#This fandom will criticize the books about how it’s black and white and then criticize the characters with black and white lens

[elumish]

I just talked about why people should be engaging critically with entertainment media and specifically getting used to identifying specific patterns or rhetoric, so here is a very non-exhaustive list of things that I see (including in ostensibly progressive entertainment media spaces like fandom or queer books):

Framing representative democracy as bad, especially when contrasted with non-democratic/autocratic or anocratic rule (e.g., "good things can get done when there's just someone smart with all the power who can force decisions through without having to debate all the time")

Benevolent dictators / benevolent autocrats (e.g., "They're such a kind and intelligent ruler, so it's good that they have absolute decision making authority")

Blaming newcomers / immigrants for the degredation of traditions (e.g., "It's not that we don't want them here, it's just that they keep trying to change things instead of learning the ways we do things")

Imperialism as a means to "fix" or "improve" other societies (e.g., "they oppress women, so invading them, deposing their goverment, and adding them to the empire is good because it will help women")

Equating gender with body parts (e.g., "secondary gender" to indicate alpha / beta / omega in the omegaverse)

Equating body parts with personality traits (e.g., alphas being inherently more aggressive and omegas being inherently more submissive in the omegaverse)

Equating sexuality with personality traits (e.g., all asexual characters being shy or quiet)

Equating sexuality with gender (e.g., all asexual characters being female or non-binary)

Lack of accounting for women or queer people in worldbuilding (e.g., "that magical species just doesn't have gay people")

Regularly having Jewish characters celebrate Christmas

Excusing abusive behavior with a bad or sad backstory (e.g., "how could he help being fascist, he was bullied as a child")

Women (except for the FMC and possibly a friend) being uniformly catty, cruel, power-hungry, man-obsessed, and/or promiscuous adulterers

Black characters only existing to support white characters

Black female characters being presented as being too strong and independent to want or need a romantic relationship, especially while white female characters have happy and fulfilling romantic relationships

Associating low empathy with violent inclinations or behavior (e.g., "he just didn't feel empathy for anyone, and that's why he became a serial killer")

[blackdress]

you're seeing these casting announcements, cheering and whooping for whitewashed characters, and yet claim that you care about poc issues? lionsgate had ONE JOB. to correct the issue in which was whitewashing a previously indigenous lead and two other main characters of the same descent.

and they continued with whitewashing, or forced diversity in order to avoid that representation, in order to spout to you about "continuity" and how "franchises" and "the industry" work.

do not fucking have it. i don't care how much you liked SOTR, i don't care how much you didn't. i'm asking as kindly as i possibly can, boycott.

stop giving famous YA authors who are rich on a success that could fund them after the grave and their poorly made adaptations attention because of nostalgia. because guess what? JKR didn't care about her marginalised majority and STILL made transphobic tweets.

stephanie meyers platformed mormonism and confederacy, and demonized her indigenous characters in order to platform her white ones. and when the tribe was based off a real one, did not ONCE give back to them in any way.

suzanne collins in the modern day, has had EVERY opportunity to correct casting, to speak out against whitewashing, to platform POC issues like you all believe she does in her work. she has not. in fact, so much of her work is deeply rooted in stereotypes and misogyny, and prejudice, but you all overlook it because she gives you the basic premise that "oppression is bad." you don't NEED a YA author to tell you that.

one thing you MIGHT need however, is to listen to minorities when they tell you that she's harmed them in her writing and in her decisions to help out with these movies. that's not limited to just the indigenous. she's harmed black people. harmed people with disabilities and mental health. women, too! and it is overlooked, and overlooked. like this fandom doesn't have an adult majority who COULD acutely call these things out. it shouldn't be the younger generation alone.

worse, all this fandom seems to want to do, is suppress "anti-xyz" for the sake of peace and getting along. you cannot CLAIM to care about important issues when you push important people and their talking points aside. because it's not hate. it's upset: it's criticism for an author who people still hold in such high regard and what she has done wrong.

sixteen years of the books, and fourteen since the first movie. when are you going to start saying no?

[generisydtoo]

Thoughts on the recent SOTR castings!

While they’re not necessarily what I envisioned, I really am happy for the girls, and think they’re gonna do great! This franchise doesn’t just cast any and everybody for these roles. I’m also glad they’re casting 2 different actresses. I’ve seen fan casts use identical twins, and they kept missing the mark for me bc, the point is Louella and Lou Lou are DIFFERENT kids.

My main issue surrounding this discussion is that now we’re never gonna hear the end of it from the “Why would she be Black/Brown?” “Y’all are obsessed with race. Why does it even matter?” crowds, and after going through this with SO many fandoms already (including this one), I just…ugh. I’ve already seen someone comment on TikTok “white Louella you will always be famous” (which I wouldn’t side-eye if we didn’t know what kind of undertones they carry)🥴.

People asking “why does race matter?” in regards to The Hunger Games is also really odd to me, when it’s a story set in a still-oppressive future of NORTH AMERICA, and while it’s not the focus of the story, there have been undertones of racial discrimination (in addition to the more prevalent class discrimination), particularly in Districts 12 and 11.

I do think it’s strange how people are writing off others’ disappointment- particularly that of Black fans and others who perceived her to be WOC- as performative or unfounded. Shame on anyone sending hate to the actresses ofc, but I’ve seen a lot of ppl equate this disappointment/criticism of the castings/director with hate towards the actresses themselves, when that’s not what’s going on.

I’ve also seen ppl try to equate the disappointment/critiques about these recent castings to the hate Amandla received in 2012. I understand and fully support not wanting these young actresses to receive hate; that should be the standard! That being said, I feel like ppl are forgetting just how vitriolic ppl were towards Amandla (including sending her death threats!), and what that vitriol was rooted in— anti-Black bigotry and racism. Again, NO child should receive hate for playing a role, but the two situations are not the same.

I’m especially tired of ppl saying “Why would she be Black? Everyone in D11 isn’t Black”. Of course everyone in D11 isn’t Black, but every single tribute we’ve seen from D11 so far has been Black, aside from book Seeder. It’s weird to me that some folks think it’s outlandish that Lou Lou, and by extension, Louella, could’ve been be Black too. It also seems like people are ignoring other people who use the terms “predominantly/majority Black” in favor of wrongfully interpreting them as someone saying D11 is “all Black,” when that’s not the case.

Lastly, it’s interesting how most of the “Why would she be Black/POC?” “Why does race even matter? Stop making everything about race!” crowd and the people fighting tooth and nail to go against Black/Brown interpretations of these characters tend to be from the same demographic that has never had to worry about having good representation/representation at all, but I digress…

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

I'm a Malleus yume, and I'm in total agreement with you. I don't understand why people are so desperately trying to twist the situation in Malleus favor with such bizarre reasons??? like I love my man, but like all the overblotters, he's in the wrong.

Vil was wrong when he tried to poison Neige, Riddle was wrong when he enforced his rules to the point of tyranny, etc. and Malleus is wrong for trapping everyone in dreams against their wishes.

Yes, there are a lot of things going on in the background, like the war and Lilia's departure and how it affected Malleus, but like.... this is happening now. Malleus is doing these things now, and it is hurting people.

Also, as for the "enemy of mankind" and "ruler of evil“ thing. These are characters with opinions, they are doing A Narrative with Conflicts, so of course they are going to be Conflicting and have Opinions. god. liking a character ≠ endorsement of their actions. people don't need to jump through the moral hoop to justify so and so's actions. just say "man that's messed up" and move on!!!!

[Referencing this post!]

I’m not going to rehash the points or the counters brought up here. You can refer to the original discussion linked above, which goes into much more detail, if you’re interested or haven’t already seen it yet. In this post, I'm going to be speculating as to why some individuals may be "desperately trying to twist the situation in Malleus's favor with such bizarre reasons," as the asker puts it.

TO BE CLEAR: I do not mean to disparage Malleus fans, and nor am I claiming that ALL Malleus fans engage in this behavior; this post is meant to be a critical look at why we see some of the fandom behaviors that we do.

As stated in the original post, I believe that many of these defenses are coming from some (not ALL) English-speaking Malleus fans. Why might that be? Well, firstly, some important things to keep in mind:

Malleus is EXTREMELY popular in the EN fandom, especially as a character to yume/ship with oneself. (He's been decently popular in the JP server as of late too, but there is still a noticeable positive bias for Malleus on the EN side.) Several fan polls consistently indicate that at least 50% of responders list Malleus as their favorite character/one of their favorite characters or indicate that they yume with him. This means there will always be considerable positive bias for Malleus among the English-speaking fanbase. Statistically speaking, this also means that extreme Malleus defenses are more likely to occur because there is already such a high volume of Malleus fans to begin with.

The average age for an EN player skews younger (like, teenager to young adult) than the JP playerbase (which, on average, seems to be women in their mid to late-20s). While it's not always true that younger = more immature/less knowledgeable, it IS the case that younger fans will generally have less life experience and thus less of a nuanced understanding of the world compared to older individuals. It is also (again, generally) the case that younger fans tend to have a more black/white view of morality and are more likely to demand that content cater to their own worldviews.

I was very shocked to read many of the recent Malleus defenses that I did. Some of them went so extreme with their wording that it almost felt as though they believed Malleus was the victim in the events of book 7 rather than the several thousands of people under his spell. While I understand being protective of a character one enjoys, I felt that some arguments took it much too far and seemed to entirely push the blame onto other characters instead of holding Malleus accountable for his actions. Similar radical defenses of Malleus have a tendency to crop up with every subsequent book 7 update. For example, there were (and still are) debates about who exactly is "responsible" for the nature of the dreams, Malleus or the dreamers themselves. So what's up here? Why the hubbub about Malleus specifically?

Well, in addition to the two points I brought up earlier (EN fans being younger on average + Malleus being a popular character), I believe a lot of it comes down to some fans being extremely attached to him. This is a phenomenon I often observe with Malleus in particular (and not as prominently with other Twst characters) due to how he is presented:

The main story narrative introduces him as Yuu's special friend, and Yuu is considered special to him in return (as he is usually feared or forgotten by others). Due to this, he is already set up as being "different" and "important" to many players.

We, as outsiders, are allowed to glimpse the positive sides of Malleus that most of the cast do not get to see. We may make the mistake of assuming that our understanding of him is what others see or believe that this is what they should see, in spite of this knowledge gap. This can lead to frustrations when other characters misunderstand him or don't see him the same way the player does.

He is a mysterious entity that we don't know much about, and it has been that way for a few years. This makes it very easy to project onto Malleus and make him whatever type of guy you want. This can heighten one's attachment to him, as you have now put in all this effort to flesh him out yourself.

Many people relate to and empathize with Malleus being lonely and awkward. This can contribute to a parasocial bond with him, and lead to the feeling that if someone dislikes or condemns Malleus, it is also a personal attack on those similar to Malleus.

His book being the last one, Malleus fans were starved for content and thus had to "fill in the void" by coming up with their own creations and headcanons. This means that by the time Malleus did become relevant, fans had already formed a preconceived notion of what he would or should be like (ie the "fanon"), which is, oftentimes, a much "softer" interpretation of him. This may then be superimposed over his actual character and the actions he takes in canon. To resolve the resulting cognitive dissonance, those fans might become defensive in his name.

The narrative of Twst hardly ever holds Malleus responsible for the things he says and does; it is therefore possible that some Malleus fans got used to that and assume this will be the norm for him. Now that others are calling for him to take some accountability, it goes against that norm and this may cause discomfort in those fans.

No one wants to see their favorite character hurt and/or die, and that has become a very real fear considering what book 7 is building up to. When people experience intense emotions like distress, they fail to think rationally and are more likely to talk off the cuff and make wild assumptions. This is a psychological truth; you can find many research papers about this if you don't believe me.

Not sure how strong of a point this one is, but I feel that sunk cost fallacy also plays a role. This refers to a reluctance to abandon something because you have already heavily invested so much in it. In this case, fans don't want to leave Malleus because they have already sunk so much time and emotional effort into him.

Considering all of that, I shouldn't be surprised that some fans became very upset at even the mere suggestion that Malleus has done bad things or should be "punished" for that. A lot of the arguments try to point out his good traits to balance it out, when that's not really the issue at hand. There are hardly any people out there denying that Malleus has good traits. There are hardly any people out there claiming that Malleus is purely wicked. There are hardly any people out there saying that Malleus doesn't have a sympathetic backstory or relatable motivations. What people actually want is for someone with both good and bad traits (ie Malleus) who is objectively harming people or threatening to harm them, to receive repercussions, given the enormity of his actions and how little he has been called out before relative to his peers.

[sukibenders]

It's annoying how many Glinda fans, specifically a certain type, act condescending towards people criticizing Glinda's actions and her as a character, calling her out for how she operates in a way that benefits her by saying "Oh, these people don't know anything, they haven't seen Act II or read the books." But when they are told that both forms of media have been seen, they still get in their feelings, especially towards black and other poc fans who, when discussing Glinda, talk about how she feels very reflective of white feminism, respectability politics and performance activism (which she is), something that they know probably what it's like to be around people like that from personal experience. Just because you like a character, especially one who does bad things, doesn't mean you get to be rude to others or downplay their intelligence when they call these actions out. Glinda is often infantilized a lot in this fandom, from what I've gathered, even though (speaking from a movie standpoint) she literally sings about how she understands the way her society works and how she uses those rules to her advantage. There are many things that Glinda does that are fake and catty, and there's nothing wrong with calling that out. Also, another thing, yes some people haven't seen the musical (in person or in full) whether it not being available or just lack of interest, but there are ways to still learn about Act II before the second half of the movie comes out, whether through a quick Google search or just watching bootleg recordings of the musical on YouTube, people can learn, but you acting pretentious and downright hostile probably makes them want to avoid this fandom as a whole. Then you wonder why no one wants to engage with Wicked. You can like her as a character, all good and well as even I can find myself drawn to her, but let's not let your enjoyment of her cloud your judgment and having you lash out at people, because that's really uncalled for.

[apoloadonisandnarcissus]

Of Sauron [Hypothetical] Redemption

Is Sauron redeemable?

This question is particularly active in the Sauron x Galadriel fandom, for obvious reasons. But it can be of interest to any Tolkien fan, really. Brace yourselves, this is a long read and we are going deep into Tolkien legendarium, here.

To many, the idea that Sauron is redeemable is absurd in itself because of how Tolkien describes him as “the second visible incarnation of evil”; “reincarnation of Evil, and a thing lusting for Complete Power” (Letter 131); or “shadow of Morgoth” (The Silmarillion). All of this means that Sauron is absolute and pure evil, yes? And hence, he has no possibility of redemption, whatsoever? 

Not quite.

For starters, there’s an idea that needs to be deconstructed here: Tolkien lore being “black and white”, or pure Evil vs. pure Good. It isn’t.

And this was actually, a grievance Tolkien himself had ever since his work first got published. The critics and the public, seemed determined to judge his books on an absolute dichotomy, without any nuance. Ironic, many are doing the same until this day (and probably the reason why Christopher Tolkien hated the Peter Jackson adaptations so much).  

Some reviewers have called the whole thing simple-minded, just a plain fight between Good and Evil, with all the good just good, and the bad just bad. Pardonable, perhaps (though at least Boromir has been overlooked) in people in a hurry, and with only a fragment to read, and, of course, without the earlier written but unpublished Elvish histories. But the Elves are not wholly good or in the right. Not so much because they had flirted with Sauron; as because with or without his assistance they were 'embalmers'. They wanted to have their cake and eat it: to live in the mortal historical Middle-earth because they had become fond of it (and perhaps because they there had the advantages of a superior caste), and so tried to stop its change and history, stop its growth, keep it as a pleasaunce, even largely a desert, where they could be 'artists' – and they were overburdened with sadness and nostalgic regret.  Tolkien Letter 154

Tolkien admits his lore doesn’t deal with “absolute evil” because he doesn’t believe in such a thing:

In my story I do not deal in Absolute Evil. I do not think there is such a thing, since that is Zero. I do not think that at any rate any 'rational being' is wholly evil. Satan fell. In my myth Morgoth fell beasts and monsters, and the Unknown. The defence of the realm may then indeed become symbolic of the human situation. Before Creation of the physical world. Tolkien Letter 183

Tolkien's Sauron

Did Tolkien created Sauron as a nuanced villain in his lore? What does he say about him? 

And there is Sauron. In the Silmarillion and Tales of the First Age Sauron was a being of Valinor perverted to the service of the Enemy and becoming his chief captain and servant. He repents in fear when the First Enemy is utterly defeated, but in the end does not do as was commanded, return to the judgement of the gods. He lingers in Middle-earth. Very slowly, beginning with fair motives: the reorganising and rehabilitation of the ruin of Middle-earth, 'neglected by the gods', he becomes a reincarnation of Evil, and a thing lusting for Complete Power – and so consumed ever more fiercely with hate (especially of gods and Elves). All through the twilight of the Second Age the Shadow is growing in the East of Middle-earth, spreading its sway more and more over Men – who multiply as the Elves begin to fade. The three main themes are thus The Delaying Elves that lingered in Middle-earth; Sauron's growth to a new Dark Lord, master and god of Men; and Numenor-Atlantis. Tolkien Letter 131

Mairon, the Maia of Aulë, was not evil in the beginning (because nothing is, in Tolkien lore).  He was corrupted by Morgoth. He repents of his crimes under Morgoth but doesn’t do penitance. During the Second Age, he begins his rise to power, being a cautionary tale of “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”.

In Season 1 of "Rings of Power", we saw "repentant Mairon" aka Halbrand:

In Season 2, Annatar was introduced, and he symbolizes "Sauron the reformer", who wants to rebuilt Middle-earth with good intentions:

Sauron was of course not 'evil' in origin. He was a 'spirit' corrupted by the Prime Dark Lord (the Prime sub-creative Rebel) Morgoth. He was given an opportunity of repentance, when Morgoth was overcome, but could not face the humiliation of recantation, and suing for pardon; and so his temporary turn to good and 'benevolence' ended in a greater relapse, until he became the main representative of Evil of later ages. But at the beginning of the Second Age he was still beautiful to look at, or could still assume a beautiful visible shape – and was not indeed wholly evil, not unless all 'reformers' who want to hurry up with 'reconstruction' and 'reorganization' are wholly evil, even before pride and the lust to exert their will eat them up. Tolkien Letter 153

During the Second Age, Sauron begins his rise to power, with good intentions, at first. However, his pride and lust for power becomes too great, and he aspires to become a “God of Men” (no longer a mere Maia).

And this is probably Sauron's greater crime (sin) in the legendarium, since Eru himself is called to intervene: Sauron was first defeated by a 'miracle': a direct action of God the Creator, changing the fashion of the world, when appealed to by Manwë [...] reduced to 'a spirit of hatred borne on a dark wind', I do not think one need boggle at this spirit carrying off the One Ring, upon which his power of dominating minds now largely depended (Letter 211).

Because of his admiration of Strength he [Sauron] had become a follower of Morgoth and fell with him down into the depths of evil, becoming his chief agent in Middle Earth. When Morgoth was defeated by the Valar finally he forsook his allegiance; but out of fear only; he did not present himself to the Valar or sue for pardon, and remained in Middle Earth. When he found how greatly his knowledge was admired by all other rational creatures and how easy it was to influence them, his pride became boundless. By the end of the Second Age he assumed the position of Morgoth's representative. By the end of the Third Age (though actually much weaker than before) he claimed to be Morgoth returned. Tolkien Letter 183 (note)

Let's dig in the "Sauron the supervillain":

The corrupted, as was Melkor/Morgoth and his followers (of whom Sauron was one of the chief) saw in them the ideal material for subjects and slaves, to whom they could become masters and 'gods', envying the Children, and secretly hating them, in proportion as they became rebels against the One (and Manwë his Lieutenant in Eä). Tolkien Letter 212

In my story Sauron represents as near an approach to the wholly evil will as is possible. He had gone the way of all tyrants: beginning well, at least on the level that while desiring to order all things according to his own wisdom he still at first considered the (economic) well-being of other inhabitants of the Earth. But he went further than human tyrants in pride and the lust for domination, being in origin an immortal (angelic) spirit. In The Lord of the Rings the conflict is not basically about 'freedom', though that is naturally involved. It is about God, and His sole right to divine honour. The Eldar and the Númenóreans believed in The One, the true God, and held worship of any other person an abomination. Sauron desired to be a God-King, and was held to be this by his servants; if he had been victorious he would have demanded divine honour from all rational creatures and absolute temporal power over the whole world.   Tolkien Letter 183

What these quotes tell us, is this: while Sauron isn’t “absolute evil” (because Tolkien himself didn’t deal with this in his legendarium, nor did he believed such a thing exists), Sauron's will (desires; intentions; goals) came pretty close to “wholly evil”.

Sauron is unmistakable evil, obviously distinguishable from “good”: he’s not a grey character, nor an anti-hero in any way, shape or form. He’s a full-on villain, some might even say a "super-villain", really. However, he’s not pure irredeemably wicked evil in Tolkien lore.

Why?

Tolkien's Ideas of Redemption

This goes back to Tolkien’s religious beliefs (Christian-Catholic) and how they are present in his legendarium; in 1953, he wrote this about the Orcs: 

the Diabolus Morgoth did, and started making things 'for himself, to be their Lord', these would then 'be', even if Morgoth broke the supreme ban against making other 'rational' creatures like Elves or Men. They would at least 'be' real physical realities in the physical world, however evil they might prove, even 'mocking' the Children of God. They would be Morgoth's greatest Sins, abuses of his highest privilege, and would be creatures begotten of Sin, and naturally bad. (I nearly wrote 'irredeemably bad'; but that would be going too far. Because by accepting or tolerating their making – necessary to their actual existence – even Orcs would become part of the World, which is God's and ultimately good.)   I have represented at least the Orcs as pre-existing real beings on whom the Dark Lord has exerted the fullness of his power in remodeling and corrupting them, not making them. That God would 'tolerate' that, seems no worse theology than the toleration of the calculated dehumanizing of Men by tyrants that goes on today.  Tolkien Letter 153 

In 1965, W.H. Auden asked Tolkien if the notion of Orcs (an entire race that should be seen as irredeemably wicked) was not heretical:

With regard to The Lord of the Rings, I cannot claim to be a sufficient theologian to say whether my notion of Orcs is heretical or not. I don't feel under any obligation to make my story fit with formalized Christian theology, though I actually intended it to be consonant with Christian thought and belief, which is asserted somewhere, Book Five, page 190,1 where Frodo asserts that the orcs are not evil in origin.   Tolkien Letter 169 

And now you know the reason behind Orc families in "Rings of Power".

Tolkien himself went back and forward with this notion, or even if the Orcs had “souls”, to begin with, but in the end his faith probably got the best of him. We also see this with his thoughts on Gollum:  

In which case (as I believe) salvation from ruin will depend on something apparently unconnected: the general sanctity (and humility and mercy) of the sacrificial person [...] Gollum had had his chance of repentance, and of returning generosity with love; and had fallen off the knife-edge.  Tolkien Letter 191

On the importance of repentance, even among the Valar:

The Fall or corruption, therefore, of all things in it and all inhabitants of it, was a possibility if not inevitable. Trees may 'go bad' as in the Old Forest; Elves may turn into Orcs, and if this required the special perversive malice of Morgoth, still Elves themselves could do evil deeds. Even the 'good' Valar as inhabiting the World could at least err; as the Great Valar did in their dealings with the Elves; or as the lesser of their kind (as the Istari or wizards) could in various ways become self-seeking.   Aulë, for instance, one of the Great, in a sense 'fell'; for he so desired to see the Children, that he became impatient and tried to anticipate the will of the Creator. Being the greatest of all craftsmen he tried to make children according to his imperfect knowledge of their kind. When he had made thirteen, God spoke to him in anger, but not without pity: for Aulë had done this thing not out of evil desire to have slaves and subjects of his own, but out of impatient love, desiring children to talk to and teach, sharing with them the praise of Ilúvatar and his great love of the materials of which the world is made. The One rebuked Aulë, saying that he had tried to usurp the Creator's power; but he could not give independent life to his makings. He had only one life, his own derived from the One, and could at most only distribute it. 'Behold' said the One: 'these creatures of thine have only thy will, and thy movement. Though you have devised a language for them, they can only report to thee thine own thought. This is a mockery of me.'  Then Aulë in grief and repentance humbled himself and asked for pardon. And he said: 'I will destroy these images of my presumption, and wait upon thy will.' And he took a great hammer, raising it to smite the eldest of his images; but it flinched and cowered from him. And as he withheld his stroke, astonished, he heard the laughter of Ilúvatar. 'Do you wonder at this?' he said. 'Behold! thy creatures now live, free from thy will! For I have seen thy humility, and taken pity on your impatience. Thy making I have taken up into my design.'   This is the Elvish legend of the making of the Dwarves; but the Elves report that Iluvatar said thus also: 'Nonetheless I will not suffer my design to be forestalled: thy children shall not awake before mine own.' And he commanded Aule to lay the fathers of the Dwarves severally in deep places, each with his mate, save Dúrin the eldest who had none. There they should sleep long, until Ilúvatar bade them awake.   Nonetheless there has been for the most part little love between the Dwarves and the children of Iluvatar. And of the fate that Ilúvatar has set upon the children of Aulë beyond the Circles of the world Elves and men know nothing, and if Dwarves know they do not speak of it.  Tolkien Letter 212

This is pure Christian doctrine.

Even though Tolkien legendarium is not a copy-paste from the Bible (and it has several other inspirations), it’s pretty clear that Eru Ilúvatar represents the Christian God. And even though God himself had different interpretations throughout History, I think we should see it as the God from Tolkien’s time (and our time, too): “God the Father” (which makes sense with what Tolkien created on his lore).

In Catholicism (Tolkien’s religion), God is just (God’s justice) but he’s also merciful, and he loves all of his children, even those who fallen into sin. No one is unredeemable in the eyes of God (no matter how deep one has fallen), if one truly repents and makes amends for his sins ("the virtue of penance"). God is always willing to give their faithful a second chance, if they accept him as their one true God, and make penitence in His service (whatever that might be).

In the lore, we know that the Children of Ilúvatar are Elves and Men. However, all the deities (Valar and Maiar) were also created by Eru. From a Christian perspective, the Valar are archangels, and the Maiar are angels. This is an on-going debate within Theology, because some agree that angels are “sons of God”, while others don’t. For the sake of the argument, I’ll just add this: Job 38:7 - when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God [angels] shouted for joy. But more on that later.

This means that Sauron is, indeed, redeemable. But he has to make that choice, himself. "Free will"; another major theme in Tolkien lore.

And, the true question, here, isn’t “is Sauron redeemable?” but “is Sauron capable of repentance”? 

In Tolkien “canon”, meaning the events of “The Silmarillion”, “The Hobbit”, up until the end of “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy (First to the dawn of the Fourth Age) the answer is no.

After the One ring is destroyed by Frodo, Sauron’s spirit is left so diminished and weak, he can never rise to power, again, according to Gandalf:

If [the One Ring] is destroyed, then [Sauron] will fall; and his fall will be so low that none can foresee his arising ever again. For he will lose the best part of his strength that was native to him in his beginning, and all that made or begun with that power will crumble, and he will be maimed for ever, becoming a mere spirit of malice that gnaws itself in the shadows, but cannot again grow or take shape. And so a great evil of this world will be removed.  

However, this is not as simple. Sauron/Mairon is an immortal spirit by definition. He can’t never truly die, since he’s one of the spiritual forces that first helped shaped the world in the Ainulindalë (the Music of the Ainur), and no soul can be annihilated or reduced to zero (non-existent) in Tolkien legendarium.  

Sauron/Mairon’s whereabouts and fate after the dawn of Fourth Age are unaccounted for, because Tolkien didn’t get the chance to finish his story. We, truly, don’t know where he went, if we stayed on Middle-earth, or to the Undying Lands of Valinor (to finally face the judgement of the Valar for his crimes), because he could go whenever he wanted in Arda, really.  

One theory is that Manwë, the King of the Valar, might have come to Mordor to capture Sauron after the One ring is destroyed, based on this description from “Return of the King”: 

And as the Captain gazed south to the Land of Mordor, it seemed to them that, black against the pall of cloud, there rose a huge shape of shadow, impenetrable, lightning-crowned, filling all the sky. Enormous it reared above the world, and stretched out towards them a vast threatening hand, terrible but impotent [Sauron’s spirit]: for even as it leaned over them, a great wind took it, and it was all blown away, and passed, then a hush fell.” 

Basically this scene but a “great wind” carries away that shadow

Manwë is the one with the power over air and winds, and when Sauron repented the first time (after Morgoth’s defeat), he went to Eönwë, the herald of Manwë, to beg forgiveness for his past crimes. His fellow Maia told him that he couldn't be the one to grant him pardon, because that’s above his station, and he needs to face trial before the Valar, namely from Manwë.

Since we know that Sauron’s pride prevented him from doing this, it would actually make sense for Manwë himself to capture Sauron after his defeat, bringing him to Valinor.

When Thangorodrim was broken and Morgoth overthrown, Sauron put on his fair hue again and did obeisance to Eönwë, the herald of Manwë, and abjured all his evil deeds. And some hold that this was not at first falsely done, but that Sauron in truth repented, if only out of fear, being dismayed by the fall of Morgoth and the great wrath of the Lords of the West. But it was not within the power of Eönwë to pardon those of his own order, and he commanded Sauron to return to Aman and there receive the judgment of Manwë. Then Sauron was ashamed, and he was unwilling to return in humiliation and to receive from the Valar a sentence, in might be, of long servitude in proof of his good faith; for under Morgoth his power had been great. Therefore when Eönwë departed he hid himself in Middle-Earth; and he fell back into evil, for the bonds that Morgoth had laid upon him were very strong. The Silmarillion

Many use Gandalf’s quote as “proof” that Sauron remained on Middle-earth like a shadow of malice, or a ghost. However, Tolkien made the distinction between himself and what his characters say, in Letter 153: “There is, to me, a wide gulf between the two statements, so wide that Treebeard's statement could (in my world) have possibly been true [...] Treebeard is a character in my story, not me; and though he has a great memory and some earthy wisdom, he is not one of the Wise, and there is quite a lot he does not know or understand.”

Gandalf is wise, indeed, but he’s not of the same rank as the Valar (he’s a servant to them), nor he, like Eönwë, has either the power or the permission to pass sentences on other Maiar’s fates. Which means, his quote is his own opinion on the subject, and not actual "canon" on what happened to Sauron after the One was destroyed.

For the sake of argument, let’s assume Manwë captured Sauron: was he sent to the Void like his former master, Morgoth?

Based on The Silmarillion it could appear that way: 

Among those of his servants that have names the greatest was that spirit whom the Eldar called Sauron, or Gorthaur the Cruel. In his beginning he was of the Maia of Aulë, and he remained mighty in the lore of that people. In all the deeds of Melkor the Morgoth upon Arda, in his vast workds and in the deceits of his cunning, Sauron had a part, and was only less evil than his master in that for long he served another and not himself. But in after years he rose like a shadow of Morgoth and a ghost of his malice, and walked behind him on the same ruinous path down into the Void.  

However, this, again, is not that simple, because The Silmarillion was not only published by Christopher Tolkien, and it contains elements outdated and reviewed by Tolkien himself, but it’s also a tale written by the Eldar, and it contains “opinions” and “facts” from which the Eldar themselves had little knowledge about (namely everything that’s connected to the Maiar and the Valar).

This means, not everything that’s in The Silmarillion is true or actually happened (canon): it’s like “Fire & Blood” by George R.R. Martin, a collection of facts, opinions, gossip, myths, etc. written by the Elves. The truth is in Tolkien’s essays and letters, really. And this is why “Rings of Power” can afford to play with the events of this book. 

Tolkien did confirm, in his Letter 297, that Morgoth was overthrown and extruded from the World (the physical universe). But his crimes were far worse than Sauron's:

the Diabolus Morgoth did, and started making things 'for himself, to be their Lord', these would then 'be', even if Morgoth broke the supreme ban against making other 'rational' creatures like Elves or Men. They would at least 'be' real physical realities in the physical world, however evil they might prove, even 'mocking' the Children of God. They would be Morgoth's greatest Sins, abuses of his highest privilege. Tolkien, Letter 153

Morgoth is a Vala (God/archangel), and he did not only corrupted Elves into Orcs, but also Maiar (angels) into Balrogs and other servants of his (demons), including Mairon himself. Mairon, like all the other Maiar (including the fallen ones), was created by Eru, but got corrupted by Morgoth, which means, the way Eru sees him is key. Does he sees Mairon as "equal" to Morgoth, or as victim of Morgoth's corruption? Food for thought. Because if he's just a victim, the Void isn't his fate.

A lot of fans in the Tolkien fandom have the headcanon that the immortal servants of Morgoth were sent to the Void, alongside him, but Tolkien never wrote about this, and their fates are a mystery. I might be mistaken here, but I think only Ungoliant’s fate is mentioned in the legendarium, and very enigmatic, too: went to the forgotten south of the world before the (first) rising of the Sun, and there disappeared from history.

Then, we have the fact that Satan/Lucifer is Melkor/Morgoth because he’s the one who corrupts God’s creation and he’s the symbolic archangel (like Lucifer was). Him being dragged in chains and imprisoned until the end of time, also parallels a biblical event.

Sauron is a satanist, a follower of Satan/Morgoth. Tolkien also makes this distinction in his letters: Satanic rebellion and evil of Morgoth and his satellite Sauron; in which Evil is largely incarnate, and in which physical resistance to it is a major act of loyalty to God (Letter 156). Tolkien also calls Sauron "a reincarnation of Evil"; that "evil" being Morgoth (diabolus).

Sauron’s crimes 

His biggest crimes in Tolkien legendarium aren’t the forging of the One ring, nor the whole “rings of power” project to enslave the Free people’s of Middle-earth, nor even the Fall of Númenor. Because, as Tolkien, told us: “in The Lord of the Rings the conflict is not basically about 'freedom', though that is naturally involved. It is about God, and His sole right to divine honour” (Letter 183).

Sauron’s biggest sins in Tolkien lore are:

Pride

Idolatry (worship of false gods): Thou shall have no other Gods before me. Mairon turned his back on Eru (God) to serve Morgoth (Devil), and this act of treason is a crime against Eru himself;

Rebellion: against Eru’s authority, by siding with Morgoth;

Heresy: he forsake his worship of Eru (his creator) for Morgoth; and also converted many Númenoreans to his Morgoth cult, in the hopes of angering the Valar enough to destroy Númenor;

Blasphemy: he cut down Nimloth, the White Tree of Númenor, a symbol of the Faithful, and in its place raised a great Temple devoted to Morgoth in which human sacrifices were performed to asks for immortality, and persecuted the Faithful;

Usurpation of God’s authority: self-proclaim God. That’s why he’s called “shadow of Morgoth”; because Sauron is a mere Maia, a servant to a God, not an actual God.

Would any of these sins sent Sauron into the Void with his former master? Again, it would depend on how Eru judges him, really.

The Void is quite a mysterious place in the legendarium; it’s located outside Time and Space, it’s the absence of the Secret Fire of Eru (“the Flame Imperishable”), his power of Creation. We only know that Morgoth was imprisoned there, and set free at the end of time.

Eru already punished Sauron once, by removing his ability to take on physical form after the Fall of Númenor; and after the One ring was destroyed, Sauron himself is little more than a shadow of his former self, his spirit severely diminished, powerless, and unable to cause any damage, at all. That’s his punishment, already.

But in order to get any redemption, that choice would have to come from Mairon. He would have to truly and honestly repent for all of sins (confession), starting by forsaken Morgoth and recognizing Eru as his one true God, and, then, fulfill a fitting penitence for his crimes. We are talking about an immortal spirit here, this process can take thousands of years or even millenniums.   

[theredhairedmonkey]

What Dark Callum Means

And what it doesn't.

So, I think it's worth discussing what the appearance of this particular guy at this point of the series means and symbolizes, as I'm sure many people are going to have a field day with his.

And by "this particular guy," I mean Dark Callum.

Who, funny enough, is actually still more reasonable and moral than the psychopathic gremlin known as "snake boi callum" found across the fandom (as he acknowledges that he loves and cares for more people than just Rayla and Ezran), but I digress. In particular, I think what some fans are zeroing in on is that the show confirms (and it actually does confirm) that there’s always been this part of Callum that is willing to abandon his sense of right and wrong for the sake of those he loves.

But...that actually plays to the larger part of this season's themes in a way that ends up enriching Callum's position as the show's moral center. Let me explain why.

Book Dark (i.e. season 7) is about the loss of innocence, told not just through symbolism (the Garden of Innocents being where Unicorns went to die being a bit on the nose) but directly by Aaravos:

Aaravos: All children have a true heart. But as we grow up, we are forced to take choices, sacrifices, compromises. And they change us forever. Childhood innocence gives way to something...complicated.

The fact that Ezran is shown here as Aaravos speaks is not a coincidence - no matter how pure, life wears all of us down.

Then Aaravos' next speech contextualizes this further - not having a dark side isn't an attribute of goodness, but innocence. Eventually, all of us develop a dark side, and inevitable outgrowth of being forced to make compromises, harsh decisions, and sacrifices.

Aaravos: The true heart is a gift of childhood. For a few wonder-filled years, we each have innocent eyes to experience the world's beauty in a simple way. Terrestrius, you were lucky and held that innocent wonder longer than most. I have seen generations of humans and elves accept the darkness that lurks inside all of us beside the light. There is no black and white, only shades of gray. We must all carry complexity. But please believe me that there is beauty in this burden. Your heart will be a little heavier. But now, there will be no more half-truths, Terrestrius. Together, we will do what must be done. However dangerous. However vile.

It is worth pointing out how many people are shown together with the quote about "humans and elves accept the darkness that lurks inside of all of us." So when Callum meets Dark Callum, who tells him he's always been inside him even before he used dark magic, we shouldn't be surprised.

But his appearance actually tells us something different - that Callum had not yet accepted him. That the Callum we have been seeing throughout the show is not the one who would do whatever he had to for his loved ones "however dangerous, however vile."

And that is the critical part here, and why despite seeing the world as Aaravos does, understanding the need for compromises, Callum nevertheless opposes him - being good isn't about lacking the capacity for darkness, but about choosing what to do with that capacity. Callum's strength isn't that he never feels the pull to abandon principles for love, but that he develops the wisdom to channel that impulse in ways that ultimately serve good rather than evil.

In short, he sees the world as Aaravos does...yet chooses differently.

Consider how this differs from Aaravos's prediction. Aaravos sees this willingness to compromise for love and assumes it must lead down the same path of progressive moral erosion that he took. What he misses is that acknowledging this capacity doesn't mean surrendering to it entirely. Callum shows that you can recognize this part of yourself while still choosing how to express it.

This makes Callum's role as a moral center more complex and meaningful. He's not a moral center because he lacks dark impulses or the willingness to break rules for love - he's a moral center because he shows us how to acknowledge these aspects of ourselves while still making choices that serve rather than destroy our principles.

[pretty-weird-ideas]

Anne Rice, Literature, and Literacy

As a Black book reader of Anne Rice, seeing racist IWTV fans doing the "Black kids in Brooklyn don't even know what a computer is" bit by stating Black fans that they are "anti-intellectual" for discouraging or telling Black fans to not read the books (or simply implying that reading the books aren't important) is disturbing.

Black people are allowed to protect their peace, and not read a book written with racist themes, by a well-known controversial author. Furthermore, the implication that not reading a specific series from an author that had a sharp downward turn in quality after Memnoch (I know hot take, I'm sorry) makes a person immature and unintelligent is a level of self-aggrandizing racism that not even Rick and Morty fans could pull off. Black people refusing to read racist content and instead choosing to prioritize content with Black characters and less harmful political themes being associated with a lack of culture and media literacy is repulsive.

Anne Rice fans (not fans of her books, but fans of HER) are in such a large fandom bubble that they have forgotten that people have been actively harmed by Anne Rice THE PERSON who was alive and isn't a figment of fandom imagination. You can READ her opinions and her political beliefs, you can read what she has said and done to real-life people who are still alive and are in fandom TODAY.

People have been harassed by Anne Rice, and people have been threatened and doxxed by Anne Rice and her supporters. She isn't a figment of imagination or a historical figure without living memories. Fanfiction.net isn't Fanfiction.net for no reason. AO3 isn't aggressively "like that" (positive and negative connotations) without cause. The existence of modern fandom culture was built by her horrid actions, and the further and further we get from acknowledging the harm and change she brought to fandom culture, the closer we get to losing fandom culture altogether.

I'm not going to say names, but once again it is repeated offenders who I have spoken about who have once again implied that Black fans are "encouraging" stupidity in Black people. That Black fans are unintelligent and that they are "uncultured" of their own volition. I'm not going to mince words here, the IWTV fandom is full of pieces of shit who believe that Black people are unintelligent and that their unintelligence is "self-inflicted". That their lack of interest in reading a singular book written by a controversial figure is a sign that they are inherently inferior. We've seen this with "Black culture encourages unintelligence" and "Black culture encourages violence" so seeing it within the confines of a space made up of queer losers (for lack of a better term as I am one myself) isn't surprising. But it is disappointing in ways that words, barring expletives, cannot describe. The xenophobia and racism towards African Americans in a show that centers African Americans is revolting. If I want to hear a rant about how Black Americans are encouraging vice and delinquency I could listen to Richard Spencer or Nick Fuentes wax poetic, I don't want to hear it from fans of a woman whose harassment campaigns towards critics are continuing from beyond the grave.

I don't want to be the person that begs people to read Black literature, but I wish a black person would walk up to white people and scoff when they say they haven't read N.K Jemisin or Octavia Butler. That we shall roll our eyes and say "What has literacy come to?" when someone says they don't know who Zora Neale Hurston is. Who walks around and rants about how "White culture is in such a bad spot because their people don't encourage listening to Jazz and Hip Hop. And how I shed my Black savior tears about how destructive their culture is,". Maybe then we would start to see shame.

[uselessheretic]

ofmd fandom has a racefaking scandal which lol i mean lmao even if u will. anyways, two things i guess as someone who doesn't even go here anymore

a black guy named atticus should've been your first red flag like let's be so serious rn

and 2. this is indicative of how fandom, and ofmd especially, weaponizes identity within it for clout where they're incentivized to exaggerate or wholesale make shit up about themselves as a way of adding validity to their views. "listen to poc voices" has always been a useless statement that gives white people permission to not engage in critical thought and instead rely on poc labor to form an opinion. and it's hilarious that this is somehow the response white fans have to this situation because they are allergic to the idea of picking up a fucking book and actually learning about critical race theory and history instead of the 20 something year old faceless blogger writing meta.

it's telling how often white fans gravitate to these viewpoints where their "authentic" and "necessary" writing on race becomes some of the most cited and propped up examples because, even subconsciously, white fans prioritize whitewashed experiences of racialization that already fits their worldview on how they imagine a poc thinks.

white people are able to succeed in this type of grift because ofmd fandom gaslit itself into thinking that reading text posts counts as educating themselves. which basically means they're doing an activism by reading fanfic and making sure they have only the most correct and woke headcanons lol its been years and you bitches still haven't picked up and finished a single book about race! you have no idea how to critically examine race relations and apply that in a real world context without jumping to the next poc's blog and hoping they have the answer!

this is why these people, despite claiming their hobby is "activism" and that they're an educational resource, will almost never post about current events. even though they claim they're helping combat ignorance in fandom, they'll never provide a source. they'll never link an article they read. they'll never recommend a book for further reading. they'll never remind people of upcoming digital workshops. they'll never suggest a documentary. they'll never actually try to give people the tools to learn for themselves because they don't have them. they just have oomfs ~really good and sooo smart~ meta they wrote based off of vibes and a prayer.

ofmd fandom is locked in a state of permanent ignorance and it'll stay that way because it likes it that way.

[chaifootsteps]

One thing i've just now noticed about the Hazbin Hotel pride merch, (Although this extends to Helluva Bosses pride merch as well, unless Mammons ace on him represents being aroromantic, although I'm not apart of the community and cant find anything on it,) is that for whatever reason, despite Alastor being known as aroromantic for years, even since the pilot.. that flag isnt present in any of his merch? It sucks because, for one thing, it makes me fear that radioapple will become canon even more, and that Viv will have to defend herself on Twitter, (really at this point though, Bluesky, the one place she thought she could avoid criticism for some reason,) and claim that more queer asexual relationships between gay men are important. Then two, that she'd kill two birds with one stone for charlastor shippers, who DARED to make their ship day on her BIRTHDAY! ... Even though they had no idea that the pilot came out on her birthday as well, and nobody intended to upset her. It's almost like they're fans of her, or something. But also, three, thinking about that happening just makes me think, "Oh, so you CAN change parts of Alastors story to better fit your narrative?" Because its like you said, the voodoo thing is something she's sticking to, even if it sinks her story and attempt at "representation" down with her. She obviously made Alastor black to have a pass to keep that element, without understanding the problem people had with it, is that voodoo is a demonized religion already that, in reality, is actually very peaceful. She should've just ditched the voodoo element entirely, and done a generic summoning if she really wanted to keep that dumbass, "Lilith is Rosie but Lilith in hell is ACTUALLY Eve who wants revenge! And also maybe Eve is ALSO The Root of all Evil, who's a Deviantart OC named Roo who's also Australian?" That's not even mentioning how she'll change characters races for the brownie points, only to have horrible implications outside and within the story. Like the obvious, "You're in my zoo!" But Rosie being a cannibal from the 18th century, with Alastor, a black man, makes me particularly uncomfortable, knowing that white people cannibalizing black people used to be common back then. They even wrote cook-books about it. Good thing she's actually Lilith though, amiright? It's like Viv saw the Pink Diamond reveal and how hype it was and wanted to put it in her story driven show without understanding what made it work. And then there's Nifty, who's Japanese, from the 1950's, who's going to have an anime moment in S2.. Do I even have to say it? This kind of got off topic, but I just feel like Alastor has been ruined, even though he's not even a character I ever liked that much. At the very least, Pilot Alastor was an interesting white man who had a moral code that, while we didn't see because of the prequel comics premature end, could've been a way to prop him up as one of the "good" overlords of hell compared to the others, and offered us insight about his life on earth, along with lines mentioning his mother's jambalaya. Series Alastor is voiced by a guy who says his stripper name is Jambalaya, who's yellow teeth are grills, that you're the racist one for thinking that, who simply kills for "fun" or for petty reasons, like having wine spilled on him, is a try hard edge lord, who is also a black man tied into a soul deal with a white woman with chains, who sings about him being her pet, and being in her zoo. Also, he'll probably be in a gay relationship with Lucifer because the creator has a grudge against her own fans ship, so he can be Charlies "father" and make the ship incest, the one thing you aren't allowed to ship in Viv's fandom full of toxic ships that often include non con, despite one character from it's spinoff show canonically thinking his own sister is hot. I hate it here, Chai.

We all hate it here, but at least we're all slogging through it together.

[sheathz]

The AfTG fandom lacks such a fuckin abundance of media literacy and critical thinking and real world experience or awareness.

I genuinely think before y'all decide to read a book series about trauma and violence and how cruel the world can be you need to do some research on actual experiences of trauma and violence and how cruel people can be.

As someone with an abundance of trauma; AFTG is such an accurate representation of different forms of truama and abuse and how different people cope and manage it. Yalls insistent need to come on here and boast about how that "couldn't be you" is incredibly tone deaf and frankly downright fuckin stupid. You're not better than anyone; fictional or otherwise.

Yalls shit ass takes on trauma when you have minimal trauma experiences or haven't experienced real trauma beyond the collapse of the economy is annoying to witness and Im tired of seeing it. I hope the irl people in your lives with PTSD cut you out cuz I wouldn't want to be friends with victim blamers and people who play moral Olympics 🫡🤷🏻

Also here's your blatant reminder ABUSERS CAN BE AND OFTEN ARE VICTIMS TOO; Often they become abusers in response to trauma. Does that justify their continuation of a cycle of abuse? No. But stating an abuser is also a victim of circumstance and trauma isn't automatically a fuckin justification of their actions. Two things can be true, Trauma is not black and white.

[tessarionbestgirl]

Since I saw your post about daemon’s redemption: Have to say it’s really goddamn telling that Daemyra is the most popular ship involving daemon while nettles is the least popular despite being his arguably only canonical love interest. Like yes Daemon x nettles is problematic though what ship in asoiaf isn’t and Nettles is who daemon arguably sacrifices everything for in order for her to escape unharmed plus nettles confronts all of daemons toxic ideals and forces him to change. I swear if nettles wasn’t a black woman and was white like rhaenyra people wedlock to daemon x nettles in a heart beat but because nettles was black people need to show faux concern and say “what about rhaenyra” you know the woman who tried to hate crime nettles

Oh yeah is funny because while I do ship Alys and Daemon on the show, I saw some D*emyra already being more open about them being a thing then Nettles and Daemon.

I even remember people making threads, how, makes no sense Daemon fall for Nettles because she has no Valyrian characteristics. What you know is exactly the point of why Martin wrote he falling in love for Nettles, despite the problematic aspects. It is the whole Brienne and Jaime arc. Brienne is not even close to a classic knight or the classic beauty of woman but she honorable and beautiful in her way as Nettles despite probably not having any Valyrian blood on her she still able to do something no one was, taming a big wild dragon while also not being westorosi beauty standard. All this affect Jaime/Daemon to question their views and change to better. ( And arguably Brienne and Jaime are way more popular than Nettles and Daemon).

Of course this is lost when Ryan adapted the Valaryons to be black, so in this sense I understand why Ryan wouldn't want to adapt the romance between them because part of what make it compelling is lost. Whatever her character shouldn't get repurpose to other characters, and had her importance diminished in the process, because if you saw the leaks, Sheepstealer is small and ugly, and not ugly in the way Vaghar or Vermithor are ugly. The dragon is ugly that stand out as weak and have no appeal even compared to other dragons and it looks even generic design.

Imagine if Game of thrones they have repurpose Brienne to Pod and made him a shitty swordsman and Jaime gave him a random sword. Meanwhile instead of Jaime learning important lessons about himself, the world and being a important step to disconnect from the toxic relationship with Cersei, he had learned to embrace even more hid worse threats and all he needs was to be loyal to Cersei.

The narrative in the book on purpose says "Jaime throwing a kid from the window for love is not right." While the show justifies Daemon killing for Rhaenyra, doing b&c and so on. You know how insane this is?! The fandom back in the time would go crazy over this. Meanwhile hotd fandom, specially tb, justifies it and even some like it.

And he done that for what? Fanservice? Because is that how it feels. This season feels in a lot of sense filler and response for Twitter fans. Either to criticize, to justify it self or to endorse the worse opinions there.

[0zeeraa0]

Tolkien fans and ASOIAF fans on critical views of the books

so i didn't know weather to put this on my tolkien blog or my asoiaf blog, so im putting it here and rebloging it on them.

i recently saw a tiktok of someone talking about how tolkien fans do not like to engage with the books in a critical way, despite the fact that they often see themselves as very intellectual for being tolkien fans in the first place.

she also brought up the point that asoiaf fans are significantly more willing to do so despite ironically being looked down upon by said tolkien fans.

and i just wanted to talk about why i personally think this might be the case

(also dont take this supper seriously. these are just shower though. literally. i just came out of the shower. my hair is wrapped up in a towel rn)

!! this post is specially about the book fans for each fandoms !!

!! i did not take into account fans of the lotr or hobbit movies, the fans of tr*p, and also not the game of thrones show fans or the hotd fans !!

(fair warning: this post has become a bit of an incoherent monster so just bear with me)

a large part of this in my opinion could be the fact that tolkien's work is often considered to be "perfect" and "flawless" and "the best there is", something that a lot of the superfans tend to take to heart and internalize. and because they think tolkien's work is perfect, and because they are huge fans of that work, they seem to come to the conclusion that they have perfect taste in literature. so whenever that is criticized in any way they take it as a personal attack. like they're taste and they're personality is being criticized instead of, you know, a book.

this is also why i think asoiaf fans avoid this issue. it is no news to anyone that asoiaf has a.... reputation..... and a very large majority of people are already very well aware of that reputation before they even start reading the books. they already hear the criticism before they can get emotionally attached to what is being criticized. that way even after reading the books and becoming fans despite those criticisms, they are a lot more accepting of having their favorite book be criticized. and are a lot more willing to do it themselves.

another aspect of this uhhh phenomenon is the "mortality" of the books i suppose

tolkien's work is often seen as "pure" and (most importantly for this case) "unproblematic". another aspect fans very often seem to internalize, and may play a role in how little self awareness they have when they have a crash out over criticism. they cant possibly be rude and full of themselves when they're fans of such unproblematic literature!! how dare you!! this could also play a role in the superiority complex i often see from these types of tolkien fans, especially towards fans of other books, namely asoiaf.

as for the aforementioned asoiaf, as we made it clear, it has a reputation. fans know what they're getting into. they know about the sex and the violence and the incest, its hardly a secret. they also know they'll likely be looked down on for liking the books and are prepared for that too. kinda hard to sit on your moral high horse when its literally galloping through the "incest fandom"...

the way the story is presented could also be an aspect in the way the fandoms handle, not "criticism" necessarily, but more like a critical view of the books and the stories and characters within it (if you get what i mean)

tolkien's work can be pretty black and white. lange aspects of the stories is good vs evil. the evil morgoth vs the good valar. the evil sauron vs the good gandalf. the evil orcs vs the good elves blah blah blah you get it. it can be argued that this doesn't really encourage critical views of the characters and storylines. some are good and the others are evil. (please note that its been a long time since i last read these books so my memory might be a bit hazy. like pre pandemic) im not saying theres absolutely no moral ambiguity to be had, but there absolutely are many characters that we are meant to see as unquestionably good or evil. and we definitely are meant to see certain actions in a certain way. theres not a lot of speculation to be had in the canon material (but hey thats what fanfics are for right?). this paired up with the moral superiority mentioned before can lead to being told that you're "excusing" evil characters actions just because you questioned their actions and didn't take them at face value. this is especially bad with the silmarillion, which is supposed to be a biased retelling of events but many people seem to forget that and treat everything it says like its the holy bible. you cant talk about certain actions being presented differently than how they might have actually happened because then you're "making excuses" for the characters and you're very problematic for that btw :/ sometimes it feels like the idea that tolkien's work is perfect and genius is the only thing that's stopping these kinds of people from just saying "it aint that deep bro"

asoiaf in the other hand is aaaallll about moral ambiguity. instead of "evil characters" and "good characters", we have cruel actions and kind actions. both of which are done by every character. yes, some lean more towards kindness or more towards cruelty, but there are very few who cant be said to have at leats a little bit of both (one of these few would be someone like ramsay). even extremely cruel characters like joffrey and cersei have motivation or reasons for their behavior that can be seen as understanding or sympathetic despite them still being inexcusable. asoiaf actively encourages you to think deeper into the motivations of the characters. the pov format of the books making this even more apparent, since we see the world through the eyes of one character at a time. were shown their biases and how they may be contradicted by the povs of the other characters.

now, because as i said these were just shower thoughts so sorry if its a bit of a mess or that it ends abruptly. i just kinda ran out of things to say. if you have more ideas on why this might be the case feel free to drop it in a reblog or in the comments.

[luciawithoutj]

Hey hi hello!

I have some things to say about new merch and jo merch in general so this is gonna be a litrle longer post and actually I think I should cange my semiotics theme (which is already about jo) about how bad their merch design is.

First of all little disclaimer: this is all my humble opionion based on what I learned in my one year of being graphic design student and an artist and designer on the internet for last 4-5 years. Before going to uni I learned most of about art and graphic design stuff by reading books and watching tons of yt videos. Second of all this critic is just coming from place of love for this band because I see so mucb potential and they could do some amazing merch designs if they give it a chance and I am fully aware how expensive the touring is and why they had to cut the quality of merch products.

So far my favorite jo band merch designs are cds (that probably required some designer to make), condoms (because they are really funny, genius, nicely designed and unique merch that fit the vibe of the band and matches their songs as well) and the new tshirt from last merch drop (which design is made by one slovenian fanartist : link.

Main reason that made me want to speak up is seeing that this merch drop will only have 100 products (my friend said that could mean 20-ish shirts per size) which how big this fandom has gotten in last year is pretty really dam limited. For a limited product I am really disappointed and I hoped for more. For such a limited product that design is the most default design they could have gone for and I am so sorry for Damon because his work is goregous, amazing, breathtaking and I could talk about it for ages and how inspiring it is but this shirt design isn't serving.

If they wanted to do bare minimum of design with those 5 images here is some of my ideas (unfortunately I don't have time to visually show them to yall on a mock ups because of finals that I should be studying for instead of writing this so try to imagine what I am trying to say and demonstrate). First is just simple instead of white choose black shirt or even better a thisrt. If you want it to go a stepp further is using their name logo font (font name is Avaline btw if anyone wants to download and use it for their designs :))) and either put it how they did when they promoted the everybody's waiting or to write idk therapy sessions or anything related to the band or it can even be some inside joke.

Something like this would make design just a bit more intersting but still bare minimum but amazing for regular merch. If they want to go a step further but want to keep the long sleeves (this idea was suggested by few people I talked too) they could put pictures vertically on the sleeves. I would find it a bit cooler if it is on the right sleeve out-side and then they put their band logo (the heart one) on the left side of the shirt where people's hearts normally are.

After exams I would definitely like to try to make some designs and just limit myself with this 5 pictures and play with typography and photoshoop to make something interesting.

Another I want to mentioned is how in my humble opinion if you are gonna sell limited edition either make it really pretty or good quality or really cursed and funny with inside jokes.

I think people (and me first) would eat tshirts (but also other merch designs) with some cursed designs or just texts that say "sparklative" or "slay pose" or "I feel SloveNACE" (this 3 were suggested by amazing people in tumblr discord server) or even let Jan photoshoop their faces on most random picture. This 5 guys with their gen z humour could make and do some hilarious merch like how amazing idea the condoms are.

Last thing I want to say is how many amazingly talented fans are. I mean even Damon was so shocked and moved by amount of talent and art made in this community. Furthermore I know (some of them as online friends and mutuals, others as just artists from same fandom) who are also either graphic design students or they work in art/graphic design/entertainment fields and some of them (including myself) would be so happy to even make few merch designs or art for them for freee or for a ticket for their show. Personally I would die from happiness if I get a chance to work with my favorite band that inspires me so much everyday to the point people at my uni think I am from Slovenia and know slovenian because of how much I include them in my uni work and how much fanart and designs I made because of them in last 6 months.

I just think there is so much potential guys might not be aware of (Idk honestly because who knows what is going on backstage in their lives). But yeah they could have even asked Damon to help them with composition of the pictures on that shirt or even hire Racik to make some pretty art or any fanartist honestly. Here is just few links of my favorite fanartists who also do a lot of graphic design related stuff (and also some of them sell their products on their own websites/redbubble/etsy/inprint/etc) :

Tia <3

Roxanne

Vic

jo.kam_ (previously mentioned her design)

Lemon

yelecx

Racik (ofc)

There is probably more but my brain for hell of it won't remember any names so feel free to add in the comments or tags more artists <3

I could probably go more in depth and give more ideas how to improve merch designs the cheapest and best way as possible but still trying to keep the quality good as it needs to be. I know there is still gonna be people fighting for this shirts and people are still gonna buy their merch but just it hurts my art/designer soul seeing this bad designs when there is so much potential and they have amazing fans and amazing crew and they work with so many talnted people and they themselves are so talented and their music inspired so many and so much.

Thanks everyone for coming to my TedTalk. <3

Actually now I am thinking and from just talking about jo work from design and semiotics perspective for that semiotics seminar I could just focus on their merch design and go more in detail about it and if yall want when it is done and I translate it in english I could share it here for people who want to read about it. Let me know I guess.

Also if someone is interested my art and design insta is lucia.without.j and my redbubble is lucia-without-j and my dms are always open if someone wants to chat or complain about anything art, design, joker out or any other fandom I am in related.

P. S. I am so sorry for any spelling mistakes and if what I said doesn't make sense. English isn't my first language.

[wlwmk]

I was really interested to hear you bring up colorism when talking about Korra. Something that I've noticed (and other poc/black women have noticed) is the stereotypical treatment that Korra/Asami get in the show.

Korra is barefoot, beat up, and rarely treated with any dignity by the narrative. Her design in the later seasons became a caricature, she was stripped of her soft/feminine features.

Yet Asami is constantly shown an innocent victim, given slow motion cringe hairflips with full makeup, somehow a successful ceo despite war profiteering/never struggling, is given numerous abilities for no reason other than to make her "look cool"

Even that line with Makos grandmother complimenting one for being beautiful and the other for being so muscular? Like, what was the point?

Doesn't it seem a little sus, that two men did this?

I could go on for hours talking about the unfair treatment of Korra through the show, and that Bryke are in fact her first haters.

Never thought of the comparison you made, but it does makes sense so I'm glad you shared them! Even if Korra is the heroine, so obviously involved in every fights while she dedicated her whole life into physical training and bending elements ect... it seems like it's a good excuse to portray her like that right? But the there's the problem you perfectly showcased, the comparison to Asami.

Personally I'll showcase through the romance and social part of the show and the fandom interpretation since that's what I observed the most.

People casually like to deny Makorra and Mako's sincere love for Korra, even if it's messy it's still factual and not that hard to understand especially knowing it's implied until the end he love her (and prob still). And outside of shipping preferences, it wouldn't influence or threaten the actual main couple to knowledge Mako's love for Korra, so why not?

The thing is, the fandom is unable to accept Asami as someone unloved.

Asami did the first moves and desperately seeked for Mako's affection but still she got ditched multiple times bc Mako's romantic dilemma in the first two books was showcasing how he only had genuine feelings for Korra and choosing her was about him giving into his feelings, that even if his indecisive he will always choose his heart and go back to her again and again.

but somehow people can't accept to see Asami as someone unloved, someone who's a second choice, Especially, they can't accept that Mako prefer the "buff" or "tomboy" like brown girl, over the conventionally pretty fair skinned asian girl, who shares the same heritage as him, bc that's what they actually think themselves, an ideology deep rotten in colorism.

And with that twist at the end with the girls being together, like you said Korra slowly got ridden of her feminine features so Asami can still showcased as that conventionally pretty girl besides her partner, but in that case, even Asami got turned into a caricature, ending up as a damsel in distress the main character has to save again and again which something that never happened beforehand... so why now?

But that's another conversation on what happens when you let two cishets white mens writing a young wlw mixed couple of color. (and obviously it's a bad idea lmao)

Unfortunately these critics are never heard since colorism is a normalised issue, and tbh I wouldn't even take time to explain it but I'm always glad to find concerned people who will actually get it 🙏🏽

[colorfulwastelandvoid]

2 things: I want the fandom to stop saying words they heard online. Ambessa isn’t a butch, like by definition she isn’t, cause she’s not a lesbian, she’s bisexual. She is also very much fem presenting. Yall are equating her being dark skin, tall and having muscles with masculinity. Which by itself is a very binary way of thinking from a supposed “woke”fandom also it’s kind of racist or at the very least colorist.

Caitlyn isn’t a fascist. That’s not what happened, go to your local library and pick up a history book or dictionary and circle that word so you don’t forget it. Also the Kkkiraman “jokes” aren’t funny, especially cause a lot of yall are white. And I ask what is funny to you as a white person about the klan that has killed, raped and terrorized black folks for a better part of a century ? Also didn’t think I needed to say this but the kkk also lynched and terrorized anyone who wasn’t a WASP (white Anglo-Saxon protestant), that includes Asian people. Asian people have been lynched by the kkk, there are records. Also how the kkk operates and do their stuff isn’t how Caitlyn did hers so I’m confused as to why this even came up other than the fact that her last name starts with a K, which such surface level thinking tracks for this fandom. I can’t for the life of me understand how other black people are letting this slide. You don’t like Cait, cause ACAB, fine it’s kind of juvenile giving that Cait’s whole story revolves around unlearning the indoctrination of the enforcing system but whatevs. Like as a black woman, I’m begging other black folks to stop letting white people play in your face. I’m not telling you to glaze Cait or even like her but I am asking yall to A : stop lying on her and B: to fight the bigotry that is being spewed towards her.

Second thing, it’s weird that this fandom disengage with a character like Ambessa. It’s also super telling that this fandom has no problem WRONGFULLY portraying Mel as this heartless manipulator or harden classist when that’s not who she is. Also does no one find it strange that very few people acknowledge that Ambessa was manipulating Cait? It almost feels like the fandom is scared to label Ambessa an antagonist. Which is really weird when you again take into account how these same people treat Mel and Cait.

Mel the soft spined idealist who was casted out for her compassion is somehow this heartless Jezebel harpy, but Ambessa isn’t even labeled as manipulative. Like this also feels racist. Ambessa like Mel is just over sexualized by their haters and fandom. Ambessa is a veteran warlord Noxian, why is it so hard to believe that this woman can manipulate Cait, a 20 something small time enforcer, who is still wet behind the ears? She is literally called the Matriarch of War. She upholds and personifies Noxian ideals to a toxic degree.I mean we all know why yall don’t come down as nearly as hard on Ambessa like yall do Mel and Cait. It’s not cause she’s portrayed as a villain, so don’t even try it. This moral puritanical fandom would still rip her apart if that was the case. Not joking, this feels racist too. It feels like yall are saying Ambessa is too dumb to manipulate Cait even though Ambessa is one of the smartest people in the show. She’s emotionally intelligent and has a situational awareness that rivals no one in the show thus far.

The Arcane fandom is weird and yall get on my nerves.

Ps what I’ve said about Ambessa also applies to Sevika. This fandom just do thirst traps for these women and no actual insight on them as characters. Before anyone says it, I love a good thirst trap and believe both type of content can exist at the same time. It’s just weird, giving the lack of critical thinking in this fandom.

Pss before yall try it, don’t even try to come in here acting aggressive towards Ambessa. She is literally my shayla, one scroll on my page will show as such.

PSss this is a show about magic. It’s crazy that these type of convos need to be had. I’m 26, so this ain’t my first rodeo, but it’s so infuriating to fight such a performative activist fandom like arcane fandom.