#RE Save Points

[crimescrimson]

Every Safe Room in Resident Evil: Directors Cut (1997)

[spkyart]

THE BOYS ⭐⭐⭐⭐

One of them is a professional yapper

[moongothic]

People often bring up the omake No Respect Time to use as Crocodad Propaganda, and y'know, I think there might be just a smidge more the omake can provide to Crocodad than what people have already discussed in the past

Like everyone's seen the comparisons between Crocodile and the anime screencaps of Don Luffyone, we all know how the two look so similar etc etc. But honestly, the resemblance is even more obvious (and hilarious) when you look at the OG manga version (Sidenote but Don Luffyone is the only one who smokes cigars in the omake... Everyone else has plain ol' cigarettes... That sure was a decision there Oda)

And yeah, you might be thinking I picked this mangacap of Crocodile in particular because the resemblance is the most obvious here and I have My Crocodad Agenda to push etc etc. But I will have you know that the original omake was from Log Book 5, which was published February 28th 2006. Meanwhile that Crocodile is from the cover of chapter 398, published February 6th 2006. So these were drawn by Oda around the same time. I didn't just cherry pick this cover page because it's convenient for my evil agenda, if these were drawn around the same time then the likelihood the resemblance is intentional does legitimately go up a little. (Also since they're both drawn by Oda instead of random animators, again, it's a bit less coincidental and could be a bit more intentional)

But as I said, I think there might be more to the omake than that.

In the past people have also pointed out and joked how a mere few months before Oda revealed Dragon was Luffy's father to us in the story (post-Enies Lobby), in the Monster Time-omake Luffy was depicted as a dragon.

Needless to say, people believe this was intentional foreshadowing (/trolling) to the Dragon reveal by Oda-- if not it'd be one hell of a coincidence at the very least.

The reason I'm bringing that up is that if people think it's safe to assume Oda was hinting at Luffy's heritage in one omake by making him a dragon like his father, then why couldn't Oda do the same in another omake (by making Luffy a mafia boss who smokes cigars like his father)? Keep in mind that Monster Time was published in May 2006 (in Log Book 7), just three months after No Respect Time. So again, these are from the same era. To me, that just makes the resemblance between Don Luffyone and Crocodile seem even less coincidental

Oh, but there's one more omake I want to bring up.

So people do often bring up Nerd!Luffy's appearance in One Piece Gakuen spin-off manga, pointing out how much he looks quite a lot like the Theoretical Child Oda gave to Crocodile in that one SBS. Yeah. So. 'Bout that.

There was this one omake called Red Hair of Class 3-Sea Time, in which Luffy was a loser ass nerd. And man, that resemblance

Like it's one thing when a spin-off manga drawn by a different artist does A Thing. It's another when Oda himself does it

[callmehere-iwillappear]

thinking abt au crossovers and listen. Listen. theres something about seeing someone who is you but not really. you but just slightly to the left. in a funhouse mirror. if just one thing went differently. this is who you could have been. this is who you never could be. this person understands you better than anyone ever could. this person will never be able to understand you because of how differently things went. and thats not even touching on au crossovers that come from different points in canon. look. this is you a year ago. this is you a year in the future. do you recognize yourself? have you changed too much? can you be the person you needed at that time? do you tell them whats in store for them? can you warn them? would that make things worse? do you say nothing and just hope things will go differently? are things too different already? is that a good thing? is that a bad thing? what can you do to save this version of you? is it already too late? are they a lost cause? are you?

[theraprism]

Class subtext thoughts on Gatsby, Flatland, and Bill.

So broadly speaking, we've had some idea of what Bill's home dimension was like since the 2015 in-character AMA, when the idea that it was nearly (if not fully) identical to the world of Flatland was first introduced. During the Weirdmaggedon 4-parter, we finally learned that Bill had obliterated his home dimension and called it liberation. (From what I recall the fan concensus on this information was that it was a malicious act of evil on Bill's part -- up until the Book's release, I don't think the idea that it was a tragedy or accident ever had much ground to stand on.) Journal 3 picked up on this again when it established the existence of Exwhylia, which (importantly!) also reinforced the hierarchical nature of existence that Flatland presents.

I'll own up to the fact I've never read Flatland myself (it is on the neverending list of classics that I still haven't gotten to yet) and will be instead be relying mainly on Wikipedia and Sparknotes clones for this analysis, but the good news is that canon Gravity Falls materials have given us the basics of how Bill's home dimension operated at this point, and so knowledge of the work seems less required and moreso recommended. Similarly to Gatsby (the book as well as the character). More on that later.

To be more specific, the important info that Hirsch has given us about Euclydia is that it was repressive in the extreme. The exact ways that it maintained this are left up to the imagination, to an extent (e.g. there is no evidence of the upper echelons of Euclydia carrying out public executions against the lower classes, as there are in Flatland), but the Book does directly pull an image from Flatland that illustrates the class hierarchy there.

Since Flatland was written originally as a satire of the stratification in Victorian society, the work goes to great lengths to specify and elaborate on the different social roles of each shape (for example, women as lines, though the gender stratification isn't relevant in Bill's case). More relevant is the way that the work considers upward mobility through generations, and the fact that isoceles triangles (working class) are considered among the lowest beings in existence, just above irregular shapes. Bill has been referred to and drawn inconsistently as both isoceles and equilateral, but based on what we learn from Exwhylia in Journal 3, it's possible that this distinction is not relevant in the GF multiverse's reinterpretation of Flatland. See:

I'm sure a part of this reduction of the hierarchy in the original Flatland has to do with the work needing to be at least somewhat accessible to younger readers, but it does textually ensure that, regardless of the specific details of Bill's geometry, he comes from a background where, in spite of his exceptional ability to see the third dimension, he saw those around him receive resources more freely. His singling out of irregular quadrilaterals reads to me as a form of internalized classism; he needs someone to punch down to.

And earlier:

He describes his regular shape as an out-and-out "power". Bill explicitly carries with him the classist ideals and values of his home dimension despite its destruction. The way he internalizes different ideas about himself and who he is is probably a subject for another post, but the point is that these qualities Bill is emphasizing aren't simply a matter of arrogance. Bill is trying to sell himself as a gentleman, a respectable individual from an upper-middle class position.

This is where Gatsby becomes relevant, because The Great Gatsby is all about a man who wants more than anything to cross the threshold of inborn greatness and become a true upperclassman. Bill appealing to his innate biological qualities as evidence for his own greatness relates back to the notion that such greatness is an ontological trait which cannot be given, but can also not be taken away. Note what he explicitly says here about the themes of class in Gatsby:

If you walk up to any college English professor and ask them what Gatsby has to say about the American Dream, I really do not think you are going to hear them say the word "bittersweet". The American Dream is a false idol and illusion; Gatsby himself is utterly miserable and meets a miserable end. There is nothing "sweet" about it.

At the same time, it makes sense that Bill would describe it as bittersweet, because for all his powers of sight, Bill cannot imagine a future where he is happy. Throwing crazy parties every night (for Gatsby at his home, for Bill on the Earth's remains), staring at an unreachable desire far out in the distance -- that's his end goal. He emerged from a position where he was repressed and since then his life has been a steady climb/crawl in the direction of power and control. Both Gatsby and Bill seek to reclaim a lost sense of fulfillment and purpose through this ascent, and both seek to become untouchable as gods are, but both are brought down in the end due to the consequences of their own actions, stemming directly from the violence they bring into their worlds of their own volition. In case you've forgotten, or if you've never read it, Gatsby's money is not clean. We may not see Bill use money, but his social currency is not clean either.

I think it's telling that Flatland can be understood as it relates to Bill's character through summary, but with Gatsby, there is so much subtle incentive to actually read the thing. From the GIF originally posted by Hirsch that I included at the top of the post to the PDF link on ThisIsNotAWebsiteDotCom.com to the fact that the gag in the Book itself goes on for multiple pages when it could have ended after one or two, the intertextuality is paramount. I think that's really cool. It's rare to see intertextuality this well-considered in genre fiction, and I think it makes the whole analytical process more fun.

[thebrainrotsreal]

FINALLYYYYYY. My guys of the jury, this has a tracked 30 damn hours and boy does it feel like it. ANYWAYS, I return for more AU shenanigans because Get Redeemed Loser AU lives in my head rent free. Felt like a nice way to experiment with more vertical style comics? Which is SM EASIER TO PANEL THAN CLASS LAYOUTS. I get why they're so much more common nowadays. Comic,,, so satisfying but at what cost,,, i'm tired. So proud of the top half tho :3.

Okay back to AU brainrot, Mark and Wasp fighting over one of their core differences! I think this is early in their relationship where Mark still thinks Wasp can at least understand what it's like being Nolan's son, only to get smacked in the face with how pride Wasp holds in that title. Anyways, look below to see my suffering made into video.

local artist redoes like 4 damn panels 8 bajillion times and screams into the sky ♡ also if you want fic of this au you should read the fic that @avisisisis wrote about it, ooooo you wanna read it so bad, it's good :3

[localchocobomerc]

I tried telling someone about this yesterday and they felt it was very bleak, but it doesn't feel that way to me:

I really like what final fantasy 7 has to say about failure! I read it as showing how much defining something as just a failure and assigning blame exclusively to the fail-er depends on removing it from the stream of causation and isolating it from context...

For instance:

1. Zack's failure to get him and Cloud to safety after escaping the Nibelheim lab. This is an easy one, because who looks at what he did and calls it a failure? It's obviously incredible that he made it that far AND was able to protect Cloud enough. But his goal was for both of them to make it, and he couldn't do it. I don't think he felt like he failed overall (thank goodness), but another person might have. Which, in context, and looking at the effects of the attempt, is ridiculous.

2. Cloud's failure to keep an independent sense of self after Zack died (after being tortured for years, after being impaled, after losing his mother, Tifa, and his hometown, all in succession). Maybe the not-that-rare attitude of blaming him for this is a fault of the OG script, which I think makes it sound like more of a reasoned choice than it is, whether through translation error or through Cloud being the only one to really talk about it after he realizes that's what happened (and blaming himself for it). Regardless, it is a failure, in the sense that Cloud definitely wouldn't want to forget Zack, never mind construct a false self from pieces of his memory, but he did. Looking at all the causes of this, and the effects (including both vulnerability to external control but also the ability to be present with Tifa when they met again, and to continue to function as the situation demanded), it just starts to feel too simplistic to view it as a failure only.

The story is full of people trying to protect each other and themselves and not being able to, or not being able to in the way or to the extent they wanted, like failing to:

- Keep the sector 7 plate from falling

- Keep the Black Materia from Sephiroth

- Save Dyne

- Save Aerith

- Save Zack

- Stop Sephiroth from calling Meteor

But if you look at each of those things in context, they both have many causes besides "I wasn't enough" and more effects than just "the loss I couldn't prevent." And in most if not all cases, making the attempt achieved other good things, like saving Marlene or giving Zack the chance to see that it wasn't all for nothing... Things that really matter a lot. Ultimately, saving the rest of the planet besides Midgar is another one of these... a good thing grown in the rubble of failure.

I just feel like, as someone well acquainted with failure, this game is saying it's worth trying and continuing to try after you fail, and that's not bleak to me at all.

[bartholomewillustrated]

Now it is only Most morning's that Lazarus gets up very early and does some warm-up painting, there are Some mornings where he has... other... business... to attend to..... ;;;>w>

Tried to do something more pushed and extreme with the lighting this time to get more of that Harsh Sunrise look I wanted in the Morning Painting piece but fell kinda short on and it ended up looking a bit toned-down.. I think I did a better job here! the blue in those shadows really comes out and looks nice and cool.. and I got a nice warm pink undertone in there somehow.. Just gotta keep trying one supposes... either way enjoy! The full picture is on my Twitter (@/bartholomewsart)

[aliusfrater]

[awfullybigwardrobe44]

Constantly in this weird mood where I’m just waiting for God to give me a sign that I’m forgiven because I can’t tell if it’s just my OCD or if I actually have gone over the deep end somehow. I’m not doing compulsions to try to figure it out, so that’s Good, but it just puts me at God’s mercy for whether or not I feel like I can come to Him and believe I’m saved

[apiratefellinlovewithastar]

what an act of love is to leave your baby in the hands of your past self knowing you will die. your baby gets their parent even if it’s not yourself, and they grow to love your baby so much they become yourself

[robo-dino-puppy]

horizon forbidden west | kotallo 8/?

[yaraaltrospace]

Which is your style: Storytelling Structure/Writing Method

I identify as a Snowflake Methodist on the long run. Glad to know there was a name for my type of writing, tbh

More info about each here

Tag your fellow writer/storymaker/lorebuilder/OC tale developer pals!

I tag for starters: @ultfreakme and @janethepegasus!

[wonder-worker]

are there any books you'd recommend for Isabelle of Angouleme?

Hi! I’m really not an expert on Isabella of Angouleme so I'm probably not the best person to ask for recommendations for her. Here are some I've heard of, though I haven't read all of them:

"Isabella of Angouleme: John's Jezebel" by Nicholas Vincent (King John: New Interpretations). I haven't read it myself but I've heard good things!

“Maternal Abandonment and Surrogate Caregivers: Isabella of Angoulême and Her Children by King John” by Louise J. Wilkinson (Virtuous or Villainess? The Image of the Royal Mother from the Early Medieval to the Early Modern Era). It focuses more-so on Isabella's tenure as queen, the period shortly after John's death, and her decision to leave England. Despite what the title may imply, it's sympathetic to Isabella and analyzes her situation in detail.

“Co-Operation, Co-Rulership and Competition: Queenship in the Angevin Domains 1135-1230” by Gabrielle Storey, her PHD thesis which collectively focuses on Isabella of Angouleme along with Empress Matilda, Eleanor of Aquitaine, and Berengaria of Navarre. You can read/download it here, it's an excellent piece for all four women.

Sally Spong has written/is writing:

Isabella of Angouleme: The Vanished Queen (Norman to Early Plantagenet Consorts). You can see her conclusion here. It's nuanced and sympathetic, though not without its issues and pre-conceived notions.

Isabella of Gloucester and Isabella of Angouleme: Female Lordship, Queenship, Power, and Authority 1189-1220 (PHD thesis University of East Anglia).

“Isabelle d’Angouleme, By the Grace of God, Queen” by William Chester Jordan. You can read it online here, though I will say that it's ... very very questionable, accepting the sensational claims of lot of unreliable sources (including the idea of John abducting Isabella in a fit of uncontrollable infatuation) entirely at face-value.

“The Marriage and Coronation of Isabelle of Angouleme” by H.G. Richardson, available here on JSTOR.

Isabella has also been the subject of two complete French biographies till date:

"Isabelle d’Angoulême, reine d’Angleterre" (Aquitaine: 1998) by Sophie Fougere.

"Isabelle d’Angoulême, comtesse-reine et son temps (1186-1246)" [Actes du colloque tenu à Lusignan, 8 au 10 novembre 1996] by Gabriel Biancotto, Robert Favreau and Piotr Skubiszewski.

There are also a few blog posts about her (here and here) which may help if you want a brief overview of her life, though they can get a little sensationalistic sometimes.

Hope this helps! If anyone knows any others, please feel free to add on!

[beneathsilverstars]

ACCIDENTALLY DELETED ONE OF MY LINE ART LAYERS SCREAMING CRYING THROWING UP

[ioannemos]

the particular bad guy of this episode, a little apprehensively: the audience wants to see me die?

nate, with more sincerity than anything he's said to anyone in her presence before: like you wouldn't believe