#Like I think even if you're not a writer there is value in learning how to put into words your thoughts and feelings on things

[i-will-physically-fight-you]

The other day I was having a "struggle day" with writing. Nothing I write is coming out fluid, it is sluggish and stilted. I spent a majority of my time writing outlines, trying to tether abstract images that flicker like a distorted slideshow across my brain to a more concrete tangible form.

But if I was to tell certain people in my life this, their first suggestion would be, "If you're struggling with writing, you should use ChatGPT to help you!"

Pushing past the ethics debacle aside for a moment, I don't know how to describe how much that doesn't help with my plight. As much as I dislike creating a rough draft, it is where the idea takes birth. It's through writing the initial scene where I discover a character's motivation or a facet of the world that never crosses my mind until I begin carving away at its rough edges.

The machine doesn't understand the way I'd take a plot point and expand upon it. The machine can't capture my exact phrasing. Technology hasn't developed enough to take a vague idea sloshing inside my skull and glimmer it into existence in front of me in exactly the way I wanted it to be.

I don't always enjoy the rough draft process, but it is a crucial part of the process. I don't want a "paint by numbers" experience. I want to start with a blank canvas and finish with a nauseating, illustrative kaleidoscope of my innermost thoughts and feelings. I want my hands to be stained by the ink and sweat of my own efforts.

I don't care if I get "lost in the past" for wanting that, I'd rather let my words be unfettered and untainted by the uniformity of what a machine thinks is the most "right" way of phrasing words based on trillions of words unrightfully seized by avarice.

[akajustmerry]

Do you have any personal advice on writing good romance? People have vast tastes on the matter but I wonder what your personal takes are

hello!

honestly, I've been studying writing romance for a while because i want to maybe write a rom com novel and while I grew up writing fanfiction I don't think it's the same as actually crafting romance from scratch. I don't have a tonne of experience with it yet, but these are some strong feelings I have on writing good romance that i've gathered in my journey so far;

when you find a romance you really love, take it apart piece by piece like a clockmaker would a clock until you understand why it compels you. if you find a romance you hate, do the same thing. you'll learn a lot about your tastes from this and you'll also learn what "good romance" is to you because it's different for everyone.

I firmly believe all good romance is a portrait of 2 characters (or however many characters are involved). Again, this is just my opinion, but I hate reading or watching romance where I don't know the characters that well because then I'm just sitting there asking why they're even interested in one another. Focus on characters more than tropes. i think there's way too much focus on tropes in recent years.

this is VERY just my opinion but I think when writing a romance it's good to think about how and why the characters would interact if they couldn't be physically intimate. What do they share (values, goals, opinions, conflicts) with each other besides having the hots for one another? And look, for some audiences, having the hots is enough, but for me i don't like when a relationship feels so flimsy that a week of social distancing would break it.

i used to feel really self-conscious about writing romantic scenarios i hadn't experienced, and apparently this is very common for romance writers. it's very important to remember that most authors in fiction genres are not writing about things they've personally experienced either. do your research, write with confidence and compassion and you should be fine <3

MY BIGGEST BIT OF ADVICE IF YOU FORGET EVERYTHING ELSE IS sincerity. just sincerity. so many current or modern romances are so irony-poisoned and self-referential. it takes the immersion and joy out of it. unless you're doing something intentionally meta like lovers being trapped in a movie or something, there's no need for them to reference tropes or hating tropes or whatever. have your characters be sincere and write sincerely.

anyway, i hope this helps! i know you sent this a while ago but i really wanted to think about the answer. hope that's okay 💖

[mykmi]

txt as your boyfriends (sfw)

pairing: txt x gn!reader genre: fluff, headcanons warnings: none ig? tell me if there's anything btw!! a/n: i hope it was worth the waiting :(( i have writer's block constantly so i try very hard to not make y'all wait for too long, sooo enjoy!!!

| choi yeonjun |

likes to show up together at every event or party

he just likes the idea that you both belong with each other, he's so proud he has someone like you so why not show you off a little bit? and if course he likes it vice versa ;))

loves to take care of you, especially when you're tired or sick

tries cooking for you but the kitchen is a total mess... he's not necessarily neat so cleaning is mostly on you.... he's just too clumsy for it

very affectionate and communicative about his feelings

he's very emotionally available and every time there's a problem he's ready to talk it out and solve it together, so you almost never argue

probably confessed first

no but like i really do believe he's someone who would make the first move, who would take you out on fancy restaurants dates and shopping dates, who would confess his feelings first and just would do most of the work lol

needs a lot of reassurance about his work and appearance

he's sometimes insecure and too harsh on himself, as he's a very hardworking perfectionist, so he needs support and some nice words from time to time just to feel better

| choi soobin |

professional yapper

yaps to you all the fucking time. when members are tired of his yapping, they just send him off to you. “take it, it's yours” they say, pushing him into the room to you and closing the door. and what else can you do besides just listen to all of that?

dates by him are usually calm

every time he plans a date, it's usually something that wouldn't take a lot of energy, so you'd spend more time talking

very genuine with you

he just lets his guard down whenever he's around you, and it means he's relaxed the most with you. he's childish, giggly, and honest

lets you take the lead

y'all i believe he'd rarely make the first move, and it keeps on going. he can take the lead, but he'd rather not, especially in something like going out or talking to the waiters

nerdy af

spends 90% of his free time playing video games, showing off his skills to you and teaching you how to play (it's a bonus if you're a gamer like him); he likes a gf who is interested in learning ab his hobbies ^^

| choi beomgyu |

encourages you to step out of your comfort zone

he is the kind of person who will help you and try something new with you, even if it's stressful or scary for both of y'all. he will encourage the hell out of you so there's nothing left to do than to try

words are his weapon

no matter if it's about the volume of his words or the value, but both ways, they're very significant ;)

very attentive

buys you the best gifts, prepares the best dates, and remembers everything about you; he thinks it's important to show how much you matter to him

needs some private time

he's an introvert and no matter how loud he is, he's sometimes tired of being in a company. gyu needs to be alone pretty often, but he will make this up to you when he recharges

the best listener

he loves listening to you and doesn't really care what specifically you're talking ab.. sometimes he spaces out, but most of the time he listens :)))

| kang taehyun |

acts of service is his love language

he doesn't really say 'i love you', but he shows his love through small and not-so-small actions. he plans dates for anniversaries, gifts you flowers every now and then, and is a gentleman ^^

shares his knowledge with you

it's not a secret that he's very smart, and he loves sharing his knowledge with you; he only does this, when you ask ab something tho

impresses you all the time

no matter if it's his magic tricks, his physical appeareance or his knowledge and if he does this on purpose or not, but he does constantly impress you

plans his future with you

he shows how serious relationships are to him and includes you in his future, your future house, your future pet, and possible future family :)))

is never boring

he loves adventures and excitement, and he bring those into your relationship too. you'll go on spontaneous trips, some exotic places or concerts just to have fun

| huening kai |

sharing is caring

shares his things with you, whether it be hoodies, plushies, or food, he shares and sometimes doesn't even notice this

quiet and embarrassed 90% of the time

he doesn't like talking ab himself, so he listens to you. he's not so self-confident, so he gets embarrassed a lot. he'd be thankful for lots of reassurance, or else he might doubt himself :((

loves physical affection

it's easy for him to show how much he loves someone by touching them. he loves hugging, holding hands, kissing you, caressing your tummy, and anything related to physical affection

babies you a lot

loves treating you with special care and treatment, doing everything for you (including chores), and taking care of you all the time

the most supportive

is interested in everything you do, attends any events that are important to you and always praises you for your good work ^^

✉ thank you for reading ✉

[ofbreathandflame-archive]

With the rise of booktok/booktwt, there's been this weird movement against literary criticism. It's a bizarre phenomenon, but this uptick in condemnation of criticism is so stifling. I understand that with the rise of these platforms, many people are being reintroduced into the habit of reading, which is why at the base level, I understand why many 'popular' books on booktok tend to be cozier.

The argument always falls into the 'this book means too much to me' or 'let people enjoy things,' which is rhetoric I understand -- at least fundamentally. But reading and writing have always been conduits for criticism, healthy natural criticism. We grow as writers and readers because of criticism. It's just so frustrating to see arguments like "how could you not like this character they've been the x trauma," or "why read this book if you're not going to come out liking it," and it's like...why not. That has always been the point of reading. Having a character go through copious amounts of trauma does not always translate to a character that's well-crafted. Good worldbuilding doesn't always translate to having a good story, or having beautiful prose doesn't always translate into a good plot.

There is just so much that goes into writing a story other than being able to formulate tropable (is that a word lol) characters. Good ideas don't always translate into good stories. And engaging critically with the text you read is how we figure that out, how we make sure authors are giving us a good craft. Writing is a form of entertainment too, and just like we'd do a poorly crafted show, we should always be questioning the things we read, even if we enjoy those things.

It's just werd to see people argue that we shouldn't read literature unless we know for certain we are going to like it. Or seeing people not be able to stand honest criticism of the world they've fallen in love with. I love ASOIAF -- but boy oh boy are there a lot of problems in the story: racial undertones, questionable writing decisions, weird ness overall. I also think engaging critically helps us understand how an author's biases can inform what they write. Like, HP Lovecraft wrote eerie stories, he was also a raging racist. But we can argue that his fear of PoC, his antisemitism, and all of his weird fears informed a lot of what he was writing. His writing is so eerie because a lot of that fear comes from very real, nasty places. It's not to say we have to censor his works, but he influences a lot of horror today and those fears, that racial undertone, it is still very prevalent in horror movies today. That fear of the 'unknown,'

Gone with the Wind is an incredibly racist book. It's also a well-written book. I think a lot of people also like confine criticism to just a syntax/prose/technical level -- when in reality criticism should also be applied on an ideological level. Books that are well-written, well-plotted, etc., are also -- and should also -- be up for criticism. A book can be very well-written and also propagate harmful ideologies. I often read books that I know that (on an ideological level), I might not agree with. We can learn a lot from the books we read, even the ones we hate.

I just feel like we're getting to the point where people are just telling people to 'shut up and read' and making spaces for conversation a uniform experience. I don't want to be in a space where everyone agrees with the same point. Either people won't accept criticism of their favorite book, or they think criticism shouldn't be applied to books they think are well written. Reading invokes natural criticism -- so does writing. That's literally what writing is; asking questions, interrogating the world around you. It's why we have literary devices, techniques, and elements. It's never just taking the words being printed at face value.

You can identify with a character's trauma and still understand that their badly written. You can read a story, hate everything about it, and still like a character. As I stated a while back, I'm reading Fourth Wing; the book is terrible, but I like the main character. The worldbuilding is also terrible, but the author writes her PoC characters with respect. It's not hard to acknowledge one thing about the text, and still find enough to enjoy the book. And authors grow when we're honest about what worked and what didn't work. Shadow and Bone was very formulaic and derivative at points, but Six of Crows is much more inventive and inclusive. Veronica Roth's Carve the Mark had some weird racial problems, but Chosen Ones was a much better book in terms of representation. Percy Jackson is the same way. These writers grow, not just by virtue of time, but because they were critiqued and listened to that critique. C.S. Lewis and Tolkien always publically criticized each other's work. Zora Neale Hurston and Langston Hughes had a legendary friendship and back and forth with one another's works which provides so much insight into the conversations black authors and creatives were having.

Writing has always been about asking questions; prodding here and there, critiquing. It has always been a conversation, a dialogue. I urge people to love what they read, and read what they love, but always ask questions, always understand different perspectives, and always keep your mind open. Please stop stifling and controlling the conversations about your favorite literature, and please understand that everyone will not come out with the same reading experience as you. It doesn't make their experience any less valid than yours.

[inkskinned]

something that stuck with me once, way back in middle school when i was still learning how to write - my teacher said "writing shock and tragedy is easy, it's humor that's the hardest."

i have been up and down the halls of academia. i have the fancy degree and the experience in publishing. i think i paved most of my own road with the little bricks of sorrow i had stored inside of me. i know i did it mostly with works that are blisteringly lonely. i know why we write like that. it's lifesaving.

but yeah, i mean. i also know how much people think that "sad" media is the same thing as "good" media. our human desire to connect is so hard-pressed that we immediately latch onto any broken themes. the bullied kids and the tales of inspiration. people keep saying things like "glass onion" and "everything everywhere" weren't actually good. because, you know, they're. happy. or happy-ish. happy enough. and we only value art if it's grimdark-adjacent.

do you know - people still consistently whine at me that my writing would be so good if i just capitalized things. i used to flinch. i get kind of a weird, vindictive little rush these days - i get to say thank you for the comment! i have chronic pain and this is how i conserve my hands so i can write more during the day :) grammar isn't real anyway! and now they're trapped in the room with me, you know? i get to pull out my map and show them how grammar is not the same thing as good writing.

writers have this thing. we scratch at our insides, constantly, prying our lives apart into splinters. prying the splinters apart into atoms. when we combust something into poetry, we control it. it cannot hurt us if it exists outside of us rather than burning a hole through the bottom of our lungs. it's not a wonder to me that so much of what i make comes out like a death gasp. i spent a long time at the bottom. i keep going back, too. when you're down there for so long, the only thing you can exhale is fumes.

but humor is hard. humor needs timing; which i can't promise in a paragraph. i can kind-of force it through careful spacing, but i have no idea how fast you're reading these things. humor needs a somewhat awareness of your audience, when really - anybody could be looking. humor needs us to understand what the joke is, why it's a joke, and to think - ha! that is funny. in tragedy, everyone understands the metaphor of a kicked puppy. in humor, you need to introduce them to the concept of a dog.

and forget about positivity. forget about anything not made for adults explicitly. every time i see a well-made children's media piece, i feel fucking horrible for the creators. most of the time, people see children's media as being sort of "not worth" applause, even though i'm pretty sure they have to work twice as hard. i have no idea how hard it must be to not be able to have your character just say. "well, fuck." something about a message of peace or friendship or caring - for some reason, that makes the media not for adults. like, okay. i'm pretty sure my father actually, out of all of us, could use a good book on how to control his temper and talk about his feelings.

but whatever. i write a short story about my ocd, and how it's fucking killing me. it gets an award. it gets published. i write a short story about my ocd, and how i'm overcoming it, and how my days are getting lighter and starting to flourish. i keep getting ghosted. no response. it just is lacking... something.

is this it, forever? you can be an artist, okay. but the trade off is that the things you make - if they're happy? if they're joyful? people will say it's stupid and pandering. you bite your nails off. you file your teeth. you hear something inside of you breaking.

the other day in a writing group, someone i'd thought of as a friend said: "you write so much better these days! i love what you make when you'd rather be dead."

[thesulkycroissant]

So there's this saying that the only time you see the middle of the road is when you're going from ditch to ditch, and that most of the time is how I feel about the canon v fanon debate.

Genuinely, I feel like people get so stagnanted in this idea that something isn't canon - which, what is comic canon anyway? I strain to unravel the mystery of which comics get to "count" and which do not - and focus on it so much that they miss any aspect of nuance.

Tim's parents are a great example. Tim's parents exist in the way they do for a simple out-of-universe reason: the writers wanted to avoid the mistakes they made with Jason by both differentiating him from Dick (making him not an orphan) and giving him a "buy-in" with Dick (something to connect them -> the circus). (Their logic was that Dick was the key to getting readers to like Tim, and that neglecting his buy-in was their misstep with Jason.) At the same time, Tim having parents is a problem because what parent is not going to notice their kid being gone all the time playing midnight vigilante? Solution: absentee parents. But now the shift to in-universe happens. Tim's parents are gone all the time, but it's not malicious; they're just kind of clueless. They love Tim. Tim loves them. But they are not around. And this out-of-universe choice, once you enter into the universe, logically can - maybe even should, if you're taking the characters seriously - effect how a character reads.

Tim's parents are gone all the time. There's every probability that would cause trauma. Unintentional, but fun to explore! The comics do a very little. I think fandoms can often make the mistake of believing subtle abuse (like neglect) is not sufficient, so it gets elevated to something physical. But your parents loving you and also causing you trauma is a relatable experience, I think. Even your parents doing their best and still causing you trauma is.

Jason being the angry Robin is another rough one. Because yeah, I agree, Scott Lobdell did some wacky and unkind things to Jason's backstory. But Jason, even going back to his original (not original, but his original non-just-Dick-but-blond) backstory, is a traumatized orphan willing to take the risk and steal tires from the Batmobile as a means of survival (in Gotham! In Crime Alley!). Why can't Jason be angry? In the throes of adolescence, at a time when he feels safe with Bruce, doesn't it make sense for his trauma to find its way out in anger? Can't he both believe Robin is magic and be angry? Can't he be sweet and angry both?

Dickie and anger. Yeah, anger plays a role in certain story arcs of his. In NTT, and in the first 80s Nightwing run, the stories take pains to show that the anger is triggered by something and channeled into brutal focus. And that it does not serve him. Dick's relationship with Kory in NTT nearly falls apart because of his anger. He treats her very poorly. I see a lot of people saying they want Dick to be angry, but not allowing Dick to learn how to control his anger is not giving the character his dues either.

And Damian. Shoot. Reading the One Bad Day comic for Ra's al Ghul kinda ruined me a bit because of how much Ra's obviously loves and respects animals, and how can you not see the echo of that in Damian's love of animals? Damian's League trauma is such a thing worth exploring, and I think the value of exploring it only goes up when you add in the complicated factor of the fact that Talia and Ra's do love him, and he does see them when he looks in the mirror, and every day Damian has to decide which parts of his family - his whole family - are good to keep and which are not.

Anyway. There's probably more, but this post is already pretty long lol. Nuance is cool, that's all.

[miraculouslbcnreactions]

Having the statue scene be what caused Adrien to fall in love with Marinette feel like one of many spite moves from Astruc. Like once again, he saw how much people hated that scene but instead of addressing the criticisms he instead just point blank tries to force us to like the scene.

I'd go with arrogance over spite. I don't know much about the man, but the quotes I've seen and my limited knowledge of the industry are why my standard take is that he and the writing staff are genuinely trying to tell a good story. While we think they're failing at it, they don't. They think it's good. You're not going to sway me to their point of view, but I do understand how they could get into that mindset.

It's incredibly rare to get professional writers who want to punish the audience. It's incredibly common to get writers who are so far up their own ass that they think they shit gold and anyone who disagrees is just a hater who can't understand their vision. While that viewpoint isn't ideal, it's not a terrible trait for a creative. You're unlikely to succeed in a creative field if you can't get into some version of that mindset.

Speaking as a writer, if you want to succeed in a creative field, then you do genuinely need to be your own biggest fan and learn to ignore criticism. Not because you're above criticism, but because:

Issue 1: A lot of people struggle with the difference between personal taste and actual flaws, leading to some really shitty "criticism". That doesn't mean that it's bad to talk about a thing in terms of personal taste, it just means that your criticisms maybe be highly subjective opinions and not objective flaws that the creator needs to know about. It's why things like book reviews are for the audience and not the author. I know people who have found great reads based on negative reviews because those reviews talked about the book in question in an objective enough way for those people to realize it had things that they loved. That means that those were excellent reviews, they let people know if they'd like the book or not, which is what a review is meant to do! It also means that the reviews were pretty worthless to the authors because there was nothing that needed changing. It was all a matter of personal taste.

Issue 2: Taking point one a step further: more objective, "good" criticism isn't necessarily valuable to a creator. Sometimes creators are willing to include "flaws" because their creation doesn't fit their vision without those "flaws". Creators can get away with that because different audiences will care about different things and you're never going to be able to appeal to everyone. This is not the greatest example, but I think it gets my point across, so I'll use it here anyway. As someone who prefers reasonably healthy couples, if I were to read a story with an awful romance, then I'd probably hate it and have very clear, logical reasons why. But if the author is totally aware that the couple is awful and needed them to be such for the story they wanted to tell? Then my critique has no value to them. It's why good critique is so hard to get and give. Good critique is not about shaping a story into what you'd call good, it's about shaping the story the writer wants to tell into its best form. It's super hard, but also fun and a good learning experience.

Issue 3: A lot of criticism is highly situational and public feedback will only ever come after a work is done and available to the public. That makes it questionable how much value you'd get from reading feedback at that point. For an ongoing work where only a part is done, you might get something useful, but for a finished one? It's questionable if there's any point in reading negative comments. For example, I've received unsolicited critical feedback on fics that are several years old. I have no idea what the goal of those comments is. Even if I agree with them, I'm not going to rewrite the fic for them. I even asked one of them what their goal was and they couldn't tell me. They just wanted me to know and the button said "comments" not "positive comments."

Issue 4: You're never going to be perfect, so even a great work will have flaws, but it's unhealthy to dwell on them. Listening to a thousand people point out what you got wrong is not going to help anyone improve. That's why good creatives are open to feedback, but they tend to have a select group that they go to for feedback during the creative process. They then ignore most other feedback. In most cases, that is the healthy way to approach the creative process. It's why I don't agree with those who complain about someone blocking critics on twitter. Block and move on isn't just advice for the plebs. Successful creatives are allowed to prioritize their mental health, too.

Of course, there is a double edged sword in action here. Because creatives need to be their own fans and develop that ability to ignore criticism, they are always at risk of forming echo chambers that lead them to create lesser works because everyone in their core team thinks the same way they do. They may not even have a core team! It takes a lot of humility and luck to find people who give you good feedback.

The echo chamber issue is especially true when creatives are successful as it's hard to want to change when you're making money off of whatever crap you put out. Once you reach a certain level of success, there will be a whole lot less push back on your terrible ideas. If it's going to make money either way, then why worry if it's total crap? (This is a major problem in the publishing industry, btw. People with large social media followings can get a book deal with relative ease and publish almost anything they want because the publisher knows it will sell and it's not their name that's going to be looked down on.)

Generally speaking, this is what I think happened with Miraculous. The show is incredibly successful so there's no reason to listen to criticism or expand the creative team. Until the show stops making money, it doesn't matter how bad it is, so there's no reason for the writers to question if they've become blind to their own flaws. And by the time the show goes too far and stops making money? It will probably be too late to fix the problems so the show will just die. That's just how this trend works.

In summary, I would not be shocked if the writers genuinely think they're writing wonderful stories and that the critics just can't see it because we're the spiteful ones, not them. People can develop really weird standards for what is good, especially when they're immersed in the industry. For example, it's not like Disney wanted to ruin the Star Wars brand or have their 100th anniversary film - Wish - be universally panned. Studios want to make money. Writers want to tell stories people like. Spite it's rarely the answer when they fail to do those things.

The one caveat I will give to the above is if you're referring to the kind of spiteful arrogance where someone creates a thing, people criticize said thing, and so the person makes more of said thing in retaliation because that's 100% spite. But it's not the kind of spite where they're making a thing bad on purpose. It's them saying, "no, this was good and I'm gonna make more of it because you're wrong and I'm right." People do that shit all the time and, once again, it's not an inherently bad thing. Like all emotions, spite is a neutral force and a powerful motivator. It can lead to great things and terrible things. I can think of spite projects that were wildly successful and spite projects that totally flopped. (Relevant Tumblr post)

If that's the argument you're making when you say "spite", then I could totally see the statue scene choice happening because the writers heard people dunking on it and they went, "No, you're wrong, that scene was awesome! In fact, to show you how awesome, we're going to have that be when Adrien's crush started!" Spite? Yes. Ruining the show on purpose to get back at haters? No.

[utilitycaster]

What do you mean (from your latest post) that you think that many actual play failures are failures of ambition?

Usually, when an actual play show doesn't click for me, it's because the GM or players aimed very high or tried to push the boundaries (of the medium or system) and it didn't quite land right. It's a pretty new medium, and while I've been very openly disparaging of how much many writers in the AP space focus overmuch on novelty over consistent quality, I do think these failures are important! I think it's good to play with what the medium can be! I just think that sometimes, it does indeed fail.

Examples off the top of my head:

Too much plot for allotted length: EXU Prime was fun to watch but I think this plot really needed to be a 16-20 episode season, not an 8 episode one, which meant that we never really learned Myr'atta's motivation or the deal with Ted until years later in the real world despite that being the core plot. Similar issues have come up with various D20 seasons; I think running a one- or two- session story isn't too hard to do, or running a longform campaign isn't too hard to do, but 8 or 10 or 20 episodes can be really difficult to plan for properly, and a lot of people overfill.

Trying to bend the system too far: I wrote a long-ass post I cannot find about this for a few D20 seasons as well (notably Neverafter) and I've fallen off of WBN for a few reasons but in part because it really increasingly feels like D&D is the wrong system - the classes of D&D support the worldbuilding, but the pace and style and magic system of D&D increasingly feel like they and the narrative are in conflict.

Trying to fit in An Important Message: the infamous Rusty Quill Gaming Everything Changes [now make a monumental decision we have not once explored in 7 real world years of telling this story, in the last half of the last episode] is a big one here. This is not unique to AP (this is why Battlestar Galactica's ending is widely panned) but I think the nature of actual play makes it more likely because to some extent you as the GM must relinquish a good degree of control.

Not realizing what you need to plan for: ultimately, in my opinion, the failure of Campaign 3. I don't think the problem is that Matt wanted to bring everything together across multiple campaigns; I don't think this is a cheap setup with a pre-determined outcome (though I could be proven wrong); I think the problem is that there needed to be a much more stringent character creation process and on-rails early plot to actually get from point A to point B in a way that felt natural within the story.

Trying to break production value records while neglecting story: With the caveat that I hated nearly every second of the hour of Kollok I watched, I have yet to see a review that talks about anything it does other than how good the production values are (*whisper* they're not even that good). Burrow's End had some really good aesthetic/filming choices and some really not good ones on top of having a story I found weak; the season of Candela Obscura I thought had the strongest story had no split-screen film edits. This could just be that my AP introduction was TAZ Balance followed by simultaneous C1 and early C2, but like...I've heard incredible actual play with no music and no fancy lighting and no sound effects and no official character art, and I've watched some heavily produced stuff that had the plot of a fucking Ed Wood movie and was utterly joyless to boot. Story first; accessibility production values (clean and clear sound, transcripts, making all speakers visible if you're a filmed production) second; anything else should ONLY come after that.

[jackwhiteprophetic]

Idk if I've said this before but Buck's season 4 arc is so fucking interesting and the way they CHOSE to have it essentially "completed" in the finale by Eddie is so intentional and beautiful AAAAAAA

So basically we open with Buck in therapy, this leads to his parents coming and Buck begins and such, where Eddie is consistently there for Buck to go to, and we have the iconic "I know you did", where we as the audience see how much Eddie understands this side of Buck, and how Eddie gives Buck the space to talk and to be angry and process without pushing him to be anything else (which contrasts to Maddie this season, though I love Maddie and I don't think the effects of her childhood on her have been given enough time in the show).

And he doesn't properly finish this self sacrificing thing here, when his mum says "you're doing what you were born to do" this is exemplified, and Buck is affirmed in his purpose being the saviour.

And then we have a kind of cyclical arc with the shooting, where Buck has to confront again how he feels like he's a shitty replacement for something, and that he's reckless and he immediately reverts to his learned perspective of "I shouldn't be here and someone else should and I now I have to make sure that it's only me that gets hurt" that he picked up in his childhood, even when not knowing about Daniel. But this time Eddie stops him, and he tells him that he's not expendable, and that he has a family who need him, and that he has a permanent place in their life.

Which is literally all Buck has ever wanted.

ALSO the conversation with Bobby in 4x14 is so interesting because it feels like there's something missing, when Bobby only reprimands Buck for being reckless and is so nearly at the point, which is that Buck does not value his life and he needs fucking help, but he MISSES it, and the audience sees that, and the scene feels incomplete, and this is simply because they wanted to save that line for Eddie. ANYONE in that episode could have pointed it out, have been given that line, because it was obvious to the audience what Buck was doing. And the writers very deliberately let our frustration at the other characters for missing it build, so that the will conversation was massively highlighted and very narratively satisfying and conclusive.

It has been SO intentional and I am obsessed with it so much

[peargor]

Not quite sure if sent the message cause bad internet connection so i'll just paste the whole thing here again incase:

Hey peargor!(donno if you're still using tumblr bt whatever) Let me Congrats ya for your coming completion on Touhou project first (yay恭喜)

Here's the wandering dude from mainland china(typical netizen lol)and randomly clicked into ya website while visiting webrings & link collections.Lotta ideas jump through my head and letme say a few words below: BoTWR's really a good series from my perspective,like,Dispite having gaps when understanding the lore,i still can kinda understand the characters,from core to spirit(Cantonese's partly cognizable for mandarin viewers so it kinda fun when lookin' zoey swearing lol)I guess a variety of mainland audience would like it too.Like,it even inspired me to have a look back into the history and mess 'n hongkong on the "great firewall" and made me sorta think deeply about all these mess……but anyways,here's imaginary non medal stickers：

"Mandarin approved"and

"i concerned for la nation"(just kidding),

and i'll keep focusing on the series(actually the others' quite adorable too,sure it took me a while to realize that you actually deeply involve in internet meme culture,after the shock when i found you do made the pogchamp meme gosh)

Btw Just wondering,did the reading disorder cause you to use more english in written form stuff?

Looking forward for the upcoming new chapters yet a few more words:

1:LIT ' O TOMMIE DESERVES ＢＥＴＴＥＲ Yo

Poor tommy,hope he 'll get a chance to be a man

2:mmm how and what would zoey's dad be…… He's sorta a villain for now but i hope he's just a dude who failed to correct his own fault by force or "internal error"?

3:that color can be some exposure of one's emotion thing.yeah classic "into head" thingy but perhaps it means more deep than what it seems?Maybe Blue represents the sadness,niche thoughts,hopeless rational thinking,Yellow's cheerfully craziness,Red's cruelly dialectical greedin' justice,and BLACK's something unresist-able unless you learn some real floyd's philosophy thing?

You can get some new referencing idea from the old HK's TVB show like "大时代"(The Greed of a man),also some new from mainland that accidentally have more coverage report on hk which apple dailys' doesn't(?),Trust me,gotta be good for setting both character and lore

Whatever,Best wishes on not getting perished by cops!(pretty sure you won't be cause you probably haven't spoke something politically for at least 2 years on the public internet and you won't be caught for drawing "china virus girl?" and political comments too early haha)

PS:Try to get yourself a fan-base besides the old social meida the X,patron,like a mewe,discord group somethin' alike for a better place for talks 'n discussion i suppose?

Hi fellow netizen! I'm sure the mainland would like to read the comics but that really opens up a can of worms that I'm not prepared to deal with yet, so for now I'll refrain from translating the comics.

1: Tommy has the happiest life compared to the rest of the main cast I wouldn't worry too much about him lol

2: mm it's much more complicated, I also think my audience expects a political opinion from me. It ties to my own experiences with asian culture in general. I am very critical, but I think the public expectation to what I'm critical of is kinda skewed at the moment. There's so much nuance to this story I hope people have a healthy discussion over the conclusion of Zoey's arc in the future.

3: Yellow, Blue and Red are the key colours. What they represent is up to your own interpretation. To me yellow is the self/your values, blue is career/ambition, and red is religion/community/family. There's more colours down the road but these are the most important ones. If there's going to be discussions over the story please feel free to create those spaces! I haven't done so because I am the main writer and I would like these things to happen naturally in the future. It feels wrong for me to create a space as someone with complete authority over the story.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on IWBTWR! Sorry it took so long to respond, I've been trying to find the words to convery my thoughts properly.

[lavenderprose]

I have a lot of thoughts and opinions about people calling Izzy homophobic because honestly I can ALMOST see where they're coming from. Izzy Hands experiences internalized homophobia on a level that is almost sickening to comprehend and that much is obvious from the way he talks to Lucius and, to a certain extent, Stede. His 'toxic' masculinity is a symptom of that but I have my own specific headcanons about that which I'll keep to myself at this particular point; I may very well elaborate at a later time. All I'll say here is that I personally headcanon Izzy as being trans, and though I understand that that's purely a headcanon, it does add some layers to his character.

That being said, I feel like Izzy is operating from a place of "There is ONE safe way to be a man who has sex with men." It's the one he's learned and has been obeying the rules of for probably his whole life. More than likely he's seen the consequences of...not doing it that way. This is something about him that I feel people tend to overlook, especially those who already have bad faith interpretations of his character. They like to use the piracy = queerness metaphor where 'traditional' (Izzy's) piracy is compulsory heterosexuality and the Revenge's (Stede's) piracy is glorious queer freedom, but I don't really agree with that. In this show, piracy is piracy and queerness is queerness. You don't need a metaphor for something that's explicit in the narration.

Izzy (And maybe even Ed, though I hesitate more with this interpretation for him) is a gay (Possibly trans, if you wish) man who thinks he knows exactly how you're supposed to live in order to Survive Being Queer. There are many real life people like him who are good and valued members of our community, but who balk at our current openness because it seems dangerous to them. Like, actively life-threatening. And yeah he's mean about it and he doesn't necessarily need to be. But you'd probably be a little mean if everyone around you was telling you to ignore every layer of protection you've ever wrapped around yourself because you don't need that anymore! It's silly and reductive to think that way! Get with the times!

And that's not to say that either party is in the wrong. That's kind of the whole point; Izzy struggles with the Revenge crew so much because from his point of view, his reasoning and fears are very valid, while Lucius and Stede et al. feel that they are reductive and old-fashioned, and neither side of the debate is inherently wrong in feeling that way.

While I don't think that this is necessarily the intended motivation for Izzy as a character (Honestly, where the writers are concerned, I don't think any of this is That Deep) it's definitely an interpretation that I feel helps to explain his motivations and the choices he makes in the show, if you're so inclined to view him as anything other than a villain. He's a queer elder who hasn't learned yet that he can maybe just a little bit STOP white-knuckling the performative masculinity that he's been clinging to to keep himself safe.

[elbiotipo]

So when it comes to distance in a fictional setting, is metric king? I wrote some fantasy post-apoc recently where the protagonist measured it in Oranges and Aevums (the latter being their own name), but more generally speaking is it worth it to hash out bespoke measurement systems for fictional cultures, do you think?

Oranges as a measurement unit sounds so funny, and a measurement based in... yourself makes surprising sense, given all the measurements based on body parts. Why not YOURSELF?

Well, I would think in a real post-apoc world metric would be king indeed, scientific and technologic instruments are in metric even in the US and you could always get a ruler from a school or scales from a grocery store, so eventually you could get back on track to reforming the metric system. It would be interesting, though, if every society during isolation had slightly different measurements for the same units because of faulty equipment (say, ohms or amperes or even grays) and they had to make a congress to clear things up.

Returning to your main question. My perspective here is the same as conlangs. It's very, very fun to have them, but it's not fun to force your audience to read them. When I write something set in a fantasy or science fiction setting, in my head I'm assuming the characters are speaking different languages and I DO explain them and even give examples of them, but the story itself is written, for both the reader's and the writer convenience, in a language we can understand (Spanish in my case, and then it can be translated). Same with units of measurement. I seldom use direct units of measurement like writing "the ship was 110.3 meters long" (in science fiction, it's often a trap as they force you to stay true to them), when more descriptive language can be used...

In any case, you could do, for the kind of immersion I love, say something like "she was 14 oranges* tall, rather small for her age" and do an asterisk like "*A.N. : 1.39 meters tall". This is very fun when used sparingly, because it gives the worldbuilding obessed reader something to play with, you can do the conversion yourself and learn more about the world, without interrupting the story. Some understandably dislike this approach, but I think that if you know what you're doing, you can hide some pretty deep lore behind it. In one of my favorite retro games, The Ur-Quan Masters, there is an alien race called the Slylandro who live in a gas giant. When they tell you their ancient history, they use their own system of measurment based on the rotation of their planet with its own names like Dranhasa and Dranh. The game actually provides you with the rotation time on "Earth" time, so some dedicated fans did the conversion, and found out the dates fit with major events in the game's past. I thought that was an awesome bit.

But I digress again. Does this mean you should not talk about measurements in your story? No, it can do for very fun plots and digressions, as well as make things more realistic and beliveable. A fantasy world sharing all the same measurement units can be as unplausible as everybody speaking "Common". Let's remember that the current metric system is a modern invention which took a long time to be adopted (and some, well one, country, still resists it). Just take a look at the many, many historical systems of measurement:

This was especially prominent in places like the Holy Roman Empire, where every statelet, county, principality, free city, prince-bishopric, duchy, archduchy, etc. may and most often did have different measurements from each other. Just take a look at how measurements varied from each German region, it's crazy. The systems of weight where particularily important. Before the introduction of standarized coinage, coins also varied not only between kingdoms, but between regions, and even towns, and coins made at different times with different alloys had different values. Rather than money in our modern sense, you could think of them as some kind of 'asset' that could vary in value depending on the circumstances. What's more, those values had to be checked by people who knew what they were working with. Silver and gold content could be weighed, ah, but you need good scales and weights, and someone who knows how to work them! And these people could easily rip you off, or you could lose value accidentally if those scales weren't done just right or fiddled with on purpose. In fact, this is where the word 'Mark' comes from.

It wasn't as easy to take say a 100 something bill and get the change in 1 something coins. There is a very interesting subplot in the anime Spice and Wolf where Lawrence, the trader character, has been paid in gold coins, and he has to trade them into lesser denominations. However, he has to be REAL careful so that nobody scams him given all I told you above. Even getting 'gold' coins was a gamble before modern coinage and banking (another long topic). How much of that is REALLY gold and not an alloy with silver or other metal? Who can you trust to tell you how much your coins are worth? Are they compatible between borders or even time, is this version worth as much as the others? Things that characters in fantasy who have just plundered a dragon's hoard almost never think about. Except in Spice and Wolf.

(here is a gif of Holo to break the wall of text)

This all of course, as again you can see in Spice and Wolf, can make trade very tedious and even unstable. This was one of the reasons why the metric system was so quickly adopted in Europe and then elsewhere; consistent units just allow for easier trade. Lots of other things involving measurement can have a major impact on your story. For one, you NEED consistent and accurate measurement to create even the most basic industrial and scientific equipment. You can wing it for a time like alchemists (and even they knew their measurements) but eventually, you need to measure things to understand them. To have working steam engines, steel production, chemical industries and more, you need to know your temperature is. If you want to do electricity, you need measurements for current, resistance and charge. If you're doing engineering, you need to have lenght, weight and volume very, very clear, or people will die. They don't necessarily need to be universal like the metric system (though it has lots of advantages, being coherent between units and decimal so it doesn't jump between different denominations) but they need to be standarized and measurable.

Most of the above, unless you're writing some kind of encyclopedia about a fictional scientific revolution (BASED BASED BASED) will not affect your characters directly. But IT IS worth keeping in mind for what kind of world your characters are living in. The standarization of measurement units always means SOMETHING in the state of your society, the strenght of the state and centralized authority, the state of scientific understanding (one could say that trying to measure the world was perhaps THE scientific revolution, "Man as a measure of all things"), the capability for industry and the standarization of coinage and trade.

Even if you don't have your characters interact directly with those things, they will interact with them. It's also, like I've said in the examples, fun to imagine characters having to learn or deal with different units of measurement, just as it is fun to imagine them learning new languages or cultural quirks. It's something I've done in the past, in my space opera setting, the worlds descended from the United States STILL use the imperial system, much to the frustration of the rest of the metric human sphere. There is also an alien character who has a hard time to learn human measurements, and that makes her melancholic about her past, as they can't intuitively see the now-extinct measurements she does. Again, man as a measure of all things... this does include other thinking beings...

There's more I could talk about here regarding time, but I did a post about that, though I'm not satisfied with it and will probably redo it in some time at the future. In any case, there's lot to talk about why every calendar in science fiction has 365 days and 24 hours.

As always, if you found this interesting and helpful, I would be very thankful if you gave a tip to my ko-fi! And feel free to ask about anything you'd like!

[uptoolateart]

The Miraculous Child

So, in 'Representation', Felix talks refers to ‘the miraculous boy’ a couple times. He also calls Adrien’s conception ‘a miracle’, meaning Adrien too is ‘miraculous’.

The second I heard this, it hit me that the title of the show has had this extra meaning from day one. If we look right back to the start of the series, it has been a story about children and adults, especially parents, some a little overbearing (like Tom) and some neglectful or downright abusive.

The message I take away is - life, bringing a child into the world, is a miracle. Science tells us how it works, but the fact that it works is almost like magic. Yet, there are people out there who fail to see this and don't value the gift they've been granted.

There will be people reading this and thinking, ‘Yeah? So what about Chloe?’

I hear you.

Audrey is a terrible person, and Andre is no better. When he hauls her off at the end of ‘Revolution’ and says he needs to correct his mistakes, he just sends her away with her mother. He’s washing his hands of ‘a problem’, just like he’s done with everything else, e.g. when he resigned as mayor. He walked away from responsibilities, after creating a mess for the people who voted him into office. Likewise, he walked away from his responsibilities as a father.

Does that excuse Chloe's behaviour towards others, especially Marinette? No. Does it explain it? Yes.

So, let's talk about choice, which has been mentioned several times in the series. Chloe has a choice to become just like one of her parents...or to become something better.

Because, if you think about it, at some point in time, Audrey and Andre and even Gabriel were all children. And children aren't just born nasty. They learn nastiness as they grow up. To become who they are today, they had to have started out in a similar position to Chloe, for example. They represent the potential future for their children.

If we saw them as kids, we'd probably see them being mistreated by the adults in their lives and we'd all sympathise with them and hope for their redemption. But we're seeing them as adults and our instinct is to say oh well, too late, they're just awful people. In fact, they could redeem themselves at any point, as demonstrated by Nathalie's turnaround in Season 5. It's just that, the more awful things you've done, the more you have to atone for. Gabriel would have to do a lot - maybe even have a brain change - to be redeemed. But you see my point.

So, at the end of 'Revolution', we see Chloe at a crossroads. She's on that plane, annihilated by her mother, and hiding by herself in a corner. She browses her contacts and hovers over Sabrina's entry...and her face crumples like her heart is breaking with regrets. Oh, it’s sad.

But she passes over Sabrina and moves onto Marinette. She makes one last attempt to bring her down. It’s an act of desperation – redirecting her own suffering onto another, trying to keep control over things when she’s completely out of control of her own life.

Marinette finally puts her in her place, and we see Chloe fall apart in a real way - for the first time ever. I don't know about you, but I found that very uncomfortable viewing. It was a relief to see Marinette stand up for herself, and it needed to happen...but Chloe's despair was also painful. I think all of those were emotions were intended.

Let’s set Thomas aside here. I don't want to get into debates about what was said on Twitter. He’s not the only writer for the show, anyway. I am just speaking about my personal perception of that scene. Chloe gained heaps of sympathy, after she’d been appalling all season, which was pretty powerful.

The fact is…Chloe needed to be put in her place. But that doesn’t mean she deserved everything she went through. Even so...sometimes these moments are necessary and revelatory. They can be the catalyst for great change.

What I mean is – if you're in denial about your position, redirecting your pain onto others, sometimes you need that wakeup call. You need to hit rock bottom in order to start climbing back up into the light. So, when Chloe fell apart, it was painful...but I also saw it as her potential turning point. As long as she maintained her delusions to escape into at school, it was impossible for her to transform - because she refused to see that there was any change needed. But when you have nothing left…that’s when you might begin rebuilding yourself.

Every episode in Season 5 has had multiple meanings. Looking at 'Revolution', when Chloe was akumatised, she trapped her victims in a maze, going round in endless circles (revolutions). Notably a lot of them were adults.

I think if this had happened early on in Season 4, Adrien would have been trapped morosely in that loop with the others. We saw this kind of thing in 'Guiltrip'. So, it spoke volumes about his growth as a character when he was the first one to seek a way out of Chloe's maze. He immediately used his cataclysm and broke a hole, escaping and letting everyone else out. Metaphorically, what he did was break the cycle. If we think about cycles of abuse, this is what the next generation always has the chance to do - to revolt against the past.

it's interesting, then, that when we got to 'Representation', we saw Cat Noir completely lose it with his father. He needed to let it all out...but he was in danger of going too far...and deep down, he knew it. His worst nightmare was of losing all control, to the point of letting his rage destroy everything he loved. Unconsciously, he's well aware that he runs the risk of becoming like his father. However, his complete breakdown, begging his father to take his miraculous to make it all stop, tells us he won't become like his father - because his conscience is too strong. He wants to break that cycle.

Felix has also done some bad things - but he's begun the journey of redeeming himself and changing. He too is trying to break out of that cycle so he doesn't become like his father.

Kagami is embracing her passionate side, rejecting the coldness and isolation her mother has attempted to breed into her, no doubt due to her own upbringing once upon a time.

And I think there’s definite potential for Chloe to do the same. There’s no reason for anyone to remain caught in these patterns. The trick is to recognise the pattern is there in the first place - because you can’t break free of something if you don’t know you’re imprisoned. At the end of Revolution, I think Chloe finally saw her prison, saw that she was already trapped in her own maze, going round in circles. Now it’s up to her to pull an Adrien and cataclysm the bars that hold her in.

Because like Felix said, over and over – each child is miraculous simply for existing. And miracles should be cherished.

PLEASE NO POST-REPRESENTATION SPOILERS IN COMMENTS :)

[vindicated-truth]

I've been in online fandom spaces ever since I was 11 or 12—which is really not an age anyone should be left alone in the internet with. In our generation's defense though—as well as our parents' defense—we were the first generation to have online experiences in all its forms, including fandom, and no one really knew how to navigate the new virtual space, least of all our own technologically-challenged parents.

I'm now 35 years old, so it's been about two and a half decades of being a fangirl in varying degrees of fandom participation, but throughout the different fandoms I've been in, a lot of it has been spent both reading and writing fanfiction.

And what I've come to realize now, as I'm in the relatively older range of fandom, is that even the mindset changes.

I can tell now if a story, for example, is written by someone younger. And it's not even about the technical things like grammar or spelling, because a lot of writers have excellent technical writing regardless of age.

But it's in the inherent themes in the stories being written, the underlying philosophies and values that stand out the most to me. Even the perception of life, reality, dreams, and fears, it's all so fascinatingly—different now, when you're older.

And it's fascinating reading these stories written by younger fans, because it's also a stark reminder of how you were, too.

I'd think—oh, I used to be like that, too. I don't, anymore, but it's fascinating that I remember I once was.

It's not even a judgment of whether it's a good thing or not—it's just a statement of fact that even your own perceptions change as you grow older. For better or for worse.

I used to be a lot more idealistic, for one. And it makes me smile sometimes reading stories or statements by younger fans, because sometimes I think—I hope you never lose that. That spark and enthusiasm for life—hold on to that, and cherish that, because it can so easily be snuffed out despite your best efforts to protect it.

At the same time, I'm a lot kinder now. Sometimes I'd read stories and statements and see how angry and unforgiving and bitter some fans are and that would also make me think—someday, you'll understand. Someday, you'll realize that people are inherently flawed and more broken than they deserve to be, and it matters that you extend kindness to them, too.

Because you'll realize that you are just as flawed and broken as them, and you need them to be kind to you, too.

They aren't perfect, but then again—neither are you.

Sometimes I think of fandom history, and how it all started with older women in their 40s, 50s, and 60s back in the days of Star Trek: The Original Series, and how it's these older women who paved the way for younger girls all over the world and all subsequent generations to discover a community and passion that will keep that fire of life in you burning.

And I wonder how these older women think of all succeeding younger women, how the perspectives and values change over time.

I wonder how I'll be, too—ten, twenty, thirty years from now.

And it's why I sometimes find it amusing when younger fans say that older women are "too old" to still be in fandom space, when it's older women who created this space in the first place.

I wonder if these younger fans who are now in fandom realize that you never really grow out of fandom. You just grow in it.

And that's something noteworthy too. Because if anything, fandom is a written history of you, too. How you grow, how you change.

And most importantly, how you learn.

All this to say: do not shame anyone for being in fandom, regardless of age.

This is your story, too.

[kurosagileo]

alrighty its post mortkranken thoughts time! under a cut so that spoilers are easier to avoid

(did one for obscuary here)

for a spoiler free thought first off, though, i think the time between episodes both works for and against the story. it's a good pacing so far imo, even if it's disappointing there's not much to do in the game between episode drops. there's enough time to let people analyze the most recent episode and secrets revealed, come up with guesses as to how things connect, and when that starts dying down, there's time to hypothesize about the next episode because teasers have started dropping. Game wise, there's time for people who have been playing for a while to get farther in cases so that once the episode does drop, it's easy to go through whenever you're ready. On the other hand, the time inbetween, the teasers can possibly hype a episode up a bit too much, i think that happened with obscuary and may have contributed to how the episode felt unbalanced (at least to me). High expectations mean there's a lot that could go wrong when things end up differently. I don't think they should release the episodes sooner, that would be an overload, just something i've been making note of and trying to not expect too much from a new episode so that i enjoy what comes out rather than being disappointed with what didn't

spoiler wise, i'll follow the format i had for obscuary!

jiro is winning the idgaf war and i absolutely love that for him. I think the writers did a good job of makng him the straight man to yuri's antics and thoroughly enjoyed scenes with him

yuri... is so silly i love him sm i want to kiss his cheek so that he bluescreens on the spot. i love that he seems like he's gonna be a scientist with questionable morals leaning to the evil side but then he ends up being so expressive about every little thing. he's smart but not manipulative mastermind ike if he's thinking something you Will know it

there's an interesting dynamic between the two which I'm looking forward to learning more about. Some of the few times where Jiro outwardly emotes are during interactions with Yuri. (Also with pc with the body lmao)

now for the story content, not an analysis of what things might mean but just overall storytelling

I think this did well with bringing the standard back up from the obscuary episode. for my thoughts on that, feel free to check out the other post i made. it was far more balanced with the investigation driving things, mc getting closer to the two ghouls, and the progression of mc's curse for the overarching story. the cameos from all of the other characters was exciting to see while going through, and was great for showing how different characters interact with each other. I think each of those small moments showed a lot about the characters.

for a few examples: alan's regrets for not saving naoki, highlighting how much he values being able to save people and blames himself for not doing enough even when he couldn't stop it; leo taking the documents, seeming to just do it to be antagonistic, but actually genuinely helping out both mc's investigation and alan's ass if the files went missing; ren and ritsu talking about ramen in the store, they're getting closer despite ren not liking working at his job and always complaining that ritsu is there, clearly they're starting to become friends; the three vice captains meeting and the absolute tension there

i could go on, each of those little cameos was meaningful imo, not all of them served to progress the main story, but they're important to see, to show how the ghouls are interacting with each other and how they act when mc isn't investigating their house

I think the investigation portion was a little rough near the end. The case wrapup wasn't as satisfying as I'd like, I think the best two episodes for that so far were vagastrom and sinostra, but the framing of it makes sense considering yuri's stigma. (specifically the part of the wrapup where we found the patient was behind things, the fight at the end was something i really enjoyed) It's something that lets yuri process everything instantaneously, so it makes sense that the answer is just given in a monologue, even if it ends up being somewhat unsatisfying. Yuri is a character who likes his monologue, and he's found everything out and is confident in his answer. I don't think that he would present the information in another way

The foreshadowing in this chapter was...... well it could've been more subtle. I kinda wish that while Jiro was leading mc through Mortkranken, there would be more attention drawn to multiple things, aside from exactly what would be relevant. I think that may have also led to the unsatisfying reveal

the very ending with the assembly was also well done, imo. it reiterates that the faculty want mc to gain the trust of the ghouls and is doing so. but it also calls into question where that request is coming from. right now, mc is very much being used by the faculty. she was pushed into the investigator role, pushed into being a student, pushed into earning their trust, threatened with a possible punishment for not being able to prove it. it serves her as well to grow close with the ghouls and be an investigator, and she clearly is, but I really don't think that's anywhere near the reason the chancellor put her in that position. we always keep the spy thing in the back of our minds while reading, while she's essentially also advertised as a spy to the ghouls

the phone call between hyde and sho was both surprising to see, but also not. Sho has a campus chat with hyde where he says that he's using hyde to get ahead any way he can. Learning that hyde is giving secret missions, it's unsurprising that Sho is one of the students he's using. I think this would be too obvious for the whole spy/traitor thing, however... there was one other campus chat that came into my mind, the one between subaru and leo. Subaru's waiting for MC for lunch, Leo approaches and sees he's got food from Sho's food truck, and comments on how Sho is really good at the friend act. Acting like he's a friend to customers to convince them to buy more. While the likely reading is Leo just lying to mess with Subaru (and honestly I wouldn't doubt that), I think it could also be that it's a true analysis of Sho.

He is good a the friend act. Sho has no problem lying to someone to appear nice. He did it to an old lady looking for a train station in the vagastrom episode. Leo told her he had no clue where it was, Sho gave her instructions and after she left, Leo asked how he knew and Sho told him oh I didn't. A lot of Sho's flaws are looked over because he's nice, when he is kinda an asshole a lot. I don't think that he's using a friend act on Subaru, but it's genuinely hard to tell. The scene at the beginning of the episode was cute, but depending on how you read it, it could be Sho playing it up for the bet with Leo.

I doubt the phone call from the end will actually be how we learn about the traitor, but I also think that Sho has a lot more resources than most to be a traitor

[bekolxeram]

No, OMG! I'm so sorry if my ask came off this way. I was genuinely curious if there was any way this could work, hence the question. I used to believe it was Tommy who flew the plane, but once I saw your explanation, I actually subscribed to your view. It does seem more believable. I wish it was Tommy, but I think you're right, it wouldn't make much sense. I was just curious if Tim and the writers were to confirm in the future that it was indeed Tommy who flew that plane, whether it would be at least somewhat believable. That was the purpose of my ask. I didn't mean to disregard your theories. I'm sorry. I LOVE your aviation analyses; I even sent you a coffee from the Kinley cafe 🫣 I hope you don't stop. Whenever I see you posted something, I have this huge smile on my face because I know I'm about to read a banger of a post. It's all so interesting!

Noooo, it’s not you. I actually really appreciate your asks. And thank you for the Kinley Café order, you have no idea how happy it made me.

I don’t get asks often, but since the 8x02 title reveal I’ve gotten a few, all aviation related. I’ve been… honestly, elated. I have the chance to yap about my passion and do deep dives on stuff that never crossed my mind before. Sometimes I get carried away, I’m very much incapable of being normal about planes. Ever since I saw those planes in bts photos, my brain has been bustling with ideas, and at times I click rb/reply before thinking because I get too excited. I would worry later that I might’ve forced my theories on others without being asked about them. But it’s not like they’re harmful rhetorics or antagonistic hot takes, just an info dump about a lot of planes. So people can ignore and I’ll move on.

I especially enjoyed doing research on that C-130 in 2x14, I learned a lot about aerial firefighting in the process. I didn’t pay attention back then, but I noticed the lack of airplanes when Tommy was giving Buck the tour in 7x04, so I went back and found the line from the TV reporter saying it was CAL FIRE.

I suspect that line was shoved in there last minute, because some technical consultants told them firefighting air tankers are never used in an urban environment, the weight of water/fire retardant can flatten cars, houses, it has gotten multiple people killed. I can think of more instances where the emergency seems unrealistic at first, but then there’s a passing line making it kind of possible, just exaggerated. I know we always joke about Tim writing soap opera level surreal emergencies, but I feel like all the other people involved in the making of this show don’t get enough credit, especially those designing the opening big disasters.

I’ve noticed multiple times that shortly after posting stuff about Tommy’s pilot career, a post would pop up in the tag asking people to stop obsessing over timeline. I paid them no mind before, they were probably not personal I thought, a subsection of the fandom does have the habit to use Tommy’s age to call him a predator. But this time, well, my theory was mentioned by name, so they were talking about me.

I can handle bad takes or even attacks from the toxic part of the fandom, I don’t value their opinion at all. Seeing rb after rb from people on our side of the fandom, some of whom I admire, basically telling me to stop being so obsessive over realism, being compared to fans who nitpick certain actors’ accents, tattoos, grooming choices, that one stings harder than I thought.

I know I’m being thin-skinned, I’m making everything about me, I’m fully aware that I’m a disaster. But I find myself hesitating to answer the other aviation related asks in my inbox, one of them particularly asking about the possibility of certain scenario in real life. I’m just not sure my input is welcomed here. I have this fear of unknowingly annoying people with my over-enthusiasm. I feel like that kid who keeps yapping about trains at school that everyone secretly hates again.

I just really, really love aviation. I thoroughly enjoy uniting these 2 things that I love and maybe learn new things from it. I don’t mean to impose. I was very excited this morning when I received asks in my inbox, but now it feels like being slammed back onto the ground, and it’s not a good feeling. I don’t know, maybe it’s time to uncouple these 2 things.