#Seven's theory

[philzasjuicyass]

HOLY SHIT.

[seven-thewanderer]

Okay I know I just posted something about things that excited me about the DLC, but screw it imma share that thing I said I had that I will not clarify above here what that thing is cus spoilers

but yeah

SPOILERS BELOW

Okay so Ruin DLC Eclipse, amiright?

but I love Eclipse, I just wanna squeeze em in a tight hug!!!

But that's off-topic

So you know how Sun was saying stuff like "I am trapped in a nap" and "reboot" and "we need to be whole"?

What if- and hear me out (you don't have to lol)- Sun and Moon weren't a jeckl-hyde situation of 1 person with two personalities, but 1 person that split into 2, those 2 being Sun and Moon?

Eclipse was the original DA, and when the virus happened, he got split into 2, Sun and Moon, Sun being... idk how to describe canon Sun, and Moon being gremlin-like, evil, and full of murderous intent?

However, though that could make sense, that wouldn't explain all the posters, and the plushies. Thus, I did do a slight mental editing to my theory, thinking back on what I heard someone else once state months(?) ago, from the books (about Sun & Moon being theater kids)

Eclipse was the main guy, the star of the show, the solar act (get it? solo? solar? okay I'll shut up). However, Eclipse wasn't really alone, as he had two smaller personalities inside: Sun and Moon. They were mainly forms for acting, and played different roles, Moon always being the villain. Then, they were repurposed to be daycare attendants, however, still also being used for the theater, whenever they were available to (however, the daycare became popular cus of people not wanting to drag their kids along with them, so they'd drop em off there, basically giving them no time to act, and the theater was slightly taken over by Comedy Bot) Eclipse was the main attraction of the theater, but they did use Sun & Moon for marketing purposes, as they were still favorited characters from their acts. So, since they were mainly daycare attendants now, that's why there were Sundrops and Moondrops. However, with their coding slightly changed, and Eclipse and Sun loving to bond with the kids (Moon was never intended to be around the kids, he was only still left around because they were intended to be in the theater again, but never got the time, so he rarely got time to roam, until they decided to turn the lights off hourly during closing time, so he could go wild and crazy), Eclipse got most of the attention, and Sun (and Moon) got jealous of him being more famous than the two. So then, Sun started taking over more often, leaving the lights high and bright, and rarely letting Eclipse take control. Sun didn't want the lights to be either dimmed, nor turned off, because dimmed meant Eclipse, and off meant... Moon. The violent, bloodthirsty Moon, who was tired of being locked up, and only having a few chances to even be in control. Then, after some time, Sun had been taking control for so long, that Eclipse was forgotten about. By the staff, by the kids, by Sun and Moon, and nearly... by himself. He was closed away, trapped in a nap, and unable to do anything. Then, Moon, still wanting control, just grew more violent, and bloodthirsty, and malicious. So basically those two fighting, while Eclipse was locked away

What wakes up Eclipse? idk. The virus? Balloon World? Cassie entering? Who knows, but eventually he wakes up, realizing he's been gone for too long, and things had gone chaotic, to ruins even (ill stop ill stop).

So, long story short (in a way), Eclipse was the main act, with Sun and Moon as personalities he could swap to whenever he pleased for the acts, and then became a DCA, and his personalities actually became personalities, and they were jealous cus they wanted the spotlight, and shut him out, and Sun begging you to help was not actually Sun (in my silly theory), and was Eclipse speaking through Sun the best he could, begging for you to save him

Obviously, that last part can't be true, especially with how Sun straight up thanks you for saving him from Moon afterwards, making it that it truly was Sun begging for you to save him. Sun wanted to be whole. Moon, however, did not.

but anyways that's that, idk what I was rambling about, but yeah it was just a silly lil theory about Eclipse

[g4l4xy-qu33n]

Okay, so I discovered something when re-reading Journal 3. The page that has the Oracle on it:

When I first read Journal 3, years ago, this didn't mean much. Oh look, it's the girl that saved Ford from Bill's possession by putting a metal plate in his head, hooray! (and some other stuff but anyway she didn't seem super significant at the time).

Well, this time around I recognised her, specifically because of the Book Of Bill AND thisisnotawebsitedotcom. She's Seveneyes! (the scratched out member of Bill's crew in BoB, and a blacked-out photo of her appears on the website when you put in 'seven eyes'.

I'm not sure if this means anything, but it certainly blew my mind!!

[excessive-moisture]

[chloesimaginationthings]

I love how you drew foxy, he so scruckly looking <3

Here’s some more Foxys I’ve drawn!!

[celestial-artisan]

Vox: I-if I say I love you, will you say it back? Alastor: No problem, pal. Vox: I love you..! Alastor: It back! Vox: Alastor:

Velvette: Why is Vox crying face-down on the floor?

[sunn-mechanic]

[ID in alt]

Guess that makes me Evil

--

I could not stop thinking about how Vex is probably dead in DR, that shit makes me so unwell

Also, version without the lyrics below, bc I like both:

[ID in alt]

[beargregor]

wait i'm curious, what makes you say that gregor doesn't like everyone else (if i read that post right)? just curious since i've never seen anyone else say that

i don't necessarily think gregor dislikes everyone else at lcb but i do think that gregor is an incredibly petty person that isn't nearly as close to the rest of the sinners and even outright dislikes some of them cough cough rodya cough cough which a lot of people just Refuse to see because he's as much of a doormat as he is. there's several examples i could get into to try and prove my point however i'll just focus on what i personally think to be the biggest ones.

additionally, this is going to be kind of long, so i'm adding a read more. read more! read it. sorry for being so wordy. i have several diseases.

Pt1. gregor is the type to try and get along at least decently with everyone, especially if he gets a good first impression from them.

this is less a point in favor of gregor's distance w/ the rest of the sinners and more just a contributing factor to it. once again there's several examples i could point to here but i think the most in your face one happened in canto I with yuri, as several people have pointed out. even before gregor comes clean about growing attached to her as quickly as he did because she reminds him of his sister, we get this interaction.

i'll go ahead and make the disclaimer now that i don't necessarily think gregor is the most reliable of narrators, especially when it comes to his feelings and interactions with most people, but from the way he acts when the topic of yuri comes up (and the way we still see him act even all the way up to c7, nearly a whole year after yuri's death) i don't see reason to question his sentiment here. gregor immediately got that aya and yuri were close, potentially even taking note of their traded belts, and went out of his way to get something nice for yuri despite hardly knowing her.

i feel like a lot of people have forgotten as much, especially since it's been so long since c1, but gregor actually spent a good bit of season 1 doing the exact same thing with the other sinners! gregor reads a connection between him and ishmael pretty quickly despite getting off to a rocky start

mostly because gregor can tell that ishmael is pretty sardonic in a very similar way to him. there's been multiple instances where ishmael and gregor have essentially expressed the same sentiment at different moments, most notably gregor's little argument after ishmael got shot with a decay ampule in c4

and ishmael's response to pilot talking about self-sacrifice in c5

i could go ahead and pull up more examples, but in general pm has gone out of their way to show us that gregor and ishmael are pretty similar, so it makes sense for gregor to assume that they're friends, right?

this will be pushpin 1. keep note of this for Later.

ishmael's only the first sinner we see gregor trying to do this with in s1, we also see him try it out with heathcliff, sinclair, and ryoushuu

he's tried to get along with charon, being one of very few sinners that we've seen actually try to establish a connection with her at all

even rodya, despite my insistence that gregor doesn't like her nearly as much as the fandom thinks he does

all of these seem pretty fine and dandy, right? sure it frequently leans towards self-degradation, micromanaging, and commiseration, but gregor can at least be pretty chummy with most of the sinners, can't he?

Pt2. hell's chicken was more than just comic relief guys please

i'm fully aware that this is quite the hot take, but i think hell's chicken deserves a lot more credit for character writing than the fandom gives it. hell's chicken gave us foreshadowing for several events, such as the donqui bloodfiend reveal

heathcliff's distortion in c6 (as well as hong lu's highly speculated distortion at some point in the future)

and ryoushuu and sinclair's continued connection by making him the odd one out on her team

which, hey! that implies something about gregor's odd one out, don quixote, too, doesn't it? yes. yes it does. that's pushpin 2. keep note of that for later.

speaking of pushpins, hey! that's pushpin 1!

splitting into teams is one of the major events in hell's chicken, and most of the sinner's choices are either motivated by very little, backhanded, or motivated primarily by not wanting to be on the opposite leader's side. i didn't include all of the picks, just because i feel like including most of them already gets this across, but i think gregor took one major thing from this: most of the sinners, when push comes to shove, will only side with gregor when they refuse to or can't take his opponent's side.

now, don't get me wrong, i'm fully aware that this is primarily intended to be comedic relief, but when gregor is being described as having his trust broken by ishmael or nearly crying because no one on his team properly sided with him for him, i feel like it's pretty fair to read into this.

something that i think is pretty important to remember in conjunction with this is that we know that gregor is the type to hold a grudge, both from his general attitude towards the G corp soldiers in c1 as well as his continued distaste for vergilius

even beyond the splitting into teams of hell's chicken, the sinners have given gregor plenty of reasons to feel bitter. i feel like this is something people have noticed but haven't really put a finger on, but it's kind of wild just how often the rest of the sinners make gregor the butt of the joke

and sure, we could argue that a fair few of these aren't really made with any ill intent. quite a bit of it could have been meant as harmless teasing, but with gregor being more sensitive than most, it coming from nearly all sides, and as often as it does? yeah, i think he's prone to taking it a bit personally.

Pt3. yes i do still think gregor was the third most important character in canto VII you guys gotta hear me out okay

of course, all of this leads up to the bit of the story i highlighted, doesn't it? c7? i totally get why people haven't really picked up on all the gregor things i did in it, seeing as they were mostly not *directly* said about him or by him.

personally, i think that gregor's distaste for talking about himself on any serious level and thus leading to him getting sort of "sidelined" narratively (which i take issue with that claim, but still. it's effective for getting what i mean across atm) is supposed to lead players to take a deeper look at the times gregor gets held up to other characters and compare and contrast what's being said about them by the matchup. as i showed earlier with his immediate latching onto ishmael, i think this is something gregor himself is at least partially aware of too.

so, that begs the question, who was gregor compared to in canto VII that makes me think it's one of the most critical pieces in understanding his character?

really, i'd like to avoid getting too lost in the analysis of this canto specifically, since i'd like to do a proper post about this later, but i figure i can bury the lede a little before doing it properly.

c7 features several characters being made to perform in sansón's play, acting out the relevant backstory for this segment of the plot. a lot of these characters have rather direct, degrading reasons for playing the roles they do.

outis, a character with an inflated ego who wants her journey to have a purpose, is made to play an aimlessly wandering villager with a single line.

hong lu and ryoushuu, two characters for whom families and the expectations placed upon them are likely going to play a major role, are made to play bloodfiends.

rodya, a character who resents her lot in life and is constantly shown to be eager to leave her destitution behind her and become someone special, is made to play a helpless villager that's too poor to even offer any money to the hero that saves her.

heathcliff, a character that has spent most of his life getting dehumanized by comparing him to beastly animals, is made to play a literal bear whose sole purpose in the plot is to get beat up and then quickly left by the wayside.

sinclair, a character that has two opposed parties essentially treating him as a macguffin to procure for their side, is made to play the character who was arguably the catalyst for this entire canto, not to mention playing a decently major role in ruina.

our star don quixote is made to play her father, the first kindred, but there's someone by their side the entire time, isn't there? don quixote's dear, steadfastly loyal companion. a character which don quixote has tasked themself with getting to come out of their shell?

hello again, pushpin 2.

gregor has been made to play our unreachable star, sancho. someone had to, of course. you can't really tell a story without it's main character, now can you?

now, i should once again give a disclaimer. i am not trying to say that i think adapting what happens to donqui/sancho in c7 to gregor is the road pm is going to take here, not only would that toe a bit past the line of foreshadowing, but it'd also just amount to rehashing that plotline again, which i don't think would make for a particularly exciting story.

what i DO think is that we can take a lot of the things that are said to either directly be the case for sancho and use them to inform how we see gregor.

and god, does playing sancho have some fucking implications for our favorite ossan archetype.

starting off, the earliest moment we get to see of sancho is quite literally her just waiting for death to take her in a pile of ashes.

which, i should remind everyone, is actually pretty damn close to what happens to gregor's literary counterpart at the end of the metamorphosis. gregor samsa experiences one final breaking point that pushes him over the edge and makes him decide to just wait for starvation to take him.

gregor and sancho both consider themselves to no longer be human, something which sancho goes out of her way to highlight repeatedly throughout the canto and gregor is quick to get defensive on her behalf for when outis starts really tearing into her

sancho spends quite a lot of this story denying herself the joys of community and friendship, despite knowing that, even with the rest of the sinners frequently making jokes at her expense and outright insulting her, they were things that she desperately craved.

and, while this is getting into my "outis is a red herring meant to distract us from gregor's eventual betrayal" theorizing, i also think it's worth noting for this discussion that sancho's fellow kindreds, her family, all seem to be under the impression that she dislikes them and ultimately her departure was an act of betrayal

and that, despite gregor being one of LCB's resident mood makers and attempted conflict de-escalators, one of the sinners that's most prone to making appeals to the bonds they've all forged together, only him and faust remained silent during everyone's speech

so yeah, i think there's quite a lot of little details and hints building up to the reveal that gregor's not quite as fond of everyone as he presents himself to be. i do think a lot of this ultimately comes down to gregor getting in the way of his own happiness, similarly to donqui, particularly because he's been frequently portrayed as something of a self fulfilling prophecy, especially by giving him as many christ allegories as they have by way of priest and garden of thorns. gregor is convinced that the rest of the sinners don't like him because he's not convinced anyone could like him, so he convinces himself that he hates them because why should he care if someone that he hates hates him too?

a lot of this ultimately ties back to my personal interpretation of what happens in the metamorphosis as well as my own theories regarding all the times gregor has made weird callbacks and references to lobcorp and ruina, but yeah. i think about this guy and his deeper characterization a fairly normal amount, i think.

to end this off i'll highlight one of my favorite little "gregor is fucking seething and trying so hard to keep it cool" moments, in the credits CG for c7 we see rodya teasing him by drawing a little horse on his window and actively pointing and laughing at it, which gregor really doesn't seem all too pleased about.

i personally think this ties into the other cruel part of sansón forcing gregor to play rocinante, which is the more literal "he's actually just straight up playing rocinante" side of things. gregor was quite literally made to play something less than human, less than even animal really, as he was reduced to nothing more than the shoes don quixote wore as she got to play the leading role. sansón directly makes jokes about gregor being nothing more than shoes in the play twice, which adds to this reading, i think.

this, imo, really plays into the adaptation of the metamorphosis! i've seen a lot of readings for the book that posit that, despite being the protagonist, gregor samsa can't really be considered the main character due to nearly everything he experiences in it being used to further his family's character development at his expense, which i think fits nicely with limbus gregor seemingly having the most said about him through indirect means by holding him up to other characters. also it's rodya carelessly making fun of His Big Major Insecurities™ again like she did in c1 which i always find fun. rodya i love you but god you're the worst.

[infamous-if]

Dude, I aint gonna lie I can't sleep because my brain spiraled to Seven's secret and I've been scouring forums and reddit posts for like an hour. What have you done to me.

can i direct you to the "secret child" theory? that one is my favorite lololol

[thelegend2t]

BFDI Theory: The Unluckiest Number

Or story starts the video "X Finds Out His Value" at 3:27

Four and X have just figured out that X's value is 7, leading them and Seven to have a little dance party sort of thing. But after X proudly proclaims his value, 7, Four adds that "It's lucky too!"

And we get some less than happy faces from the peanut gallery. One and Three standing beside each other to form the infamous unlucky number 13. In fact, 13 is kind of an interesting number when it comes to Algebraliens.

This is the BFDI Wiki's list of every Algebralien (That is a rational number), notice anything? That's right! 13 isn't there! And this list doesn't leave any number out if it can help it. Eleven, Twelve and Sixteen have never had any significant role in any skit or episode. Thirteen is missing from the official roster of numbers.

Also as a "Sans is a near anagram for Ness" level detail: TPOT 13 is when One herself says "Entree over. Now onto the main course." and as the line suggests, is when One picks up the pace in terms of intervening in TPOT.

I believe that the number 13 is not just unlucky in a superstitious sense, but also if any Algebralien were to become Thirteen the result would be catastrophic, bringing bad luck wherever they went. And that's exactly what One and Three did.

In the first episode of TPOT Winner asks, on the topic of prime numbers, "Are those, like, illegal where you're from?". And while they're obviously not this could be foreshadowing that there is a specific prime number that IS illegal, due to, y'know, bad-luck related catastrophe.

I don't just believe this explains why there's no Thirteen, but I also believe this is why One and Three are where they are.

In the video "Thanks for 2,000,000 Subscribers!" we get a good look at the law enforcement system on Algebralien society, mainly that there is none. There are no police, possibly no government. Any sort of jail sentence or punishment for crime is carried out by the community as a whole. We see this with Fourteens punishment, he's not arrested by police, he's apprehended by his neighbors who seem to hold no special status of any kind.

Now, if we put our heads together maybe we can think of any Algebraliens that are locked in a cell, presumably, by other Algebraliens. I think at one point both One and Three were kept in cells, but as of now only Three remains imprisoned.

Many have speculated that Three closing their own cell is telling that they wish to finish their sentence due to the guilt of their actions, and I agree, and I think those actions were them being one half of the duo known as Thirteen. (One half of 13 is 3, you heard it here first folks!.)

But One is a lot more bold. They're not content with being held down or people having more power than them. Being a part of Thirteen came with it this great power which they wish to return to. And besides, as long as someone is staffing their jail cell, that's just one more person to manipulate.

But who did she manipulate? The answer may surprise you, but it also may not, I don't know how many people actually watched the subscriber milestone videos.

In the video "Thanks for 1,000,000 subscribers!" at 7:50, we see Seven say this:

Seven considers One to be their BFF, presumably standing for "Best Friend Forever". Now, Seven as a character has been consistently portrayed as having no friends at all. In the song "Counting on Christmas" sung by the Algebraliens, Seven explicitly states that they "really, really, really want some friends".

Seven is sort of the black sheep of the community, though still, they ARE part of the community. As such, they are also part of the group that decides who is to be in jail, and who is to be free. And if all it takes is the promise of friendship then One escaping that cell was well within her range of capabilities. Who knows, maybe the friendship was in some way genuine, but the end result is the same, Seven let One free and even now sees nothing wrong with their friendship.

So that leaves us with this. One is actively trying to free Three, but Three is still patiently waiting in their cell for their lawful sentence to expire. Which... is kinda what everyone has been saying already, yeah, I'm not exactly the first to theorize that One is trying to free Three. What I am doing however, is laying out how I believe all these puzzle pieces fit together.

[bisexualenbyblueberry]

is this anything

[raayllum]

Anyway I did my 2nd watch of the season after sleeping / with the end in mind and it totally worked for me, especially with the understanding that there is 30% of the story left (and thereby Callum and Rayla's arcs aren't Over and room for more growth/plot had to be left open) and watching with the ending in mind.

I'm not upset that this is where Arc 2 ends, in some ways because it's sort of like season 2 of Avatar where Zuko doesn't join the Gaang in their 2nd arc (book two) because from a character basis he really wasn't Ready to do that / they had more story to tell, so I don't think with what they're doing it would've made sense to rush it in TDP. Nor do I think any of the previous set up for other outcomes (i.e. possession fight, salvation, etc) were wasted. Merely that TDP likes to do layer upon layer, and also have foreshadowing come back once (so you think you're safe) and then twice. I also don't think that Arc 2 resolved all the threads (i.e. Rayllum and greater good conflict / Aaravos & Callum) and ended them, and instead nudged them forwards in interesting ways for continued future exploration. I'll probably write more about the specifics later if this post doesn't get unwieldy or condensed with them for now.

In the meantime, these were things that I found really clicked for me on my 2nd watch through for S7 and with Arc 2 in general:

1) Arc 2's overarching focus on the Archdragons / the finale resolution with it.

We had a focus every season on at least one of the archdragons, with Zubeia (S4-S7), Luna Tenebris mentions (S4-S6), Rex Igenous (S4), Domina Profundis (S5), Sol Regem (S5-S6), and Avizandum mentions (S4-S5).

With that in mind, while I'm sure Aaravos' intentions was for no one to know of his plans ahead of time (7x01)... his actions also led to Callum and co. making connections to all the other Archdragons that they could pull on to bring everyone back to Lux Aurea, and Aaravos could destroy them (with no real consequence to himself, as his spirit was now free and his body could reform), taking a massive swing at the Cosmic Council's grand order that'd been enforced by the archdragons. He said the elves and dragons would fall hard... and now the dragons have, with the Cosmic Council being next (and thinking that the real focus on the Cosmic Council would be predominantly in arc 3 was, I believe, the general fandom consensus anyway).

AARAVOS: Now this is familiar, isn't it? Hasn't this all happened before? Arrogant fools. Again and again you make the same mistakes. (7x09)

Suitably, though, the Archdragons sacrifice themselves to protect all of Xadia, making amends for past / previous actions in their own way (narratively). They upheld the Cosmic Order, and then chose to break it.

Now, Aaravos will be returning to a world where there are no archdragons, and the only thing that can destroy his mortal form again would be the Nova Blade or some dark magic spell to take his spirit (but more on that later).

This also caps off S7 being about the destruction caused by one Archdragon (Sol Regem) and then the salvation through sacrifice from the other four as the finale. It comes full circle, but without repeating the cycle.

It also seems like the Nova Blade hasn't actually ever been used, as Aaravos states in 7x07:

She could have used the blade to destroy me, but chose instead to help imprison me. To spare me.

Or if it has, it still has a massive consequence that Zubeia is familiar with (the wielderdies if it's used to kill someone?), given that she is worried when Zym (and Ez wielding the sword) appears, intending to use it:

I'll also talk a bit more about why I think Aaravos designed 7x09 to be a win-win scenario for him no matter what when I get to Callum's section, but in the meantime...

2) Rayla's arc

Listen, y'all know I wanted Rayla to save Callum, like a lot, and thought there was a good chance she would if he was possessed again. However, neither of those things happened (also circumstances were crazy) and it was built up throughout the seasons, as well as in S7:

RAYLA: We can't save everyone, Soren. There's too much at stake. (4x05) RAYLA: But I can't help you yet... because right now, the world needs me. Callum and Ezran need me. There's a great evil returning to Xadia and we have to stop it, at any cost. (5x01) RAYLA: It hurts me to know they're trapped like this. It's agonizing. But our mission comes first. The world is in danger, and you can trust me to stay focused. (5x04) RAYLA: No, Callum. I want to help my parents, but I won't let it bias me. (6x01)

The season 7 setup is most prominently seen in S7 during Rayla's trial, in which she emphasizes that the assassins' deaths were not in vain due to the subsequent impact on the world as a whole, and in how their assassin pledges were upheld in their own way:

Life is precious. life is valuable. We take it, but we do not take it lightly. All of your lives were taken. But your sacrifices, they weren't for nothing. Callisto, you pledged your breath for freedom and we freed ourselves from an awful, pointless war. Andromeda, you pledged your eyes for truth. And we found the truth, a truth that changed the world. Skor, you pledged your strength for honour, and now humans and elves have finally begun to treat each other with honour again. And... Ram. You pledged your blood for justice. But what is justice? The king died that night. A life for a life. Is that justice? How much suffering is enough to paid for the mistakes we've made? I don't have the answers. But I'll carry you with me, all of you, forever.

So it made sense for her assassin oath to come back in some manner ("My heart for Xadia"). She had to honour her team's sacrifices by being willing to make her own (killing Callum and herself by symbolic extension), partially because her and Callum's "ride or die" dynamic had become a "ride and die" dynamic": this was his plan and his choice, and the alternative was to let him succumb to a fate worse than death AND to let Aaravos destroy the world through his hands.

And I get why this feels kind of backwards, because on the one hand, it seems like Rayla made a lot of progress, even questioning the validity of her own suffering for mistakes she / choices others have made, which is Huge!

And yet she's willing to suffer, and sacrifice Callum. The paying the price motif is even brought back in Aaravos' dialogue with the archdragons ("And what will your sacrifices buy?"). So what gives?

Well, I think in a lot of ways Arc 2 was Rayla learning to accept and ask for help (S5-S6), that she wasn't alone (S4, S7), and working to come back every time she leaves (S4) but... still being prepared to leave:

and still with sharing or acknowledging her own burdens not being her instinct.

There's a reason we all went "Rayla refusing to sacrifice Callum would be Character Development" after all. I also think it's quasi-similar to Rayla leaving after S3. She had a lot of opportunities to learn that she didn't have to do everything alone in arc 1, but those lessons didn't stick; in a similar fashion, Rayla had opportunities throughout arc 2 to learn that she doesn't always have to sacrifice something, but with Callum being increasingly sacrificial... Those lessons were there, but didn't stick. The other side of her sacrifice arc is not resolved.

With that in mind, I wanna talk about our favourite dorky mage, and then maybe arc 3.

3) Aaravos' Grand Plan & Callum's Corruption

This is a little hard to parse out just because we don't know what Aaravos' next step / goal was in bringing about Eternal Night (presumably to get the attention of the Cosmic Council, but who knows). That said, a few things I'm chewing on:

Aaravos, as previously discussed, found the most effective way to rid the world of (presumably) every Archdragon other than Zym

Aaravos, for whatever reason, wanted Ezran to have the Nova Blade, which Aanya even sets up for us in 7x09

Aaravos knew all along that Callum would turn to dark magic to take him down.

AARAVOS: Very soon, your brother will embrace dark magic to save those he loves. EZRAN: I suppose you've seen that written in the stars? AARAVOS: I have seen it written in his eyes. (7x07)

Furthermore, he wanted to have Callum be corrupted again, gave him the apple in 7x01 as the first attempt. The apple corruption was lampshaded with "Is there anything I can do to help?" + identity/name motif. Aaravos was actively goading him into dark magic in 7x09, even when he knew there was an assassin ready to kill Callum (Runaan), and smiling even when Callum began the spell (once Rayla had stepped in).

As of S7, Callum has been called (and not disputed being at least partially) a dark mage, used Viren's staff and now has it in his possession (and we still don't know why it was never supposed to be used again), and has a white streak. The willingness to go that far "has always been a part of" him and is now permanently reflected in his character design.

Secondly, we know that Aaravos' game with his pawns is not over, due to the secrets of the cube being ongoing (but confirmation in 7x09 that it indeed points towards Elarion) and due to framing with Claudia.

While I did consider that maybe Callum's pawn intro imagery had come back around in the conversation in 7x06 featuring the cube so heavily (!!) and then Callum choosing to do dark magic to stop Aaravos and save everyone as his destiny ("The one I write myself")... He's still corrupted, Aaravos is still going to come back in 7 years with Callum as a vessel, and the Key to the Book (metaphorically to literally the Book of Destiny) is still unresolved.

TLDR; think about how much it'd Hurt in a Good Way for Callum and Rayla to both know she would've sacrificed him for the greater good (fulfilling her end of foreshadowing from 6x03) only to be smacked in the face that Callum refuses to sacrifice her in Arc 3 with the other side of his ("if you ever have to choose between me and the greater good...").

The fact that the Cube canonically points towards Elarion, which feature stories about "a fair exchange of beloved for beloved" after a season in which Aaravos mandates "Your beloved is an assassin who cannot kill" is just the cherry on top. It also means that both Callum and Rayla have accordingly hit the 50-75% wavelength of their arc(s), with us now having a definitive basis for her being willing to that sets up more clearly her being not willing to in the future, the circumstances we'd need for a possession fight re-established, and the cube beat still on the table because the cube itself is still waiting to be plot relevant.

Rayla always follows Callum's lead ("Say the word and I'll go back into that tower with you") and reflects him ("Who told you that?" "You did") and the lessons he teaches her about love. He'll pave the way, and she'll follow, and then their arcs will come to a close.

We just had to get here first.

Conclusion??

Anyway I hope you enjoyed, I want to do a bigger Arc 3 predictions post (the ruby project, Evrkynd, Claudia, Harrow, etc.) sometime soon, but I hope in the meantime this brought some potentially needed assurance, excitement, or another perspective to consider.

[sorinethemastermind]

Book Seven: Dark

Synopsis according to TDP Wiki:

Following Sol Regem’s destructive rampage on Katolis, which saw the death of Viren, Claudia has been manipulated by Aaravos into freeing him from his prison, against the wishes of her boyfriend Terry.

Meanwhile, while Rayla had successfully revived Runaan, her friends Callum and King Ezran were left devastated to learn of the fate that befell their home.

With Aaravos now free from confinement, and with Claudia by his side, the world is now forced to face the great threat that has been pulling on their strings for a thousand years.

I am not okay people, and I cannot wait.

[rewritingcanon]

i’ve seen relationship therapists and psychologists analyse hermione and ron’s relationship and conclude that they wouldn’t work out in the long run. they’ve argued for hermione to be with harry, krum, even DRACO (don’t understand how a counsellor can vow for canon dramione but alright) as an alternative partner for hermione since ron is “too insecure” to be with her and match her intelligent prowess or what have you.

i seriously don’t understand this sentiment. ron and hermione genuinely seem (almost) perfect to me, maybe not in the movies (a common denominator of people who don’t like romione is that they always cite evidence from the movies, since the films took a lot away from ron’s character and his growth), but definitely in the books.

looking at ron’s insecurities, a lot of people dredge his inferiority complex up to toxic masculinity primarily, when it was more explored how it was an effect of his home life (not gonna argue toxic masculinity wasn’t a factor, they’re teenagers in the 90s written by a pretty misogynistic woman so…). he was the youngest son out of how many children? all of his older brothers were brilliant in some way. bill was an extremely gifted spellcaster, charlie was gifted with magical beasts, percy’s academic score was unmatched, and fred and george (despite their trouble) were entrepreneurial inventor-geniuses. ron, on the other hand, was quite literally born a disappointment to his mother, who conceived him specifically because she wanted a daughter, whilst ginny was born her favourite (though, even then, ginny was gifted at quidditch). ron was mediocre in every sense of the word, and his two best friends were harry (one of the most famous wizards) and hermione (the smartest witch of her age yada yada). and i’ve seen people argue that harry was more welcomed by molly into the weasley household than ron ever was. this isn’t even mentioning the amount of bullshit he copped for being poor (people always downplay the blow to confidence being in poverty can have on a person who is constantly surrounded by people who not only have more, but look down on him for simply being unlucky as to not have what they do).

so yeah, ron was an envious kid, but he was that way not because he was an evil patriarchal conception but because he was lowkey neglected. and even then he was overall an extremely devoted and loyal friend to both harry and hermione, because he did genuinely love them.

there were many moments of ron standing up for hermione that was cut from the films, not as a guy who was romantically interested in her, but as a friend. ron arguing with snape for making hermione cry is one of my fav scenes in the books ru kidding me, and in the movies he AGREED with snape RU KIDDING ME. not to mention how ron was a sobbing violent mess when hermione was getting tortured in the last book, whereas he wasn’t nearly as bothered in the films. and the films cut out harry being a dick to ron about his familial concerns (in dh), so when ron left it seemed like a random dickish move over his jealousy towards harry and hermione’s relationship.

there’s also a million moments where they minimised ron’s usefulness in the books for comedic purposes (forbidden forest with aragog, troll scene, devils snare scene) so ron seems dumber than he is. like, he’s actually smart and a really good spellcaster…. in the books.

so simply by stating this most of the arguments against romione become void. “he’s too stupid/weak for her” simply not true. “he’s a terrible friend who doesn’t stand up for her” also not true. “he’s too insecure to have made a move on her,” yes, but given the context i don’t think people would freak on about ron’s upbringing, i think many would be more understanding, especially considering his growth. even if he wasn’t insecure, hermione is beyond incredible and is bound to make anyone nervous when pursuing her (not an excuse for ron to act like a dick, but it does explain a lot where the movies don’t). “they argue too much” they bump heads, none of the arguments they have are actually super damning, with the exception of ron leaving in deathly hallows.

maybe i’ve covered everything (excluding the abhorrent amount of classism that clouds people’s judgments around how they view ron when harping about how hermione deserves better? hopefully).

now, i know people won’t like me mentioning the cursed child, but i’m going to considering we actually get an insight of their life as a longterm married couple there. a lot of ron stans hated how ron was the only character that wasn’t doing something incredible. harry was head of the aurors, ginny was a famous quidditch player retired to a famous journalist, neville was a hogwarts professor, hermione was quite literally minister on magic. and ron…. ran the joke shop with george.

and i think this was almost the perfect route to go down for ron. because he was average, and was perfectly fine with just being average. hello?? that speaks leagues of growth for his character. he’s supportive of hermione’s work, he grounds her when she gets too caught up in being the literal president of wizarding society, and he still viciously defends her, minister or not. in fact, he’s proud to simply be known as hermione’s husband because he doesn’t feel the need to prove to anyone else his worth. the people he loves most know his worth, hermione never downplays or underestimates him, they are complete equals in the relationship in every single way that matters. they kept ron’s best qualities whilst making him seem more of a healed person. they work so well as a married couple without it seeming like mischaracterisation (not to mention the cursed child literally shows how those two are in love in every reality, so there quite literally can’t be a better partner for hermione or ron according to canon).

so i really don’t understand how professional relationship counsellors can go online and denounce it. probs because they only watched the movies, but it’s 2023 and ron stans should not STILL be fighting for their lives trying to defend him from people who simply don’t consume media with as much depth (which is fine, but one should clarify if they’re talking about the movies because i’ve seen people state they’re talking about the hp BOOKS when it’s simply just…. the films). anyways. romione on top, thanks to coming to my ted talk.

[wonderlandcrown]

Well That's a Big Cat

Hello everyone I'm very much alive, just been extra busy w/ school lately and been getting too much sleep

There's been a lot of chimera/overblot Grim on my dash lately so I'd like to contribute : Chimera Grim's Design

So starting off, Grim has a ring of blue fire surrounding his neck, much like a lion and its mane, this could either reference the chimera, or it could be referencing the King of Beasts - Scar.

Also it's interesting how the Shroudbros and Grim both have blue fire, with the Shroud family curse being that they burn away blot and how Grim has an addiction? to eating the left over Overblot stones (and seems fine after eating it) I remember seeing a theory about how Grim might've been the monster that killed Ortho, (given how Grim doesn't remember much about his childhood) Forgetting about your childhood is a actually also a sign for childhood trauma, no idea if it applies to cat-monsters though. .u.

Also, see those tentacles behind the mane? Does it remind you of someone? Our favourite octo-capitalist perphaps?

Ah yes, the snake tail. Again, this could either be referencing the chimera or the snake in the Scarabia icon. (both maybe?)

Dragon wings!!! The chimera doesn't reference dragon wings so this is definitely referencing Malleus' dragon-fae lineage. Interestingly, I don't see any references to OB! Riddle or Vil, those two could be harder to reference since they don't have a clear "animal" motif, I would appreciate it if anyone notices anything lol.

But we're still missing the goat, the chimera has a "goat protruding from it's back" but I don't see it anywhere on Grim (again, if you notice something or know someone who is better than analysing stuff pls tag me ToT)

@prince-kallisto has posted about how Twst has LOADS of religious symbolism(specifically Christian symbolism), so check them out for a clearer analysis on the stuff I'm abt to say. Goats are a symbol of Satan/The Devil in Christian mythology, and given how Maleficent(a dragon) herself has demonic symbolism the dragon wings on Grim's back could symbolise the "goat protruding from it's back".

[essektheylyss]

while we're airing grievances for fun and profit, it remains fucking wild to me that "read theory challenge" was used as a bizarre gotcha for so much of the campaign by people who almost certainly could not have won that challenge if they'd been called on it.

like yeah, you're suuuuch a superior intellectual decolonialist scholar. tell me more about how your only reading suggestions are a vague "foucault", the communist manifesto, and ursula le guin's wikiquote page.