#Retool (trope)

[hislittleraincloud]

If I ever needed a Harlequin Romance-type of cover for UVC.... I'm dying. Bing, how dare you. I didn't ask for this.

[inspectorspacetimerevisited]

During Lynda Bellingham’s run as the Inspector,

the programme turned more into a soap opera, even being broadcast twice a week.

[theglassesgirl]

The Ithaca Saga: What IS a Monster, how it’s presented, and when fictional S.A is integral to the plot.

So -

This was originally a response to @ / anniflamma which you can still find on my page unedited. But with the new discourse surrounding the suitors, I figured I could retool it as a standalone essay to express a topic I’ve been trying to pin down for a while now; What exactly does the mean when they call a character a monster? What do they do, do the reasons matter, and how does the subject of rape affect how the fandom consider some monsters more unforgivable than others? When IS rape in fiction “necessary” and why such questions defeat the purpose of exploratory creative works.

In this post we will discuss all the major antagonists of the Epic Musical, Penelope’s agency, the label of Monster and the types of moralizing one might do when faced with uncomfortable subjects in fiction and how to prevent these feelings from blinding is about what a story is trying to say.

For those who read my original response; there’s new content to read here and posts that will be referred to, if you’d like to give it another gander!

Thank you,

Let’s begin;

I think making the threat of rape explicit was very much needed, actually.

It’s come to my attention that there are people here and on tiktok who are so uncomfortable with the subject matter in this CENTURIES old tale that they’re both refusing to accept that it plays an important part in the original poem and musical, AND are bizarrely insisting that Jorge should have magically done away with it to make more palatable.

This is beyond juvenile - it’s a clear sign of media illiteracy.

What, if I may ask, do you think it means when you say that the suitors are going to force Penelope to choose one of them to marry.

You may respond that they want to take over Ithaca. That they want to be king. But take a moment to consider what forcing a woman to marry one of them will entail. I wonder if you think that one can divorce the idea of sexual violence in this plot.

It would be…unfathomably difficult to do so. Because you CANT. There is an implicit threat of Penelope’s will breaking and having to have unwilling and reluctant sex with any one of them in the event she just gave up and picked one.

This isn’t a storyline that depicts Penelope of being willing to marry any of the suitors. She is WAITING for her husband’s return. Even if he doesn’t, she doesn’t WANT to marry someone else. Her consent is being violated by the very merit of them being in her palace, eating her food, and threatening her son.

They’re doing ALL OF THIS in order to bend her will in the HOPES of raping her as a bonus to becoming king of Ithaca.

My contention is the use of “unnecessary” when it comes to this trope in media - though themes of rape can be uncomfortable, to call them unnecessary HAVE to meet certain criteria. Which this specific instance doesn’t.

By observing various responses, it’s clear that the threat of rape went completely over many’s head in this instance of the story. So I very must appreciate Jorge making it SO clear that it’s upsetting.

This part of the odyssey, and the musical, is very much about Penelope suffering under the threat of assault for YEARS. In the same way Odysseus was (a thing I touched upon in my calypso essay, in terms of his ambiguous situation in the musical) - it’s a parallel that works as both Antinous and Calypso were introduced (regardless on your personal interpretation of what Calypso did or did not do, but that’s neither here nor there).

It has taken an emotional and psychological toll of either spouse. And the kicker is that neither of them are freed of this situation on their own - they are both rescued by outside forces. Athena/Hermes helps free Odysseus; Athena/Odysseus will help free Penelope.

The looming threat of rape is SO necessary that it helps the catharsis factor we feel toward PENELOPE’s story - it’s nothing to do w Odysseus who by now is a force of nature as big as Poseidon, his actions happen TO her, and it’s up to her to decide (per “would you love me” ) what she feels about that. She can very well reject him! She’s suffered under male violence for YEARS. Odysseus’s violence and those of the suitors toward her are basis enough for the comparison.

Do all men, including her husband, become violent? Does she want to put up with that? We know from her song snippets that she is NOT a woman that simply succumbs to the Rape Rescue trope as suggested by ignorant consumers of media - and I call it ignorance and consumerism because there’s a clear lack of engaging with the material in an intuitive way. It’s just blind consumption - as if one bites into a burger and find a pickle, which you personally don’t like, and having it removed - you can’t treat ART that way .

Penelope is a very intuitive and emotionally intelligent queen. Stop infantilizing her. Her own husband suggests that like the suitors, his actions make him just as bad as they are and presents his hope as being understanding if she rejects him on those grounds. But those ARENT her grounds. She has full autonomy and can make a distinction FOR HERSELF whether she considers her husband equal to the monsters who have harmed her.

So let’s talk about the “Monster” label as it is presented on the entire musical.

Some have erroneously suggested that Odysseus has been given an out to commit cruel and ruthless deeds with out “good justification” - he does it for his family,, after all!

Which is a misunderstanding of everything every antagonist of each saga has done.

Let’s start with the Troy Saga: Odysseus has killed a BABY. He made the choice to put his family over this child. Everything he has done and lost would be for literally NOTHING if he hadn’t, as even if he had killed the suitors and regained everything - the GODS themselves would make sure that child would come to an aged Odysseus and slaughter him, Penelope, Telemachus and his entire kingdom when he came of age.

Odysseus STARTS as a monster. We have been rooting for the man who laid Troy and its children asunder. As such, the label of a monster is NOT so much a morally subjective label - it simply a thing that IS. Or rather. It is what ALL the antagonists ARE, but it’s hardly a condemnation of any of them.

(Peep that one of the first lines Ody says refers back to in the Vengeance Saga is what he did to Troy - he STILL views his actions over there as unforgivable, so not even HE will ever see himself otherwise, the problem was that he felt so guilty over it that he became a detriment (a different kind of monster) to his friends and family when they were all guilty of the same thing and trying to get home.)

ALL of the antagonists have a “good reason” to kill ALL the soldiers (who again, have looted and slaughtered the Trojans) Odysseus and his close friends included. Whether your AGREE is almost irrelevant…because the story itself proposes that it’s irrelevant.

The next saga introduces the cyclops: his motivation is primarily that his FRIENDS the sheep have been slaughtered. You can argue in the scope of things, you can’t empathize with this but it’s his good reason. He’s the son of a god, and these sheep are all he has. His friends, who matter to him as much as Polites does to Ody, are being taken and slain, he is being drugged, attacked and maimed. VERY much was Ody goes through in the final saga. And even so.

The Cyclops is antagonistic to the party, he’s a monster who feels justified killing to avenge his killed sheep. A monster is a thing he IS.

As Poseidon’s son, he asks his father to kill the 600 men who have ransacked his home and beat on him. He doesn’t view his father as being wrong for this. In the same ways Ody and Telemachus don’t waste any time addressing the slain suitors later on. Poseidon is a monster of a god - it’s just a thing he is. Not even being stabbed 100 times is enough to repay the harm he’s done - to most everyone, not just Ody, but we are not asked to quantify that. Just live with it.

Circe has killed NUMEROUS men over the years. HER “good reason” is that something bad happened to her nymphs when she let a stranger in her islands. She doesn’t even promise that she WONT kill in the future - her song ends w the suggestion that the world may continue to need her to puppeteer! Because she does not exist to be “redeemed” - she is somewhat more reasonable and capable of empathy than even the likes Athena, who being a greater and more powerful god, does not have the one on one affection to her follows as Circe does. She’s a monster! It’s a label, a thing she IS.

So here we begin to ask; is it LOVE that gives people the capacity to do monstrous things? Because the cyclops loved his sheep friends, Poseidon loves his son, Circe loves her nymphs.

And by now you’re saying now wait a minute didn’t the Underworld Saga go over this? Why yes it did! And Odysseus decides to “become the monster” - he already IS one by the standards of the cyclops, Poseidon, Troy - they all see him as a monstrous being. But he accepts that, after being one in Troy, he held back and ruined the lives of his men, making him a monster to THEM. His “good reason” for being so!

He attempts very hard to be the General he was in Troy and prioritize them going home, sparing no sympathy towards his enemies - but in the Thunder Saga we see the gods further push him to be completely self-serving like they are. The sun gods cows are harmed, he sends Zeus in relation - his “good reason” being his friend were personally harmed.

Odysseus’s “good reason” is ultimately decided to be the same good reason he had to slaughter the Trojans - to get back home to his wife and son.

Like with the Cyclops sheep, Circe’s nymphs, The Sun gods cows, and Poseidons son, WE are shocked and made to feel some type of way about Odyseuss’s reasoning. Surely HIS personal suffering shouldn’t cost the lives of “innocent” men…but it does! It surely does.

He is a monster. It’s just a thing he IS.

Now, Odysseus spends the next seven years under the thumb of ANOTHER monster. And through calypso own reasoning, despite her tragic backstory, her “good reason” she IS a monster. She’s incapable of understanding why she wasn’t reciprocated. Incapable of empathizing with a human because as a god who has spent eternity alone, it stands to reason she, like all the other monsters mentioned before, prioritizes HER personal suffering over everyone else’s. In some versions she either kills herself or does spend the rest of eternity alone. She’s a monster. This is a thing she IS.

Now what the HELL does all this have to do with the suitors?

Odysseus started the musical a MONSTER. He’s worn different hats, but it is what he IS. It’s a label, not a moral critique.

ALL of the antagonists of every saga have a “good reason” NONE of them are ruthless for ruthlessness sake! It’s immaterial whether you agree with them or not, but to understand them for what they are.

Odysseus is the antagonist of the ithica saga, md while the suitors are the antagonist to him and his family, we see their fate form THEIR POV

The suitors could not have been depicted as “rude youthful men” like Telemachus. That Odysseus killing them should be shocking - a frightening condemnation of everything he’s done and became. But I ask once again - in what world are the suitors not implicitly set up as monsters?

Because again. They aren’t being rude for rudeness’s sake! They aren’t JUST eating Penelope’s food and sleeping in HER house. Them threatening Telemachus, as you propose, isn’t “enough” of a reason because they didn’t wake up one day beefing w this boy. Everything they do is for the express purpose of sexual violence towards the Queen of Ithaca, who upon assaulting, will make it so any one of them will be King.

You can’t separate the one from the other. You get a nonsense scenario. The whole REASON they’re there in the first place.

Even if you create a fanfic where 108 men wake up one day and raid the palace to slaughter the royal family with no intent of sexually assaulting either (because remember Telemachus is also the subject of Hold Em Down) and then fight amongst themselves to be the next king, but then isn’t that STILL a “good reason” for Odysseus to slaughter them?

Now I hear what you may be asking: but if all the monsters of the sagas, Odysseus included, have a “good reason” even though we might not agree with it, what kind of monsters does that make the suitors? Surely and clearly THEY aren’t doing what they’re doing for noble reasons.

I consider them akin to the 600 men who died under their captains command.

Because, as stated before. Odysseus views his actions in a Troy as his start of monstrosity. He did all that to finish the war and do back home. He ruined the lives of all Trojans.

So did his soldiers.

The only moment in time (even in the deleted songs) that the bulk of them repent about the war is in terms that it left them without food.

But glasses! They were just following orders!

Which is what one of the suitors suggest in song 38. Their serpents head is dead, THEY were just going with Antinous’ flow, they are innocent.

Like the 600 soldiers, the 108 suitors sacked a home that wasn’t theirs and harmed a wife and child - does them being the queen and prince pale in comparison to the hundreds of wives and children slain in Troy? Homer is a genius to ask us to see these parallels for what it is.

The suitors ARE monsters. That is simply what all 108 of them are. In the context of the story itself, their intent is to break Penelope’s will, commit martial rape, and become king of Ithaca. They aren’t there for kicks, they aren’t ignorant boys, they’re socially accepted adults abusing the hospitality rule with an express purpose.

So a GROUP of monsters are slaughtered by ANOTHER monster, and though in this instance we can argue it’s morally justifiable, it doesn’t take away from Odysseus’s fear of being rejected by his family. He has ruined the lives of the Trojans, his men, AND multiple gods! To get to this point. He IS a monster. And the story asks US, through Penelope, if he is still worth loving.

Seeing Penelope as merely his reward is so backwards and bizarre. It’s very clear that bad faith interpretations of her are based on objectifying her erroneously, when the narrative presents her as a fully developed character.

In the story both in the poem and the musical that the suitors ARE NOT her guests. She is being sequestered against her will.

In what world could the suitors be “just” murderers and not….very clearly rapists? It’s BUILT into their motivation. You would have to change the very FOUNDATION of the Ithaca plot line and Penelope herself??? To say nothing of Telemachus’s role!

What’s the proposal here? That Penelope invited these suitors? That’s she’s actively looking for a replacement husband? Okay, again, that changes literally SO MUCH of the story, but wouldn’t that put Telemachus in a position where he too has to change? Does he resent his mother for doing this? Is he helping his dad out of spite or because he wants him back? How are we meant to view Penelope in this radically new and hip Epic the Musical? Is she savvy and in her right to choose a new boo? Okay…okay, so then….you want Odysseus to be the only one unchanged and go axe crazy because….hes jealous? He kills these upstanding men….curtain call. That’s all folks!

Absurdity at its finest. You throw Penelope’s agency out the window. Her weaving and unweaving her loom is meaningless or simply doesn’t happen. Or maybe it’s that she wakes up one day and goes hey yknow what I WILL consider marrying one of these guys with no sense of dread and fear. Oh wait Oddy has killed then all! Never mind me feeling unsafe a week ago, he’s done a Bad.

Crazy.

It’s just…not going to end up making Penelope look like a well written female character if Jorge has done what you wanted! THAT would make her a mindless prop. You seem to think she is one, and that’s not the case. Historically, in fact!

She is a whole person in the poem and musical whether you understand it or not. You would have to argue so thoroughly why she sucks and let me assure you - there are entire DISSERTATIONs on why you’d be incorrect.

So, no.

No, you CANT take away the rape in Penelope’s storyline. It matters ALOT. It’s the ROOT of the matter! Could old school vegetales make something up that’s more to your sensibilities? Maybe at its peak but god, I couldn’t possibly come up with a draft that could reflect that. I won’t even try.

The rape aspect of the Ithica Saga isn’t unnecessary - it’s INTEGRAL to the plot. It can make you uncomfortable, but it’s BUILT into the royal family’s suffering whether it’s explicit or not! And it SHOULD be explicit! Because you seem to think because it usually isn’t, that the rape aspect isn’t there!

I cannot imagine coming to this kind of conclusion.

They are not random men going on a siege of the palace one day - you cannot “sanitize” the SUITORS because by the very merit of them calling each other THE SUITORS there is an implicit threat of sexual violence. Because Penelope doesn’t WANT suitors. She rejects them. They’re already violating her consent.

How the FUCK to do you censor the rape when it’s in every action they take? And I know what you’re saying: but didn’t Jorge censor the rape aspect that both Circe and Calypso commit towards him?

Further reading: suggests that ALLUDING to it is not the same as censoring, that it still FITS the PURPOSE of these characters in regards to Odysseus’s suffering under them. That after ambiguity, it is NECESSARY to make the rape aspect CLEAR in order to create both catharsis and MEANING at the end of the narrative. The THEME is still respected and present, it is not REMOVED. Please consider reading the linked follow up that answers this question.

In short.

It’s truly a matter of using one’s goddamn head when it comes to view fictional depictions of rape as “necessary” - because though some depictions can be presented BADLY, to suggest they should not EXISTS lends itself to rape culture. It silences the voices of victims. Its representation denied. Don’t talk about it, don’t even suggest it, because rape is bad.

It’s an action that happens to people. It’s a crime in civilized society. It’s a physical and psychological trauma that has always been. It happens daily, in fact. Though epic the musical is a source of entertainment for you, it doesnt exist solely for that purpose.

When Homer included it within his original oral story, he did so as a storyteller trying to get his audience to philosophize, not simply have fun.

I think we’ve come to some abysmal conclusion that men can’t write about these topics when we have historical evidence of at least one man knowing what the hell he’s talking about. And Jorge has done a phenomenal job even when he hadn’t depicted blatantly.

If you’re uncomfortable to the point of not wanting to see it at all, that is entirely on you, art and creative works allow us to explore these topics safely. Whether it’s from the POV of the assailant or one of the victims commenting on it, fiction is one of the only places we can talk about it and learn about ourselves in a way it doesn’t harm real people.

I don’t even want to BEGIN discussing all the losers who are still harassing Antinous fans or people who genuinely enjoy his song despite/BECAUSE of the subject matter. Its purpose in the story matters more than you policing how it’s presented and how it’s consumed. No amount of people enjoying themselves will take away the foundational POINT of the character and song. It’s perfect the way it is.

Like with the chaos that calypso discourse wrought, you cannot control how people treat a NOT REAL CHARACTER or the songs they sing - if it bothers you that one type of fictional villian is treated one way or another, it is on you to find likeminded people instead of going into others faces and pretending to be a self-righteous prick. You can throw whatever buzzwords you want, the CONTEXT these characters live in has nothing to do with how others want to play with them. If you don’t understand the difference between the two instances, fandom is certainly not for you and will not be changed to suit your sensibilities.

To end this post, I want to thank those who further asked me questions and bounced ideas off with me, and wow, what a phenomenal ending to a grandiose musical. I hope I can see it live, animated, streamed, developed into a game etc whatever form it takes now that the concept albums are published

Thank you all for engaging w my work💖

[bonefall]

What roles are Willow Tail, Quick Water, and Fern Leaf going to be like in your rewrite? I hate most of DOTC but I do enjoy a lot of the side characters, especially them

Willow Tail I know what I'm doing with, Quick Water and Fern Leaf I'm less sure of.

BB!Willow Tail -> Willow Flayed Bare

Willow is a young molly from the Wind Coalition who fought at the First Battle. Her first name was Tabby, and she earned her title for presenting a large, weaved willowbark basket to the Wind Runner. She's an artisan with a useful talent.

Since I completely overhauled Moth Flight's Vision into Moth Flight's Vow, which has a NEW origin for how the Cleric's Vow occured, I'm still reworking the Bunny Bones plot that I'm fond of.

I'm unsure if it's going to be a novella or a catalyst for the conflict of another book. It might be a good way to create an opportunity for Quick Water to run her rebellion

Willow has a petty dispute with one of Clear Sky's kittens; Tiger Sky. It's a TINY bananas squabble. She doesn't like seeing her rude ass sunbathing on the moor, so she starts leaving bunny bones on the border and accusing her of stealing to get her banned from the area.

Skystar, being the man that he is, takes the accusation that one of HIS warriors, his oldest (remaining) DAUGHTER no less, VERY personally. What started as a mean girl moment quickly exploded into total war.

I LIKE the way that the original plot was so unjustified and avoidable it's painful. I just wish it was framed as the miserable, violent moment it should have been. I'm planning on keeping Willow's blinding, but it's the final straw for Tiger who can't stomach this any longer.

Willow is likely going to end up in the River Kingdom, exiled for starting the conflict. She might still get retooled; in a later draft she may become a ShadowClan Mountain Cat.

Quick Water

Aside from a brief moment in Sun Trail where they give her the trait of being 'vain' and being woman 34 that Clear Sky smacks around to relieve stress in Forest Divided, she's suuuuper neglected in the main arc imo.

I haven't read past the part where they unceremoniously kill Sun Shadow in Shadowstar's Life, so I hope to revisit it before retooling Quick Water more. I hate how DOTC takes every opportunity to shit on Tall Shadow when she doesn't fucking do anything.

(Side note: it's kinda why i cant see Shadowstar as the girlboss ppl want her to be. Wind Runner is the girlboss. Canon!Tall Shadow is absolute girlfail. In BB, Tall Shadow is less girlfail but she still has the pervasive energy of... this isnt going to make sense to anyone but me BUT BB!Tall Shadow is SO girl obama to me. Well-spoken high road liberal who gets steamrolled by dirty fighters.)

So BB!Quick Water,

For one she's going to be part of a full family. It's either going to become the Water Family OR her name will change and she'll become Quick Tail.

I think she's going to become good friends with Shatter Frost, as Shadow's Clan early "conservative" types who think Clear Sky has a point.

They might end up with kittens, because DOTC is supposed to be about. Like. Ancestors. It's bizarre that they gave the Quiet Rainkin like 20 surviving descendants while everyone else dies off. Not cool actually.

In any case, I want to boost Quick's role significantly. Let her be one of Tall's key cats, either a hunter or a fighter. Something that isn't surprising when she eventually tries to toss Shadowstar out of power

Shadowstar actually survives this coup. She's one of the longer-lived founders in BB!DOTC, unlike canon where she was the first to go. Quick, meanwhile, is one of the VERY FIRST Dark Forest demons, which I can hopefully have a lot of fun with.

Fern Leaf

(CW: Canon!Slash and the racist trope he's written as that includes physical and sexual violence)

She is VERY up in the air currently, because I'm rejecting Slash as a villain completely. It was SUPER fucked up of them to make TWO stinky, born-evil native villains and then write one of them the way they did. Not only is it thematically RANCID, but it's also LAZY writing.

They have to make Slash a lustful creep so that Clear Sky looks better, because they DIDN'T WRITE A REAL REDEMPTION WHERE HE FACES ACTUAL CONSEQUENCES.

Like... I'm sorry, we understand that the way they wrote Slash is a really old trope, right?? "The natives will kidnap our women and hurt our children if we don't unite, and that's why the colonization of this land was totally cool" Warrior Cats is no stranger to xenophobia, but this time it went so far it invoked an outright racist trope.

(And then they just... totally gloss over that Star Flower is "young" compared to Clear Sky, who was less than 3 at the time, meaning she must be around the same age as the son he is actively abusing and EURGH Forest Divided makes me want to throw up)

SO.

Now that I have screamed about how ROTTEN this part is to stress WHY I need to gouge it out with a rusty spoon;

First of all, Slash has an updated name to help separate him from canon a bit. The Mountain cats call him Dashes for his leg markings, the Park cats call him The Silver Pelt for the color of his fur, his real name is Star-shine. Just "Star" in a casual context, his birth name. "Shine" is a leader suffix.

In-canon, Fern Leaf's purpose is to be abused by Slash enough that she reveals information to Gray Wing, and to contrast Beautiful Boy Clear Sky who beats the shit out of women and kids for good reasons so his abused underlings still wuv him.

So... no. Not keeping that. Lol, lmao even.

While I'm not totally against allowing Star to remain some type of harsh or even abusive towards his cats, IF that remains, I need to stress how much it is influenced by the constant stress and violence the Forest Cats are surrounded by. Harsh times don't cause abuse, but they do contribute, and even important, protective people can still abuse a victim.

Doesn't make it okay. Doesn't even make it easier to heal from. It robs you of the simplicity of it all-- being hurt by someone you desperately want to remember fondly.

Still, it's a very fine line to walk when I already have a big problem to fix here. I'm dealing with an egregiously racist trope, even if I HAVE already removed the MOST awful parts related to Canon!Slash's behavior (it's not appropriate for the tone I'm setting or something im comfortable writing).

But the physical abuse is a huge part of Fern Leaf. So, do you see my conundrum? I am confident handling the nuances of abuse, but this part of the story could use bleach.

I have a few ideas, one I'm leaning towards, but I'm still open to suggestions

Idea 1: Fern Leaf is one of Misty's kits

This was an earlier thought I'm moving away from, but it's worth mentioning. I already have Birch and Alder I'm doing this with, with Alder Claw eventually defecting from SkyClan, so adding Fern Leaf to the litter might be redundant.

In any case, Milkweed was mates with Misty. If this idea stays, Fern could be the one kitten she managed to escape with, forced to leave the other two behind. But then I wouldn't keep Fern's abuse, y'know?

(Plus Milkweed has so many kittens to pick from that I already need to shave some down. She's got like 6 in canon; I've gone over it before but a massive reason why WC's family trees are so tangled is because of "superqueens" like this. They tend to give one parent a lot of kits instead of giving a lot of parents a few kits.)

Idea 2: Fern Leaf is Star's daughter

Either with or without abuse, this is the one I'm leaning towards. It would mean she can show up a lot through the story as his ""lackey"" until Thunder and Bright learn that her and her dad are just like them.

If I nix the abuse (which seems wisest at the moment, honestly) then Fern can still be covered in her iconic scars, just from tangling with Park and Mountain cats constantly. Naturally she's at the forefront of battle patrols, she's fighting alongside her dad.

Plus, there's lots of opportunities for overhauling the dynamics from canon. Her mom didn't "abandon" them, she was probably attacked by the settlers. Star can be a good parent or just one with more complexity, instead of whatever canon was trying to do with Slash and this unrelated kid he hits.

(Re: very strange they refused to acknowledge that sometimes biodads are not worth forgiving or coddling. Interesting that Tom the Wifebeater and One Eye are sympathized with by the narrative for having kids. Curious they decided Canon!Slash of all characters would NOT be a father.)

Idea 3: Shuffle Fern into a Mountain or Park group.

AKA: prioritize the portrayal of intense physical abuse and her recovery, while avoiding tying it to the Forest cats entirely.

I feel like this one is the least interesting, but I'm keeping it on hand just in case. Like it says on the tin, she'd get any association with Slash/Star removed. I'd try to keep her developing a bond with Bright Storm though, since one of Gray Wing's... okayish moments was his interactions with Fern in trying to encourage her to leave.

(Even then, i really cant stand how the narrative concludes through Gray Wing that Slash is super evil because he doesnt feel love. And that he just decides to not tell Tall Shadow there's an evil group of cats spying on her and planning to invade because... Wisdom idk.)

If I do this, I will probably put her into WindCo. Their "homestead" system where individual families own mini-territories is a ripe situation for abuse to occur in, and the very structure of WindCo means that there's no one around to stop it or seek out for help.

Plus, maybe I could find some way for her to help out Thunder's crew as a WindCo insider. It's not a total wash, I just find Idea 2 more interesting.

[fancyfade]

every female character who was created with sexist tropes or under blatantly sexist writing in mind deserves someone to retool her character and that person should be me

[summerongrand]

I believe that Tim wronged Lucy and took away her agency. Love is a verb and we act this verb out through our actions and decisions. What Tim did to her was not love. It was out of a selfish need to protect her because he thinks he knows what's best for her better than she does. He doesn't.

Chenford has a long and difficult, uphill road ahead if they want to be together again. Tim is gonna need to come to terms with a lot of things, starting with how he treated Lucy. And he's gonna need to be willing and determined to change for her and for him if any healing were to happen. It's gonna be rough for him because he's gonna need to unlearn a lot. He'll need to treat her better. And the writers will need to do Lucy better because this whole "using WOC as plot devices for their male counterpart" trope needs a retool.

Nobody - actors included - knows if they'll get back together in canon. I'm hopeful they will but I'm also not going to get my hopes up.

[slimeboiss]

I'm bored and with more Hundred Line news slowly dripping out I figured that I'd give my impressions on all the characters we've seen so far.

TAKUMI SUMINO

The protagonist himself, and probably the one guy we know the most about, even if most of that is just standard protagonist stuff. Kodaka's protagonists pretty must just follow the same archetype - relatively normal character among a cast of far more talented and impressive psychopaths, which usually leads to him developing a complex about it. And from what we've seen so far... Takumi seems to pretty much fit the bill to a T. Will he probably subvert expectations? Most likely - we've seen it with Hajime and Yuma from Rain Code before. There's definitely more to him than meets the eye, but I highly doubt that he's gonna be anything more than an average guy at the beginning, the straight man for the more unhinged characters around him.

He *does* seem to have an edgier look than every other protag we've seen so far. The rest of his look is pretty background character coded, which fits, but his hair makes him a dead ringer for Yomi from Rain Code. Which if you still remember that game, is a pretty far cry from "just an average guy". 50 percent chance that this is some sort of stylistic choice or if it actually means something about his personality - maybe he's a lot more rebellious than he seems from a first glance? Hard to say.

From the earlier promo art from before we knew what this game was supposed to be, the two "protagonist" characters had the same red hair and black color scheme, plus the katana that Takumi uses in battle. It looks like these traits were carried over to the final design at least - an interesting tidbit, even if it meant that we lost another potential female protagonist. This time with glasses, even!

DARUMI AMEMIYA

The second character we know the most about so far, and she's gotta be one that sticks out the most. When the trailer first dropped in June I swear like half of all discussion was just talking about her - more specifically, her design.

On first appearances, she very much reminds me of like a Kokichi-esque character, you know the one character in every game that just exists to make trouble and make the game more interesting when Monokuma's not around. She's a murder game fanatic, she has a bunch of crazy sprites, and also fights with floating knives. She's like if you asked an AI image generator to create THE danganronpa character.

She's not the first female character to be like *this* in Kodaka's works - Junko, Genocider Syo, Shinigami, etc, etc. - but exactly WHAT her role is is hard to pin down. She's been a lot more prominently advertised than other characters, so part of me believes that she has to have a significant participant in the game. Whether or not she's THE designated problems clown that every Danganronpa game, 90 percent chance she's going to be like top five most popular characters to come out of this game. hundred percent guarantee.

As a bonus note, I wonder if she was based on this character from the old promo art before the game was retooled entirely? I have nothing else to go off besides similar vibes - but it was a thought I had nonetheless. Probably the only other character from these early images that I can see carrying over to the final game besides Takumi, so this is the last time I'll bring it up, promise.

EITO AOTSUKI

TV Tropes says that he's supposed to be an apprentice astronaut - I have no idea where they got this from, but it would make him design make more sense. Plus his last name also means "blue moon", for what it's worth.

On the surface this guy seems like a coolheaded nerd. That was my first impression anyway. Someone said early on that he had Nagito vibes, and well... yeah I can definitely see that. Pretty boys in Danganronpa are hardly ever sane, and aside from his massive forehead he is definitively a pretty boy. Of course, this was before Tokyo Game Show came and went and...

Well, you've all seen that screenshot by now lmao

So yeah he's definitely gay. And gay for Takumi, no less. And if we know anything about characters that gay homoerotic tension for each other in Kodaka games (and Uchikoshi games to some extent), is that they're NEVER unproblematic. Just look at his face in that CG - he's definitely a freak.

As a side note, when the trailer first dropped I was under the impression that his weapon was a huge ass wizard staff, which fit with his whole nerdy vibe. I then realized it's actually supposed to be a big ass scythe - so make of that what you will.

HIRUKO SHIZUHARA

I fucking love tall women with long hair and glasses. Anyway, she's the cold, serious type with a penchant for bloodlust. She has a giant axe and admits to getting excited cutting down monsters. She's a freak yeah, but at least she does that while looking hot.

A lot of people have compared her to Peko for obvious reasons, but honestly, she's like a pretty direct copy of Martina Electro from Rain Code to a T. A statuesque woman with glasses with a lust for blood? Yeah that sounds familiar. For how much of a clone she is, the one thing that differentiates the two is that, for all her presence, Martina was ultimately submissive towards the far more problematic Yomi (the guy I said is identical to Takumi, ironically) - while Hiruko hasn't really given off those vibes so far. Wouldn't be surprised if Kodaka doesn't somehow work that in though. Disappointed, but not surprised.

TAKEMARU YAKUSHIJI

I don't have good quality shots of him on hand so enjoy this crusty cropped screenshot of grumpy Takemaru.

Not much to say about this guy so far. From what I've gathered from his intro, he's a rough and tumble type of guy, a delinquent who still believes in justice. And he used a motorcycle in battle. Sound familiar?

I can see him being a standard "jerk with a heart of gold" - he doesn't seem to be quite as violent as a certain other motorcycle riding delinquent, but who knows. He's one of your starting party members, so I'm guessing he has some early prominence in the game.

KAKO TSUKUMO AND HER BROTHER

Putting these two together since they seem to be a package deal - and to be honest we're reaching the point where I don't have a lot to say about most of them.

Kodaka has NOT had a great track record with brother sister relationships - yes, not every brother sister relationship he's written has devolved into incest, but when Kako is saying "dearest brother" and seems to practically joined at the hip... can you really blame me for being a bit hesitant? There are of course ways that this doesn't end up being gross, and I sure as hope this doesn't turn out to be another Junko/Mukuro in DR3/Kiyo Chapter 3 situation.

OKAY, my fear from first impressions aside, Kako seems to be the meeker, quieter of the two, while her brother acts as her assertive protector. I don't think there's a scene where they've been apart so far... take that as you will.

Kako mentions that the two of them havent graduated junior high yet (im assuming that means theyre ninth graders, around 15 years old) - so they're presumably in the same grade. Maybe they're twins? It's hard to tell with same-face syndrome and all, but hair style aside they do have similar faces. Which does lead me to wonder... what if they're identical twins, but Kako's brother is transmasculine. This is just my pipe dream honestly - Kodaka hasn't been great with LGBT rep before, buuuuut he's improved... somewhat? Uchikoshi, on the other, is pretty good on LGBT issues - famously good even, especially in Somnium Files. It's hard to tell what influence Uchikoshi has had on the game aside from the branching paths approach to storytelling, but I have a little bit more confidence in the LGBT rep in this game if Uchikoshi is on the team.

Don't have much else to say about them, other than I'm CROSSING my fingers that they don't turn out to be weird. On my knees even.

ANGIE YONAGA TALENT SWAP

I know it's kinda cheap to do the whole "this character looks like this character" shtick because Komatsuzaki's style has had sameface syndrome since the very beginning, but coome ooooon, if you're going to give her the same skin tone-hair color combo then it's going to be impossible not to notice.

Anyway that aside, I can't really say much else about her. We hit the point where these character's dont have names yet so I'm going in blinder than blind. Out of all the characters, she seems like she could be a Danganronpa character the most - her outfit very clearly communicates a "talent", I'm guessing mechanics.

She gives me tomboy vibes. Like, she's also one of the only girls in the entirety of Kodaka's games to wear full-length pants as far as I'm aware.

THE TOKEN THING

Im still not sure whether or not this is a boy or girl. I'm leaning towards boy, but I'm only like 80 percent sure that's right.

He's the token character with the cartoony design that's inevitably going to rank at the bottom of every popularity poll regardless of whether they're actually a good character or not. Character-wise, they come off as a shy fifth grader - Chihiro level shy, not whatever Mikan had going on.

not much else to contribute to my opinion other than that their design is definitely just a retooled beta ryoma

THIS GUY

Exaggerated screaming sprite? Cartoon character on shirt? Fuckass hair cut? Yeah this guy's a fucking nerd. He's going to be Takumi's annoying "best male friend" character who you either love despite his eccentricities or want to shove off a building. Or both depending on which day you're on.

Flip of a coin that he's also the token pervert character.

-

Aaaaand those are the first ten characters. There are still five more characters to go through (plus the mascots), but I wanted to ask why the characters were split up this way. Why don't the other five guys show up at the beginning? My current working theory is that they're part of a separate class, perhaps one that gets the rest of their students massacred, leaving these five as their sole survivors. There is ONE character that could be an exception to this, but we'll get to her when we get to her.

GUY WHO LOOKS LIKE HE SELLS KNIVES

Yeah you can probably find better higher quality images somewhere else.

This dude... he's edgy. He's like someone's Tokyo Ghoul OC. He gives me Korekiyo vibes, but like, in the first impressions kind of way. He seems like a laidback kinda guy that would still stab you in the throat when you look away. And it looks like he's threatening the bowl cut nerd with a knife in at least one route, so that's not far off the mark.

His design also feels kinda traditional japanese mixed with modern gothic elements - the blue hair and eyepatch. The eyepatch also has an eye symbol on it, so symbolism yay.

SAMURAI GIRL

A real prim and proper girl. Highly traditional. Nothing much else to say, she has a cool design. That's not always an indicator of a "good" character in these types of games, but one can hope.

GREEN TOMATO GIRL

Hard to imagine this character isn't going to be a chuunibyou. Or at least, very difficult to take seriously. The creepy smile reminds me of a jack-o-lantern... wait is that the intent?

Not a lot to go off on rn, but she's definitely one of the characters I'm more interested in finding out about, if only to learn why she wears a mask with a smile for hours at a time. What's the mask for? What is the point of the mask?

ABSOLUTE UNIT

When I first saw this character from behind on the cover art, I thought she was chubby. Turns out she's actually just jacked. She's cute! She looks like a jolly character, just a ray of sunshine. It's nice to get female characters that don't just fall into the same body type.

As a side note - this isn't as blatant as Ryoma's design, but she does remind me a bit of one Sakura's beta designs, which gave her a more traditionally cute face to contrast with the rest of her body.

Her more cartoony face also reminds me of Ibuki's beta design too, although hers doesn't look *quite* as stylized based on the few brief glimpses we've gotten of her.

KARUA KASHIWA

One of the more mysterious characters so far - Takumi's childhood friends that Takumi tried to protect from the monster invasion. We don't actually know what happened to her after that - she;s not with Takumi when he wakes up, but she appears alongside the rest of the cast with a different outfit.

I know danganronpa same face syndrome is insane, but its hard to imagine that we're not at least meant to assume that these two are the same character

Theres zero chance that there isnt a huge twist regarding her, but what exactly she is or what role she plays is anyones guess because there hasnt even been an english trailer since what? June? Oh, speaking of June-

Both Kodaka and Uchikoshi have a habit of introducing female characters to be pseudo-love interests/close confidants. Think Kyoko, Chiaki, Kaede in Kodaka's case, and June, Phi, Iris, Mizuki in Uchikoshi's case. As far as characters we've seen so far, she fits the bill the most so far. She's the childhood best friend with a ton of mysterious circumstances surrounding her! She has white hair and purple eyes!

However because she's so obviously suspicious and close to the main protagonist, that also means that the likelihood of her actually being the "mastermind" is close to zero. So congrats Karua fans!

SIREI

Serves the same basic role as Monokuma but instead of Monokuma's gimmick of having the voice of a children's mascot, he instead has a deep sexy voice. I don't know whether or not he's supposed to be the antagonist or moreso a morally unhinged mascot character ala Shinigami, but idk both seem just as likely.

I would have a plushie of him.

NIGOU

ninety percent chance this thing is literally just comic relief who cares

IN CONCLUSION

I spent an hour typing this out and embarassed myself in front of my mutuals by revealing that im invested in how danganronpa 4 turns out.

[ilikekidsshows]

Do you think Marinette in s4-5 is OOC or a product of retooling? I've seen many people said pre s4 Marinette won't do anything that hurt cat noir either physically or emotionally since she care for him and is the real marinette. But then again I also see people said s1-2 Marinette is the real Marinette.

---

Yes, but no. Marinette's character has been altered, but it's almost completely based on things that have been there from the start. They just didn't used to be a problem. It’s called Flanderization on TV Tropes, when a character gets stripped of their nuance so that the writing can focus on some aspect of them and make that aspect more extreme. But this process doesn’t usually involve inventing new things for the character, unless the writers try to make their simplified version more complex again.

Marinette absolutely would and does hurt Cat Noir in the pre-retool show. However, it wasn’t nearly as consistent, constant or extreme back then, and Cat Noir wasn’t made to apologize for being upset about it. This unequal part of their relationship has been exaggerated and goes unquestioned far more.

Even before the retool, Marinette hurts the people she cares about. However, before the retool, Marinette could come down from her occasional high horse to admit she’d been in the wrong and would often work to make up for it. After the retool, Marinette stays on her high horse constantly and just goes: “I had good intentions/I didn’t mean to/I was correct, actually" or whines about how bad she feels until her victims coddle and console her.

Chloé used to be basically Marinette’s shadow archetype in the early seasons. She was a a reflection of what Marinette could become if she let her selfishness and entitlement get out of hand, which was showcased in Animaestro when they actually teamed up to bully Kagami just because she was bitchy (in their minds) and too close with Adrien. Marinette doesn't go out of her way to hurt others, but she often doesn't care that her attempts to get what she wants hurt others until she actually sees that someone is upset.

Post-retool Marinette has started to resemble early-series Chloé, with her high social standing and tendency to treat others as lesser. The only difference is that, for Marinette, that mistreatment isn't the goal but the result of her pursuing some other goal, usually getting with Adrien. But the audience can’t see this similarity because Chloé has also been flanderized into what should be a parody of her mean girl archetype, but we’re expected to take seriously as a threat.

[troutfur]

And I am done with the main Shifting Roots storyline. I will read the bonus short stories at the end before giving my full review. I have a lot to say about this book, how it reflects its origins as a Warriors OC fic, what it does with story tropes common in this fandom, and what its significance is for the many other projects that like it were originally Warriors AUs until their worldbuilding diverged so much it made more sense to retool it as an original story.

[facewithoutheart]

Thanks for the tags @martsonmars, @forabeatofadrum, @ileadacharmedlife & @rimeswithpurple ❤️ lovely to see you all today.

I’ve been in a bit of a writing hole since finishing my last fic, so I’ve been plotting and organizing and retooling and trying out a few new WIPs here and there. Nothing too substantial.

From a new WIP where I’m trying to return to my roots (snowbaz, established relationship, crack with smut):

I’ve gotten the drop on Simon Snow and he absolutely knows it. I lead him toward our bedroom, my hips the swinging bait on which he’s hooked.

Except… wrong metaphor.

From an old WIP where I’m trying to apply what I’ve learned since last year’s nanowrimo failure (original story, strangers to nuisances to lovers, other tropes unknown):

“Anna…”

“Bryan.” She drags out the vowels.

“Permit me my peace.”

“But it’s Friday.”

“Counterpoint: we’re not twenty.”

Give Life Back to Music switches over to Ain’t it Fun and Anna’s grin widens. “Aren’t we?”

“No,” Bryan drawls, pulling over an onion to start chopping. Part meal prep, part defense. “My liver doesn’t benefit from the same feature as your playlist.”

“Having remained functionally the same since our first year of college?” She walks over to the fridge, pulls out a Shiner and pops open the top. “Don’t I know it.”

I’ve been having more fun making playlists for my original story than actually writing but some words have happened!

I need to get back to my published WIPs but I just can’t find the energy. Maybe soon.

Tagging @bookish-bogwitch, @cutestkilla, @sillyunicorn, @you-remind-me-of-the-babe, @whogaveyoupermission, @stardustasincocaine, @thewholelemon, @onepintobean, @larkral, @aristocratic-otter. @artsyunderstudy, @fatalfangirl, @captain-aralias, @raenestee, @moodandmist, @confused-bi-queer & @shemakesmeforget

[polniaczek]

If you could rewrite the last season of the facts of life and give the show a proper ending what would it be like? What would you change and what would you keep the same?

Great question! I'm sure there's lots of things I'd change in theory but most of my "wish this happened differently" feelings happen at earlier points on the show.

Some Things I Would Change:

S9 Jo isn't so feminine for starters. S8 Jo is as feminine as I ever want her to be. In multiple episodes, by multiple characters, it's agreed upon that Jo wearing traditionally feminine clothes and makeup, softening up her appearance for guys, isn't who the real Jo is. So, she wouldn't fall victim to the trope of the hard, rebellious tomboy becoming a soft, conforming woman. S4 Jo would neverrr pay someone else to work on her bike.

Either she doesn't let Rick pressure her into marriage, and the wedding doesn't happen, or Rick flat out doesn't ask. In my dream world, Rick and Jo are both queer and there's a whole "self-recognition through the other" moment early on in the season and they ARE going to a drag party in that one ep and I like him a little more. lol In the real world, I say Rick is no one special to Jo, just a goofy, annoying friend who doesn't recur too often. And we already had one of those, his name was Roy.

I just need to vent about something for a sec because what show is this? This is not our show. This looks like Home Improvement. Step by Step. This looks like a misogynistic 90s sitcom, and the season has been touched by too many men, and if you look at the writing and directing credits for it on wiki you'll see I'm right. Get these men out of here. Fuck S9 actually, anon, you've uncanned the worms. 😅

Mrs. Garrett and possibly George return to bring more energy to the show. Beverly Ann’s presence doesn't serve much purpose (though I do think she's funny), and Andy's storylines are lowkey half-baked and boring and could've benefited from George's presence over Pippa.

Pippa doesn't show up. Sorry to any Pippa stans out there?? I don't hate her, but what a waste of screen time.

Tootie gets to act her age. The writers treat her like the others, but that girl is like 19 and practically married herself. We also get to see more of her career pursuits rather than her just showing up to scenes with these big announcements or passing mentions of auditions.

Natalie has BEEN the sexually liberated one, so there's no need for the show to focus on it so seriously. One or two quick cracks about her satisfying sex life and that's that. On the flipside, I kind of hated how unserious her episodes about journalism/writing were in comparison to the episodes about Blair's and Jo's career pursuits.

Also

Things I Would Keep the Same:

Blair’s arc in S9 is solid. I liked that she was forced to confront her issues with self-image. I liked that with law she found a source of confidence outside of her money and looks. It was a great way to wrap her story up. I wouldn't have been mad if she had chosen the law route in the end, but I'm not mad about the Eastland route either. The episodes themselves are nonsensical, but the grandiose effort does suit her and it would've been a watchable spinoff.

Jo ending up at the center is a good fit for her character. It's interesting in comparison to that one scene in New York, New York where she and Jessie go to the center in the Bronx, and Jo is the one trying to help people. She does mention the interest in becoming a legit social worker, so as far as I'm concerned that's her real ending.

Tootie's personality and goals never change which is about the only great thing they ever did for her.

Jeff becomes the hunky college-educated boyfriend after his illiterate beginning on the show, love that for him.

Natalie's spinoff ep was decent enough. Definitely would've needed to be retooled if it had worked, but she had more chemistry in one scene with David Spade than in all her scenes with other guys.

Believe it or not, I've not thought about this much, so I have no idea how I'd prefer it to end differently

[squirrellyshorrorreviews]

Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey (2023 & 2024)

I'm doing both in one post because it feels right.

After Christopher Robin abandons them for college, Pooh and Piglet embark on a bloody rampage as they search for a new source of food.

Not wanting to live in the shadows any longer, Winnie-the-Pooh, Piglet, Owl, and Tigger take their fight to the town of Ashdown, leaving a bloody trail of death and mayhem in their wake.

Where to Watch: Peacock

Score: 2/10 (1/10 + 3/10)

Hear me out.

These movies are trash. Not unwatchable, mind. Still trash. But.

BUT.

Together you've got a really interesting picture of how to pivot like a champion.

Rhys Frake-Waterfield gives an absolutely TRASH horror movie in the first one, maximizing on the copyright lift but putting kind of minimal thought into where it was going. It's hastily made, paced so terribly it annoyed me at points, not fully thought out, with some fun slasher movie ideas in there and some old standby tropes. Solid cinematography and practical effects with uncanny valley levels of costuming is held back by a weak script, weak acting, and distractingly bad CGI.

Then the second one happens. Makes the first one an in-universe bad movie and basically starts over from scratch in what I can only describe as a fucking power move. It gives more (read: ANY) thought to how it wants to use the children's story in a horror setting. Gives more solid characters to work with. Overall generating a better movie, but the bar was in the floor.

If this was by design from the beginning it's a good choice; but based on my cursory look, it seems like Waterfield just had more time to retool his universe while he waited for Tigger to enter public domain.

The sequel fails in some of the same ways the original did; the pacing is roughshod at best. The script, though stronger, is still weak. But it hits the 80's slasher schlocky horror note better and more clearly in the sequel than the first. If you're going to watch these, I'd say do the second one first. Or only the second. Everything you need to know about the first one to understand the second is explained in the opening animation. You legit do not need to watch the first one.

It lacks the depth I want to see in good, toothsome horror movies. They're not great. They're not childhood-ruiningly fantastic or even shock-jocky. They're just popcorn slasher movies through and through. Which isn't a bad thing. Sometimes that's what you want and it's good to see that little slice of the genre still alive so long after its heyday.

Blood and Honey 2 gives shit Texas Chainsaw Massacre Remake meets Nightmare on Elm Street Part 3 meets the American McGee's Alice PC gamer demo, if that makes sense.

These... just have Winnie-the-Pooh in the title.

[they-lived]

For the writer's ask game: 12 and 17!

Thanks for the ask friend 💕✨

12) a trope you’re really into right now?

Super vibing with friends to lovers right now! Something so sweet and so tender about a care that runs so deep through your soul that romantic love blooms!!!!! It’s so pure!!!! The history between two characters is chefs kiss

17) talk about your writing and editing process

I am a firm believer in sitting down and getting the initial concept out and sitting with it for a bit. Basically going back and retooling and reworking as I go. I try to pre-write a chapter or two (or 9 if you’re sources of sunlight lololololololol) so that I get a break from looking at a document and then I can edit before posting. Sometimes I get a beta but mostly I do it all in house!

[scienter]

Why do people hero worship Klaus?He barged into Mystic falls to murder a bunch of kids.He actually did murder Tyler and turned him for his selfish experiment.He stripped him off of his freedom and murdered Tyler's last living family.Tyler simply led a liberation movement by helping unsire other hybrids like him who klaus had enslaved.Klaus yet again went after him and did everything possible to ruin his relationship with Caroline.He threw him out from his own home and threatened to kill him if he was in the same vicinity of his own girlfriend.On what ground was Klaus playing the victim card when he destroyed Tyler's entire life for sport?

It's the Draco in Leather Pants phenomenon.

As TV Tropes explains, "Draco in Leather Pants is when a fandom takes a controversial or downright villainous character and downplays their flaws, often turning them into an object of desire and/or a victim in the process. This causes contradictions with the established characterization, and fanfic writers have to openly retool the character to fit this demand."

Draco in Leather Pants occurs in every fandom. It's especially prevalent for characters the audience considers physically attractive though.

[mayordeas-clone]

if yanderedev was ever able to take a joke about his game then yansim could have been retooled into a dumb shitpost that actually played into the absurd anime tropes it deploys. but no alex is like "this game is very serious and dark so please take it seriously" while in the same breath being like "no i can't rename the characters that just have random nouns as names, they've been like that since the beginning"

[chuckletons]

here's me talking (or rambling) generally about the jb comics in cn starring/cartoon cartoons and block party. i'm not a huge fan of most of the stories. some of this is also more series bible talk except with a focus on bunny, johnny and suzy as opposed to just johnny and carl. also longg post underneath the cut. some scattered trivia and notes at the end too if you're interested in that sort of thing

the most notable instance of bunny making johnny do chores is the beginning to "i, fly." we never really see it happening otherwise. however, this is a reoccurring theme in the comics. it also matches up with the pre-retool bible stating that johnny gets an allowance from bunny each week.

in most of the comic stories, bunny has a low tolerance for johnny's behavior and often threatens to kick him out and otherwise fully embodies the "aggressive nagging mom" trope. this is even noted by "charles d. brown," a fan that sent in letters. there's also a running gag in a few stories of bunny chasing him with a bat? that is completely absent from the show (and likely wasn't allowed even if they wanted to.) bunny instead takes the role of beating the tar out of any man that threatens her son. van's bible and the retooled version seem to be similar in the way bunny uses guilt to get johnny to do what she wants. that specifically was not a retool invention. although s1 bunny wasn't very fleshed out, nor did she appear a lot, van was planning to do more with her before he got fired. the retool was going to harness a much more edgy identity, so it makes sense.

back on topic: comics also feature certain panels such as bunny asking who would be stupid enough to give johnny a driver's license.

my biggest problem with these stories is how frankly miserable some of them feel. johnny and bunny's relationship is a big part of that. in the beginning to the smarty pants story, we see bunny pouring a super-sized box of antacid into her mouth as soon as she sees johnny hitting on a random woman, telling him that she's the "eighth 'betty' [that] week [he] decided [was] 'the one [for him].'" she then gives him genuine good advice that he doesn't follow, a la suzy.

overall, the amount of awareness bunny has just makes me feel terrible for her. what makes bunny work in the show is her pretending (or being blissfully unaware) that her son isn't as bad as he seems. like the rest of the cast, she's a very flawed person. the show works because johnny's friends are also fucked up in different ways without being the exact type of cynical that he is. characters like pops can be very, very mean to johnny, but characters like bunny carl and suzy have their mean moments as well. but some comic stories take this to an extreme and i think the show achieves a specific vibe of mean that mostly worked.

the world revolves around whatever johnny subjects his friends to, but they are his only support system. they feel like a group of horrible people that work well together, united by one idiot. i like that a lot about the retool, it's a huge reason why i got this into it in the first place. but, i love that there's a balance between, say, episodes like "johnny's guardian angel" that acknowledge how the status quo is johnny's fault or episodes where his friends don't care as much about him, and ones where they do and they pay for it. it's not too static. if you don't love one, you have the other.

retool bunny is notable because of the heart she brings to the table. again, she loves her son and will fight to protect him, she's way too clingy and longs for the past when he was still a child, she makes plenty of mistakes as a mother, but at the end of the day, you know she wouldn't threaten to kick johnny out on a daily basis or treat him like a total freeloader. either the retool or the comic writers misinterpreted what "bunny guilts johnny" was supposed to mean. for meaner jokes with her or carl etc., you could at least go "that's kind of funny in a dark way" or at worst "this feels ooc" and move on to the next episode. when we get the gist in the comics that bunny is always suffering this much, what joy is there seeing them interact?

the majority of the stories were not written by the show's writers, but there is a difference between comics and tv censors— comics seem to get away with more. some examples of comic writers taking advantage of this were funny, some were not. one example is in the "you cast a spell" story. i'll let you guess which panel. very S1 in nature, honestly.

(left) this one-page comic where it's obvious a woman hired actual hitmen to kill johnny after he stalked her is like... the show didn't do this because 1. again, i doubt they were allowed to and 2. it's uncomfortably realistic. the stalking part. i feel weird criticizing a one page gag like this, but the concept of hiring hitmen to kill johnny IS funny— and that very well could've worked in the retool's world, don't get me wrong— it's how it's executed. the bollywood movie did a better hitman/assassin type concept.

(left and right) much like bunny, johnny feels uncomfortably self-aware in ways he shouldn't be. "'sides, it's full of stuff the babes can throw at you!" this should not cross his mind. he'd likely tell you anywhere BUT some place that tongue-in-cheek. it's a very easy joke. "always be a gentleman on the first date, save the real you for later!" johnny doesn't play dumb or polite to deceive women, he's just a jackass. "charm school johnny" and "tyler perry's guide to love" are the main examples of this, as johnny can't be a gentleman (or pretend to know what one is) without someone guiding him along. CSJ is a cel-era S2 episode. johnny isn't smart nor devious enough at any point in the show to say something like this. his everyday self is wildly inauthentic as it is.

to me, it feels like these lack what really makes johnny funny when he IS funny. i can't tell if this is a misunderstanding of his character or if the bible was a bit off in terms of what retool johnny became. kupperberg's stories seem to have this problem the most, however... all in all, it kind of feels like an exaggerated parody of the retool and what could be viewed as its worst qualities

one of the other comics i found interesting was "go cart go," a story about suzy building a go cart for a derby and asking johnny for help. johnny uses a nickname for suzy as opposed to forgetting her name and otherwise acts nice to her. he kind of sees himself as a role-model to her, and he has a "tooth or consequences" style change of heart when he sees how sad she is after he enters the derby with his own cart. he cheats his way to get her to win. it's arguably the sweetest official johnny and suzy story i've ever seen and it was very likely an episode premise in the bible that got reworked into the aforementioned tooth fairy ep. johnny is completely selfless and it's played straight even when he gets beat up at the end. is it in-character? is the tone accurate to the show? not really, but it's really nice to see. i like it! retool johnny WAS supposed to be a "jerk with a heart of gold," it's just a shame we barely got that.

other random notes:

johnny uses a lot of "flirty" food nicknames. "pop tart" he uses at least twice. very much the same type of thing as "etruscan honey bun" from the gladiator short. definitely toned down in the actual show

like the s2 model sheets, master hama is referred to as 'master hong,' something that was likely changed early in production to lessen possible complaints of racism / (over)stereotyping

only two of the comic stories were written by one of the show's crew members (john crane.) partible pencilled for a comic / covers but wrote zero of the stories, even post-retool. retool-era storyboard artists such as dave schwartz (the man with the idea for a suzy spin-off / "the great bunny book ban," whom unfortunately passed in 2021) and neal sternecky pencilled a few comic stories. lovely work

unlike "johnny bigfoot," a john crane story, miss williams/winkleman is referred to as "miss butterworth" in "to sea or not to sea." further confirmation that she's the retooled version of ms. babe (suzy's teacher in S1), complete with johnny trying to woo her repeatedly— something he only does twice in the retool as she appears three times with two different designs and last names.

one penciller, anthony williams, was particularly on-model / used plenty of model sheet poses and expressions in the stories he illustrated. since none of carl's model sheets have been shared online yet, the williams-drawn comics are the closest thing we have to those.

besides the short bursts of "HUH?" bible-influenced moments with carl, he's written pretty decently in the comics. consistently. i like the majority of his appearances a lot.

in a car story, suzy gets jealous of a woman johnny persues. that sort of thing is absent from the show entirely— instead, she uses johnny and women to persuade him to take her places. suzy seems to have no hard feelings toward the women, not even in "rashomoron" (where carl is used to fulfill that purpose instead.)

john q bravo???