#I feel like this is true to the character pre-development

[thats-the-biz-babe]

my final(ish) thoughts on 8x06/confessions/the break up (and tommy's pov):

so obviously my initial reaction when 8x06 aired was to go. okay. this is the most stupid break up of all time. nothing about this makes any sense (*sobs*). this is still true, and i'll say for the most part i just have to put it down to bad writing. but it's canon regardless, so we have no choice but to take what we're given lol. if anything this serves as proof of why arguing about who is really to blame for this whole thing is pointless.

i'm sure this isn't news, but the problem with confessions as an episode overall is that it brings up so many questions and proceeds to answer none of them. i'm not gonna answer them either, because i'd be lying if i said i knew, but i have some ideas so i'm gonna talk about my thoughts on it anyway, including the areas that i think are the biggest offenders for shitty writing.

if this comes across as more sympathetic to tommy's perspective, it's because it's his pov that we're missing the most context for / that i have the most questions about (bc he's not a main character). so that's going to be the focus here, but this isn't intended as a criticism of buck whatsoever. and yeah, a lot of this has definitely already been said, but i wanted to compile my thoughts on everything before we go into season 9. and hopefully we get a reconciliation, even if it is half-arsed and we don't get any resolution or even explanation for their initial conflict (not holding my breath, especially after they tried to retcon the whole thing in 8x11).

i love bucktommy, we know this (i hope?). i think they're perfect together and they love each other and they should get back together and get married and buy a house together yadda yadda yadda. however, one of my biggest criticisms of their story line is we really didn't get to see much of them when they were actually dating. there were a few (super sweet) moments we did get shown on screen, especially in masks (so right before they broke up) but as often is the case with this show, we were left to fill in a lot of gaps. we really don't know what point they were at pre-breakup because after they got together their relationship was more or less neglected on screen. most of it happened during the hiatus, and they can't focus ALL their time on them (this isn't the bucktommy show after all). but any guesses as to what they were like as a couple are just that, guesses. did it feel like it had started to develop into something more serious at that point? or was it still early stages? what pace were they actually going at?

an example of what i mean is at the anniversary dinner, buck was checking out those girls in front of tommy, and when they flirted with him he didn't tell them he was on a date. he looked pretty guilty about it too, but whether or not it was just supposed to be generally over the fact that he was checking them out (hence tommy reassuring him), i don't know. maybe it was because he knew he was supposed to correct them, but he obviously didn't feel comfortable doing it for whatever reason? this isn't entirely relevant, but i always wonder whether it was supposed to be a really clumsy way of reminding the audience that he's bisexual (screaming at you: he still likes women!!! even though he's with a man!!!) i mean it would be better if they just used the fucking word...

anyway, what we also don't know is whether this was a common occurrence, we know buck is out to the people closest to him at this point but how does he act in public around strangers? is he still uncomfortable being seen out with a man? can tommy sense his reluctance / hesitation at holding his hand when they're out together? does buck correct people when they assume him and tommy are friends? he was a lot more openly affectionate at the coffee date, so i like to think that after that he was okay. but realistically, him grabbing tommy's hand to prove to him that he's ready in the moment doesn't actually mean all his discomfort is suddenly gone or that he won't still struggle in the future. who knows.

this part is purely speculation based on what i know about tommy, but i can imagine that not being something he wants to push buck on for fear of making him uncomfortable. so as long as he doesn't go back into first date territory, how much would tommy let slide? the impression i have is that he doesn't see the things he wants and needs to be any where near as much of a priority, especially in a relationship he doesn't think will last. it's all about buck's pace, not making him uncomfortable or pressuring him before he's ready. does tommy ever ask for anything? if that was what they were trying to do, the writers didn't exactly do a convincing job in showing us a relationship that was equally balanced.

this isn't me accusing buck of any of these things, and if it is true i definitely don't think it was intentional on his part. i don't think he was a bad boyfriend, and it was tommy's responsibility as much as his to express how he was feeling and what he wanted (buck isn't a psychic!!). it was an active choice on tommy's part to play the role of the "perfect starter boyfriend" for buck and not put himself into a position where he gets too invested (which didn't work, clearly). but my point is that we have no idea whether things like this were a one off or not. we only really see tommy taking care of buck and not vice versa, but i won't dwell on it too much because at the end of the day buck is the main and they only have so much time on screen with each other.

another example is we also have no idea whether buck has called himself bisexual off screen at this point. not that he is required to label himself, but was the conversation they had at the anniversary dinner the first time they broached the topic of sexuality since they got together? it certainly seems likely that they didn't ever go deep into it before considering what that conversation onscreen entailed. they had takeout the night before, they were obviously spending a lot of time together, so what went wrong? (looking for an answer other than "they spent the whole time fucking" preferably lol)

asking tommy if he had ever been with a woman was weird (they did sort of touch on that during their first date), so did they never talk about dating history again in the six months they were together? tommy never mentioned being engaged before? he didn't seem reluctant to give that info up, he wasn't exactly hiding it, and it seems even stranger that buck never mentioned abby in all that time considering she was so influential to him, especially with the whole buck 1.0 -> 2.0 thing. buck also implies to eddie that he know's tommy's gay in 7x05, but it comes up again at the anniversary date like he doesn't know, and it's a strange thing to not have established already given they're six months in. sure, asking tommy why he wasn't checking out those women doesn't necessarily mean he didn't know that he's fully gay, it was probably just the opening he chose to get to the second question. but it seemed like a strange way to go about it when they could've just had him ask about tommy's past relationships / relationships with women straight up. then again this is tv and people can't just have conversations, they have to be triggered by something else (sigh). there's just so many better ways i can think of to naturally bring up the topic of exes, they do it in 7x04. anyway, buck says in season 7 that he wants to get to know tommy, but it does make you wonder how much they did actually get to know each other once they got the chance.

again, i'm fully aware that a lot of what the episode comes down to is lazy writing because they were just trying to get from point a to point b and the easiest way they found to do that was buck checking out women -> notices tommy isn't -> asks him why -> tommy says he's gay -> buck asks if he's ever been with a woman -> abby reveal -> buck spirals -> josh convo -> break up. you can say "oh but it doesn't matter because the writers clearly didn't think this far and any explanation you come up with won't actually be what they intended". true, but the fact is that that IS what happened canonically, and i feel like if i'm gonna meta any of this show i have to meta all of it, even the parts that don't make sense (and i'm having fun, sue me). if nothing else this stuff is interesting to delve into and fix in fanfic world. and yes... this also isn't exclusive to bucktommy. madney and bathena at the very least have had similar issues. athena didn't even know bobby's mother was still alive until recently after being married to him for years. i'd love to see them stop trying to manufacture cheap drama and do something substantial with the characters (if you need ideas, i'm right here tim) but we all know that's not gonna happen (sigh).

none of what i'm about to say is necessarily true because AGAIN my whole point is we don't know. but suddenly i start becoming far more sympathetic of tommy's position if after six months his boyfriend is still uncomfortable being seen with him in public and has entirely ignored and skipped over thinking about or talking about his sexuality in all that time. at this point it feels like he's avoiding it on purpose, and how can you be with someone who still seems ashamed of who they are with no real attempt to deal with it. despite it seeming that way it could just be that buck doesn't deal with having feelings for people well regardless of gender (which yes, does seem to be true). but you know what it looks like to someone who doesn't know that. and tommy likely sees buck as a super open, honest guy who doesn't normally hide how he's feeling.

again (i'll keep saying it), this comes down to lazy writing, but the whole josh convo and the comments about tommy being cruel was crazy to me because how do you not know this already? he knew michael, who went through something similar. tommy already admitted he used to be a dick back then and regrets his actions, and specifically on the subject of abby said that she deserved better. so the judgement over his past all of a sudden was really strange? obviously when it's someone really close to you it's harder to picture them like that, and even harder to get your head around when you hear the specifics. but does buck not know any queer history? did he not do any research? has he not spoken to josh / hen (still mourning the hen+buck scene we didn't get post coming out) at all about any of this since coming out? this part was clearly put in to hand hold the general audience through a lesson about how it used to be harder to be gay (and sucking ryan murphy's dick about it) but like i said, it's not the first time they've done a comphet storyline, and if they wanted to go back over it again it needed to be done better than that imo (not even getting into the fact that the abbytommy of it all makes no sense). anyway, i'll get back on track, it is what it is. it just makes me come back to the fact that buck seems not to show any interest in engaging in / learning about queer related things. it's a shame because sure, we've seen buck make out with a man on screen, refer to having a boyfriend, imply he sees a future with him etc but there has been no indication that he has started... looking at himself as a queer person ig? i mean since the last update we got on this front which was in 7x05 where he referred to himself as an ally multiple times (which i get, but times have changed). is this the show being scared to commit? a compromise for the homophobes who were upset about bi buck, by letting him date a man but not focusing too much on the "gay thing"?

so getting back to the point, if what we learned in confessions was anything to go by i wonder how much else they didn't talk about? and then buck asked him to move in? i understand why tommy didn't think they were gonna last if they were skipping so many steps. you don't want to start living with someone when you still feel that you aren't able to be honest with each other. you can't avoid bringing up certain subjects with each other and still expect any level of trust between you if you don't want the relationship to collapse very quickly. tommy seemed okay with buck checking out the women at the restaurant. he said it was okay to recognise they were attractive, which i get, but the actual flirting and the lack of a "hey i'm actually on a date with my boyfriend" would personally make me uncomfortable. and in that case i'd wonder if jumping into asking me to move in with him was just him being impulsive and not something he'd actually thought out, or something he was doing for the right reasons. is tommy gonna take that risk and uproot his entire life for someone who makes big decisions on such a whim? like, i don't even think this was just him being insecure, i think there could potentially have been some valid concerns here.

another thing is okay, buck could've said "move in with me" to mean they should move in together generally, but it did kinda sound like he was asking tommy to move into the loft. y'know, his tiny bachelor pad that didn't have walls between the rooms and certainly didn't have a muay thai gym or room for a carlift? this doesn't seem well thought out at all... or like he's properly considering how tommy might feel. not that i think this was something that buck didn't actually want (though how was tommy to know) but even though the sentiment was real the fact is it WASN'T well thought out. it was clearly (to the audience) something he decided as the result of the conversation he'd just had with josh, where he admitted he could see a future with tommy. and again, tommy doesn't know any of that because buck doesn't share his feelings with the only person who really needs to know!!! and whether tommy knows it or not, buck does have a history of making impulsive decisions like that.

it's true, this whole thing could've been a one off and the rest of their relationship could've been perfect. but we can only extrapolate based on what we're shown on screen, and i do think these are questions that are worth asking and that there is room for more nuance here. either way, tommy was still a complete idiot for running rather than saying how he felt, but i don't necessarily (key word) know if him being worried was as out of nowhere as it seemed. that's really gonna be down to however you want to interpret it, because i don't actually think we'll ever get the answers that we want. i don't think this is something the show cares about or has ever properly considered, but i'd love to find out more about tommy's perspective because there are two people involved and only one is a main.

i think the most important take away from this is that the writing of this show is horrendous, so it's probably best not to dwell on it (doesn't take his own advice). this is what happens when you dig too deep into a show that doesn't ask for anywhere near this much attention and makes absolutely no effort to be consistent or logical in it's writing. welp, at the end of the day despite the gaps in what we were shown on screen, the parts that we did see were enough to convince us that they do have amazing chemistry, and that they care for each other so intensely in a way that is really a first for both characters. a perfect fit, with so much potential left to explore. if they get back together, they definitely need to have some big conversations they put off the first time around (not that i expect we'll see any of it), but i don't think it's anything unfixable if they want to make it work. and as it's looking right now, it seems like they both still love each other and want each other back.

what do i want to see going forward? more screen time for the relationship, buck being open about having a boyfriend (yes, in public too), for tommy to continue being as caring as he has been, but maybe to see the reverse of that as well? more conversations, things that show us they do actually know each other and are comfortably being open / aren't hiding things from one another. more casual physical affection, the fact that they're a couple being obvious when they're in public together. i'd love to see them both out together with the 118 too, or just interactions with the rest of the cast in general. am i still holding out to hear the word bisexual on screen? idk. but i'd like to, i think it's important especially after all the weird jokes about abby turning men gay and buck not knowing which pool to jump back into. i want to see the show commit to this thing.

[castellankurze]

"You know, they say that all men are created equal, but you look at me and you look at Zoraal Ja and you can see that statement is not true. See, normally if you go one on one with another viper, you got a 50/50 chance of winning. But I'm a genetic freak and I'm not normal! So you got a 25%, AT BEST, at beat me. Then you add Koana to the mix, your chances of winning drastic go down. See the 3 way at Succession, you got a 33 1/3 chance of winning, but I, I got a 66 and 2/3 chance of winning, because Koana KNOWS he can't beat me and he's not even gonna try!

"So Zoraal Ja, you take your 33 1/3 chance, minus my 25% chance and you got an 8 1/3 chance of winning at Succession. But then you take my 75% chance of winning, if we was to go one on one, and then add 66 2/3 per cents, I got 141 2/3 chance of winning at Succession. See Zoraal Ja, the numbers don't lie, and they spell disaster for you at Succession."

[hellboundhimbo]

ok so yeah: officially done with wano. can confirm that shit was peak, i loved it so much, and i am genuinely very very sad to see the characters exclusive to that arc go. wano was something else, man, it really could’ve been its own manga. fuckin beautiful story, oda more than outdid himself with this one. truly cannot overstate how much i loved wano, its kinda crazy to wrap my head around people disliking this arc. cuz like. i understand the reasoning behind it— wano’s length being a large factor— but as someone watching it after it’s already been completed, i had no issues with the pacing at all. wano was a massive story that required a lot of time to finish, and while act 3 was insanely long, it was long for a reason!! genuinely my only complaints are that i wish usopp had gotten a buff (or at least a significant feat), the reasoning behind kin’emon coming back to life was total bullshit, and hiyori’s personality kinda doing a 180 post wano was sort of jarring (tho granted that one can be explained.) also like kaido was kinda mid that’s also a detractor.

still though in the grand scheme of things, it really feels like small potatoes in comparison to the fucking masterpiece wano is regardless. fucking beautiful storytelling only elevated by the anime adaptation, wonderful artwork, moving character development, the best flashback in the whole damn series— i really could just slobber all over wano’s cock for hours. INCREDIBLE arc. god i love wano. i really don’t know whether or not i prefer wano or whole cake. my gut says whole cake bc its more strawhat centric than wano but MAN. WANO.

[elf-trash]

Solavellan Recommended Reading

I made a post like this for SilverV a million years ago and wanted to make one for Solavellan as well!

A few of these fics overlap with the ones I have linked in my current pinned post, but there are soooo many fantastic Solavellan fics out there that I decided to make a longer rec post so I could include more of them!!!

Without further ado, here are some of my favorites, in no particular order. Some of them are one-shots or shorter multi chapter fics, and some of them are massive long fics and everything in between. Some of them are new and still in progress, some of them are completed, and a handful of them are older fics. All of them are absolutely worth your time!

walk you to the shore - Scaryanne A beautifully written post-Veilguard one-shot about Solas and Lavellan having it all out in the Fade. Highly recommend!

the sun to burn - Pip (Moirail) An Inquisition re-write that goes off canon and does a phenomenal job at exploring a ton of aspects of the lore and story. Features fantastic character writing and takes really thought-provoking directions with the lore!

love is not a victory march - Brunchatthebookstore A Veilguard retelling where Lavellan is present at the ritual at the beginning that goes off book from there. It's beautifully, heartbreakingly written and off to a REALLY strong start with some truly devastating moments, so this one is absolutely one to watch.

miles below the surface of the dawn - gostak This fic is one of the most beautiful things I have ever read, period. On its face it's just 6 chapters of "there was only one bed" Inquisition-era Solavellan smut, but I stg the writer was channeling the spirit of Solas Dragon Age himself because it is the most perfect Solavellan smut I can imagine. Read this one, just trust me.

Martyr - widowling If you like Solavellan angst, this one delivers in spades!!! It's set during Veilguard and explores what would happen if the Evanuris kidnapped the Inquisitor (and more specifically, how Solas would react). It is DELICIOUS and also extremely painful but well worth it!

Requited - cursedhag A beautifully written, pitch perfect Inquisition rewrite that fully checks all the boxes! Features a lot of excellent Solas POV that incorporates all the new lore reveals we learned in Veilguard. Do yourself a favor and read this!!!!

rook wins in the end - wiltedartist A great exploration of Rook's relationship with Solas in Veilguard. Solavellan, but focuses on the one-sided unrequited feelings that Rook develops for Solas. Really interesting angle that I haven't seen done better.

And Yet - say_lene Beautiful Inquisition-era Solavellan one-shot. All of this writer's fics are so beautiful and well-written, so I kind of picked this one randomly but ALL of their Dragon Age fics are worth reading. We stan a good smut character study!!!!!

In the Colours of Your Regrets - scribeofmorpheus Another excellent smut character study! Solas sadly jorkin' it in the Lighthouse to his own sad murals of his wife. 11/10 no notes.

Roses Where Thorns Grow - Bdafic This one explores what would have happened if, after Crestwood, Lavellan learned the truth about Solas and they rekindled their relationship. It's a beautiful story that stays true to character and explores some of their messier and more complicated relationship dynamics.

Servitude - niceasspavus Another really, really solid Inquisition rewrite that explores Solas and Lavellan's romance. Well-written with excellent details and characterization. Highly recommend all of this writer's other fics, as well.

These Hands, If Not Gods - Gefionne An AU where a pre-Inquisition Lavellan accidentally discovers an eluvian that lets Arlathan-era Solas time travel to her. Beautifully written smut and character development. AUs aren't often my thing, but this one is absolutely worth your time.

Looking Glass - Feynite This one is theee classic Solavellan fic and probably needs no introduction. It's a time travel Arlathan AU, and it still holds up even after all these years, even unfinished. If you haven't read this one yet, stop whatever you're doing right now and fix that.

Wildest Dreams - elf_trash Finally, this one is mine!!! It's a retelling of Veilguard with Lavellan as the protagonist (aka Lavellan IS Rook) that focuses on her complicated relationship with Solas. Starts near the end of Inquisition and will continue through Veilguard and slightly beyond. I plan on reincorporating a lot of scrapped ideas from Joplin.

This list is in no way comprehensive, as a) there are sooo many good ones and b) I haven't read everything (yet lolol), so please feel free to reblog this and add your favorites!!!

But in the meantime, do yourself a favor and check out all of these fics! Top tier stuff all around.

[fruitsofhell]

I'm starting to reach the point of Tenna brainrot where I'm beginning to develop that critical eye for his fandom portrayal, bolstered heavily by him obviously having some Tumblr Sexyman Bait mixed into him, but as someone who is usually violently repulsed by true Tumblr Sexyman Bait I have been having a blast noticing how he subverts those tropes. For me right now the biggest tell of people focusing on him as A Tall Guy In A Suit vs the little goofster he is how softly they draw him, cause its also my biggest fixation with his design.

Tenna's has a uniquely soft and rounded character design for what he is - a CRT in a shiny suit rendered as an early CG model. Not only did Toby take that aesthetic in the direction of SNES pre-rendered sprites so that instead of being polygonal he would have that unnaturally smooth finish, but he also took the time to blast Tenna's palette with a bright lavender tint and no black outline. Then on top of that even, his CRT head is stylized to be as rounded as possible, and almost every pointed aspect of his character besides his nose has a soft taper just by nature of the lumpy, clay-like model he is. And these details serve a couple of goals:

First and most interesting to me, combined with the big cartoon gloves and coat-tails, Tenna's softness really helps sell him as a Rubber-Hose adjacent - and therefore old and nostalgic - looking character without it being too forced. Or even worse, trying to bluntly mimic the Rubber-Hose style in a way that would have made me furiously critical lmao. Literally the defining part of those designs that I see people mess up is how rounded and 3D the characters were. Besides oddities like Mickey Mouse and a few other super early characters' ears, characters of that era were overwhelmingly designed to make sense in 3D space. The style is sometimes referred to as the "center-line style" because on reference sheets you would see characters broken down into spheres with lines down the center to help portray depth.

This to say, if you want to get to the fundamentals of that style, an essence that can transcend the most obvious aesthetic tropes of pacman eyes and black and white, you make characters very tubular and *rubber-hose-y*. Tenna is very much that and in a way that dates him back to a nebulous essence of that old cartoon style, as well as making him distinctly a product of clumsy but adorable early CGI -- in a way harkening back to the early baby steps of 2D and 3D animation. (And fuck it, it kinda gives me digitized claymation vibes sometimes). Nevertheless, this collection of subtle and unsubtle visual motifs come together to make Tenna appear and feel old, charming, and most importantly, soft.

If Toby wanted to like really, really say "This guy is a TV cartoon" a far more obvious aesthetic to draw from would have been Hannah-Barbera type characters in the Modernist style, which uses economic design tropes that are so embedded in our idea of a cartoon you will find attempts at a rubberhose style accidentally using them, despite the styles being diametrically opposed. That gorgeous Hatsune Miku design for the vocaloid song people keep super-imposing Tenna over is a PERFECT example of the artstyle on a character who's design otherwise has nothing to do with it, emphasizing the focus on bold, flat shapes that often don't reflect any sort of real depth. Tenna could have easily been in a style like that, but no matter how many circles you may use in the design, they'll never be spheres, they'll never have that sense of depth and therefore almost tangible softness that Tenna's design has. Toby's artstyle, though not heavily related to either tradition, does rely a lot on flattened perspective and bold shapes in character designs, so it is very interesting to see Tenna arrive intended to portray an era aligned with those pre-existing conventions, but completely blowing them out of the water.

This because on top of evoking that nostalgia, Tenna is meant to evoke it with a specific kind of softness -- to make him as unassuming and friendly-looking as possible, almost unnaturally so. I don't think it's meant that the form is a distortion or facade of his normal self, but the fact that Tenna is the softess, puttiest thing in the entire canon so far implies there is a really strong reason why he's uniquely defined by these ideas. I mean we saw Tenna lose his cool and drop his silly act, and we got The Sprite - which is so gorgeous in its own way - Tenna's electronic themeing finally pulling some sharpness out of his design, made unnatural both by bringing attention to his inhuman parts and clashing so oddly with the soft rendering of his model. But even there the intention is not that Tenna is dropping a facade, that state was abnormal, and if the electronic in him was meant to conflict with his putty exterior you would maybe see more angularity on the TV in contrast to it. He coulda been a real ENA-like, if not by default then in that expression, but NOPE! It's all still cohesive!

In design, Tenna is constantly vying for Ralsei's spot of softest fluffiest guy around, and any aberration from that portrays him as being uncharacteristically harsh. He is defined by being soft, comforting, fun, nostalgic, and basically not anything that usually defines a Tumblr Sexyman. He's not particularly skinny by cartoon standards (nor curvy, I support you guys but we gotta be FR), he's not edgy, he's not secretly cruel (more just has the potential to manipulate people), and he doesn't have those toothy pointy design tropes that define a lot of those characters. He does for like, one sprite, and even then as I said its clashing in every way against his default personality. And I feel like when people forgo these aspects in his design, I can begin to assume they are doing so in his personality as well.

With constantly sharpened static teeth comes a more cunning character than he is ever portrayed to (successfully) be. Every time his suit is drawn to be more angular or his joints more defined, someone is forgetting his suit was primarily design to appeal to children, not parallel his old business partner. Obviously the only valid people in the Sharp Tenna Camp here are those who draw him in the Modernist TVA style (and everyone else cause this post is not that serious). But like as someone who actively has been studying why he doesn't give me the Tumblr Sexyman ick and being really delighted by how he maneuvers around all these tropes in a SUPER visually and narratively compelling way, I am a bit disappointed to see him just drawn like... as TV Head Tumblr Sexyman #9.

DONT MENTION HIM next to that asshole from Hazbin Hotel either OMFG! Tenna is my (and Kris') best friend from the corny gameshows, cease the slander!!

[ego-osbourne]

I wanted to expand on my last post. Eventually I’ll do one about Glarthir, but I feel like he’s an easier case to understand. For now, I want to talk about why

Mankar Camoran was right.

To preface: I think an extremely important part about understanding this position is reading Oblivion’s writing from a Doylist perspective, not a Watsonian one. Oblivion as a game provides a very biased narrative for the player, feeling almost as if the Empire itself made a game about the events of the Oblivion Crisis, erasing most things that make the Empire look wholly evil while offering just enough grey area to keep it from looking squeaky clean, and thus keeping most suspicions of true intent away. So much of TES’s lore and story is supplemented through propaganda that fans have to sift through and interpret. Here’s my interpretation.

On surface level, Mankar Camoran is a very forgettable villain. Beyond surface level, though… he’s still rather forgettable. In-game, we only see him two times throughout the whole main quest, once to establish that he even exists, and twice to kill him. He’s very mortal, and most players will see him as nothing more than a blabbering old man with very little credibility or motivation beyond “mwahaha I’m evil.” In Paradise, his speech to the player strays a bit far from the Dagonite sermon we hear in the Lake Arrius Caverns, dropping proper nouns that were never pre-established before then. Reading his Commentaries won’t help with understanding, either, as it’s filled will inane jargon that can hardly stay on topic between paragraphs, let alone between books, speaking of “heaven” and “angels” and spelling Nirn like NRN as if it was ripped straight from ancient Hebrew Christian scriptures. It’s all very esoteric, but in the way that it feels like you’re talking to someone with only a baseline understanding of occultism, and it completely rips you from your immersion in the game. Even without the Commentaries or the out-of-place mentions of Lorkhan and the motivations that come with that, Mankar stupid enough to even get the names of the Daedric Prince’s realms wrong! What is happening?

MK. MK is what is happening.

To be fair, this is not all Michael Kirkbride’s fault—in fact, I’d argue that MK had little-to-nothing to do with the finalizing of Mankar’s character and motivations; however, he was clearly involved. The Commentaries are rife with his writing style, and we have posts by MK confirming his involvement with writing Mankar. I’d more accurately (but less punchily) say that what is actually happening is developer meddling and a lack of proofreading.

DEVELOPER MEDDLING

Developer meddling can be intentional (in-world propaganda) or unintentional (narrative-pushing biases). These oftentimes overlap, and the case is especially apparent in Mankar.

Fantasy has always had an oddly charged stance against elves, and TES is no exception. Aside from Daggerfall, no mainline TES game has had a mq villain be something other than a Daedra or an elf. Daedra are self-explanatory candidates for villains, being TES’s stand-in for demons, and (whether lore accurate or not) are seen as inherently evil. However, elves are a whole different story. They are simply another people group within the realm of Nirn, and yet if a villain needs to be presented, that villain is more often than not going to be an elf. It wasn’t until Skyrim that we saw non-elven and non-Daedric villains; though, none are quite human either. Alduin is a dragon, obviously; Harkon is a Nord, but he’s also a vampire, and his vampiric nature supersedes his human nature; Miraak is an… Atmoran? a Nord? but, again, only hardly such, posing more like a Daedric-dragon-manthing than something solely human. In Oblivion, there is only one primary human enemy—Mathieu Bellamont of the DBH quest line, but even he is only just human. He’s a Breton, a human-elf mix, a “manmer” (yes, Bretons do count as mannish races, but I still find it to be a slightly damning detail). Every other villain is an elf (Mankar, Mannimarco, Umaril*) or a Daedra (Dagon, Jyggalag).

*Umarill is described to be a “half-elf;” his mother is an Ayleid, but his father is “divine” (see, 1).

Already we see a strange lean towards non-humans—especially elves—being villains. This is contrasted with humans largely being seen as the good guys. Uriel, Martin, Baurus, they’re all humans against the elven villain, Mankar. Pelinal Whitestrake isn’t classified as a specific human race, but is certainly human enough to be named Shezarrine, the “God of Man,” and notably genocides an entire race of elves… and this is celebrated in game. The player is meant to emulate Pelinal during the Knights of the Nine DLC, and his genocide is supported by the Divines and generally seen as a good thing.

Meanwhile, any anti-human sentiments are treated much more seriously in lore, framed either as a severe threat or pure evil. For example, Tiber Septim’s complete takeover of Tamriel is a good thing, despite his multiple war crimes against elves and his general hatred for them, but the Thalmor’s shadow over Tamriel is a world-ending threat that paints all elves (or at least all Altmer) as villains conspiring against humans. As another example, looking back at Oblivion, the Ayleid’s enslavement of humans is purely evil, but Pelinal’s complete and successful genocide of the entire Ayleid race is something to be celebrated. There is an obvious double-standard regarding elves and men in TES, and even when there are exceptions to this rule, the majority of the series is woven with this prejudice.

We can see this very clearly with the Camorans, particularly with Haymon (the Camoran Usurper) and Mankar. I read most “historical” documentation of Haymon and Mankar to be Imperial propaganda, though I am surprised by the fandom tendency to read these documents as the full-faced truth, especially when considering these documents’ biases. I’ll break down a few examples.

Haymon Camoran rose to the Valenwood throne during a time of great strife within the country, particularly in regard to Imperial control (see, History: Third Era, ¶1). He sought to free Valenwood of Imperial rule, and did so through means of war. In any other scenario, this would read as a story of heroism, where one person is able to assemble enough hope to stand against the shadow of an oppressive empire and free their country. However, TES offers us no such narrative, only giving us retellings of this history through Imperial lenses (Pocket Guide to the Empire, 3rd Edition; The Refugees; The Fall of the Usurper; etc.). In these retellings, Haymon is demonized as a cruel warmonger, with the only one to stand up against him being Kaltos Camoran, who held the throne before Haymon (see, Invasion of Tamriel, ¶1). Kaltos’s positive image in these accounts hints that he was an Empire sympathizer, and this is magnified by the fact that Valenwood was in a state of unrest due to Imperial rule while Kaltos was on the throne. Kaltos was likely allowing Imperial forces to remain within Valenwood, and we can speculate as to why (greed, status, etc.). No wonder these Imperial retellings categorize him in a good light, he was on their side and effectively a traitor to his own country. If we had Valenwood retellings of this history, I would wager that they’d regard Kaltos in a negative light and Haymon in a positive light, for the most part.

Additionally, Haymon is further demonized, reported to have led an army of undead and Daedra (see, Invasion of Tamriel, ¶1). This is a blatantly odd and impractical choice for an army, especially when other evidence points to Haymon having great enough of an influence in Valenwood to not be assassinated or stopped when he took the throne from Kaltos; thus, he would surely have enough influence to lead an army of Bosmer. To me, this reads like Imperial reports meddling with history, choosing to paint Haymon as a lich-like villain who can only convince the undead and Daedra to follow his reign rather than allow their readers to believe that actual flesh-and-blood intelligent people would follow Haymon. This is a common tactic of propaganda: dehumanizing the opposition’s support so that it seems foolish for anyone in the present time to support the opposition as well. Furthermore, rumors of Haymon being the son of Molag Bal are apparently rampant throughout the Empire, which is so amusingly outlandish that it reads like the real-world counterpart of someone calling a political leader the Antichrist in protest (see, Notes, *1).

As for Mankar, propaganda exists for him, too, most notably in the book The Refugees. This book is rather deceiving, however. My first read of it had me fully believing it at face-value because it presents itself as a mere documentation of true events. The Refugees details Haymon’s last attack in Dwynnen, High Rock, and focuses on a small group of survivors: some civilians, some detractors from Haymon’s cause. The book leads the reader to believe that the main characters are these various refugees, with the plot being a simple sharing of conversations about the goings-on of the attack. But, it sneaks in little things that we would see in pro-Imperial accounts of the event, like Kaltos being framed as the Good Guy while Haymon is a cruel warmonger, again (see, ¶34). Additionally, it “so happens” to serve as an origin story for Mankar, who in the book is reported to have been born among the refugees. This birth is far from ordinary, though.

Mankar’s mother, Kaalys, is reported to be the runaway mistress of Haymon, hiding with the refugees in Dwynnen after abandoning Haymon’s cause. The refugees believe she is sick and going mad from stress, as she keeps yelling, “Mankar is coming!” repeatedly. By the end of the book, though, we learn that she was not simply sick, but was going through labor, and this “Mankar” is the very child she birthed. She reports that Mankar “will bring death. He will destroy all,” (see, ¶62). She then runs off immediately after labor with Mankar in tow.

There’s a lot to criticize here. What seems like a strange, crazed mother prophesying the incoming Crisis that Mankar will bring actually reads very much like propaganda against Mankar, written in his later years of life, possibly in response to his growing popularity to “prove” that he was born of malicious origins that even his own mother could sense. This is all hidden under the veil of The Refugees being a simple retelling of events, shifting the focus away from Kaalys and Mankar just enough to make readers unsuspicious of its propagandist intentions. Attempting to read into the details brings up a lot of issues.

First: If Kaalys was in labor during the sacking of Dwynnen, that means she had to have been very pregnant for a couple months up until that point. How in the world was she traveling with Haymon across the continent (from Valenwood to High Rock) while being that pregnant? It seems like an oversight by an author who simply wanted to tell a specific narrative of Haymon’s allies turning against him. Second: How did the refugees mistake her for being sick instead of recognizing that she was pregnant and in labor? Those seem like two very different things, with the latter being very obvious and recognizable. It seems like another oversight by an author who was not too worried about the details of their story, and who only wished to tell a specific narrative about Mankar’s origins. Third: How was she able to up and run away with Mankar immediately after giving birth? And while injured (see, ¶55)? Even if technically possible, that is highly improbable, if not next to impossible. It seems like a cheap tactic to work her out of the picture rather than follow her journey after the fact, as if the author only meant to tell one specific narrative. Are we seeing a pattern?

Oh, and fourth: Who talks about their child like that? It’s almost like the author wanted to paint a specific narrative about Mankar being born evil. The Refugees stands as one big anti-Haymon, pro-Empire propaganda piece written under the guise of sympathetic characters and calling any remaining supporters of Haymon foolish, because look! All of Haymon’s closest followers abandoned him (note that this is the only report we have of any of Haymon’s followers abandoning him)! And also, look! His son is evil! Even his mother knew it! And before he was born, no less! (/speech in-character)

My theory is that this book was written in response to Mankar’s growing influence within the Empire. He was charismatic enough to win the minds and hearts of many of the Empire’s citizens, and The Refugees sought to prevent further damage as much as it could by pretending to be a simple report from the Dwynnen sacking that just so happened to have Mankar’s evil origins scribed within it. Tsk tsk tsk.

A LACK OF PROOFREADING

So, that was all Mankar’s background, but what about the man himself? He’s obviously a raving idiot who can’t keep his thoughts straight to save his life. He seems to not be well-grounded in Daedric affairs at all, showing a mix of Dagonite worship, Lorkhan sympathy, and Ayleid appreciation all while attributing the wrong Prince to the wrong realm. This is where MK comes in.

By 2006, it seems MK was no longer directly involved with Bethesda Game Studios after his work on Morrowind. However, he still had a lot of contact with the employees and developers over at BGS, and would answer them in emails about any questions they had, especially regarding inspiration for writing Oblivion. It seems the devs, in attempting to get a feel for Mankar’s character, asked MK to write a speech by Mankar. MK writes something up, seemingly semi-flippantly according to his desire to want to “*really* [go] nuts with it” after learning “Terrance Freakin Stamp” would be voicing Mankar (see, 2006, ¶14).

Unbeknownst to MK, his emails would be used word-for-word as in-game dialogue (Mankar’s speech) and books (the Commentaries). Quoted from MK, “That whole speech came from a section of said email where I attempted to get inside [Mankar’s] head so I could understand how he might think, and how that thought would translate to his writing. Turns out, [Mankar] writes like me. Ah, well,” (see, 2006, ¶12–13).

These emails were not altered when translated to game according to MK (“Turns out, Mankar writes like me.”). Additionally, these emails were not fact-checked, either. The speeches and books seem to be a complete rip, a copy-and-paste from MK’s email, with flaws and all, including the mistake of attributing the wrong Prince to the wrong realm that everyone likes to clown on Mankar for. Mankar was never intended to be written as a raving idiot, his dialogue was simply never fact-checked against TES’s own lore, and his character suffered the consequences.

On the topic of MK’s involvement with writing Mankar, it explains why Mankar’s motivations seem to flip from pure Dagonism to Lorkhan sympathy. MK is writing to BGS with a Morrowind brain, where Lorkhan and his lore plays a major part in the plot of TESIII. But, in TESIV, Lorkhan is never mentioned outside of Mankar’s own speech/writings. If the devs of Oblivion had taken more careful consideration of Mankar’s character instead of ripping straight from MK’s emails, I believe they could have narrowed down Mankar’s motivations and made him a much better villain. I would argue that Lorkhan’s story does not need to be told in Oblivion’s plot, and the plot would have benefited a great deal from focusing on, oh, I don’t know, the Prince actually behind it all, Mehrunes Dagon! Dagon, too, is clowned on for being a thoughtless, stupid, barbaric tank who only knows destruction. It’s no wonder that the fandom often forgets he is also the Prince of Hope, because the devs forget that detail themselves!

MK and Todd Howard both even say that Mankar was right to some degree—or, at least, he was meant to be! MK says, “Canon or not, my two cents is that [Mankar] is completely right … but don’t quote me…I didn’t write this in-character,” (sorry MK, gotta quote!) (see, 2006, ¶15). Todd Howard even claims that he wanted Mankar to be a morally grey villain! Quote: “You know, he’s not a cackling maniac. We like to have our bad guys be a little grayer. We want that moment where the player goes like… Maybe he’s right,” (see, Notes, *5).

Crazy! Todd Howard wanted Mankar to be seen as grey, as competent, as right! And yet, because of a total lack of care for fact-checking, a disregard for the necessities of cutting away excess plot, and a general apathy for Mankar, the Mythic Dawn, and Dagon as driving forces in the story, Oblivion’s main plot suffers for it. Todd Howard’s intentions to make Mankar a grey villain flopped so severely that it requires many leaps and bounds to see Mankar the way Todd might have wanted him to be.

LEAPS AND BOUNDS

However, I would argue there is hope for Mankar’s character as it stands. The execution was horrible, but the pieces of a grey villain do still exist! Many of my ideas were first sparked by this video, so I would recommend giving it a watch if you’re able!

For this formula to work, we have to look at Mankar from a very objective perspective. We must consider that most/all of the information given on Mankar in-game is propaganda. Even in-game events that the player sees with their own eyes must be understood as manufactured to create a caricature of a villain rather than a true villain with understandable motivations. Essentially, we must have a very critical eye about everything.

Mankar Camoran was born to Haymon Camoran and Kaalys Camoran. In Valenwood, Haymon was regarded as a felled hero, his life ended too soon to completely free and secure Valenwood from Imperial rule, allowing it to be overtaken by Summerset and Elsywer after his death (see, History: Third Era, ¶2). Valenwood is then overrun by sympathizers of various political entities, leaving the to-be prince Mankar unsafe in his own country. Perhaps he and his mother flee to Cyrodiil and hide under different aliases for a while, or perhaps Kaalys swears loyalty to the Empire in exchange for protection from the overpowering forces back in Valenwood. However it happens, Mankar eventually ends up in Cyrodiil, and he has complaints about the religious-political system.

The Empire, reportedly inspired by the real-world Roman Empire, fittingly reflects the Roman Empire’s facade of order and peace while perpetuating unrest beneath the surface. Racial tensions against elves persist from age to age, with the Empire constantly undercutting their elven enemies and making them the face of the opposition, from Alessia to Tiber Septim. This anti-elf sentiment is perpetuated by the Divines themselves, who hypocritically promote peace and unity while celebrating figures such as Pelinal Whitestrake and allowing the likes of Tiber Septim into their ranks. Homelessness and poverty are also rampant in the Empire despite the Imperial Cult’s vast wealth. Again, the Divines are hypocritical, offering words of peace and prosperity through their priests, but they ultimately do nothing to help with the economic crisis.

Mankar sees this and is rightfully appalled. How can both the Empire and the Divines do nothing about all of this suffering coming from the hands of their own hypocrisy? Mankar, the son of Haymon Camoran, the almost-liberator of Valenwood, finds it fitting to speak out against the Empire, and does so on their own terms—as a minister. Seeing as the Divines do not care for his people (elves), and seeing that the Daedra are much more effective in responding, Mankar seeks the help of Mehrunes Dagon, the Prince of Revolution, Destruction, and Hope—Revolution against the stagnant and hypocritical ways of the Imperial Cult, the Destruction of the corrupt Empire, and Hope for a better future to come. Mankar becomes a priest of sorts, writing sermons on the state of the Empire and the Imperial Cult.

He reaches the hearts and minds of the poor, impoverished, and down-trodden of society. With Dagon’s help, he is able to create a pocket-realm of Oblivion, Paradise, as a refuge* for his new followers. As his influence grows, so does his ability to do something about the Empire’s hypocrisy, and so he begins to act.

*I genuinely do not know why Paradise turns out to be a surprise torture realm. This just feels like the devs wanting to point and Mankar and go “Look! Evil elf!” This is especially damning considering that Paradise looks like an Ayleid city, and that most (maybe all?) of the victims of this torture-realm are humans. So, Paradise is a representation of human Tamriel under Ayleid rule? Okay, Todd.

Mankar is working with Dagon to bring about the New Dawn: an age free of the Empire, perhaps a restart of the kalpa itself, so that Tamriel will be free from the choking grasp of the Divines and their mortal rulers. Mankar is willing to kill for this, perhaps because he knows everyone will reawaken in a better Era, or perhaps because he is aware that none of it will matter with the New Dawn, or perhaps because he has stopped having sympathy for anyone still supporting the Empire and the Imperial Cult. However you want to string it, he knows he has to get the Daedra on the field to make anything happen, and so he collects his followers and makes an attack against the throne. They kill every Septim (or so they think), and with Uriel’s death, they are now able to open Oblivion Gates across Tamriel. The Revolution part of the plan is complete, and now Dagon and his forces can bring about the Destruction of the Empire. Those who understand the Empire’s corruption will join Mankar in Paradise, and those who don’t will be killed—whether this is a mercy or a punishment is up to further interpretation.

And so exists Mankar Camoran, finding it unjust to simply sit aside and allow the Divines-backed Empire to kill the world slowly with its corruption. If it’s going down, it might as well go down with some hope of a brighter future. Mankar Camoran, the son of a failed liberator, a prince never-to-be, sees fit to eliminate a future of lies, corruption, and death by the Empire and create a new world—a better world.

This can then branch into more interpretations. The player can decide if Mankar is making a leap in logic, or if he’s doing the wrong thing for the right reason, or if he just straight up is doing the best thing possible for the situation. There could also be a lot more done about Dagon’s own motivations for this: does he feel sympathy for elves, and thus backs Mankar’s cause? Does he want to stick it to the Divines? Is there something else he wants to obtain from Nirn’s destruction? Explanations could go anywhere, and it’s sad that the game offers us nothing.

Either way, I feel like a lot of players would be able to sympathize more with Mankar if he was truly presented as a grey villain like this. As he’s presented in game, he’s simply a stupid cult leader with no sense of focus for the subject at hand. With a little more polish, though, he could be a revolutionary gone too far, or not far enough depending on how you play your character.

To me, Mankar is a representation of how the perfect blend of in-lore propaganda, real-world bias, and developer oversight created the most forgettable and laughable villain in TES, yet so full of untapped potential. Mankar is uncared for because of his apparent “stupidity,” but too much of the fandom fails to recognize that he was not intentionally written this way, and his presentation in game is a broken mirror of who the devs, creator, and supporters of Oblivion wanted him to be.

Mankar Camoran, objectively, is a revolutionary, the son of a revolutionary, and seeks freedom from the corruption of the Empire—an empire that advocates for genocide, winks at hypocrisy, and allows poverty to flourish. Who wouldn’t want to try and overturn a system like that?

Mankar Camoran was right.

[ottersul]

Having just finished the new Giant-Size issue, I feel it perfectly encapsulates the long-standing narrative problem in Jean Grey and Scott Summers' relationship. While the artwork is breathtaking, it highlights a dynamic built on a love that doesn't overcome obstacles, but rather pretends they don't exist.

For decades, characters like Madelyne Pryor, Emma Frost, and Wolverine were catalysts for profound evolution in both Scott and Jean. Yet, that development is consistently rendered irrelevant by the narrative imperative that they will always "find each other again." Their reconciliation isn't portrayed as a conscious choice between two complex adults, but as the inevitable conclusion of a pre-written destiny, which ultimately denies them true agency.

While I have my own biases, my core critique is this: I would find their relationship far more compelling if the characters were allowed to earn it. Their transcendent bond would feel meaningful if they were forced to confront their messy, complicated past, rather than simply categorizing decades of essential life experiences as mere deviations from the path.

[samyisasleep]

I think this fandom has a huge problem understanding certain characters - I’m not talking about headcanons or AUs, but the way people analyze canon material.

I’m saying this as someone that often “edits” characters in her own head according to headcanons, so please don’t take this as a “anti-cringe, no fun allowed” post.

This isn’t a hate post towards anybody, and I’m aware that most people (me included) can’t possibly remember every single detail in the comic! I had to re-read lots of parts myself to write this.

I am also not saying you’re a bad person for liking the mentioned problematic characters in here! Huge Kurloz fan :o), I frankly don’t think I will manipulate an hypotethical girlfriend into joining a cult.

Vriska isn’t like a “popular high school mean girl”; she was abused by her lusus, forced into violence from a young age for survival, developing a sadistic personality as a coping mechanism. She also based most of her choices on the events in Mindfang’s journal and her true character development happened when she stopped depending on it.

Tavros does have a successful character arc; his pre-retcon version builds a ghost army (something neither Vriska nor Meenah managed to do, and that says a lot) and gains confidence; his post-retcon version, although we can’t assume the mentioned advices Rufioh gave him were useful (considering Rufioh himself isn’t actually confident), seems to have a bit more self-esteem. His relationship with Aradia is also very underrated.

Eridan (as much as it makes me feel queerphobic to say this) isn’t hyperfeminine nor does he have a diva attitude, he’s just melodramatic and emotional; he’s a nerd that is secretly obsessed with magic, and the fact that he’s desperate enough for romance to flirt with multiple people doesn’t exclude the fact that he’s introverted and trusts very few of his ���friends” (Karkat and Kanaya). I suggest you read this post by propheticclown talking about Eridan and how his fashion sense isn’t fashionable. He heavily depended on Kanaya’s emotional support and the way Karkat temporarily prevented him from going on a rampage.

Sollux isn’t a “stereotyped discord moderator” and surely not an incel; he simply likes to code and explained the game rules to the group when they were about to start playing. (Remember his relationship with Aradia, the same girl that rejected and even harbored black feelings for Equius, who tricked her into entering a robotic body he had deliberately programmed to make her harbor flushed feelings for him - which I frankly believe to be incel behavior.)

Speaking of Equius, he doesn’t have red feelings for Gamzee just because he believes his caste is superior - in fact, he said he despises him for not acting “the way a highblood should”: his feelings for him are explicitly black.

Gamzee was abandoned by his lusus; the lack of parenting is what brought him to develop a sopor slime addiction.

Many people miss the point of Feferi’s character: she’s the representation of an activists that speaks for oppressed groups, yet babies them as if they as a whole weren’t smart enough or capable of anything on their own. This is why SolFef is actually a toxic pairing (and no, I don’t believe toxic ships shouldn’t be allowed or anything, but a better understanding of the dynamic is important for the way the characters involved are perceived).

Not as crucial as the other cases mentioned, but Kanaya’s style is the equivalent of an alternative style on Alternia, so making her goth would erase that. Remember that her interest in fashion was described as odd.

Damara isn’t a good person, and definitely not a better person than Rufioh. What Rufioh did was wrong, and I agree*, but why did she need to torture his lusus (who had nothing to do with this situation)? Let’s not forget she also sexually harassed multiple people verbally! And the fact that she speaks a language many others can’t understand doesn’t make it less bad than when Cronus does it, if anything it’s even creepier, because someone that doesn’t understand Japanese can’t even realize they’re being harassed.

*You could argue that his canon cowardice didn’t allow him to directly break up with her, but still that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be held responsible for that.

Kankri is ableist and sexist, other than pro-censorship (the unnecessary or counterproductive type).

Horuss is as much of a coward as Rufioh is and doesn’t value his perspective (“who would value a cheater’s respective”, yeah but if you’re the guy he cheated with then it may be crucial for your relationship).

Kurloz manipulated Meulin (not even subtly, just straight up used chucklevoodos on her); their relationship may be full of affection but it definitely isn’t healthy.

[croquettish]

Listen please feel free to ignore my idle ramblings. You just inspire me to bring my thoughts to paper and I always love to read your take on everything.

Honestly I also very much read Hans as a comphet gay man all the way.

He feels like the most overcompensating character ever. He makes loving women his whole entire brand which is so sad to watch sometimes.

The way he is expressing his attraction to Henry feels leagues removed from the way he is trying to court every single woman in the game.

He doesn't need flashy gestures or words for Henry. When it's real you dont need as much embellishment so to say.

For the first time in the games he sounds and acts natural with someone else he expresses interest in. Like it's not just a show he has to put on for everyone else except for his own enjoyment as whenever he interacts with women.

He looks like he is freaking melting with Henry.

I honestly also even think his constant trips to the bath house in the first game are just for basically spa treatments and not much else happens there. I think I even remember him saying something along the lines of he just likes being pampered.

It makes me really confused how people can think there were no signs of him being gay in the first game. What do these people think gay people would have acted like in a time when it might as well be a death sentence or a life as a monk AT BEST to express your true feelings.

I think Hans reaction, trying his best to be perceived as the most women loving giga chad ever is honestly the only sign I needed to realize that that can't be quite true. It feels fake all over. I sometimes wonder if they originally intended this whole attitude to feel genuine, but realized in the making how that just doesn't feel right at all and switched up his character accordingly? Like he's a character breaking free from his own pre intended writing somehow?

If you're reading him as Bi absolutely a valid opinion as well though! No hate only love!

Another point I just saw in your most recent post I wondered a lot about is the part of gaining reputation with Hans in the first game when being talked back to/down to (I think there also is at least one instance in the second game when I called him a brat and got reputation).

Honestly I think it's much to do with his low self esteem and probably not great metal health.

When you're struggling with your mental health because of your family situation like he does with Hanush you never get to develop a clear sense of self and deep self love and self respect. And various people deal with it in different ways, wheather they pull back into themselves and become people pleaser or they go another route like Hans and build this air of very high self regard around them. Of course either way it's all just a charade hiding his very vulnerable and self loathing core. Which sometimes makes flattery feel uncomfortable and being talked down to like self affirmation even if that's super twisted.

The way he talks to Hanush in the first game especially is so different from his snarky self. He is utterly defeated in the face of that man. He doesn't get angry how he usually does until after talking to him, he only ever meekly tries to even get a word in. He's belittled, not taken seriously and treated like a completely useless person and he doesn't really do anything. I think that's how a lot of people act in the face of a parental abuser that they learned not to set off even more.

(Honestly why I loathe Hanush. He's not one of the "bad guys" the games try to present. He is portrayed as a likable if hot headed guy, but he's an abuser in my eyes and is absolutely to blame for how Hans sees the world and himself).

Same as the unhealthy way of self harm Hans developed in making sure he stays unlikable so to say. For instance when trying to push Henry away when they are in the pillory. Even Henry sees that Hans is just saying mean things that he doesn't mean at all, just saying them to make sure Henry stops liking him and leaves. He never learned that he is allowed to be cared for like that so he has to make sure it stops. He has to make sure he is alone, uncared for, deprived of his only friend. That's a form of self harm if I've ever seen one. It honestly blew my mind that they added that. That whole scene is very rich when looked at from a mental health point of view in their interactions. When using the "Swear" option when playing as Henry he says something like "Who could ever be proud of you?!" and that seems to hit Hans like a ton of bricks crushing him. He looks like he is going to cry immediately and doesn't even come back with something to say like before, because that hit home like nothing else.

Like in their divorce era he snaps out of his self imposed agony and split from Henry as soon as Henry gets hurt because that's too much, that's not related to his self imposed denying himself his happiness. Even when you're fighting Old Semine at the wedding in swordfighting he is freaking cheering you on like he isn't really mad with you. It's not Henry he wants to hurt but himself.

I think that man is wildly unwell mentally and that's one more thing I really love about the way he and Henry interact with each other.

Henry seems to be somehow aware of that whole struggle and doesn't interact with it in an unhealthy or harmful way most of the time.

He is a caring man at the end of the day and that is exactly what Hans needs to heal, strengthen his sense of self and become a better version of himself.

Sorry again for putting like 5 different points in here. But I would honestly love to read your take. You always inspire me to think more about these characters I love.

Why would I ever ignore your idle ramblings when they're so insightful!!!! Also thank you so much, it honestly makes me super happy that people find value in my hyperfixation of picking this game and its characters apart. The fact that my own ramblings inspire you to think about these games and their characters in more depth makes me extremely happy ❤️

So for starters I'm so glad that I'm not the only one that reads Hans as a comphet gay man. There are honestly so many hints that he's overcompensating in the biggest way. As I said in my initial post about why Henry pushes Hans away at first, @hallowedlore pointed out that Hans' vibe of "love? I never knew love till now!" [five minutes later] "love? I never knew love till—" can be VERY indicative of queerness. Because of course he hasn't found the right girl; he was never looking for a girl at all. There are so many examples of this. Similarly, as @codeword-art pointed out here, noblemen are "supposed to be proud, stern, with a love for women," which, as they put it, most likely "stems from Hans' own doubts about his own sexuality." I could not agree more with this.

It's honestly not surprising to me that Hans has no idea how to act around women because he didn't grow up around them at all. His mother is either dead or ditched him and he didn't grow up with much of anyone, let alone any peers. But he did at least have Hanush around to act as a sort of male rolemodel. He had Captain Bernard and semi-frequently saw other noblemen. Women of his status, not so much. It's no wonder he doesn't really interact with either Rosa or Katherine, but even there, he seems more comfortable around Katherine because she's more like the women he was exposed to, castle staff and bath wenches.

I'm also inclined to agree with you about his trips to the baths. And not just because we find out he tried to convince one of the women to strip for him by playing dice with her (when he could have just asked her to) and then, after failing, used that as a conceit for how to try and get Henry naked… but also because he's so fucking bad at it. I tried for quite a while to find the post here but someone recently showed off a conversation Hans can have with one of the bath maids near Devil's Den, which is just so, so profoundly pathetic. Iirc this is during the fake Karolina era when he is white knuckling down on the last vestiges of heterosexuality that he thought he had.

It's interesting too that there is a non-zero chance (not a large chance, mind, just the possibility of it) that Hans could be a virgin. Like I think that's kind of fucking hysterical that for all his showboating it is possible for it to all be 100% fake pretend bravado. Do I think this is likely? Not really. But it's possible. Because we have only ever seen him strike out with women and we know for a fact that it is canon that he struck out with the real Karolina as well. He's bad at this! He fawns over Klara and goes to the baths to see her even though she's the only one of the bath maids there where touching is off the table. We also know that he's an idealist and a romantic who loves love. It wouldn't surprise me if he would look at sex he could pay for at a bathhouse as a sort of... hollow thing that wouldn't appeal to him. But by god, he'd pretend up and down and left and right that it does.

Another thing that should be commented on here that you brought up as well to a degree is this scene—and here I have to draw attention to @audentesfortunaiuvatt as usual magnificent tags. We know that they're canonically nude here. And @komorebian's wonderful gifts beautifully illustrate how much this motherfucker is just straight up checking Henry out. It's not even remotely subtle. And this is far from the only time stuff like this happens in KCD1! Like I shipped them like crazy after playing the first game and I can't imagine that was entirely unintentional on the part of the dev team. I mean look at this shit!

So much of Hans' character is faking it till you make it. Except he can't fake this well enough to pass as straight. He tries so hard and even then he's fucking transparent.

I maintain that I do think part of the reason that he enjoys when Henry gets smart with him is because he's willing to treat him like a person instead of an object, but like I said in my last meta post I do think part of it does have to do with a lack of self-esteem. The reason he does so much showboating is in order to try and fake who he thinks he should be. He masks and plays the mimic at every possible turn.

I also agree with you that Hanush had a big influence on his mental health (and lack thereof). But I think there's a bit more nuance here than you're suggesting. Because while you can 100% read Hanush's behaviors as abusive, the real issue (for Hans as well!) is that he's not actively and consciously trying to go for that result. Hanush genuinely thinks he's doing right by Hans and leading him toward what's best for him. And lbr here, even with something like the wedding, while the thing he's leading him toward is undeniably self-serving, Hanush is also… technically correct. Divorced from Hans' emotions, it is the "correct" choice. Hanush has raised Hans into a capable ruler in concept. This, to Hanush, was undoubtedly the most important thing. He just didn't realize he had to show him love and help him grow as a person as well. As I've said before, he's a great guardian, but he's a fucking godawful parent because he has no idea what he's doing.

If you're still sitting there going "no, he's evil" then I want you to look at the tiny tiny insight we get into Hanush's psyche here. It's just five seconds long and occurs at the very end of the scene where he lectures Hans during Clothes Make the Man. I brought this up as well in my meta post about Hans' relationship with Hanush. Hanush has no idea what he's doing. He (a former robber baron and perpetually broke gambler) was handed this extremely young child to raise out of nowhere. He's not a father. He doesn't know how to raise a kid. When he agreed to raise Hans in the event that something happened to his father, Hanush (like most people who agree to be a child's godparents) most likely didn't anticipate actually having to do it. And while it was quite common in medieval Europe for nobles to "foster" their children with other noble families as a way of cementing bonds and alliances, that doesn't mean that Hanush automatically knows how to parent.

You can read his stern talks with Hans and his emotional neglect of him as abuse. But the key thing here is imo intentionality. That abuse is borne from ignorance, not malice. And in a lot of ways that lack of intentionality makes it far, far more insidious. If Hanush hated him or hit him it would be so much easier for Hans to sort of recognize that what's happening here is emotionally damaging. He can walk away from this thinking that Hanush loves him and wants what's best for him, leaving him to internalize it all without second-guessing it. Because he's never had any reason to question it. It's also why him bringing up his parents here is especially poignant. Only with Henry, only placed outside of the bounds of society, only when surrounded by people who see value in him (so much so that Zizka assigned him control of a company of men!) does he start to question the things that he's taken for granted all this time.

And it does lead to things like the self-harm you mentioned, which I've commented on, if in no other way, at least in meme format:

(That's a lie, it comes up in my fic.)

That boy hates himself so much and thinks he's so fucking useless he literally actively pushes Henry away just so he can't let him down later. He knows this whole scene was his fault and is (even if it's just subconsciously) so angry with himself and insecure about how he's dragging Henry down that he flees. Even when Henry keeps forgiving him, over and over again.

You mentioned what happens if Henry bitches him out while they're in the pillory, and I agree that it makes a ton of sense that Hans, caring about Henry's approval as much as he does, would feel absolutely gutted. But I don't think that's the most telling thing you can get out of that conversation. If you play it nice the whole way through (my preferred route of choice, bc it ends up only making Hans feel all the worse for it after), you get this bit of dialogue:

Which... hoooooo boy.

I understand you need to take it out on someone. I can take it.

And that's exactly what Hans is so terrified of! That one day Henry won't be able to stand him anymore and will leave. So he leaves first. I mean, we get front row seats to his psyche later on that confirms exactly that. Because this, the "I wasn't good enough for you," is his take on what happens regardless of how nice you are to him.

@tsinavar and I had a conversation recently where they brought up what convinces Hans to keep poaching or not is whether or not Henry brings up his own safety. Which floored me bc, yeah, it really is that simple. Hans doesn't give a shit about his own hide because he doesn't think his hide is worth all that much to begin with. But Henry? He's worth the world to Hans.

And I think Henry recognizes this. He knows Hans, inside and out. It's why he can gut him in two seconds flat but then can choose not to. A Henry who is good enough at persuading people can use that ability, combined with how well he knows Hans, to talk him out of poaching by knowing to invoke his own safety. Like, no wonder Henry means everything to Hans. He sees Hans, inside and out, and stays by his side anyway.

[egg-emperor]

The relationship of Eggman and his creations VS the relationship of Eggman's creations with each other

Eggdad and the eggfam has a ton of potential and interesting things to explore in fanon and not in the way people think. People seem to really be into the idea of it being this super unified thing where all the "members" fit perfectly into solid family roles and traditions and get along perfectly and literally just recreate the nuclear family structure. But it's so much more complex, unique, and interesting as a result. Not just to how they all are with Eggman but also with each other too.

Let's look at what we've actually got in the game canon so far. We'll start with-

The relationship of Eggman with his creations:

Metal Sonic has never once been called "son" by Eggman in a game. He has no known attachment to him besides bringing him back for convienience if he finds he can get more use out of him, but he's been more than happy to abandon him if he betrays or fails him.

Orbot and Cubot have also never been seen as sons of Eggman's. He's constantly yelling at them, hitting them, and threatening them. There's no fatherly bond, they're his assistants that he treats terribly.

In fact, as you see at the end of this segment, in the Japanese version of Sonic Colors, Eggman is heavily against the idea of being seen as Cubot's father. (But also Cubot has almost expressed attraction towards Eggman in Team Sonic Racing so it gets weird and complicated lol)

This hasn't changed since I made the above clip as he still treats them cruelly, even in front of Sage in Murder of Sonic

And this is clearly an aspect of their dynamic that's here to stay, as Eggman is even still whacking them around in TailsTube too

Sage is currently the only character where we know the familial aspect exists and is mutual. However, Eggman values her and accepts this dynamic for uniquely selfish and twisted reasons. Specfically for her usefulness and loyalty, how her skill can serve him well, and how he can take the credit for such an impressive skilled life-like creation, especially emphasized if he accepts the title of her father. His reasoning is quite disturbing really lol

It's a huge subversion of the traditional father and daughter dynamic in the way Eggman created Sage to protect him and serve as type of guardian for him rather than the other way around as a parent would typically be,

to the point she gets into danger and sacrifices herself for him and he lets her because it's specifically her function and this doesn't change even after developments

Sage is also still a servant/assistant to her master Eggman, she's mature and reliable and will get work done

(Link to translation here)

and so he promotes her to taking control of the Eggnet, a big responsibility.

She clearly isn't some immature child that needs her hand held and to be protected and coddled. He values her because she's so capable and useful to him and says so himself.

It's to the point that Eggman is the one who can actually be the irrational stubborn manchild throwing tantrums in some situations, while Sage is the more mature level headed rational one in those moments.

Sage is the very first creation he's called himself a father of and it was the best first choice that makes a lot of sense with his already existing character being considered and involved, rather than a complete change of his character and this is why it's great and works.

Not only is it not true that Eggman has ever felt a familial connection to any of his creations pre Sage in the canon games, it would also ruin the whole plot point in Frontiers of him starting to feel that way about a creation for the first time and processing it. This is clearly a first time thing for him.

So now let's talk about-

The relationship of Eggman's creations with each other

Eggman hasn't, and as far as we know, still doesn't see the likes of Metal Sonic or Orbot and Cubot as his sons. However, we do know that some of them seem to feel familial connections/at least desire a familial dynamic amongst each other that we know of.

As I showed above, Cubot did have a voice mode in the Japanese version of Colors where he would call Eggman his father and Eggman absolutely hated it.

In Rise of the Wisps, Orbot and Cubot express a desire to see Metal Sonic as their "big bro". Metal Sonic however, clearly isn't thrilled or into the idea, constantly looking pissed off to be around them.

Metal doesn't want anything to do with them and doesn't react well to the dynamic of seeing them like family, he's just like "whatever I don't have time for this" and focuses on the job that he's created to do, eager to ignore them and take off and get away from them.

Sage however, has expressed interest in Orbot and Cubot as being like brothers to her for being his creations too. Which Eggman half-heartedly went along with in a "I suppose so" shrug kind of way. Likely because he could see it made her happy and kept her loyal and useful.

But of course with all the examples I provided earlier in the post, he hasn't and still very much doesn't see them as his sons and still treats them terribly. Even in front of her, which is really interesting after he tried to entertain her desire to see them as her brothers before. Even that desire of hers doesn't stop him.

And lastly, it has been said that the "let's go dad" shirts Sage and Metal Sonic wore in Murder of Sonic were Sage's idea, so this tells us that Sage also wants to see Metal Sonic as her brother, which makes sense as she does with Orbot and Cubot too.

However, we don't know if this is mutual and if Metal wants to see her as a sister or not (for all we know, he could've been forced into the shirt by Eggman to keep Sage happy as we didn't get to see any enthusiasm from him lol) and this certainly wouldn't suggest how Eggman sees Metal still, especially with how he clearly still doesn't see Orbot and Cubot as his sons despite Sage wanting to see them as her brothers.

So yeah that's the current canon status of Eggman's relationship with his creations and his creations' relationships amongst each other. I think there's a lot of potential and fun ways to explore it without forcing them onto strict family role and tradition boxes because it's clearly much more complex than that.

They don't all see each other as family, Eggman doesn't automatically see and accept the idea of all his other creations being like his children too and some of them are even against the idea of being each other's siblings and don't get along like that. It's interesting to think about the difference in dynamics among each.

Eggman accepts Sage as his daughter but doesn't automatically see all the others as his children, while despite this Sage wants to see Orbot and Cubot and Metal Sonic as her brothers, and Orbot and Cubot want to see Metal as their brother but Metal clearly doesn't like the idea, etc.

There's also the potential complicated feelings and competition they could have against each other, especially when Eggman only sees Sage as his daughter and didn't see the others as his children before and so far it's quite clear he still doesn't see Orbot and Cubot as such even after Sage wants to see them as her brothers.

The ways Eggman could notice and exploit this to make all of them work even harder to please him to outdo each other, or possibly in hopes that he'll see them as family too if they're interested in that also has tons of potential. It's so much more fun than restricting them by putting them all in specific strict boxes.

Especially because not even the one dynamic that has the 100% known mutual familial feelings involved with Eggman and Sage are completely vastly different from the typical traditional expected dynamic canonically! I'd love to see more fanon not just embrace this but also the nuance and complexity between his creations with each other too. :D

[eeriesilkworm]

The Byler x Little Women (1994) parallels were more direct than you probably thought

The trailer for season 5 is (hopefully) dropping soon! So why not bring back an older Byler theory to help wane your inevitable byler doubt? (And a thank you to @thewisewill80sbyers for supplying some awesome parallel gifs)

Part 1: What we already know

Mike is Laurie. Laurie is a wealthy young man who feels ordinary and directionless. Though kind and free-spirited, he’s bored, insecure, and pressured to conform to gendered expectations of manliness. He finds purpose by attaching himself to people he sees as extraordinary.

Mike mirrors this. He idealizes the heroic and fantastical—superheroes, sci-fi, D&D—where he can feel important. In reality, he often feels inadequate. What he doesn’t see is that his true brilliance lies in his loyalty, compassion, and heart.

El is Jo.

Jo March is awkward, clumsy and intense. She has a special gift (writing), which sets her apart. She sometimes has emotional outbursts due to the intensity of her emotions. Above all, she has relentless need for independence and freedom. She envies men for this reason.

El is also markedly different from others—her special gift is her powers—but they are as burdensome as they are extraordinary. She too struggles to fit in, often coming across as awkward. She lashes out when she feels powerless or trapped, due to the intensity of her trauma.

Will is Amy.

Amy March is sensitive and pragmatic. She matures the most in Little Women, growing from an impetuous child to a poised young woman. She is an artist, but she's also pre-occupied with what others think of her. Amy believes she must sacrifice romance in order to marry well to secure stability, and ensure the happiness of others.

Will follows a similar path. Once the smallest and most protected member of the party, Will is now described by Ross Duffer as, "coming into his own as a young man" in Season 5. He is also described as sensitive and is an artist. Like Amy, he is resigned to sacrifice the desires of his own heart, to avoid ruffling feathers.

Part 2: Season 4 parallels

Here’s where things get a little tangled, love triangle-y and anachronistic. Bear with me.

In Little Women, there’s a 4 year time jump between childhood and young adulthood.

In Stranger Things, the time jump between Seasons 3 and 4 is only eight months, but due to the rapid emotional development of the characters—and the visible aging of the actors—it feels longer.

This dissonance actually works in favor of the parallel, and may be why it was chosen.

Laurie confesses to Jo

Laurie clumsily confesses his love for Jo in a moment of desperation, afraid that he will lose her. This loosely mirrors Mike’s clumsy attempt in season 3. It also mirrors both his fight with El in Vol 1 and his monologue in Vol 2.

Jo rejects his suit, insisting they could never work together or make each other happy.

She says they would quarrel (fight) too much.

This reminds me of El confronting the issues in their relationship in Vol 1, while Mike became evasive and feigned obliviousness. Like Laurie, Mike refuses to accept the truth of this connection.

Something SUPER important and subtle about this confession scene in Little Women (1994) Before Laurie confesses to Jo, he is complaining about the responsibilities and expectations set by his grandfather: Laurie: "[Grandfather] is exceedingly bent on locking me up in one of his offices... If I don't, I'd have to defy [him]. I can't go against the old man. When I imagine myself in that life, I can think of only one thing that could make me happy." So, Laurie is resigned to live a life that feels inauthentic and unfulfilling, but if he must do it, he at least wants to do it with Jo. (Someone who can make him feel special by proxy instead of feeling special himself). If we're interpreting Mike as a repressed homosexual (and we are, to be clear), then does this parallel not make complete sense? Mike, internally: "If I have to be with a girl, if I have to model the relationship of my parents... I want it to be with El."

Movement, travel and emotional distance

Both Jo and Amy leave home after this time jump: just as El and Will leave Hawkins at the end of season 3.

At this point in Little Women, Jo and Laurie are separated by a literal distance. In Stranger things, Mike and El are also separated by an emotional distance, in which they struggle to be truthful with one another about their feelings, even once reunited.

Jo goes to New York alone to pursue being a writer; mirroring El’s "arrest" and solo journey at NINA to recover her powers.

Amy is in Europe working on her painting, and Laurie discovers her there as a more refined and mature version of herself. They are now in proximity to each other without Jo's presence, clearly mirroring Mike and Will being partnered together in California.

This proximity starts off a little awkward, though: Laurie is now attracted to Amy, but Amy appears emotionally unavailable due to her courtship with Fred Vaughn.

The Painting is Fred Vaughn Now, it’s possible Will finds another temporary love interest in season 5 to mirror this plot-line. However, I posit that Will's painting itself is Fred Vaughn in this parallel. Because to Mike, the painting represents an obstacle to Will’s heart. If the painting isn’t for him, then he’s led to believe Will has feelings for someone else. He immediately asks about it at the airport—not out of idle curiosity or politeness, but to quietly probe for the truth.

This moment parallels Laurie’s reunion with Amy in Europe. When he first sees her, he quickly asks Aunt March if Amy and Fred are engaged. Laurie, like Mike, is trying to determine if the door is still open.

Both Laurie and Mike are given vague, unsatisfying answers. Aunt March replies, “Not yet,” implying that an engagement may be imminent.

Will, meanwhile, doesn’t offer the painting to Mike, nor does he say it was meant for someone else. Neither Laurie nor Mike receives the emotional reassurance they’re seeking—and both walk away feeling displaced.

In-authenticity and conflict

Another striking parallel between Little Women and Stranger Things lies in how both Laurie and Mike begin to act strangely—almost out of character—when reunited with their respective love interests.

Laurie is drinking, smoking and flirting with women, neglecting the music he once claimed to love. He drifts through his days aimlessly, cynical and disillusioned.

Mike is putting up a front of being nonchalant and “cool” in front of Will. He avoids eye contact, doesn’t hug Will, and struggles to speak to him directly. Even his wardrobe choices reflect this shift. Costume designer Amy Parris revealed that Mike’s Season 4 California look was him, “trying to make it work”—a subtle nod to the fact that Mike is performing a version of himself, rather than being himself.

Disappointed with their reunion, Will and Amy both hold their love interests accountable for their behavior.

The clearest parallel here lies between Laurie and Amy’s picnic in Little Women and the Rink-O-Mania scene in Stranger Things. These confrontations don’t go over well: Laurie and Mike are extremely defensive and frankly, butt-hurt.

Amy calls out Laurie for squandering his potential and living without purpose. Laurie then lashes out in jealousy, criticizing her for wanting a practical marriage.

Likewise, at Rink-O-Mania, Will tries to express his hurt. He points out how distant Mike has been, how one-sided their communication has become. Mike, like Laurie, deflects. He places the blame back on Will, saying he should’ve reached out more.

Accountability and re-connection

Laurie and Mike then extend an olive branch to Amy and Will, taking accountability for their behavior. Their apologies are more about actions rather than words.

(It's giving: "I didn't say it." "You didn't have to.")

Both directly reference something their love interest said in the previous argument, revealing that—despite their initial defensiveness—they had been listening all along.

Check out this interesting parallel:

Laurie takes Amy's advice about going to London—he's doing this to earn back her respect and prove his worth as a romantic suitor.

Amy, during their fight: "...why don't you go to your Grandfather in London and make yourself useful?" Laurie, in his apology: "I've gone to London to make myself worthy of you."

Mike uses coded language to indicate that he's ready to let go of the "cool guy" facade and be closer to Will again.

Will, during their fight: "Well, we used to be best friends!" Mike, in his apology: "I think it'll be easier if we're a team. Friends. Best friends."

Shared loss and tragedy

When the middle sibling Beth dies (spoiler alert?) Jo, Amy and Laurie return home to be with family and grieve together.

Similarly, El, Will and Mike return to Hawkins very shortly after Max's death.

This is a parallel to be sure, but there are very notable differences.

For one, by this point in Little Women Laurie and Amy are now married!

However in Stranger Things, Mike and El are technically still together, even if they're not exactly on speaking terms.

So where does this lead us for season 5?

Part 3: Season 5 predictions

The Little Women parallels might end in season 4, but it feels extremely... unfinished. I think if they continue, it will focus more closely on El's arc than Byler. Hear me out.

Predictions for El: Confrontation and reckoning

While in New York, Jo meets Friedrich. Friedrich is older, but he feels like an equal to her. He shares her love of literature. Unlike others who simply praise Jo, Friedrich critiques her writing with honesty and respect. At first, Jo finds this hard to swallow. But eventually, his challenge helps her grow—not just as a writer, but as a person. They slowly fall in love.

Now, El doesn't have another love interest in season 4 and I can't imagine her getting a new one in season 5, so this is where the parallels might get a little... creative. (Think Fred Vaughn is the painting creative).

Perhaps for El, Friedrich represents someone like her. Not a love interest, but an equal.

A reckoning. A challenge.

I posit that Friedrich is Henry.

After returning from New York, Jo is inspired to start a school to educate children (specifically girls). Friedrich himself is a professor.

Likewise, I think we can expect to see El educating reforming children like her. She will be inspired by Henry: not because he's a good person (because he isn't) but because she can do what he couldn't.

She will end the cycle of abuse and choose not to become the monster.

Predictions for Byler: Secrecy and subtley

In the 1994 film (which these parallels are based on) we don't get a lot of information about how Laurie and Amy got together. Their love story happens quietly, away from the eyes of the other characters and even the audience. They fall in love in Europe and marry before returning home, revealing the news gently and with some hesitation.

I think Stranger Things may take a similar approach with Mike and Will.

Instead of a dramatic, last-minute confession in the climax of battle, I predict that Mike and Will’s romantic connection will begin to develop much earlier in the season than expected—but quietly.

Their relationship may be portrayed with ambiguity on the surface, but still carry clear romantic coding beneath: shared looks, coded language, physical closeness, a clear shift in tone. Enough to let the audience know something is happening, even if the characters themselves aren’t saying it out loud.

It won’t be a loud reveal: It’ll be a secret. Like Laurie and Amy, they may choose to keep their evolving relationship private for as long as possible.

The reveal of their relationship will be gentle and hesitant: not just to the other characters, such as their friends and family, but to us. The audience.

Don't worry, I still expect there to be a Byer kiss and confession scene, I just think their actual relationship will quietly evolve in privacy.

Well, that's all for now folks. I'll edit this or add another part if I make any more connections or predictions. What do you guys think?

[themothwhisperer]

Shauna Shipman is dealing with an immense amount of loss and failure that never stops spreading. Her coping mechanisms are a direct reflection of the only thing she was good at back to a (rare) time where she actually felt valuable: Violent acts.

“This is what you do, Shauna. You create your own problems. You stir the pot just to feel alive.”

And it’s completely true.

Thing is Shauna had a very bright future ahead of her. She was doing extremely well at school, was performing great in her sport and was appreciated by her teammates/friends. Yeah, maybe Jackie would’ve been an obstacle at times. But also, maybe not? She was living into her shadow, but that’s very common in teenagers to develop this type of behaviour. She would’ve probably grown out of that or handled things differently with time. Maybe. Of course, this is just hypothetical. But one thing is certain; her future was promising. She would’ve actually matured.

But that’s not what happened. The chaos caused by the crash exposed very quickly how things would never be the same for any of them. Shauna was particularly affected by those traumatic events. Jackie died leaving an incredible amount of guilt, emptiness and shame in her. Her son died as well, inevitably generating a great deal of damage. And then, we don’t even have to talk about all the atrocities she is committing afterwards. She knew pretty early on that even if she was to ever go back home, her future was long gone. She was never going to reach her full potential.

So naturally, she doesn’t want to go back to civilization. She’s losing if she goes back. Again. Loss is a theme in her life. It’s the main actor even. It was something she could deal with in her pre-crash life, but now? No way. It’s too severe. The events took everything from her. She’s trying to build herself back up. She knows going back will be another failure she will need to carry. The only vehicle through which she can potentially find success and gratification is in leading. She needs a new identity anyways. Without Jackie as a guide, she needs to do it herself. And even if her authority is challenged, it’s not totally hopeless. They’re scared of her. Violence is her power. So not only she needs to stay in the wilderness, she also needs all of them to stay with her. Otherwise, who can she lead? How will she feel whole again?

But as we know, they will be rescued eventually. I however suspect the events taking place between now and the rescue won’t be pretty at all. And Shauna will most likely be horrible. Just like she is in the adult timeline, she will probably create her own problems to justify her actions. And this is a circle. What she will do will make it even harder to go back when she will ultimately be forced to.

“You stew and you seethe and you make it everyone else’s problem because you hate to be alone. You hate yourself. And you want everyone else to feel just as miserable as you are.”

We got a little glimpse of what going back means for Shauna with the grocery store scene. And with the entire adult timeline for that matter. She’s far from the woman she was meant to become. Her life is boring and on top of that, she has to endure herself. Everything she did, everything/everyone she lost and everything/everyone she failed.

What she’s feeling is very human. She feels like she can’t win. Never. It’s infuriating. She feels empty and alone. Helplessness is pretty much all her existence is at this point. She never really got a real shot at rebuilding herself up. She’s the result of being the butcher. What’s left of her? Fear and violence. They were her strengths then so they still must be now. Shauna never really got to mature normally. This is the only thing she knows. No wonder she’s so angry all the time. No wonder she can’t escape the life she had in the wilderness. Her source of fulfillment could only live deep into these woods.

Shauna Shipman will always be such an interesting and heartbreaking character tbh.

[kyliafanfiction]

You know what annoys me the most about people or fics who try to act like New Wave was (intentionally) trying to turn Amy into some perfect little healbot or something? Someone who had no existence outside of healing or w/e? Or have Amy get righteous about people only seeing her as a tool or commodity?

Ffs. Amy would love to be able to just turn off her brain and be a healbot. At least that way she wouldn't feel guilt. She already sees herself as a commodity.

She wouldn't get angry at other people for commodifying her for her healing. She'd be like "you, you get it"

Now, New Wave did actually turn Amy into the closest thing she could be to a dedicated little healbot. But it wasn't an intentional thing by Carol and Sarah. It was just the product of New Wave's own ethos and Carol's shitty parenting interacting with Amy's anxiety and abandonment issues.

Now, like, this is not not a good trait of Amy's, it's one of her many toxic traits in fact, but it is a trait of her.

So fanfics where Amy (during pre-S9 era, to be clear. Post-S9 Amy's got a whole different raft of problems) gets righteous about being commodified, or about New Wave trying to make her a healbot or w/e... That's just not Amy. Not really. I mean, maybe if you have it be at the end of a character arc where she's learned to see value in herself outside of her ability to heal and she's lashing out at Carol and Sarah for creating the circumstances that led her to make those decisions, for Carol's shitty parenting and Sarah's insistence that New Wave needed to happen and the ethos behind New Wave generally for 'making'* her believe that she had to do this, that she had to heal so much or she had no value if she wasn't a healer, etc. But having it be before a meaningful amount of character development on her part? That's just not Amy. It's really not.

-------------

*I put making in quotes, because of course short of mind control you can't really 'make' anyone believe anything, but it's also true that one's parents play a huge role in shaping how people view the world, and it is a responsibility of parents to handle that task with care. Carol and Sarah... really didn't.

[3ldergodz]

I used to hate botw zelink until I understood the characters more. I always thought it was that boring heterosexual couple that is always in media, but the more I learn about Zelda (the character) and link the more I realize they actually work really well, especially post calamity.

Zelda had never been the 'posh princess' ideal that so many make her out to be. A lot of the time fanart annoys me because they smooth out all her edges, make her look like some angel and not the gremlin hunting for lost science that she is. Both Zelda and link are gremlins in entirely different ways, but at the end of the day they'll both end up neck down in mud.

Zelda is a scientist, but she isn't exactly a pure academic in the ivory tower. She likes getting her hands dirty, and finding things herself. Link for almost the entirety of their pre-calamity life was the determined knight, which made them flash really wildly. Traditionally a story like this would have made Zelda seem uptight and that her meanness is just a mask for her true feelings, but this one didn't. Instead of keeping them as they started and having them be together (like so many media would) they had them develop as people before they ever became something. Zelda learned just how much link cared for her, and that he could help her try to protect her people without putting that pressure that her father was putting on her. At first she saw him as an extension of her father, but eventually she realized he wasn't loyal to the king, he was loyal to the people.

But even then Link was far too stiff and emotionally stunted for them to work. He would never have made such a scandal. But have him lose his memories? Not have the entire pressure of the whole kingdom on him? All he had was this mystery lady he felt vaguely drawn to, and a stubbornness to save this kingdom no matter the cost. But he didn't have to do this the way a proper 'knight' would anymore, especially because he couldn't remember what a proper knight was, he could do this his way.

And so he hunted for koroks, ran through the mud and dirt, made food, beat enemies with their own limbs. He was wild and crazy but for the first time he was truly free. I think that desire to escape their pre-determined roles really helped them. Nobody knew who link was, so he didn't have to be anything.

I really like the au's where in tears of the kingdom nobody knows that Zelda is the princess. She didn't want to be a princess back then, and as much as she felt a duty to her people, I don't think want to be a princess now either. She would do everything she could to help, but with her skills in science and history and not just in politics. And link, or course, wasn't a knight anymore. He was just the 'swordsman', sure he would always be warrior through and through, but this time didn't have to do it out of 'duty', he didn't have to follow zelda because he was her knight, he protected her and the kingdom because he loved them, and he wanted to. But they would always protect their kingdom they way they wanted to, not the way anyone else told them too.

Which is why I ship zelink for than sidon and link or mipha and link. I love two characters who would do anything for each other, two people who understand each other more than anyone else ever could. I think that's why a lot of heterosexual ships are boring to me, it's not them being straight, it's how lazy the writing is. It's not just enough for two characters to link hands and see into each other's eyes, they need to truly be what the other needs, the person who understands them. So thank you Nintendo for good story.

[jennelikejennay]

One thing that bugs me about the way Vulcans are usually depicted (with some lovely exceptions) is that their philosophy—logic, or the teachings of Surak, for short I'm just going to call it Surakianism—is very often shown as a bad thing. Either that, or Vulcans aren't following it at all.

Writing about religion (and I do think Surakianism is best approached as a religion*) is always fraught. Because generally as a writer, you don't actually practice the faith in question, so naturally you'll have an outside view. That's doubly true of Surakianism, a way of life humans basically can't follow and it would probably be bad for us to try.

[*I know they don't call it a religion. But the way it deeply affects the interior life of Vulcans, their ethics, and so on feels very religious to me. It doesn't seem to have a position on theism; Vulcans get their beliefs about god(s) from elsewhere, such as traditional Vulcan polytheism and their own perceptions of the universe. But the way it exists as a social structure AND a guide to the inner self is absolutely religious to me.]

We are told that Vulcans developed this philosophy specifically because they needed it—they were destroying themselves without it! Their emotions were overpowering and violent, and they were clannish to the extreme. So despite what most of the human characters say, especially Bones, I think the path of logic is a good thing for Vulcans, even if humans don't get it at all.

Surak's teachings can be summed up into three basic points (a Vulcan somewhere just raised an eyebrow clear into their bangs at this oversimplification, but I'm doing my best here):

1. Logic, or the use of reason as a guide and the control of emotions

2. Nonviolence

3. IDIC—infinite diversity in infinite combinations.

Of course we only ever hear about the first one, because that's part humans notice. I'd say it was like reducing Catholics to fish Fridays and Mormons to underwear, but that's exactly what people do, so I guess it's understandable.

But I think the ordering goes the other way for Vulcans. First, acknowledge that others are of value, including and especially when they're different from you. Then, do them no harm. And finally, to achieve that goal, control your wild, violent emotions.

People imagine pre-reform Vulcans a lot of ways (and I never get tired of reading about them), but I think the best guide as to what they're like is by looking at Romulans. Romulans aren't wildly expressive with their emotions, we're certainly not talking about people who would otherwise be laughing and crying constantly. Instead, they're secretive and carry long, hateful grudges. They're loyal only to those closest to them, and they seem entirely without empathy otherwise.

Imagine the Vulcan emotions are like that. They have strong bonds to their clan, probably in part because of their telepathy. They're suspicious of outsiders, angry, prone to violence. Preferring the familiar is an instinct in humans too, but a mild one. Certainly humans have been and still are racist, but it's something we can generally overcome. I'm not sure the Vulcans could, not by relying on their emotions.

So they came up with the solution to control their emotions completely. Use reason instead as a guide to behavior, because logic will tell you that your own clan is not more important than another, and that reaching out in peace is beneficial to yourself and others. Don't give your emotions any credence and don't let them run wild.

Humans do some of this ourselves, and should arguably be doing more. We spend a huge chunk of our childhood learning to control antisocial impulses like screaming, hitting, and biting. We demonstrate self control in many tiny, unnecessary ways, in order to show to others that we are in control of ourselves: stuff like etiquette, social rules, even just leaving the last cookie on the tray for someone else. These are signals that say I am not governed by my appetites; I can be trusted to consider the needs of others.

And we could obviously be doing more. Too many political questions are being answered by people's emotional, knee-jerk responses like "I feel threatened by people who are different" or "I am angry about my enemies and want them punished" instead of "what produces the most benefit for everyone?" If we leaned more heavily on logic and reason to get us our answers, we'd make way better decisions than we do. Star Trek doesn't often acknowledge that in real life, making a snap gut decision doesn't actually have a very high success rate. Logic gives you better odds of saving the day.

But, you might say, Vulcans aren't doing very well at any of this. A heck of a lot of them that we've seen are racist. And while they repress their emotions just great, they don't actually make the most logical decisions most of the time.

But I don't think this actually discredits a religion at all. We all know Christians who are great at the easy parts of their religion—learning Bible verses or saying rosaries—but don't seem to be even trying to love their neighbor. That's in fact the way religions are usually practiced! External elements that people can easily see (like never smiling) are adhered to by social pressure, but more heart-level things are aspirational at best. That doesn't mean the message of a religion is bad; it doesn't really tell us anything.

This is especially true for a religion whose practice isn't optional. You have to follow Surak to stay on the planet. I can see this rule was necessary during the time when the Romulans were kicked out—pacifism doesn't work as a global solution unless everybody's doing it. Now, it seems a bit harsh. I think they get around it by not exiling anybody who's at least giving lip service to logic. That racist baseball guy in DS9 isn't a good Vulcan, but as long as he doesn't do anything violent or openly reject Surak, they're willing to say he counts.

Why are Vulcans so often the opposite of what their religion teaches? I think it's the other way around: their religion focuses specifically on their chief faults: clannishness, racism, ego. It just hasn't successfully transformed everyone. Makes perfect sense, really. We might as well ask why Christianity goes on and on about sex when humans are well known to be super obsessed with sex. Well that's WHY! It's one of our strongest impulses which in the past we felt the most desperate need to control.

The best argument against Surakianism is that total repression isn't the best way to handle emotion, that we need self-awareness of our emotions before we can account for them.

To which all I can say is, don't you think Vulcans know that?

I imagine there are lots and lots of viewpoints on this among Vulcans. Some favor repression and some favor understanding and acceptance; some think it's okay to have a little dry humor and some think we should be serious. We have the kolinahri who believe in the excision of all emotion (which I imagine is universally seen as extreme, like we might see cloistered nuns or monks who reject the world to achieve enlightenment). And surely there are ancient, wise Vulcans who deeply understand all their emotional impulses and are completely in control of them. Spock certainly seems this way by the movie era if not before: he knows that he has emotions, what they are, and how to respond to them. He has overcome the emotion of shame. So he seems not impassive on the outside, but a person at complete peace inside and out.

I just feel like we could stand to see more good Surakians, who are good not in spite of their belief in logic, but because of it. Kind of like how we see both good and bad followers of the Prophets on Bajor. I'm kind of anti religion myself, but I still want to see it given its due—especially a religion founded on such good principles. Sure, it's not a religion humans can really practice, nor need—a good half of our emotions are positive and pro-social, so it's no wonder a person like Bones would be convinced Vulcans are just punishing themselves unnecessarily. But it successfully turned Vulcan from a planet so violent it almost destroyed itself to a home of peace and learning. Of course Vulcans aren't going to mess with what works!

That has been my rant about logic for today. I highly recommend @dduane 's book Spock's World for a much deeper dive into logic and the path Vulcan took to get there.

[yuurei20]

Is it true that Cater is a playboy? I've seen some people saying that he's a Playboy, but I'm not sure if its canon. Thanks!!

Hello hello! ^^ Thank you for this question!

This was also mentioned a little bit in response to an earlier question about Cater's habit of flirting with people, which includes a compilation of screenshots of what is probably the kind of scenes that people are thinking about when they talk about Cater being a playboy!

But I think this might depend on your definition of "playboy" 👀

As of this post, the only canonical romantic relationship we have heard of in the game (on EN 👀) is Ace and his ex-girlfriend!

If your definition of "playboy" is "someone who dates a lot of different people," then "playboy" does not apply to Cater, as far as we know :>

What we do know is this!

His family moved around a lot when he was a child so, at some point, he started intentionally keeping his interpersonal relationships shallow rather than try to forge meaningful connections:

"That's why I always tried to be on good terms with everyone, rather than forge strong bonds with a chosen few. Like a circus performer who has a grand old time with people from around the world, and then packs up and moves on."

While never stated outright, it is a common theory that this is why Cater keeps Trey at arm's length during Wish Upon a Star:

Trey is already his closest friend, so Cater might be keeping up a buffer zone of secrets like what his true wish for the Star Sending is so that they do not become any closer, and their inevitable parting will be less painful.

Lilia tries to encourage Cater, saying that, in deciding not to get too close to any one person he may be the wisest one there, but Cater is not convinced that Lilia can truly empathize:

"Lilia's developed cherished relationships while living in the same place his whole life. There's no way he could ever understand how helpless I feel."

Another thing we know about Cater is that he might be feeling the loss of one, specific friend in particular! He tells Silver that he remembers making a friend at a new school one time, only to immediately learn that he would be moving away again the next month.

It is interesting that he mentions this one friend in particular--were they the catalyst? Was that the point when he decided that he would never get close to another person? We do not know 👀

If you are seeing "playboy Cater" coming from the JP side of the fandom, it is possibly because his speech patterns are that of a チャラい character on JP!

I think "flirt" is a decent translation for チャラい? 🧐 (It was localized as "shallow" on EN, and is the reason why Eliza rejects Cater during the Phantom Bride event.)

They are characters that talk/look flashy, seem shallow, and tend to flirt with everyone equally rather than picking someone specific to pursue. (Orange hair is common but is not required ww)

This survey of 3,324 people voted the top three チャラい anime characters as Moroboshi Ataru (Urusei Yatsura), Saeba Ryo (City Hunter) and Lupin III, to give you an idea of the チャラい character archetype ^^

And a common theme of Twst is: appearances can be deceiving!

Vil and Lilia seem to suspect Cater of having "a morose side that the rest of us never see" hidden by his sunny disposition, but Cater claims otherwise 👀

Much like Epel appears delicate but is actually the opposite and Lilia appears young but is actually old, it is possible that Cater intentionally acts shallow while actually he has a complex inner world--he is flighty not because he is trying to attract people, but because he is trying to keep them away.

More here! ^^

・Cater's Inner Life ・Cater's Childhood

To the original question: I do not believe that we have heard about Cater having any relationships (romantic or otherwise) at all except for one single friend from pre-NRC, which might not qualify him as a "playboy"! ^^