-Var

Rad-Zee; generally keeps to himself in a lab. doesn't like Van's twins because of their shenanigans

Kara Zor-El: more brash than Clark. Due to having both sets of parents alive and being in a different city, she doesn't visit often. More likely to be seen in Kandorian or Kryptonian celebrations than Earth ones though sometimes her whole family visits Clark's on Earth holidays

Judy/Equila gained her powers back and her grandparents started living on Earth as well. They take care of Judy while Kara is busy since Judy likes being with Kara

Clark's siblings (& their kids):

Cory Renwald; since he's a government agent, he's usually busy. Doesn't know Clark is Superman, but knows they have a connection. Trusts Clark's judgement on things, but feels Clark's too much of a goody two shoes. Doesn't really visit due to being busy but he'll try if he has time

Kral of Titan: succeeded in his revolution on Titan, which feels awkward for him since he feels guilty about thinking of betraying superboy (clark). Since everyone's a telepath on titan, everyone there knows this, but they built a statues to honor him anyways. Also learned that the temperature control gene is recessive (this is to connect it better to losh). Tries visiting often to escape the awkward situation he put himself in, but has to deal with making sure things don't go back to how it was during Clark's Smallville days

Kathy Warren; busy with Cadmus work usually. Doesn't feel like she has to hide her super intelligence anymore and feels like Cadmus has people she can relate to that don't alienate her

Kon-El; tries to be his own man, still has some of the complexes he's had before but he's getting better at handling them. Specifically remembers the Kents being alive so it's weird that he finds that in this continuity they're dead

Martha: time travel brings a future version of the baby that Kon was co-parenting on gemworld. She feels like Kon abandoned her. Kon can't really argue against that

Mighto/Tim Tate: Blames Clark/Kal for the death of his parents. Generally unpleasant to be around. More reserved on the Kents' death day (most of Clark's siblings meet up at their graves), Mighto does not attack on that day, despite all his flaws, Tim loved the Kents

Varl Quoz: Sometimes either he or the Kents/Els travel to Xenon though they make sure they always have enough fuel and spare parts to travel to and from it. The former weakling world is also used for people to live on. Varl and Kal get along well but due to Clark's privacy, the rest of the family is unsure of the whole situation (Varl explains later during their second or third vacation there)

Mon: he's still stuck in the phantom zone. Sometimes he makes asides, or attempts to help the family. Gregor and Chris are closest to him due to actually being able to talk whenever with him. Mon is grateful for this since this means he has more to do than absolutely nothing

Halk Kar: a bit insecure due to having lesser powers than Superman and thinking he was stronger when he thought he was Superman's brother. Is usually space traveling so he only visits on rare occasions

Mae: generally the same, except she lives with Linda. also in this continuity she's made by this universe's Lex (he was using an alternate identity) & Kathy while they were both working at Cadmus

Linda: generally the same except she keeps the Earth Angel powersTwilight: lives with Linda and Mae. uses her darkness powers similarly to how the Earth Angels use their powers (wings and blasts)

Blithe & Comet: live with Linda & Mae

Ariella: raised mainly by Linda and Mae. she's worse than Van's twins in how much chaos she can cause, which is, at least one of, the reasons why the others live with Linda and Mae

H'El: hates clones. has super op powers. Respects Jor so he doesn't attack on days that Jor-El discovered something which luckily is a lot of days. nobody likes him which makes him even mopier. Sometimes he crashes on someone else's couch just to angst about it and complain about everything. everyone else here finds him annoying

Rogol Zaar: everyone else here hates him - including Mighto and H'El. it's because he's the only one that doesn't care for Jor or the Kents (Mighto thinks you should respect your parents; despite H'El's breakdown he still is kryptonian and respects Jor). He is never invited

Lanes:

Lois: rash and more bold. Takes charge

Sam: war criminal

Lucy: somehow a combination of post-IC, Pre-crisis & Post-crisis Lucy. I'll figure it out. Anyways she has supernaturally white hair due to some jimmy olsen stuff that happened. In the end she married Ron and has a son with him

Sam Troupe: friends with the super kids, most notably john and chris. Is really confused about everything since john and chris are suddenly older than him, so he hangs out with the super-twins now

Leonardo: has a bit of a rivalry with Cory. Cory tries to ignore it

Legion stuff:

Laurel Kent manhunter and Laurel Kent real person coexist. the manhunter decides to be an antihero and later hangs out with Dev-Em

Kent Shakespeare: generally how he acts in 5YLXTC and Jonathan Samuel Kent cousins that bicker; idk I'd have to think more about it

Laurel Gand: distantly related to Mon-El, takes more after 5YL Laurel

Sensor Girl 2: Kara(?) (it's unclear)'s descendant who only has the super senses (super vision, microscopic vision, super hearing, super shouting, super ventriloquism that type of powers). Unsure if she should be legion age, little legion age, or between them hmmmm...anyways sometimes some of the Kents or Els visit the other time period other then their native one

[malfiora]

Jaydick and Pragmatic Love

For some reason (*cough* neurodivergence *cough*) I like to get introspective about why I like the things I like. My love for jaydick came kinda naturally – a red/blue aesthetic between 2 dorks with canonically strong and complex feelings towards each other? Been there, done that, sign me up. But, like...why? Why was I obsessed with this ship? Why is the pairing itself so compelling, whether you ship them or not? I thought: "I don't know, it's the way they're coded as opposites but aren't really, and the way Jason admires Dick but also resents him a little, and the way that Dick's entire identity shifts when Jason comes along, I guess."

And digging a little deeper, I could finally put it into words: it's because Jason was made for Dick. In much the same way that Dick (and consequently Robin) was made to be Bruce's ward / Batman's partner, Jason was created to be someone Dick could conceivably pass his mantle to, someone he could see something of himself in and trust to take on the responsibility he'd been safeguarding for years so that he could finally go do something else (i.e. become Nightwing). Metatextually (i.e. between text and audience), this makes sense, especially given the logic that Jason needed to be similar enough to Dick for audiences to like him while being his own person so he wasn't just a shameless ripoff. (This logic evolved over time, hence retcons, but still.) But contextually (within a text, between characters), what must that look like?

If I had to put it in a single word, it seems like both fans and writers have settled on pragma. According to Greek philosophy-based types of love, pragma is the type of love based on personal qualities, a sense of duty/obligation, and long term commitment. There is compromise and mutual understanding here. It's the type of love most associated with married couples who have been together for a while.

What's awesome about this is it can coexist alongside other types of love, like philia (platonic), eros (lust-driven), or ludos (flirtatious). These secondary types are where I see the disconnect between shippers and antis, but pragma is still the foundation, not necessarily in a romantic way, but certainly in the commitment.

A few examples under the cut.

Nightwing (1996) #119-122. I wrote about this enough, and so has frog. Commitment, sense of duty/obligation

Nightwing (2016) #15. Jason and Dick being bros, and Jason being self aware and commenting on their coping mechanisms (i.e. violence). Long-term mutual understanding.

Red Hood and the Outlaws (2016) Annual #1. stealing this from @the-mocking-robin to make a point. Admiration of personal qualities.

[ganymedesclock]

You think it's OK for heroes to do emotional labor for the villains. You're trash

Ooh, an angry anon! Been a while!

There's a couple of interesting angles to take here. I think what I want to start with is the terms you are using are all vague to the point of futility.

What makes a hero? What makes a villain? And what do we consider emotional labor, vs. 'common human decency'? These are all subjects we have pretty big opinions on, but the subjectivity of them cannot be ignored. As opposed to, say, a narrative antagonist, calling a character "a villain" almost always comes with the decisive punch of believing this guy is bad, unpleasant, dislikeable. The insinuation they are undeserving.

To which I will shamelessly say, yes. If you are, incidentally a person in a story or like a person in a story where you have an extremely large ability to affect others' lives, you have a moral obligation to extend that benevolence to people who are objectively bad.

Here's the thing that gets to me about "is it a hero's JOB to save the villain". If you look at the average fictional action hero, they have a remarkably high interest of being the incarnate god princess of space, or the strongest man alive on the planet, or similar concepts. We often are led to feel this is fair, because we like this person. Rapport is built by the narrative so that we feel like this is something they deserve, a heroic becoming.

But the truth is not every human being on the planet is going to be the Hero. At which point we kind of have to inevitably discuss, would we want the Hero to be kind to us? Would we want him to take our life and its qualities, everything that led us to that point, into account? Would we want to survive, if we met the hero at such a point when we had chosen to or felt driven to do something terrible?

And this is where the other conceit comes in. "A villain" is worse than meaningless as a blanket categorization. In some stories, the villain is a fat man who spits when he talks because the writer hates those traits, and the hero attacks him because it is ostensibly cathartic.

In some stories, the villain is openly and explicitly a disabled victim but now their behavior is scary so we just don't want to deal with them anymore.

In some stories the villain is an empowered individual operating in bad faith.

To say Hojo from Final Fantasy 7 is exactly the same type of person as Ganondorf from Legend of Zelda is to ignore that complexities exist in both of those people and the response to them should be centered before all else on reducing harm.

Focusing on wanting to punch Hojo because he's ugly and makes us feel unsafe and you don't like that and you want to feel safe is useless. Of course he makes you feel unsafe. He specializes in making you feel unsafe. Are you going to attack every wide-mouthed, glasses-wearing, slightly greasy man on the assumption they're all Hojos? No. That's pointless. Those collection of traits are morally neutral and meaningless. The problems Hojo has is that he's an entrenched and empowered misogynist and sadist who lives in a system that overlooks all of his behavior. That's what to target there.

Ganondorf is a political insurgent, racial minority, and thief of a divine power. You cannot steal a divine power in real life, so we are thus dependent on the narrative to explain this allegorical crime to us. (It is not, say, like Hojo medically abusing animals, which even if he is doing so to fantastical ends- creating supernatural monsters- is an ordinary crime we understand in reality)

And you kind of can't separate that the Legend of Zelda is fundamentally telling you a story about how a brown man from the desert is an unworthy evil successor trying to take the special promised something out of a land that is prosperous and wonderful when his own land we are told is savage and inhospitable. You cannot separate this from the idea that a pastoral green field is seen as the ultimate place of a gods' favor, from the idea that these fair-skinned blonde and blue-eyed people are seen as gods' favorite people, that Ganondorf with his dark skin, golden eyes and red hair is an intruder born under the "wrong" god explicitly for the purposes of always tormenting those fair blonde people.

You cannot separate this from the idea we are told Ganondorf is less human, was less human all along or that his unwillingness to give up on wanting something that isn't his turns him into a monster. That his humanity is forfeit. And it is okay to kill things that aren't human.

These are ideas we have to pick apart, because the reality is, there is no reliable force in this world that is going to give us a crown and mark us as the protagonist. There is no force that will hold our hands the way that a parent holds a baby learning to walk, and guide us to make good decisions.

Being good is work. Being good is continuous effort. Being good requires thinking about it really hard.

Being good also requires rigorous effort to understand other people, especially other people you don't immediately like or get along with, especially other people who are behaving badly.

What you might call "emotional labor"!

Hojo is someone I would never like or want to be around. I don't personally enjoy him. To me, while Sephiroth is a fantastical and tragic antagonist, one I can like and find sympathetic, Hojo is uncomfortably real. We know Hojos in real life. We see them on the news. They're politicians. Some of them have better hair.

The threat posed by Hojo is a threat posed by entrenchment of power. It is a threat posed by someone who means badly, and has found a way to escape the social pressure that would normally keep such behavior in check- the "dude, we don't do that here," the frustrated look, the making sure the date he just drugged has a cab out of the bar and he's not going to bring another date around here any time soon.

The only meaningful way to respond to Hojo is to examine by what systems we can hold powerful malicious people accountable and in what ways we can take power away from them. "you simply kill them with your fantasy powers and don't think about it" does not count. Hojo does not actually even mind becoming a boss fight. He's thrilled. He already has a backup plan. And this leaves us unprepared for reality when you cannot just fantasy boss fight a creep at a bar. You have to understand the vectors of harm.

This conceit is, in fact, one of the major narrative thrusts of the original story I am writing, Chiaroscuro. Very simply and without spoilers, the primary central antagonist is a Fallen Hero. He is a hero, narratively and spiritually.

He is a person who has begun to do horrible things, because out of exhaustion, out of misery, and out of trauma, he can no longer examine systems of harm or understand what makes particular things bad. So he desperately jerks away from, or attacks, things that scare him or set off his trauma. And the only way he has come to learn how to respond to these things is with fantastical violence, which he is extremely good at.

This results in him fatally assaulting a fifteen year old who does not mean him badly at all.

This is the end of the road. Once your horizons collapse only to a binary state of heroes and villains where the villains' job is to go away completely forever, you have become someone whose only response to conflict is to completely remove or eliminate anyone who challenges your worldview.

So yeah.

I sure hope you are 'doing emotional labor for villains', especially if you have enough power, importance, central significance that you are 'a hero'.

Otherwise you can't really reliably know why anything bad is bad.

[daeneryseastar]

Honestly, I think the Alicent stans are gleeful about what the show did to Alicent's character because now they can fully indulge in their dislike of Rhaenyra (all Targaryen women because apparently, they're all evil whores who don't fit into the image of a perfect Westerosi Lady), prop up Alicent's "suffering" as something aesthetically pleasing, and fixate on Alicent being a repressed lesbian "betrayed" by her crush and how Rhaenyra is a spoiled brat who abused poor baby Alicent. Don't even get me started on the constant comparisons they make between Sansa Stark and Alicent Hightower. "ALICENT WALKED SO SANSA STARK COULD RUN!" The theme is not only worrisome but nauseating.

that seems to be the case, doesn’t it anon? i think it feels vindicating for them, due to the whole ‘she spent her entire life suffering in the name of duty and honor, she deserves a conciliation prize’ like you mentioned (maybe there’s some deeper trauma that needs to be looked into for some of them idk) as if said 'prize' doesn’t end up costing her her entire family. the way they’ve written her in the show just screams the glorification of abuse. she’s allowed to physically, mentally, and emotionally abuse her own kids in their eyes bc she too was abused, every misdeed she commits is because she was abused, etc. she isn’t allowed to just want her son on the throne despite the set-back it would do to women, she has to have some sort of sob story to make her seem more sympathetic bc women can’t just be against other women without reason (eye roll) or be antagonistic in general without reason. the queer plot-line was also not needed seeing as it was doomed to fail from the start and its existence dives deep into queerbaiting and even racist territory; subsequently, they decided to make the velaryon’s black and then completely sideline laena, rhaenyra’s actual queer love interest, in order to uplift and pair the sad white woman with her instead (which is strange since it seems like most rhaenicent shippers loath rhaenyra, but i digress). she’s not a complex character; she’s one-dimensional, inconsistent, AND the result of hypocritical writers not being able to understand that victimization doesn’t automatically mean interesting.

it also feels like half the time her stan's can’t decide if all of her suffering is bc of the men in her life, or if it’s *somehow* all rhaenyra’s fault that she was put in that position. the show has attempted to switch the power dynamics at play by aging alicent down and rhaenyra up, but it doesn’t work simply bc alicent still has more power than her as queen consort (and still spends around 10 years without otto's influence bullying and ostracizing rhaenyra, which is not how a mother terrified for her children's lives would act in the face of their would-be murderer). furthering that, the lack of critical thinking skills is blatant in this fandom and shows when they attempt to vilify the targaryen's (especially the women, yikes) because they only do so to uplift their own boring favs. show!alicent, and by extension, both media's versions of helaena, are passive characters who conform to and uphold the patriarchy, they’re the perfect type of women for incels and pick-me’s to glomp onto to ‘prove’ they’re not misogynists (see? we DO like women! (only if they’re submissive and don’t fight back ofc)).

the only comparisons between sansa and alicent would be their show characters. only the latter half of got for sansa makes any since comparison wise. she too was a character that was further victimized to make her seem more interesting and righteous in the show writers efforts to make her qitn (and also to further the bullshit mad queen dany plot line). sansa is still quite a compelling character without adding in an unnecessary rape plotline, but if they hadn’t included it the only similarities between these two women are that both are apparently redheads (nope) and bastard-phobic (debatable). that right there is where any and all similarities end. in reality, alicent is the cersei to rhaenyra’s sansa, not the other way around.

the fact that many consumers (especially the women) seem to like the adding of an abuse storyline to these characters is so gross, and really telling of how the media has construed the reaction one should have to gender-based violence (or benevolent sexism). they condemn and pity these characters for what they go through, but in the same breath, praise the writers for adding ‘nuance’ to these women’s stories. worrisome indeed.

[wiltking]

Hello, this is probably a silly question but how did you get so good at writing? I've read you fics and they're amazing, even just a simple sentence you say sounds great. (I mean it sincerely) I want to improve my writing and my english along the line, what did you do? Or do you have any recommendations?

oh gosh i still feel like a baby writer with so much to learn. but i think the thing that helped me the most is learning how to read books from a writer's perspective. especially my favorite books. i mean really taking them apart piece by piece and figuring out why they come off as such good books to me. story structure, word choice, yes even something as simple as sentence. why do i think this book is so good? why is this character so memorable to me? in what way was this incredible line set up to have such a great impact? why do i continue to think about these books even years later?

these are the things I think about while I read. and its especially helpful during a reread when you already know the whole story of a book and can pay closer attention to things like setup and delivery.

this isn't reserved for 'objectively' well written or technically complex books, either. i've said many times that nora sakavic's all for the game series was the most formative to me when i was trying to seriously get into writing. and i always hear people expressing that the writing in those books isn't the greatest. respectfully i disagree, but even if people don't think they're well written there's a reason why those books are so beloved. the intense passion that radiates off the page even during some of the most insane ideas is just one of those things.

more recently i've been doing some research while i work on my horror writing by turning to some of my favorite fantasy / dark fiction writers. resuming my reread of the hexslinger series by gemma files is part of that, because those books were also extremely formative, and reading kissing carrion by the same author last year really made me think for the first time ok, maybe i can write flowery queer horror too. because those stories really resonated with me, and i think about the ending of the hexslinger series constantly. for years. it literally haunts me. but the reason why the ending is so impactful is all the build up that leads up to it. and the way the relationships are written. and the balance of love and horror and genuine connections and the deepest betrayals and... anyway i've kind of been going through her writing with a fine tooth comb to try and understand why she's inspired me for sooo many years.

elizabeth bear's edda of burdens; another formative piece of writing for me, despite me also having some issues with it. i'd love to reread it soon too but don't exactly have the time when i'm in full writing mode, so the other day i just took apart the intro to by the mountain bound in my reading journal. by copying down the first three paragraphs, underlining my favorite lines, and writing some notes about them. my notes aren't anything profound, i was just appreciating the wolfish way mingan is described in the littlest ways that are also so integral to him, and the pretty words chosen to describe the season. the way he's set up as different and 'other' from the very first page even with something as innocent as choosing to daydream. it's all stuff i try to appreciate and learn from.

i don't use my writing journal often (because its easier to type my thoughts here, tbh) but i generally use it to collect quotes i like (and always try to leave some notes about why i like each quote). the other day i also jotted down the opening sentences to some folk tales because its relevant to what i'm working on, and i wanted to study what important information they chose to lead with to set the tone of a story.

tldr; examine your favorite books from a writing perspective. try to understand the choices that were made on both a grand scale (story structure) and little details (word choice, descriptions, paragraph flow). and always try to write your passions even if its weird!! especially if it's weird. you've got this <3

[the-fucking-cannibal]

Why do you make porn of child characters?

As Homelander once said:

Just kidding! 😆💕 But jokes aside dear anon, assuming you're referring to my Kaeloo content I'd like to take this wonderful opportunity to give you a little bit of context about this show (and it's characters) and why it's ok for fans who consume this type of media to interpret it however they want!

-

The show "Kaeloo" is a category of media most commonly known as "meta cartoon" or "self-aware cartoon."

These cartoons are characterized by their tendency to acknowledge their own fictional nature, often addressing the audience directly and making references to the fact that they are part of a show, therefore breaking the fourth wall by talking to us!

-

This means that the characters in the show are aware that they are fictional, therefore they understand that they exist within a TV show and that their actions are being watched by an audience.

Within the show, the characters often organize games, challenges, or events specifically to entertain the younger viewers.These activities are part of the show's format and are designed specifically with the child audience's enjoyment in mind. (Not because they're actual kids who only play games just to kill time, but because playing games is LITERALLY their job (as Kaeloo mentioned too), in order to entertain US, the audience watching).

Most of the things the characters do within the show are a form of acting. They are playing parts or roles within the games and performances. This adds another layer of fiction, as the characters are acting within the context of the show itself. The primary goal of the characters' actions and the show's structure is to engage and entertain the viewers and this allows the show to be highly interactive and dynamic! Plus the characters' awareness makes for humorous and comedic situations (like Season 3 ep. 17 or Season 5 ep. 24)

-

The show also emphasizes the fact that the main four are often portrayed as older actors outside of the cartoon when they're not playing games or organizing entertainment for the kids during Meta Episodes. They also explain on behalf of the writers how it's hard for adults to be able to express themselves with darker topics while also managing to pass for a kids show to air on television, and that includes the stigma of animation still always being associated with children and not adults, and I believe Rémi himself wanted to express that struggle of expression through this cartoon.

However this topic really gives us a much more complex and interesting view on the characters' struggle too! We get to see Kaeloo and her friends trying to express their natural mature (and often explicit) selves while also struggling to keep their actions "kid friendly" in order to not traumatize or offend the children with their explicit undertones and mature language.

I see Kaeloo as an adult with a very responsible and mature approach with her awareness that kids might be watching them, and she often struggles with her fear that the adult topics they face and their actions may not be suitable for them, trying to ensure their safety all the time just like any other responsibile adult would!

But of course, if that isn't enough proof we also have a canon portrayal of what children REALLY look like in the show!

So long story short: No, I don't personally believe the main four are kids. Or at the very least, Kaeloo, Pretty, Mr.Chat, Olaf and Eugly definitely aren't.

But please anon, also keep in mind that this is just MY personal view and interpretation of the characters! Every fan is allowed to interpret them however they like most and there is NO right or wrong way to enjoy a piece of media or fiction! It's yours to enjoy! 🩷

Some fans are ok with picturing them as children that smoke, drink, make sexual innuendos and drive; but to me personally it feels more comfortable and logical to see them as adults!

(And on a side note, i truly appreciate the creativity and artistic talent that Rémi puts behind his work and the portrayal of each character. Being a nsfw artist himself, I really don't think he would mind knowing that every fan has a different and personal interpretation of his creations. He's a chill guy and hey, he has no problem drawing his characters in explicit/adult contexts, so why would it be wrong for some fans to agree with him? Adults are allowed to project too ahahah 🩷).

[mxopifex]

A Fanfic Writer's Guide to Writing Fanart Prompts

So it came up while chatting with some other members of a fandom gift exchange that some of the writers felt less comfortable writing prompts for recieving fanart gifts and I thought I'd try and make a guide to help out since I do both fanart and fanfic.

The stumbling blocks as I understood them were: 1) not knowing what you like in fanart, 2) not knowing how to articulate what you like (which is probably more related to the first item than you think), and 3) worrying that all your prompts are too narrative. Imma do my best to address those, but if you have other questions feel free to drop me a line. I want to help.

I call this a guide, but it's more of a series of questions to ask yourself than a how to, or rather this is a how to think about and understand what you want to ask for type guide. A good prompt doesn't need to (and maybe shouldn't) touch on every issue I bring up here. The goal is to make the person who is making your gift feel confident that they can make something you like, not to tell them exactly what to do.

What to do if you are worried that you make all your prompts too narrative heavy:

First, relax. Fanart often carries a narrative component. You can reasonably prompt something that might involve a bit of visual storytelling. That said, the amount of story you can get in a single image is much smaller than the amount you can pack into even a modest 1k short story. Imagine a single scene you might like to see; the kind you love when it pops up in a fic. "I'd like to see the blorbos on a beach vacation" or "I'd like to see character A treating character B's wounds." You can further abstract this to things like "a cozy domestic scene" or "being flirty."

Some Prompt Prompts for if you are feeling stuck on what to ask for

Tropes! Many tropes work in a fanart setting. The ones that don't are the ones that need a bit more narrative behind them to make sense. It might be tricky to convey Fake Dating with a single image, but Hurt/Comfort or Only One Bed is very doable.

AUs! Want to let the artist play dress up with the blorbos? See what they'd look like as the socialite guests in a 1920s Agatha Christy style murder mystery? or just ask for something more general like a fairy tale setting or modern au.

Set the mood! What's the vibe you like best about this character or coupling? Do you want something dark and broody? More lighthearted and comedic? Tender and romantic?

Style! While I don't advise requesting something in the vein of a specific artist's style (the person making your gift has their own style) talking about styles of art that you like can help them understand what's visually appealing to you. So mentioning like "a moody film noir type setting" or "overwrought flowery romance like in shojo manga" isn't horrible, as long as you leave the artist room to bring their own sensibilities into the picture.

Poses! Want that bridal carry? Sharing an umbrella? Something that emphasizes a height difference? Don't go too hog wild with details "and their left pinky at a thirty degree angle..." but if you wanna see someone getting dipped on the dance floor, go ahead and ask for it.

Two final thoughts. First, just like with fic prompts you want to have a couple different ones in your ask. Every artist has things they feel more or less comfortable with, and giving a few options helps to make sure that there's at least one that they can work with. Particularly if you have a more complex prompt, it would be good to also have one that's simpler or more open to interpretation. Second, check in with yourself to see if you have any art specific DNWs.Maybe you can handle written descriptions of blood but not visual depictions or maybe the character has that one outfit that you think is butt ugly. Either way make sure you are clear about it in your prompt.

[k-s-morgan]

︎This is the first time ever I'm writing to a writer as I'm a lil anxious about my English. But after many years of reading your flawless work (TGSTLTH), I really couldn't hold myself anymore; if I stay silent one more second, I'm going to explode from repressed emotions.XD

I'm absolutely going crazy over your storytelling. I think nobody -and I do mean NOBODY- was this close to perfection with the characterization of Sebastian and Ciel. It's like you are working together with Yana herself. You've really managed to catch every aspect of their relationship that made this whole storyline (manga and anime) the way it's been, which seems to be the entire reason why I still can't get over Kuroshitsuji. It's just so dark and dramatic... the bitter power struggle between these two and the way they compete for control —which is pretty entertaining to see when you think about it because both parties are unable to maintain any type of control or authority over the other.

From what I see, this fandom has mixed feelings about S2 of the anime. Some love it, some ignore its whole existence, and some people are okay with it. Unfortunately, I'm the second one. I like the story arcs that are canon to the manga. When I first started to read TGSTLTH, I really thought that fanfic would follow the storyline without S2 in it since you reflect the complexity of the bond they share as a human and demon so prettily. I've always wondered if Ciel, as-twelve-years-old brat, managed to become Sebastian's living hell, how much of a pain in the ass he would be as he grows older. And the plot has several unresolved mysteries that have not been addressed yet. That's why I'm not a big fan of S2; it closes off all the possible ways this story can go as its ending. However, you are the only one who could warm me up to S2; I trust you.

I read the snippets. It was surprising to see Ciel doubting his appearance. I was questioning whether his look-alike was truly superior or if it was just the circumstances influencing his perception. I feel like it's mainly his fear of not being good enough for Sebastian to stay. Which explains his continuous freak-out about the possibility of his soul being unworthy. And I clearly remember Sebastian thinking, "The boy wasn't nearly as pretty" upon seeing him.

Your talent is exceptional and beyond comparison. Please never stop writing. Stay safe...❤❤

B.

Ps. If my English is difficult to read or understand, please feel free to ignore this.

Hi! Please don't worry, your English is absolutely fine! I'm so happy you've been enjoying Those Gentle Slopes so much, and I'm honored that you feel like I did justice to Ciel and Sebastian. They are my favorite characters, and Ciel is probably my most favorite character ever, across all fandoms, so I really treasure the chance to work with them and get such lovely feedback from other readers.

With S2, yes, it created a lot of controversy in the fandom, but also yes, I love it with my whole heart! I always call it a love letter from Sebastian to Ciel. I do have some issues with it, like the exccessive sexualization in general and of Hannah in particular - it feels just awkward sometimes, but the main plot and especially the resolution make me ridiculously happy.

I agree that the bond between a demon and a human is fascinating. I enjoy exploring it a lot, and I so look forward to all the adventures Ciel and Sebastian will have. But I also think that it cannot go on like this forever: even if Ciel got older, sooner or later, something wuld have to give. He'd either die from old age, which would feel like a very underwhelming ending to me, or Sebastian would eat his soul likepromised - but then I'm sure we'd have ended up with the Red Valentine development, where he's lonely, miserable, and missing Ciel. The idea of Ciel becoming a demon in a way that puts such a strain on his relationship with Sebastian - it's like a new life for their bond. So many new conflicts and possibilities could emerge from it - new settings, new events, new power struggles. If you stick around, I really hope you'll like it! And I really appreciate your trust.

And yes, you're absolutely right, Ciel is prettier than his look-alike (at least from how I envision it). Sebastian probably overestimates the difference between them a bit because he's biased in Ciel's favor while Ciel is freaking out because he's been feeling insecure and unworthy for a while at this point, and learning about Sebastian's second contract was just the last blow. These two idiots…

Thank you for your wonderful ask again! I hope you enjoy the next chapter.

[alwida10]

What's your opinion on the new Loki powers from the second episode? (Energy blasts and moving shadows, as I know you don't wanna watch it -- completely understand, it's really out of sync and tries its main character like shit)

Hi dear anon! 🤗

First of all - I’m so honored by this question!! I kinda considered myself an outdated part of the fandom since I don’t watch the show anymore, and getting this ask gave me such a warm feeling!! 💚

Before I start: I said I wouldn’t watch the show, and I did not, so all I answer here is probably a bit awkward, as half-knowledge tends to be. I did. see the scene in question in the trailers and base my answer on that. If I forget anything or don’t know I’m happy to get corrected or supplemented.

I assume this is the magic we’re talking about:

I saw four types of magic: the green blast, the illusionary doubles, ripping the temped from Brad’s hand, and the shadows grabbing Brad.

In the movies, Loki has often used illusionary doubles. To me, his powers in phases 1-2 have been an integral part of his characterization. A mirror so to say. Or like a curse turned to advantage.

Loki had been stolen from Jotunheim and made something he wasn’t? -> he can appear to be someone else to a degree not even the whole population of Asgard realizes it’s him when he poses as Odin.

Loki was ignored, shut up, and silenced by his family? -> he learns to hide himself from Heimdall’s eyes, and even turn invisible to the shield agents in Thor 1.

Loki was lied to about his heritage, how people treat him, and even his future? -> he learns to forge lies so well that they become illusions that make people believe the wine turned into snakes, Loki was standing in front of them, and many more.

Loki’s rage on him being locked away and forgotten to the point only a guard lets him know Frigga died? -> his rage manifests in a shockwave that destroys everything in his cell.

There are more examples, but my point is Loki’s magic was mirroring what was done to him. It’s adaptive, and telling.

Now, regarding season 2.

Many people criticized season 1 for having Loki work too little magic. Season 2 seems to be “improved” in that regard, but my personal opinion was always a bit more complex. I do agree Season 1 had too little magic, but at the same time, I don’t think any magic is an improvement. If they introduce him doing powerful magic we haven’t seen before it will always lead to the question of why Loki didn’t use that magic against Thanos or the minutemen that arrested him in season 1.

Why didn’t he use the green energy blasts and go for a knife? Why didn’t he magically rip the prune sticks from the hands of the TVA agents and instead talk down to them from a stone? Loki’s journey in the MCU has been long and that makes adding magic incredibly complicated.

But even when we look past this, his new powers imo lack the elegance of his former powers. What does the blast connect to? It’s a push, I guess. Loki was pushed around so now he can push as well? Okay, I guess, but it’s also a very stereotypical way to use magic. The Jedi do it, the Dragonborn does it, the Witcher does it. It’s standard. I don’t think the writers put much thought into it. The same goes for the telekinesis. No worldbuilding or characterization-based explanation. Just some power many fictional characters have.

So, last but not least the shadows. I must say, the visual of the horns growing was … distracting for me. It reminded me of a snail stretching its eyes. 🙈 but of all his new powers I do like this one the best. The connection to the character is shady at best (see what I did here? Bwahaha) but at least I could see Loki trying to get out of Thor’s and Odin’s shadows by learning how to control his own.

Did this answer your question? 😊 if not, do not hesitate to put a follow-up one in my inbox!