#all i know is that there was a lot of legitimate horrible ’’’’’’bullying’’’’’’ from multiple people but then also some more abstract weirder

[princesssszzzz]

Team fandom fights has rotted the brains of some I fear. I’m mostly team green but that person is embarrassing! Loud and Wrong! A lot of people are projecting hard onto these characters to the point where they no longer understand the characterization or the relationships between everyone

Absolutely, it is projection bc they didn’t get it from F&B or even the show. Especially onto Aemond. Half the takes on the show are people’s headcanons they collectively decided to treat as canon while what actually happened on screen is ignored. It’s also people who have been in their own little fandom bubbles and echo chambers since season 1 so they feel comfortable saying bullshit and don’t think anyone will even question what they’re saying. Echo chambers where people tell each other every character that isn’t their fave is secretly a horrible person and their faves are perfect and should be defended no matter what.

The characters during the dance are not a monolith of a “team”, they are individuals. For example, Aemond and Rhaena are much different than Aegon and Baela. Totally different; each pair one on team green one on team black yet totally different characters and interactions with each other. First off Aemond is absolutely wrong in his interaction with Rhaena and that’s not the first time I’ve seen people try to justify the “ride a pig” comments seconds after acknowledging it as bullying when it’s said by one of the strong boys.

Aemond and Rhaena barely interact, and adding up all their interactions, there is no normal person in this world that would say Rhaena is a bad person and not only that, but that Aemond or literally anyone would be justified in attacking her in any kind of way. There’s literally people in the fandom saying she should be killed by Aemond like wtf 🤨 Literally going off the characterization of them, Aemond is STILL pissed at the strong boys and there is absolutely no reason anyone should be falsely claiming he hates Baela and Rhaena at the end of season 1. Hence why the WRITERS of the show have him ranting endlessly about strong boys despite Baela and Rhaena being randomly added to the fight scene. He’s not mad because a younger girl hit him, he’s mad because he doesn’t like the strong boys and his eye was taken out. Aemond doesn’t give af about being pushed by a girl years younger than him, much smaller than him, and who isn’t trained to fight. And he’s not mentioning them in his little toast for a reason. Especially not Rhaena, when Aemond is a character that absolutely knows he was wrong in how he spoke to her and mocked her for not having a dragon, but would not admit it. That doesn’t mean he’s besties with them, that means they would literally just have a “cordial” relationship post time skip if the dance never happened. Even Baela is cordial with Aegon and calls him cousin despite not knowing that mf and this is after she’s hearing him be disrespectful for the first time.

This takes me back to the dinner moment where Rhaena raises her cup to Aemond after Viserys’ toast. Anyways, I just think it’s funny. I’ve also seen people creating fan art showing Baela and Rhaena flipping off Aemond and being antagonistic towards him when they literally aren’t like that whatsoever. This seems like the false characterization of Baela and Rhaena and their relationship with Aemond specifically that fans are constantly trying to push despite that not being on screen. Don’t even get me started that Aemond literally watched Rhaena clearly disagreeing with him and Jace fighting. Disagreeing with both Jace pulling out a knife and Aemond grabbing a rock.

People are not paying attention to this show and just seeing what they want to see atp.

Aegon and Baela interact multiple times and Baela genuinely can’t stand him. Then we add in the show interactions with him sexually harassing her, they have a fight and legitimately have no reason to give af about each other. Baela is not some mindless violent person despite what people keep pushing, she literally jumped in shock when Daemon killed Vaemond. Aegon is not a good person to Baela, and no amount of people saying Baela went to the rat pits is going to change that.

The interactions between Aegon and Baela is more obvious and it’s just impossible to misinterpret what type of people they are and their moments. The events of the dance and Aegon’s behavior leads Baela, someone who has never killed anyone, to risk her life attacking him. They are supposed to oppose each other. Their dragons names are literally Moondancer and Sunfyre.

That being said, despite what the chronically online claim, as of the end of Season 1 I’m absolutely under the impression neither Aegon or Aemond (or Daeron) hates Baela or Rhaena or want to kill them over Aemond getting pushed or simply because their father married Rhaenyra. Neither the show or the book is as simple as team black v team green and people need to start comprehending that sooner rather than later. I’m 99% sure Aegon on screen in the future will have an opportunity to kill Baela and will not take it. Baela and Rhaena are innocent, hence why so many things that happen purposefully don’t involve them. So much for these people and their “Baela and Rhaena are the villains and the green boys should go fight them” headcanons and wishes. People ignoring that these characters are related, and that does mean something. There is no blind “I want to kill them!!” going on. What’s not clicking 😭 Aemond didn’t even want to kill the kid that actually took his eye but you want to headcanon that he’s eager to kill Baela and Rhaena? Please go sit tf down 😂 Aemond and Aegon are not some mindless brutes trying to kill everyone on team black. How has this NOT been understood by someone claiming to be a team green stan. I don’t even like the show but I understand it better than it’s fans…..

[eternalstateofoctober]

wow i literally haven’t remembered this in almost ten years but it just unearthed so hey remember when in like 1st or 2nd grade the kids in your class idr who exactly but yeah threatened to push you out of your second story classroom window but you jokingly talked them out of it and made a deal it would happen in sixth grade instead and then it was a thing all through elementary school

[heavencasteel420]

I find it really frustrating when people interpret Jonathan (particularly Season 1 Jonathan) as being an edgelord who dislikes people for no reason. As a joke, it's stale and, as a remotely serious take, it's devoid of empathy or even basic comprehension of what happens in the show. Let's think for a second about how the citizens of Hawkins (the town where Jonathan has lived his entire life, and therefore his main reference point) behave towards him, his family, and others he's shown to have positive feelings towards (such as Nancy and Will's friends):

Kids bully his younger brother for homophobic reasons;

His younger brother's friends are bullied, both verbally and physically, often for racist and ableist reasons;

The police gossip about how his mom is crazy and speculate about her sex life;

Lonnie, his abusive deadbeat father, commands more respect in the town than his hardworking, loving mother;

Nancy is the only person at school to show any concern about Will, a missing little kid;

Steve makes a snide remark about him hanging up missing posters (although he has the decency to object to Tommy's crueler remarks);

Tommy makes a sick joke--twice--about Jonathan killing Will;

Even Barb, a "nice" girl who generally disapproves of Steve's crew, doesn't go up to him with Nancy or say "hey, in addition to my concerns that you are sexually in over your head with Steve, he and her friends were really fucking mean about a literal missing child"; this doesn't mean she was cool with it, of course, but it does suggest that this type of talk isn't noteworthy to her;

Steve and his friends--however legitimate their grievances--chose to confront him about the photos in the most schoolyard-bully way possible, which may have not been so bad in that context, but (in light of their behavior at other times) does imply that they also just kind of enjoy bullying;

Multiple people just stare and don't try to help at all when he and his mom are completely imploding in front of the morgue (although I understand it's an awkward situation for a bystander);

Steve and his friends slut-shame and humiliate Nancy in the most public way possible (at least pre-internet);

Steve says that he "always figured [Jonathan] for a queer," which at best means that Steve is willing to use homophobic slurs in a fight (even if he never actually thought that and is just talking shit, and even if he's not a particularly passionate homophobe) and at worst means that this is something that is generally said of Jonathan and that he's subject to homophobic bullying (whatever his actual sexuality);

Steve compares him to his "screw-up" father, knowing this is a sore spot;

Steve calls his mom--Joyce, a hardworking single mother with an objectively hard life--a screw-up;

Steve says "it's no surprise what happened to your brother"; this is an incredibly cruel thing for him to say, and also seems like the kind of callous thing he's heard from his parents or other adults ("it's a shame about that little boy, but something like that was bound to happen in that family");

Hopper and Karen Wheeler are the only non-related adults who show any concern for Jonathan.

Why would Jonathan like the people of Hawkins as a whole? From his vantage point, they're largely callous, bigoted, and cruel. Many of the main characters experience them as such. What kind of masochistic suck-up would he have to be to like Steve as he is for most of Season 1? Maybe he's an edgelord, but he's got his reasons.

I mean, I don't know. I disliked a lot of people in middle school, and some of it was being a moody teen, but also a lot of people in my middle school were homophobic conservative religious fanatics who were regularly horrible to me, my friends, and others. I was still a moody teen in high school--moodier, even!--but I was generally fine with my classmates because they were a lot nicer and less prejudiced. My mom is a warm and sunny person, but she'll talk shit about her hometown because a lot of people were racist or sexually predatory. Sometimes people thinks badly of those around them because those around them act badly.

[seattlesea]

The Wasted Potential of Piper McLean’s Backstory

I think it’s safe to say that Piper’s backstory was easily the weakest, most boring, and worst-written one of all the characters in Heroes of Olympus, but it didn’t have to be. Riordan wasted a lot of potential for her backstory that could’ve added much more to her character just for ‘My dad doesn’t pay attention to me!!11!!!11!’ and then showing multiple flashbacks of Piper and Tristan spending quality father-daughter time alone together and completely invalidating all of Piper’s annoying complaining. Not only that, but Piper’s backstory is just a boring copy of Rachel’s. 

So, this is what Riordan did with Piper’s backstory:

1. ‘Neglectful’ dad. Piper spends 50% of The Lost Hero complaining about how little time her dad spends with her (and 49% thinking about Jason) instead of focusing on actually helping him. And while neglectful parenting can be very dangerous to a child’s happiness and social skills, Piper clearly wasn’t neglected or ‘ignored’. How do I know? Well for one, there are multiple flashbacks in The Mark of Athena of Piper and her dad hanging out- surfing, researching Greek mythology stories, watching Tristan’s movies and laughing over them, Tristan telling Piper Cherokee stories, etc.- and two, Piper isn’t unhappy nor unsocial and doesn’t show any symptoms of child neglect besides being clingy and possessive (but remember that the McLeans weren’t always rich, and were actually quite poor before, so Piper didn’t learn that behavior from her father). Besides, for someone who is claimed to be ‘smarter than all her other siblings’, Piper clearly doesn’t know that it’s her father’s agent that controls his schedule, not Tristan.

2. Rich and pretty= bad. In a lot of different circumstances, being rich and pretty has its cons, but Piper’s complaints about it are completely offbeat. Why? Cause we don’t know why she’s complaining about it. She complains about being rich, but why? She complains about being ‘too pretty’ (as if that’s something people legitimately complain about), but why? There’s no backstory or reasoning given to this. If there was, Piper’s constant complaining might have been valid, but Riordan just threw it into her story to give the readers a reason to take pity on and feel sympathy for her, and because he didn’t give Piper an actual reason for her complaining, it made it unbearable. If he had written it in smaller doses (much smaller) and wrote it realistically, it could’ve been really awesome. Because if you’re going to complain about something, make sure you’re complaining for a reason. Why does Piper hate being rich? Why does Piper hate having a bunch of awesome things most people would kill for? Why does Piper hate being attractive? And how Riordan tried to validate her complaining with ‘She wants to be normal’- NO ONE WANTS TO BE NORMAL. What teenager wouldn’t want a private airplane and giant mansion after living in a shitty wood house most of their life? Cause yes, Riordan, write your character complaining about her private chef making her a gold-wrapped sandwich while most of the other characters were worrying about where their next meal was going to come from and have her complain about having things while most people didn’t have 5% of what she had. That’ll totally make her a likable character. There’s a difference between being modest and being ungrateful.

3. Bullies. Being bullied sucks, and Piper has every right to complain about it. But...she didn’t. She didn’t complain at all. She didn’t even care about it. So she’s perfectly fine with being bullied and pushed around for her ethnicity, but her dad working a little overtime is the end of the world? How??? Besides that, Riordan didn’t write in bullies to shine a light on racism towards First Nations people, but for one reason only- to degrade femininity. Piper is described as a ‘tomboy’ (even though she doesn’t actually dress tomboyish, but that’s for another mini-rant) and the only bullies towards her we have been introduced to are girly-girls- Isabel and her group of friends who wore ‘matching pink tops and enough makeup for a Halloween party’, Drew Tanaka, Khione, etc. That’s not progressive, it’s sexist. ‘Femininity’ and ‘weakness’ are not synonymous, and nor are ‘masculinity’ and ‘strength’. Also, how did Isabel and her friends not know who Piper’s dad was? I’m pretty sure Tristan didn’t hide her from the entire world (though that would’ve been a way cooler backstory). 

4. Stealing. Anyone else out there who also knows that Piper isn’t actually a rebellious trouble-maker? Cause she isn’t. She got kicked out of four schools for being accused of stealing, but she never actually canonically broke any rules. As for the stealing part of her backstory, it was really, really lame. It was just a bad, invalid excuse to make Piper look like the badass and cool trouble-maker when in reality, all she did was politely ask for things. Not exactly ‘badass and rebellious’, and it was completely unnecessary. Piper wanted attention from her dad, but she got it multiple times and could’ve gotten it in many other different ways that didn’t enforce the racist ‘kleptomaniac First Nation’ stereotype. 

And this is what he should’ve done with her backstory:

1. Rich and pretty= distrust. Piper was reluctant to tell Annabeth about her famous father in The Lost Hero, but for the wrong reason. She didn’t want Annabeth to know about her movie-star dad because she didn’t want the ‘attention’, but she should’ve not wanted Annabeth to know out of distrust. And by ‘distrust’, I mean ‘not knowing if they want to know you for you or for your money’. This is a common con for rich and famous people, and they often turn paranoid and distrusting because they can never be certain if someone wants to be their friend because they think that they’re a cool person or if they want to be their friend because they’re rich and famous. That would’ve been a perfect reason for Piper to be reluctant to make new friends (especially after announcing to her whole cabin that her father was Tristan McLean), but she didn’t care. She even said that she ‘hated using the famous dad card’ but never showed signs of being dubious of new people who knew who she was. As for being pretty, a lot of attractive people are also distrustful because they never know if someone wants to date them for their personality or for their looks (and in Jason’s case, it was definitely the latter. No one wants to kiss someone a few minutes after knowing them and never actually talking to them one-on-one and it be anything but sexual attraction). Piper should’ve been very reluctant to get into a relationship (especially after Jason embarrassed and sexualized her in front of the entire camp calling her a ‘knock-out’) and it would’ve added a valid reason for her to complain about her looks. Cause again- why does she hate being attractive? Cause she’s tired of being stereotyped? No, cause she stereotypes other people. Cause she doesn’t want to be attractive? No, cause she never said anything about that. There was no reason for it, so it was a huge waste of many chapters and made for a horrible character arc. 

2. Alone in a big house. Piper complained about her dad being ‘too busy’ despite him being a very loving, caring, and inclusive father, but why didn’t she even mention the other part of it- being alone? Sure she had personal chefs, assistants, etc. with her, but no one related to her and no one who wasn’t being paid to be around her. Being alone sucks, but being alone in a giant house with a bunch of games and other stuff you’d love to share with another person but can’t? Damn. Speaking of which, what about Piper’s past schools? Five schools and no confirmed friends? It’s not like Piper has a hard time making friends since she was able to become friends with Leo (and only after being at the Wilderness School for a few months versus full school years at the others). Riordan could’ve written a very interesting backstory that didn’t have to relate to monsters (like Leo’s) but focused on the wrong parts. 

3. Impossible (and toxic) beauty standards and pressure. While being unattractive (or thinking you’re unattractive, cause you’re not ugly, you’re just not your type) sucks, being attractive (and extremely attractive) has multiple cons. Not only is there- racism in the beauty industry, society’s toxic and even deadly standards of beauty, not being open to relationships out of fear of only being liked for your looks, fear of not being taken seriously and being stereotyped, being cat-called and even the fear of rape, being compared to others, etc., but there’s the constant pressure (especially from family members, friends, and peers) of showing off your looks even if you don’t want to or are not comfortable doing so. I have an ‘hour-glass’ shaped body, and at first I loved my body and was very confident about it, but after the constant urging from my family members to wear tight (almost revealing) clothes to show off my body starting at only twelve years old despite me not being comfortable wearing those types of clothes, I hated my body and wore exclusively baggy and layered clothes for nearly 3+ years. This would’ve been perfect for Piper’s backstory, especially since her mother literally sexualized her by putting her in an ‘embarrassingly low v-neck dress’ in front of tons of campers. She wore basic, simple clothes, but she only wore them to avoid being labelled a ‘girly-girl’. It’s not even canon if she actually likes those clothes or are actually comfortable wearing them or not, she only wore them to avoid being something else she didn’t like. It could’ve led to an awesome character arc- going from insecure about your looks because people keep pressuring you into showing them off to only wearing and doing what you like. Piper tried to hide her looks, but for what reason? To avoid being stereotyped as ‘girly’? Yes, Piper, because girly-girls are the only type of girls that are pretty. Obviously.  

4. Charity. Rachel rocked this one. If Piper wanted to be kind and modest, why didn’t she give any of the things she had to people who actually needed it? Instead of moping about how rich you are, give the things you don’t want to those who need it. It’s a lot more effective and moral than spending all your days complaining and sulking, and it’s much more likely to gain readers’ favor than constant whining. 

5. Stereotypes. Riordan tried so hard to avoid the ‘snobby rich girl’ stereotype, but in my opinion- he should’ve utilized it. Piper went from ‘I don’t care about what I have’...to the exact same thing. She didn’t grow at all regarding her fortune and riches. Even in The Trials of Apollo, she lost everything and didn’t even care. Who wouldn’t care if they lost everything they had? Piper could’ve been grateful that she still had her dad and humanity while still being upset she lost everything. Back on topic- Piper could’ve gone from spoiled, obnoxious, and money-obsessed to ‘It doesn’t matter what I have or what I am but who I am’. She should’ve started off as the basic, stereotypical rich girl- a greedy, selfish, idealistic, spoiled, rude, dramatic, and overly ambitious primadonna diva who tried to buy her happiness and relationships but realized she couldn’t fill the hole in her heart with money and lipstick. Or how about the reckless homewrecker who broke hearts just for fun before realizing she actually wanted a real relationship, so started letting people in? Riordan avoiding the rich girl stereotype to make Piper more likable is what helped make her dislikable, because it ruined the chances of a good character arc. Besides, while not showing it on the surface, Riordan did actually sink into the rich girl stereotype by making Piper a selfish, ungrateful, and attention-seeking whiny brat, but she never grew from that or even realized she was doing it. 

6. Looks don’t matter. The fandom thinks that Piper is the one who stands for ‘looks don’t matter/it’s what’s on the inside that matters’, but she’s the opposite. She: -dismissed Percy and stereotyped him based off how he looked -hated her entire cabin and mother just because they were girly -hated and stereotyped Drew just cause she was wearing jewelry and makeup -constantly fussed over her looks and looked at herself more times in one chapter than all the other characters did combined -commented on Jason’s appearance multiple times, etc. So no, she isn’t the one who stands for that. The character who doesn’t think about their appearance at all is the one who stands for that, not the character who thinks about their looks 24/7. She should’ve been the character to stand for that, cause who better than the daughter of beauty and a famous, attractive movie-star? She should’ve been the one to scream to the mortal world that ‘Hey, I’m attractive but I’m not my attractiveness’. 

7. Racism. If Riordan wanted to expand on Piper’s character, why not write about the number one thing she should’ve been struggling with before being introduced to the mythological world- racism? She’s Cherokee, and there are multiple things against First Nations people nowadays like horrible living in reservations, living in the land she knows was stolen from her people and watching her father pay taxes to the very people who stole it, etc. Bullies suck, but bullies are common. The struggles of First Nations people is not, and it should’ve been added to Piper’s backstory not only to make her more realistic and better-written, but to shine a light on the racism and oppression against First Nation tribes. 

8. Monster attacks. So Piper is the daughter of a rich and famous movie star, most likely used multiple different pieces of technology, was out in the open only a few hours away from Camp Jupiter, and was out in the mortal world her whole life, but didn’t experience any monster attacks whatsoever, even at fifteen years old? That’s extremely unrealistic and dumb. Monster attacks should’ve been used to make her backstory more interesting and realistic. 

9. ADHD and dyslexia. Was I the only one bothered that Piper didn’t show any signs of ADHD or dyslexia? Every demigod has them and Frank is the only one confirmed not to, but Piper had no trouble focusing, staying still, reading, concentrating, forgetfulness, short attention spans, etc. She was even able to read the directory at Medea’s Department Store, the writing on the wall at the Cyclops-infiltrated warehouse, Greek stories with her dad, etc. In canon, she doesn’t even have ADHD or dyslexia, but showing her struggling with it (especially as the daughter of a famous movie star who’s pressured into being perfect and poised at all times) would’ve added so much to her backstory and character.  

10. Abandonment issues. So Piper’s mother literally leaves her before she was even born...and she didn’t care? It’s understandable that she would accept her mother’s choice after finding out that her mother was a goddess who couldn’t stay with her, but what about before? She didn’t even comment on it. She showed signs of abandonment issues (insecurity over her relationships, the inability to trust her partner’s intentions, constant jealousy, difficulty with feeling actual intimacy, possessive and controlling behavior, clinginess, constant need for attention, etc.) but they were never expanded on or even called out. She was portrayed as the perfect one without any faults or need for help cause she was (in Riordan’s eyes) supposed to be the ‘strong one’ who didn’t need others to help or save her, but that just led to a dull character and flat arc. 

11. Standards of perfection. Piper is the daughter of a rich and famous movie star, is extremely attractive, etc., so writing her backstory as being constantly pressured, raised, and even demanded into always being poised, presentable, and perfect her whole life would’ve been way better than whatever the hell Riordan was doing. Piper should’ve rebelled against society, not her dad who didn’t even do anything wrong. Basically- What Piper did: My dad wants to bring me to a nice salon cause he loves and cares about me? NO! I’m going to cut my own hair even though cutting your hair in First Nations culture is literally taboo without even bothering to tell my dad that I don’t want to get a haircut to see if he’ll agree! What Piper should’ve done: Society wants me to always be perfect and presentable? NO! I’ll show them that I’ll be whatever I want to be without their input!

12. Rich and famous ≠ a perfect life. People are often mistaken that rich and famous people have the best, perfect life, but they don’t. With society’s impossible standards, controversy in the fame department, tons of hate for a bunch of different reasons, and more, Piper could’ve been the one to show that more money doesn’t equal more happiness, cause who in the world would constantly want flashing cameras in their faces, the inability to go out without being followed and/or harassed, fake friends, constant judging, the inability to have any privacy or being able to do anything normal people can, etc.? 

So, yeah. Piper’s backstory was just a steaming-hot mess, a pile of wasted potential, and flat-out bad writing. Riordan could’ve written an awesome character with a great character development, but it was trashed only because he couldn’t focus on the right aspects of her backstory. 

[dgcatanisiri]

Right. THAT is why I don’t watch every video essay that passes through my recommendations, just because it’s about a subject of queerness. Because it wants to talk about one of the biggest examples of queerbaiting as if it existed in isolation from everything else that happened in that fandom.

I need to blow off some steam here.

When it comes to addressing issues of St*rek, you CAN. NOT. divorce the discussion of how the show queerbaited the audience from the audience’s racism. The show had a canon queer character (of color) and centered around a character of color. And, when it came to fan content, what I would usually see come about, if the above two were involved AT ALL? Was crap like this.

A gif of Scott and Stiles, Stiles going for a fist bump, Scott a five, and them just rolling with it, with the text below bringing up a “stoned fratboy” AU. And the very next reblog text drops Scott IMMEDIATELY and makes it into a St*rek thing. Nothing about this show mattered but the characters of Stiles and Derek.

This will forever be what that pairing is associated with in my mind. The erasure of Scott to prop it up, even when it’s not even the subject.

The thing is, this pairing has ALWAYS been my go-to of straight people translating the dynamics of straight relationships onto queer couples, a translation that always misses the mark - aesthetic attraction aside, you aren’t going to genuinely fall for and proceed to act on an attraction to someone who is legitimately aggressive to you. The bully and the bullied do not ACTUALLY end up together, because the bully has made it clear that, if they were given the chance, they’d leave you bloody, not your heart a-flutter. 

AND THAT WAS THE DYNAMIC. For the better part of Derek’s time on the show, he did not give a single flying fornication about Stiles - his focus was on SCOTT. On how Scott - the “Teen Wolf” of the series name - was now a werewolf, how that made a connection between them, as pack. Derek legitimately threatened Stiles with bodily harm on multiple occasions - and in a few occasions off the top of my head, actually followed through with it. Stiles was something that Derek had to put up with, and routinely made it clear that he didn’t particularly care to.

It doesn’t matter how flustered Stiles might have gotten about Derek, the genuine reality always was that Derek DIDN’T care about Stiles. It was not until the show began actively leaning in to the queerbaiting that we saw any positive shift in their interactions. Until that point, it was a lot of antagonism, and, again, antagonism may have often been used to describe straight pairings, but... I mean, people, even the straights are reaching the point of calling out this shit as being unhealthy dynamics at best. 

But they were attractive white guys who breathed in the same room, while being the only romantically unattached characters in the main cast during the first season. Despite the fact that both had plenty of interactions with other characters that could have offered them something with more foundation - Scott and Stiles are best friends who are as close as brothers, Derek is after Scott to join the pack. Stiles on screen is pestering Danny about “am I attractive to gay guys?” and then got him to come over to his bedroom (it’s the same scene as that infamous “Derek in Stiles’s bedroom” bit, not that anyone ever discusses that...) Hell, go in the direction of the dynamic above, Scott and Jackson are rivals on the lacrosse team throughout Jackson’s time. Yet, even with that being the same dynamic AND not involving either character - so not “conflicting” with the ship while offering the same draw in terms of their interactions - it’s a barely touched ship when you look it up on AO3.

So we have the fandom actively AVOIDING featuring the characters of color, diminishing them, and, based on my experience in terms of the content that existed throughout the time of the show’s airing, even transplanting Scott’s characterization over to Stiles - Stiles is the snarky shit who doesn’t mind suggesting killing a perceived threat because he wants the danger dealt with directly, while Scott is the compassionate nurturer who will do everything in his power to find a solution that saves the most lives. But I recall a lot of trying to make Stiles out as “the pack mom!friend,” as if he’d be the one taking care of all these characters if they showed up unexpectedly. 

Like, that example always came with the way he positioned himself over Isaac and Erica in the episode “Raving.” The way that actually is him using them as a shield - if the kanima broke through the door they were pressed against, it’d hit them first, giving Stiles time to run away. But sure, he’s the pack mama, looking out for the baby betas.

When Stiles or Derek suggest or do something morally questionable, they’re justified. When Scott disagrees, he’s the worst. When Derek betrays Scott (working with Peter in season one), his actions are brushed off entirely. When Scott (justifiably) does not trust Derek (his plan for dealing with Gerard in the season two finale), he’s a horrible person for leaving Derek in the dark - even though Derek has spent the whole season actively preying on a group of teenage outcasts, threatening to kill anyone he believes is the kanima, and just generally being a variety flavor bag of dicks.

The fandom diminished Scott, and it even diminished Danny - at the same time that we had Danny and Ethan’s relationship in season three, there were still calls for “a gay couple” on the show. Like, that was the way it was looked at, that “we need a gay couple,” exact words. Because Danny/Ethan was not main cast, or, to put it bluntly since I already said this was a matter of racism, because Danny wasn’t white, this canon gay relationship was ignored and erased in the name of getting the two white boys to kiss. Not “a gay couple in the main cast.” Just “a gay couple.”

For the record, I’m not gonna touch on the age gap element, Stiles at 16, Derek in his early 20s, even though I know it’s become a popular thing to go into as time has gone on - in today’s example of “nuance is a thing,” the nuance of this is that we have adult actors playing teenage characters, which creates muddied waters since fictional construct says one thing, but your eyes and head are seeing actors of a more appropriate age interacting, and while I don’t condone it IRL, this is still fiction and I’m gonna just leave that alone for the time being. The core of my complaint overall here is that fandom was inventing this relationship wholesale and then getting pissy when canon didn’t conform and actors disagreed.

So when you have an interview where, after a few years of being asked repeatedly about “is St*rek gonna happen?” when he plays neither character, when this show is supposedly meant to center on his character, but no one seems to talk to him ABOUT his character, when these “fans” are minimizing him and his character, Tyler Posey makes a snippy remark about how this is “weird, twisted, bizarre, and they’re watching for the wrong thing”? Yeah, actually. He’s right. St*rek shippers WERE watching for the wrong thing.

In the eyes of these shippers, Scott could do no right if it would mean that Derek was wrong. To them, “Teen Wolf” was a description of Stiles (the teen) and Derek (the wolf), and Scott was an incidental character at best. And how dare anyone involved be at all upset over this.

But the videos on queerbaiting NEVER bring this stuff up. And, when those from outside the fandom, who report on these in autopsy fashion, bring up things like Tyler Posey’s comment, they do it in a manner that even suggests that he - the actor who was nineteen/twenty years old at the time of the show’s filming and premiere - was responsible for the various forms of queerbaiting that the producers pushed, like the infamous “Dylan O’Brien and Tyler Hoechlin cuddling on a ship” thing. So, you know, just perpetuating this attitude that permeated this fandom, of this casual low-level racism. 

But no, this never comes up. But speaking as someone who was there during the height of Teen Wolf’s Tumblr popularity? Oh, it ABSOLUTELY was everywhere. But, because the people doing these autopsies were in the midst of this (and, while I’m acknowledging this at the end of this ranting, I do want to be clear that I am speaking about this fandom as an entity in its own right, and not any singular individual in and of themselves, I don’t think that all shippers of this ship are racist or that shipping it is in and of itself racist, just that as an overall experience of this fandom is this core of) or they came after the show’s heyday and missed it, know the pairing for being queerbaited before they know the show/fandom/pairing itself... They’re not seeing it. They’re not talking about it. And it makes for a deep failing in these examinations. Because that racism is why the pairing got as popular as it did. Again, there were other pairings with other foundations available. And yet somehow, it’s the white guys who hate each other getting all the attention in the fandom, over anything else. 

[xx-thedarklord-xx]

For a DVD commentary: “Muggles aren’t very accepting to what they don’t understand. This has been proven countless times throughout history. Witch hunts were popular in several countries. Also, muggles like to vilify things that aren’t perceived as normal and are quick to want what they can’t have...” This explanation of attitudes to muggleborns was awesome (When to Give & When to Take) I was wondering what you were thinking, how you empathised with Draco and so on-you explained it really well!

First, let me say you are the first one to ask me something regarding that reblog. So thanks for that!Second, I love that you asked about the Simple Acts series. I apologize for how long this reply will be. Now to answer your question. I think my favorite thing about writing Draco is understanding how important duality is. This is true about all characters. But there is so much layered into his upbringing that just isn't good. Ideals that are twisted and concepts that are far more harming that originally intended. But despite all the bad parts to why purebloods might treat muggleborns badly, there is always some kind of reason behind it. Always something that originally drove that mindset. Whether it was just a bigoted excuse or it had once started out as something that got twisted. Explaining or even talking about that can be difficult. Especially since this is my own interpretation for that story line. But there are multiple facets to the whole thing. I think that it would have started as Draco said, it would have begun as a trust issue and the seed of doubt would have spread. Over time, the views become twisted, people are set in their ways and dislike change. The wizarding world is so outdated in a lot of ways. But as Draco said later in his dialogue, there is no excuse to ever make someone feel as if they didn't belong. There is no reasoning or justification that can legitimately wave away dehumanizing someone else. His own actions and self-aware are the primary reasons he knows his parents were wrong. The quote you put in there, of part of his reasoning also shows duality. The duality of humans. What was mentioned is the bad parts. The side that wizards see and use as a means to treat others horribly. They discount the actions of good muggles and just decent human beings in general. Duality is one of my absolute favorite concepts in writing. Because I see a complicated character that was never given the depth that all characters deserve. Every action has a purpose or reason behind it. Whether it is bad or good. There was a driving factor behind the decision. The duality to Draco is not only seeing his mistakes but understanding them as well. If we don't provide a back story to the whole issue, then we are only left with vague speculations. Which is why I love fanfiction because it gives writers the chance to see issues in ways that canon didn't provide. That scene where he apologizes to Hermione is one of my favorite parts to the series. Because I was able to delve into what made him a bully. Not the end result of his actions, but the beginning, the thoughts that would have made him think that was acceptable. It showed so much character growth because it granted me the option of showing that the world is complicated. It was more than just, 'Draco was a bigoted arse'. Because that is so underdeveloped. There is so much more to it than that. It would be so easy to write off the whole thing in that simplified way. But when is anything in life that straightforward? I just really like duality to people. There isn't a single character in my opinion that doesn't have that. I can take a glimpse at all of the characters and learn so much if I treat them as I would a person. Because even the bully in real life, has a thought process. Whether they are lying to themselves or they made the wrong decision. I just want to know what it is. I find people fascinating, because of how complicated they are. I don't know if this explained my thought process much. My emotions were all over the place during the writing of that installment. I couldn't delve into Hermione's thought process without tearing up. I couldn't get into Draco's thought process without looking at things from more than one perspective. I guess my final explanation to why I was able to emphasize with Draco is that I realized the full potential of his duality. Hopefully some of this makes sense!

[bluephoenixdruidicprincess]

Shadowhunters Season 2 Review and Thoughts for Season 3

Alright, it’s that time again. It’s time for me to give you all the low-down on Shadowhunters Season 2 as a whole. My thoughts, my feelings, and improvements I would like to see made in Season 3. Season 2 was definitely an improvement over Season 1 but trust me, it still has its issues.

This is going to be an honest review of my thoughts and feelings regarding this show. If you’re the kind of Shadowhunters fan where you only want to hear positive things about the show, this is not the place for you. If you decide to stick around and get offended by what is said, then that’s on you. I warned you. Just know that if you send me any rude comments or messages, I will 100% ignore you. I find that’s the best way to deal with bullies. I work 14 hour days. Do you really think I want to waste my incredibly valuable free time dealing with derogatory comments? Hell no. This review will consist of my honest opinions. Opinions are never right or wrong. I’m not telling you how to think and feel. I’m telling you what I think and feel. So please, let’s discuss with dignity and respect. If I’m critical about the show, it’s only because I want it to get better. There is, in fact, a difference between hating a show and being critical of it. I do not hate Shadowhunters; I am being critical and analyzing the flaws as I would with any other show. There are positives but there are also negatives. It’s great if you want to promote positivity with this show (and I encourage you to do so) but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t acknowledge the things that are legitimately wrong with it. Also, keep in mind that despite the fact that I do love the books, me being critical of this show has nothing to do with my love of the books. I don’t really care if the show deviates from the source material as long as it’s good and it makes sense. My problems with this show are problems that I would have with any show or book for that matter. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to take issue with a show that has plot holes, shoddy world-building and inconsistent characters. There will be spoilers for the books and movies.

I want to preface this with I am neither PRO nor ANTI Shadowhunters. I see it as neither a good or horrible show. It’s serviceable. That’s really what this show is. Ultimately, as far as tv shows goes on their own, it’s nothing all that special. It could be -- it certainly tries -- but at the end of the day, it falls flat. It’s a show where it’s interesting to watch and see what’s going to happen, but I also don’t find myself all that excited to watch the newest episode. This show has never gotten me to the point where I was counting down the days until the next episode airs. Usually, I’ll watch an episode and then I’ll be like, “Ok. That was alright. I’m ready to go watch something else now.” There’s no, “OMG! That episode was insane. When is the next one coming out?” That has never happened to me with this show. This is going to be spread into two different sections. The show’s storytelling and the characters and their relationships. So let’s get on with this.

The Storytelling

If there is one good thing I have to say about Shadowhunters in its sophomore season, is that compared to Season 1, vast improvements were made to the writing. Granted, the bar wasn’t set all that high considering how nonsensical and ridiculous Season 1 was but hey, it was an improvement. It was an improvement in the sense that at least now, the episodes are arcing properly. I may not have been a big fan of how a lot of the actual story was being told, but at least it was arcing. But, I do have to say that overall, Season 2 had a very clunky feel to it. There were a lot of different plot points going around and most of them were dropped without having any real resolution. Izzy’s drug addiction was completely dropped, her insecurities toward Alec were dropped, Aldertree served absolutely no purpose in the overarching plot in season 2, Jocelyn’s death did absolutely nothing for the story. It didn’t drive Clary in any way which was actually the idea behind it. While under a spell, Alec attempts to commit suicide because of the guilt he has for the part he played in Jocelyn’s death and then that’s completely dropped. The demon-shadowhunter baby plot point never shows up again. Trust me, I could go on and on. I haven’t even hit 2B yet. But I don’t want this post to end up being 15 pages long so I’m going to stop here. Let’s not get me started on the dumbness and pointlessness that is Azazel. I’m sure you guys get the point. I do feel like Season 3 is probably going to be written a little better than Season 2. For Season 2, we had new showrunners and I think ultimately, they were using Season 2 to filter out a lot of the weird plot writing that Season 1 had going on. With a lot of those weird plot points closed out now, Season 3 is probably going to arc much better. Or at least one can hope. I am definitely going to use Season 3 as a factor in deciding whether or not I’m even going to stick with the show.

I’ve talked about the show’s issues with arcing, dropped storylines, now let’s talk about elements of writing that drive a show. Let’s begin with pacing. Pacing was a HUGE problem with Season 1. Now, Season 2 episodes were a little bit better paced but there were still points when characters jumped to conclusions about something and you’re just like, “Wait, how did we get from Point A to Point B?” If I have one critique to make regarding this show’s pacing, they need to stop having 3 or 4 plot points going on in a single episode. This show has so much potential to be really awesome if they could focus on the characters and their interactions with each other. The characters, their actions, their motivations is what should be moving the plot forward but it’s the other way around in this show. And that also adds to the clunkiness of the storytelling. An episode should have an A plot and a B plot and that’s it. But sometimes we’re getting C, D, and even E plots at times in a single episode. All of these are characters are super interesting. Let’s spend less time with the plot and more with the characters.

Another issue this show has is payoffs. This kind of goes along with pacing. The show isn’t always evenly paced in its plot which is why we sometimes have moments within the story that kind of come out of left field. If you have an idea of where you want your character to be at a certain point in the season, you need to pace that character development out. So when that character has that really epic moment, it completely “wows” your audience. This is what’s known as a pay-off. If you don’t pace it well, the pay-off is very bland and uninteresting. A good example of this is in the Season 2 finale. That moment when Clary was about to be executed and Jace manages to break free and save her. The pay-off could’ve been amazing but I found myself asking, “Why didn’t he just do this in the tent?” All throughout 2B, Jace has never been depicted of having problems using his angelic superpower and yet now, he’s only willing to use it to break free of the chains when Clary’s about to be killed? This would’ve worked fine if throughout 2B, we’d seen Jace having issues using this power and then in this moment, when he sees Clary about to be killed, that’s when he’s able to turn it on. That is what’s known as a pay-off. And it could’ve added something to the Clace dynamic. Then, of course, the other big thing I’ve talked about is Clary’s fighting skills. This is something I wish they had paced out a little more evenly so when she killed Valentine in the finale, it would’ve been far more impactful. Everyone likes to talk about how Clary was so bad-ass in that moment but for me, it was a “whatever” moment. I’ve lost count of how many Circle members Clary actually killed without pause through the duration of Season 2. And I’m supposed to be impressed that she killed Valentine? What would’ve been far more impressive is if throughout the series, we see her learning how to fight, stumbling through at times (because that is far more realistic), her mother’s death driving her to be better and then finally in this moment after watching Valentine kill Jace, knowing Valentine’s actions led to her mother’s death and the destruction of her brother’s soul, she’s able to call forth everything she’s learned to exact her revenge. To finally destroy the man who took everything from her. Once again, that’s a payoff. But instead, it just falls flat. Yes, it’s great to see a girl be a bad-ass but at the same time, it’s nothing I haven’t seen her do before. Why should I care? Because it’s Valentine this time? In Season 3, I would definitely like to see a greater emphasis placed on character motivations and payoffs.

This show has a huge subtlety issue as well. Now this pops up in various forms throughout the writing. Sometimes, it’s through character actions or sometimes it’s over-explaining things through dialogue. Either way, it leaves the audience with the impression that the writers think their audience is stupid. Now, my most hated scene in the Season 2 finale is that moment when Alec was given the specific job to take care of the demons while Magnus closes the rift. And Alec takes one shot and misses and then decides he needs to abandon the mission and go to Magnus pleading for help. Alec would never do this. His job was to keep the demon off of Magnus and instead he leads it directly to Magnus? It makes no sense particularly since earlier in the episode, Alec took multiple shots to slay the demon that was flying around Manhattan and it never phased him when he missed. He was chillin like a melon. And it goes completely against what we know about Alec to begin with. He is not afraid to sacrifice himself to save the people he loves. He would not have retreated back to Magnus. He would’ve continued fighting until he killed the demon or the demon killed him. Because in Alec’s eyes, the life of Magnus and his sister is far more important. I get what this scene was going for. They wanted to showcase that Magnus still cared about Alec but there are hundreds of ways they could’ve done this. But I guess the writers were afraid that it wouldn’t have been clear that Magnus still cared about Alec if it wasn’t this big huge moment of Alec pleading Magnus to save him? If you don’t have subtlety in your story telling, you also lose a lot of the impact. The dialogue also needs some work in this as well. The show has the tendency to spoon-feed information that can be inferred by the audience. I feel like this show is trying to gain the early to mid-20s audience. If this is the case, how about treating us like we’re intelligent 20-year-old adults? Exactly how bad do they think the public school system is that we can’t infer what something called “a Kill Tree” does or that Edomi are demons that come from Edom? The dialogue at times gets a little clunky because of this need to over-state everything.

I also have a problem with how this show deals with conflicts. And this stems from the arcing as well as the pacing problem. This show resolves conflicts within the story alarmingly fast. There are conflicts that can’t be resolved easily and every time the show does, you lose the impact of these characters feeling like real people. It also hinders the plot because it makes the plot feel very disjointed. 

Now let’s talk about the adaptation part of the story-telling. My problem with this show has never been them not following the books. My problem is them following the books, then not following the books, and then going back to following the books again without keeping with the changes they made. Let me better explain this, as I know it’s a little confusing. This show will make changes to a particular plot or character point that doesn’t exist in the books. And that’s fine. I don’t have a problem with that. My problem is that they’ll make those changes and then take another scene 100 pages down the line out of the book and use it nearly verbatim. When you made that original change, the context has changed as well which means that scene isn’t going to work the same way. You have to change that scene to fit the new context. An example of this is the infamous Seelie Court kiss scene. Previously in Season 2, the writers had made the change that Clary was really enjoying this new-found romantic relationship with Simon. Or at least, there weren’t any hints that she was secretly coveting Jace in episodes prior. She had even told Simon that despite knowing Jace isn’t her brother, she had no plans to break it off with Simon. She wanted to be with him. And this change would’ve been alright but the show still tried to keep the Seelie Court kiss scene more or less verbatim as it is in the books. In the books, this scene and how it plays out makes sense because the reader could always tell that even though Clary didn’t overtly hate her romantic relationship with Simon, it didn’t make her feel the same way she felt when she was with Jace. None of that is applied in the show. The show goes on stating that Jace is the kiss that will set them free as it is the kiss Clary most desires but there was no set up to this revelation so the pay-off of the kiss scene doesn’t work. Because you were never really led to believe that while Clary was dating Simon she wanted to be with Jace. As I said, they made a change and as a result the context has changed so the future writing also needed to change…which they didn’t do. When authors write certain things at certain points in their books, it’s for a very calculated reason. Everything more or less has a purpose. When you adapt a book to any kind of film, it’s a given that changes are going to have to be made and that has never been my issue with the show. It’s always been them making a change and then not having the rest of the story change along with it to support that change. Ultimately, at the end of the day, I wish Shadowhunters had taken The Vampire Diaries or the The 100 approach to their writing. I wish they had taken the bones of the source material and then told their own story and created the characters and their personalities in their own way. When Shadowhunters was first announced, initially, that’s what I thought they were going to do. I can’t help but feel like maybe this show might’ve been better written and executed if it weren’t for them being so bogged down by the source material. As much as I love the books (and trust me, I do), this show could have really benefited from a Kevin Williamson level of adaptation. For those of you who don’t know, he was the one who developed The Vampire Diaries for tv adaptation and I was always really impressed with how it was adapted. And I will never apologize for liking Vampire Diaries. Yes, it got a little convoluted in later seasons but seasons 1-3 are fantastic. I am more or less excited for Shadowhunters Season 3 because we are starting to delve into the second half of The Mortal Instruments series and I feel like the second half is going to work much better for adapting. Shadowhunters made the decision to create the show with an ensemble cast in mind however, the first half of The Mortal Instruments isn’t very conducive for an ensemble cast. You pretty much follow Clary and Jace and that’s about it. But the second half starts focusing much more heavily on the other characters. And I feel like it’s definitely going to be easier to adapt. Season 1 and 2 were bogged down by the fact that in the source material, there isn’t a whole lot that characters like Alec, Magnus, Izzy, and Luke are actually doing. Clary and Jace are the ones that are driving the story. And it’s very clear with the storytelling in the show, that the writers didn’t really know what to do with them. This is definitely something I think is going to be improved in Season 3.

Season 3 also needs to work on their world-building. More specifically, their use of magic systems. I continues to grate my nerves that there are no rules to their magic system. As I’ve said before, rules are so important in a fantasy and most importantly in the magic system within that fantasy. If your magic system has no rules then you can do anything with magic. If you can do anything with magic, what makes it compelling? All it does is become a convenient plot device. And I love magic systems. I don’t want to see a magic system be used as a cheap plot device. I want magic to be its own character in a way.

So there are certain themes I’d like to see explored in Season 3. Well, really only one theme. And that is, “consequences”. This show has a huge problem with it’s characters never facing any true consequences for their actions. In the finale, it was laughable to me that when Jace mentions to Clary that she can’t just bring someone back from the dead without a consequence and she’s all, “not this time. This time there won’t be any consequences.” This line is funny to me because it actually implies that Clary has faced consequences for her actions before, which she has not. I really hope the show goes into this theme in Season 3. That they really bring to the fore front that Clary’s selfish nature is the root cause for these horrible things that are going to happen. I really hope the show has the guts to go this direction. They probably won’t considering how much they love to paint Clary as this Mary Sue who is beyond special and could never do anything wrong because she’s so selfless and wonderful (ugh, I just vomited a little in my mouth writing that). But as Season 3 hasn’t aired yet, I’m going to hope for the best. It’s not just Clary that has this issue either. It’s the show’s story-telling as a whole. Their inability to have any truly impactful consequences. The best example is how Max played out in Season 2B. Now, I’m not saying that Max should have died, as he does in the books. I’m saying something resonatingly impactful should’ve happened to him. My own dark theory was that Jonathon hurt him so bad that it put him in a coma that he would never wake up from and that was the driving force for Izzy to go after Jonathon. And it kind of sort of happened. Max does go into a coma but then he gets a miracle treatment from the Silent Brothers and he’s perfectly fine now. It has no lasting impact. Essentially there was no consequence for anyone letting Jonathon into their lives besides a couple of nameless dead shadowhunters. Max recovers and then they go after Jonathon. Yes, they’re mad about what Jonathon did to Max but ultimately, it’s not going to leave a lasting impression on their psyche. It definitely felt like the writers chickened out. There are a lot of different directions the theme of consequences could take Season 3 and I hope the writers are brave enough to take it because at this point, they really need it.

Characters and Their Relationships

Let’s talk about these characters and their relationships now. How these characters are depicted gets very uneven at times. And this show has an issue with slow-burn. They do not know how to do a slow-burn. It stems from their pacing and subtlety issues. They want people to like this show so badly that they’re forgetting why people cling to fandoms in the first place. It’s not that two people are in a wonderful relationship that leaves you in a pile of goo everytime you see them together on screen, it’s how they got there, how their relationship developed, how they as characters develop. That’s what leaves you in a pile of goo. And I haven’t had that experience with this show yet. Yes, I love Malec but there are so many problems with the writing that prevents me from having that gooey feeling. This show is by no means bad but i wouldn’t call it good either. The times it leans closer to the good spectrum are when the characters are driving the story. Let’s start talking about these characters.

First up is Clary. Oh boy. I’ve made no secret about my distaste for Clary. And it’s really difficult to pinpoint exactly what it is about her that grates on my nerves. There’s a lot of little things that bother me. Ultimately, it’s the Mary Sue-ness of her character. As I said earlier, it’s her doing really selfish things but everyone else ignoring it because they think she’s so selfless and wonderful. Now, I don’t have a problem with Clary being a selfish person. At her core, that’s what she is. She follows her heart and that leads her to doing selfish things. It’s perfectly human. Humans are selfish beings. Even when we go out of our way to help others, there’s still a selfish undertone – for a lot of us, it makes us feel good knowing we helped someone, it benefited us in some way. But the fact that no one calls Clary out on her crap any more is what I dislike. Clary does these selfish acts because it’s a way to push the plot forward but it’s never used to push her character forward and that’s the issue I have with her. If the show didn’t tote her around as this perfect being and just own up to the fact that she is selfish, I would have no issues with Clary. Dare I say it, I may even like her. Which is why I mentioned earlier when I talked about the consequences theme for Season 3, I would like to see her selfish nature be called to the fore front. For Clary to really be held accountable for her selfish decisions. For her to really look at herself and be like, “oh, no. I’m causing this. Everything bad that’s happening is all because of me.” Really, I just want the show to do something that will make this audience think, “Yeah. She’s not perfect. She makes mistakes.”

On to Jace. I fluctuate a lot on my feelings for Jace. Dom Sherwood does a fantastic job of portraying him. That’s never been my issue. He is fantastic at bringing this very angsty feel to Jace. Which is important because Jace is quite angsty. And I do love it when male characters show their vulnerable side. However, sometimes the writers take Jace’s angst to an absurd level. Just how easily this guy gets moved to tears, I find a little ridiculous. This guy is more emotional than I have been in my entire life. And I say that with the time period I went through puberty in mind where getting a B on a homework assignment was enough to drive me to tears. It’s really hard for me to believe that a 20-year-old, whether they be male, female, unspecified gender, whatever, would be crying over some of the things he cries over. My feelings might be hurt a little but I don’t think I’d cry over some of these things. But I’m also a really sarcastic person and sarcastic people usually don’t let too many things bother them. We believe in hiding our insecurities through jokes. It’s probably why I like Book Jace so much. A lot of the fandom thinks Book Jace is mean. I don’t know where they get that. I think he’s really funny and whenever the fandom says that he’s mean, I really have to question how they, as a person, functions in the real world. Trust me, there are some genuinely mean people in the real world. Some of them are located right here in this fandom. If you think Book Jace is mean, how do you deal with those people? But don’t take this to mean I hate Jace. I haven’t genuinely hated Jace since Season 1 Episode 6 when I changed his name (temporarily) to The Douche. I like him much more in Season 2. His motivations and his character development as a whole is super interesting. And I love it when he gets snarky. Doesn���t happen nearly as much as it should, though. I live for the moments when Jace gets sassy. I really like what Christine from polandbanannasbooks said about the kind of person Book Jace is. He’s a more sexy and angsty version of Chandler Bing. I’d like to see that guy pop up more in the show.

With Clary and Jace talked about now, let’s take a brief interlude and talk about Clace now. Clace is definitely an example of a couple they rushed when they didn’t need to. It’s not that Kat and Dom have bad chemistry, They have this fun, breezy chemistry about them that works super well when they’re just hanging out. However, when it gets to the point where they’re being forced into having a romantic, epic moment, it’s just that. It feels forced. The show also doesn’t do them any favors by making them so generically YA at the same time. They fall for each other simply because “they were meant for each other.” No work has actually been put forth into developing their relationship, what it is about each other that they like so much. It’s just bland, cheesy, YA tropes. And not the good kind of YA tropes. My hopes for Season 3 is that we’ll get moments where they’re start actively learning about each other on an intellectual level.

For Simon as a character, I’m not really super interested in him. He’s super funny. The show clearly gave all the Jace snark to him. But at the end of the day, even though it felt like he had a lot to do this season, it also feels like he didn’t really accomplish that much. For me, as a character leaving an impact on the season, he didn’t really factor all that much. I am very interested to see how his character is going to progress in Season 3 as it looks like they’re going completely off-book with him. Like I said, I almost prefer that the show would go off-book.

I guess we’ve got to talk about Izzy, now. Izzy has always been a character that routinely falls on the wayside for me. A lot of the fandom seems to really like her but I find her kind of dull at times. And she is a bad-ass but she never contributes a whole lot. The show never really knows what to do with her. They like to tell us she’s a bad-ass but she has very few character moments that actually lend to that. She seems to only serve as a support function for Alec and Clary. I was super excited when they started introducing this drug addiction for her character. A lot of people say this ruined her character. In my eyes, it’s hard to ruin a character who was on as shaky foundation as she was to begin with. She has no real consistent character foundations. I liked the drug addiction plot because something interesting was finally being done with her character. And no one comment saying, “Oh but Izzy is so great because she’s the best pathologist in NYC. That’s a contribution.” I hate the whole “Izzy is the best pathologist” angle. First of all, it is such a Mary Sue angle to make her the best. Second of all, what exactly makes her better than all of the other pathologists? Third of all, I find it insulting that this 19-year-old is the best pathologist in NYC when you have people who spend 10+ years receiving their medical training. At what age did she begin her training? When she was 6? Not to mention, there are so many plot holes with the pathologist angle that I don’t even want to get into right now. Basically, for Izzy, I hope that she gets written better in Season 3. They were going an interesting angle with the drug addiction but then she got a miracle cure and it’s never mentioned. There was absolutely no point to that plot at all.

I’m very much on the rocks about whether or not I want the show to go the Sizzy route. The Sizzy that I love is from the books. And Izzy’s personality has changed so much that we’re not going to get Sizzy from the books. Now what the show is currently doing with Simon and Izzy could lead to some really interesting foundations in their romantic relationship IF they keep it a slow-burn. But this show also sucks at slow burns so I don’t know how optimistic I should be.

Next up is Alec. My favorite character in both the books and show. He was already pretty good in the books but the show did a really great job with figuring him out as a character in the show. I just really enjoy him. He is a little inconsistent with his logic. And like with Izzy, I wish that he would do more in the fore front of the story. He fares much better than Izzy does in the story telling but his plot points always feel like they’re just kind of added on and then subsequently dropped. He has all of these great B plot ideas that never really seem to affect any of the main story and as a result, they’re usually dropped. And then of course, a lot of the fandom doesn’t perceive Alec as his own character. They see him as one half of Malec. And if he’s not doing something that’s going to forward the Malec plot than it’s automatically trash.  I definitely wouldn’t mind seeing Alec spend a bit more time away from the Malec plots and really give us a chance to see more of him as a person.

As I made in my previous point, we can’t talk about Alec without talking about Magnus. I am very off and on about Magnus as a character. Honestly, this guy’s motivations and his changes in motivations were starting to give me whiplash. I care about Magnus in the sense that he’s a really interesting character and when he’s allowed to be snarky, he’s great. But the way that he reacts to situations, it doesn’t feel real. And I’m not talking about the acting. I’m talking about the writing. He reacts to things in a very childish and vindictive way.

Which means I have to stop beating around the bush. I have to talk about Malec this season. Oh boy. This is going to be long. Malec in this season was great…when they have absolutely no conflict. When they’re hanging out and having fun, supporting each other, you love them as a couple. However, when they’re in a fight, Malec grates on my nerves. I had gotten to the point in 2B where I straight up didn’t care about what was going on in their relationship. I became apathetic to Malec. The world must truly be ending. Now, this is not me saying I don’t want Malec to ever fight. This is a dig at how poorly written the Malec fights are. Here’s the thing, the ideas behind the Malec fights are actually really good but the flaw is in their execution. There’s a very childish tint to it. I hate what happens in these Malec fights and I hate how they’re resolved. Here is the specific formula on Malec fights:

1) Alec does something that angers Magnus

2) Magnus tells Alec to get out (because that’s a totally healthy way of dealing with your problems)

3) Alec apologizes and Magnus forgives him but Magnus (in his eyes at least) has nothing to apologize for

Rinse and repeat. It happens this way every couple of episodes. And I hate how unequal this relationship is. And this is not me being mad that my favorite character is the one at fault in his relationship, this is me being mad that it’s being written like everything is always Alec’s fault and Magnus never does anything wrong. Even though it’s not true. He also adds to these fights but it’s never called to attention in the writing. This is not a very healthy way to approach a relationship. And with it always highlighting that Alec is at fault, this could very easily be interpreted as an abusive relationship. You have one party believing he’s at fault for a conflict, he apologizes, and the other party gets to continue thinking he’s the perfect one in the relationship and can proceed to blame his lover for anything that goes wrong. Because that’s the way it’s always been. Now I know that’s a little extreme. Granted, Malec isn’t quite there yet, but if this formula keeps up, it won’t be that big of a stretch to call this an abusive relationship. A relationship is all about equality. You cannot have a successful relationship if one person holds all of the power. I really hope Season 3 is going to address this. I really hope there’s a reason for why Malec conflicts were written this way and not just because the writers really like Magnus. I’m hoping Season 3 is going to explore Alec noticing these tell tale problems in his relationship with Magnus and starts questioning it. Maybe this will lead to them breaking up for a much longer space of time because he doesn’t truly believe that Magnus respects him or his position in this relationship. I really did not like how Malec got back together in the finale. I believe the exact words I said in response to Alec saying “I can’t live without you” was “oh, please. Come on.” Seriously, they had been broken up for barely 1 episode. At most, it was a couple of days. You need to be broken up a little longer than that before I’ll accept that sort of declaration.

Not only do I have a problem with Alec always being the bad guy in the relationship, I also have a problem with how Magnus deals with conflicts. Essentially, when a relationship conflict crops up, he responds with, “You’re making me mad. Get out. I don’t want to deal with you.” That is not a healthy way to deal with relationship woes. Why does a character who has 500 years worth of relationship experience behave like a 16-year-old yet his partner, a 20-year-old is far more willing to stick it out and compromise right off the bat. And I have to ask, is this how he’s always going to deal with these relationship conflicts? Is this how he’s always dealt with them? If that’s the case, no wonder he’s had 7,000 relationships. He’s probably never made it past the first fight. He probably tells each of his lovers when they have a fight to get out and leave him alone and they’re probably all, “You know what Magnus? You’re a cool guy and all but I need someone who who’s going to behave like an actual mature adult so I’m going to peace the fuck out.”

When this guy gets his feelings hurt, he becomes ultra vindictive and childish. I mean, just in the last 2 episodes of season 2, he was absolutely horrible. He was actually willing to let NYC be destroyed because he didn’t want to help Alec. As much as I do like Magnus – and I really do, don’t misunderstand me – but Alec deserves better. Like I said, I hope the writers are going for Magnus’ behavior to be called out in Season 3 but I also know better. Hope for the best but prepare for the worst.

Well, I think I’ve ranted on Malec for long enough, let’s talk about Luke. Luke has the potential to be a really great character but he also suffers from much the same things that Izzy and Alec suffer from. The story not really knowing what to do with him as a character. I mean, there are long stretches of time where Luke just kind of disappears. Hopefully, this will change in Season 3 and he’ll become a much more active agent in the story. I also hope he quits his day job as a detective because he is the worst detective ever. I don’t even know how he still has a job. He never seems to be working.

And a little side note. I’m also low-key shipping Luke and Maryse. I think they could be really interesting as a couple. 

Now we’ve got Maia. I actually really like Maia but for whatever reason, the show just cannot write her in a decent, consistent way during a finale episode. In the 2A finale, they had her automatically jump to killing Clary with no real development into her making a decision like that and in 2B she’s all damsel in distress in the Seelie realm. Never mind the fact that she’s been depicted as a bad-ass werewolf in earlier episodes, but in the finale she was just really quiet and meek. It was very strange. Definitely for Season 3, they need to make Maia more consistent with her character development and not just change her personality whenever it suits the plot.

Will Tudor was also amazing as Sebastian/Jonathon. I’m not a fan of the burnt blob he turns into. I find Jonathon a much more threatening villain when he’s Will Tudor being creepy as fuck as opposed to the burnt blob the show decided to add. I’m really hoping he returns as Will Tudor and not the burnt corpse.

Not a whole lot to say about Valentine. Ultimately, I’m very disappointed with where he went as a villain. I always found Valentine to be moderately interesting in the books and the show just took away everything that was interesting about him and left us with a Disney villain. Alan Van Sprang did the best he could trying to humanize Valentine but the script wasn’t doing him any favors. Hopefully the next super-villain this show has will write their villain in a less cheesy and cliché way.

In my Season 2 Finale review, I had also had this theory where I was hoping Maxim Roy will come back to play Lillith in the form of Jocelyn. I think that would be really interesting. And no, I don’t keep up on the Season 3 spoilers/behind-the-scene stuff. I want to be surprised when it airs. So no one tell me that Maxim Roy isn’t returning. I’d prefer to be disappointed on my own.

One more thing I want to mention is the Jalec parabatai bond. The show has taken a lot of steps to improve the parabatai bond and I love that they have. However, they seem to only highlight the angsty parts of it or to use it as a plot device. The parabatai bond is super interesting in both the positive and negative effects it leaves on those who have it. The show loves to talk about the negative effects of it. I would like to see the show start to show the benefits it has. They also need to make this bond more consistent and equal. A lot of times, it feels like Alec experiences the effects more than Jace. It was beyond weird to me in Season 2 Episode 3, that Jace finally makes it off the ship but yet can’t tell that there’s something wrong with Alec. And then Jace cuts his hand, and Alec has no problem feeling that? If there’s one thing I’d like from the parabatai bond in Season 3, it’s the consistency.

At the end of the day, this show tries really hard to be epic. It really wants to be on Vampire Diaries caliber but the writing just isn’t there. The acting is. That isn’t the issue. I love the actors, I love the way they portray their characters. Even the ideas the writers have are actually really good ideas. It’s just the execution that they have a problem with. Once the writing catches up to the actors’ talent, I think we’ll have a truly amazing show on our hands.

Well, that’s about all I have about Season 2. Again, I am neither PRO nor ANTI shadowhunters. In my eyes, it’s neither a good or bad show. It’s just bland. What I’m doing here is just looking at this show and telling you what it makes me think and feel. Do you have to agree with me? No. But you should still respect it. So, with that said, I would love to hear your thoughts and feelings about Season 2. Are there changes you think could be made that I didn’t mention? I’d love to hear how other people interpret this show. This is why fandoms are so much fun but they’re horrible places when can’t people can’t respect each other’s opinions. So please, respect make the dream work.

And with this blog post out of the way, I am now going to go see American Assassin and proceed to fall in love with Dylan O’Brien’s talent to create strong but vulnerable characters.

[shirlleycoyle]

Be My Mayor, Anne Hidalgo

As a New York City resident, I have had more than two months to sit at home and think. One of the things I have thought about is how the city might be different if we had a better mayor.

It is not news that our mayor sucks. Bill de Blasio has been widely criticized for years as a micromanager, a bully, someone who literally is sleeping on the job, and generally someone who doesn’t seem to like New York City very much, culminating in an embarrassing presidential campaign whose sole purpose seemed to be so he could spend time away from New York. He is behind on every issue, constantly getting dragged by the city’s press corps for mostly legitimate reasons, and appears wildly out of touch with what is going on in the city he runs.

And that was all before his city became the epicenter of a global pandemic.

As you can imagine, these traits do not carry over well to running the city with the worst coronavirus outbreak in the country. In fact, those traits are in large part why the city he runs has the worst coronavirus outbreak in the country. At least, that’s the gist of a New Yorker feature published earlier this month (the state’s governor, Andrew Cuomo, deserves a good chunk of the blame, too). He was slow to institute social distancing measures because of how it would play politically and factor into his ongoing feud with Cuomo. He fought with his public health experts and only started listening to them when one threatened to resign. He encouraged New Yorkers to “Go on with your lives + get out on the town despite Coronavirus” in early March, well after it was clear the virus was here. And he snuck in a final session at his public gym after he issued an order calling for all gyms to close.

Now, de Blasio is transferring the vital contact tracing efforts, which will largely determine if and when the city can reopen successfully, from the Department of Health and Hygiene, which does contact tracing, to the public hospital system, which does not, for reasons no one can convincingly explain except that de Blasio personally doesn’t like the Health and Hygiene experts, a theme of the New Yorker feature. Along the way, the New Yorker quotes various former consultants, aides, health commissioners, and advisors calling de Blasio’s various missteps during coronavirus’s critical early days in the city “pathetic,” “self-involved,” “psychotic,” “mind-blogging,” and “just horrible.”

I want someone better to be New York’s mayor so badly, now more than ever. Specifically, I want Paris’s mayor, Anne Hidalgo, to be my mayor. I want Hidalgo to save New York from Bill de Blasio.

Hidalgo is a city leader I have admired for years, because she has exactly the traits de Blasio lacks: a coherent, clear vision of what she wants her city to be and the personal fortitude to enact it. She has the confidence to dismiss irrational criticism as such and embrace good policies because they are good. She has led a years-long effort to make Paris more livable and pleasant by reducing car usage and expanding green space, efforts scientists and urban experts know would be great for the people living there. Hidalgo has made a lot of enemies with illegitimate gripes doing this, but hasn’t compromised on her vision. With an election this year, on which one of her major platforms was the “15 minute city” where people can find “everything you need within 15 minutes of home,” she won the first round of voting with the highest vote total (the second round was postponed due to coronavirus). Amazingly, her rivals have largely attacked her on the grounds that she hasn’t gone far enough on any of these initiatives.

Hidalgo’s reaction to the pandemic has been similarly aggressive, with 30 miles of new bicycle lanes repurposed from car lanes. Cycling is, and will remain one of the safest modes of transport as we continue to live through this pandemic.

She is doing this not just to further her existing vision, but on sound scientific grounds that more cycling is a key ingredient to getting cities working again after they re-open.

“I say in all firmness that it is out of the question that we allow ourselves to be invaded by cars, and by pollution,” Hidalgo said, as relayed by Citylab, in a quote that ought to make American urbanists cry with jealousy. “It will make the health crisis worse. Pollution is already in itself a health crisis and a danger—and pollution joined up with coronavirus is a particularly dangerous cocktail. So it’s out of the question to think that arriving in the heart of the city by car is any sort of solution, when it could actually aggravate the situation.”

These are not the ramblings of some crazed environmentalist, as she would surely be accused of if she were mayor of a major American city. Multiple studies have linked air pollution, especially particulate matter from car exhaust, to higher coronavirus death rates. And, during a critical time for small businesses, bike lanes are increasingly proving to provide positive economic impacts for the corridors along which they run, especially for restaurants.

Meanwhile, in New York, a city uniquely reliant on public transit by American standards, we have no coherent vision for what the other side of this looks like. How are we supposed to get around? Are we all supposed to buy cars? Where are we to park them, both near home and at work? Are we all supposed to bike on roads where 27 cyclists died last year? Or are we all supposed to walk to the water and ride de Blasio’s signature transportation mode, the NYC Ferry?

To be sure, cycling is not a solution for everyone. Lots of New Yorkers have commutes too long for a bike ride, and lots of people—including the disabled and elderly—might not be able to bike as a main transit method. But that is true for Paris, a city with robust public transportation usage, as much as for New York, and it’s not a reason to do nothing. Instead, de Blasio has done worse than nothing and made cuts to the Department of Transportation’s budget that will slow down buses and halt safe streets initiatives, making bicycling more dangerous.

Transportation is not the most important thing in the world, especially during a pandemic, but it is a key factor for cities working. And, if a city can’t get transportation policy right, the odds are it’s getting lots of other stuff wrong, too. The last three months—much less several years—have demonstrated our current mayor can’t get these things right. It’s time to have a mayor who can. Save us, Anne Hidalgo.

Be My Mayor, Anne Hidalgo syndicated from https://triviaqaweb.wordpress.com/feed/