#although usually in the context of fandom

[ooc-themis-cattails]

[musicrunsthroughmysoul]

After writing this 1.2k words fic and realizing how much I disliked it, I was really hoping that re-reading it would inspire me to write a new fic (or rewrite it, basically), but after re-reading it, my muse is like 'Hmmm nah, I got nothin'.' D:

[apoloadonisandnarcissus]

"The Last Temptation": One Megathread to Rule Them All - Clues and Speculation, PART 1

By now everyone in the “Rings of Power” fandom is aware of “The Last Temptation” - Galadriel and Sauron scene in the finale (2x08) - so I’ll save myself the trouble of further explaining it, because we have more interesting things to talk about.

What happens in this scene? What is the season building towards? And what are clues, foreshadowing or red herrings the episodes have given us so far?

It's pretty much confirmed that Sauron will pitch the “be my queen” question to Galadriel, again. I usually don’t pay much attention to the actors’ interviews because they’ll say anything to avoid spoiling the story and spill the beans, but sometimes it’s important for context.

From Episode 7 preview, we know that Galadriel will arrive at Eregion and share a heartfelt moment with Celebrimbor (I'll come back to this scene later on). However, the showrunners have teased that 2x07 is an Elrond-centered episode, and I don’t think Sauron and Galadriel will reunite before the finale (2x08) because that’s one of the climaxes of the season. Anyway, my guess is that Sauron has already left Eregion once Galadriel arrives.

1) Will Galadriel resist or succumb to Sauron’s temptation? 

You cannot face him alone.

To me, this scene with Gil-galad is the most important one, when foreshadowing is concerned. Mainly because our High King of the Noldor got it right last season, so we better pay attention to what he says.  

We foresaw that if Galadriel’s search should have continued, she might have inadvertently kept alive the very evil she sought to defeat. For the same wind that seeks to blow out a fire may also cause its spread.

Gil-galad tells Elrond the true reason why he sent Galadriel back to Valinor (1x01) 

Oh, boy, and how right he was! 

But Gil-galad isn’t the only character who warns Galadriel she can’t face Sauron alone because she might not be able to resist him: 

Similar to Gi-galad, Elrond shares the same concern.

And why would he think that?

In 2x06, it’s Adar who warns Galadriel she might succumb to Sauron as well, because she’s acting quite smug at being able to resist him once before (1x08). 

I resisted.

For a while, perhaps.

His eye bores a hole and the rest of him slithers in.

So far, this season, we have three different characters warning Galadriel that she might succumb to Sauron if she faces him alone at the finale. Unsure if Celebrimbor will tell her the same thing in 2x07, but three characters saying the same thing is far from a red herring, at this point.

2) And so, the main question now is: will Galadriel face Sauron alone, out of her own volition? Or does Sauron chase after her to isolate her from the rest?  

We already know that Galadriel is consumed by the idea of finding Sauron, and to destroy him; but now, she’s motivated not only by her brother’s death at the hands of his werewolves, but due to her belief that everything she experienced with Halbrand (and the connection they had: friendship, romantic, ambiguous) was a lie and part of Sauron’s schemes of deception. 

However, in this scene in particular (2x02), Galadriel is feeling especially vulnerable, and eventually agrees with both Elrond and Gil-Galad, that she can’t face Sauron alone because she’s unaware of what might happen if she lets him in, again (meaning, she might actually succumb to him). 

However, from 2x02 until 2x06, Galadriel grows bolder and more confident, mostly aided by Nenya and the visions and the guidance the ring of power provides her with. Although, I would argue it was never her intention to face Sauron alongside Elrond and the others, and this scene was a moment of weakness (or the red herring itself).

I swear to you, High King. I will not stop until he is destroyed and I have put this right.  

Morfydd Clark herself has said that Galadriel knows she messed up really bad, and is on a desperate mission for redemption. However, last season she was also desperate in finding Sauron and destroy him, and that worked wonders, didn’t it? 

Based on this, I would say Galadriel will seek out Sauron all by herself in the finale. We already saw Galadriel and Adar paralleling each other in their pursuit for Sauron, and how consumed and obsessed both of them are by it. While Adar is sacrificing his “children” to destroy Sauron, Galadriel thrown Elrond under the bus (by telling Adar he’s the one who carries Nenya) just to get a chance of finding Sauron and face him herself. 

Galadriel’s pride is her main flaw of character, and usually what gets her into trouble (in both RoP and the books, with her only letting go of her pride on the Third Age when Frodo offers her the One Ring and she declines). And in this case, her pride will be her downfall. She believes she'll always resist Sauron, because what he offered her last time (power) wasn’t enough to tempt her.   

My guess is that Galadriel will lure Sauron out either by using Morgoth’s iron crown or Nenya, but my money is on the first option (as we saw on the trailers).

3) Elrond’s Choice

Before we get into the rabbit hole that is Sauron’s plan concerning Galadriel, we have to talk about Elrond’s promise in 2x04:

This scene might be a red herring or foreshadowing, but I’m inclined to believe the later. And it can either happen in either 2x07 or in 2x08 (during the “Last Temptation” scene).  

Since 2x07 is an Elrond-centered episode I would argue it would make more sense for this choice to happen in this episode. In the preview, we saw Elrond and Adar having a conversation in the same tent he dined with Galadriel and proposed an alliance to her (that didn’t work out, did it?). Adar knows Elrond carries Nenya, but he has other interests in dealing with the Elves, too. 

He expressed to Galadriel his desire in knowing what comes after Sauron is defeated and the fate of the Orcs, seeking out a truce between Elves and Orcs, which would allow him and his “children” to live in peace in Mordor. I believe he will propose this to Elrond, too. In exchange, Adar might want to use Galadriel to lure Sauron out.

And so, in 2x07 Elrond might have to choose between saving Galadriel or stopping Sauron.

But now you are wondering: if Elrond allows Galadriel to remain Adar’s prisoner and she’s at Eregion in the same episode, this theory doesn’t make any sense? How did she escaped? Well, that’s a question for another time, but another character might set her free (one who would make the show more complex and give Galadriel some character’s growth and development).

4) Galadriel’s Sacrifice  

She sacrificed herself to save us all.

No, you are mistaken, Camnir. She did not do it to save us. She did it to save the ring.

These quotes are from 2x04, when Galadriel faces the Orcs by herself and eventually gets captured by Adar. However, it’s the second time in this episode there is a mention of Galadriel either sacrificing herself, or something.

This can be foreshadowing for several things: 

Celebrimbor’s death (since she says this after Elrond talks about how his father once prophesized Celebrimbor’s life would one day be on his hands); 

Galadriel goes to fight Sauron alone (it can be an extra layer of foreshadowing to this happening); 

Galadriel sacrificing herself to save Middle-earth (meaning she goes/joins Sauron at the end). 

5) Sauron’s plan concerning Galadriel 

Sauron is in Eregion in the middle of his “Rings of Power” masterplan. However, and through his interactions with Mirdania, Galadriel’s Doppelgänger, it’s clear she’s still very much on his mind, and is a part of his plans of domination.

The plan is simple: Sauron wants Galadriel as his queen, still. 

But why? Galadriel is not yet the powerful "elf-witch" she'll become in the future.He can see her potential, sure, but would that be enough to explain his obsession? There is a lot of meta already about the parallels between Morgoth/Silmarils and Sauron/Galadriel, so I won’t get into that here.

How strange. When the light... caught your hair... for amoment, you seemed her perfect likeness. 

Whose likeness? 

Why, Lady Galadriel, of course. 

There is a lot of discourse going on in the “Rings of Power” fandom concerning Sauron’s true feelings for Galadriel: obsession, love or something else because he, being an immortal spirit, is uncapable of “human-like” feelings.  

The answer is easy: both obsession and love are correct. The ones arguing Sauron is not capable of love are wrong. According to the lore, Maiar can fall in love, and one Maia did fall in love with an Elf (and these characters happen to be Elrond’s ancestors). Mairon is capable of love. But he’s a fallen Maia, corrupted by Morgoth, and, so, his love is also corrupted into possessiveness, obsession, jealousy, unsatisfiable lust, emotional turmoil, pain and suffering.  

I would even argue that Sauron fell in love with Galadriel while he was on his somewhat “repentant era”, and it started out as something purer, but it’s twisting into something darker as he goes deeper and deeper into evil, until it turns into hatred, later on.

In 2x06, and in order to manipulate Celebrimbor into finishing the Nine rings of power and prevent him from finding out Eregion is under attack, Sauron conjures a vision of “Everything is well on Eregion”. However, after Celebrimbor leaves, he’s left alone in his own vision (delusions) and his thoughts dwell on Galadriel.  

How do we know this? We have several characters randomly mentioning “it’s a horse! A horse! It’s a horse!”. When I first watch this scene I was a bit taken back. But nothing is random, folks:

And then we have Sauron the Poet:  

All of these clues are meant to show us, the audience, that Galadriel is still on Sauron’s mind. And that he harbors some quite strong feelings for her. And this will come into play in “The Last Temptation” scene, like the director of the finale, Charlotte Brändströmm teased on “X-Ray Vision” podcast: 

I think Sauron even really loves Galadriel and you see that at the very end. 

[chaxan08]

British Titles

I usually don't share posts of this type, but I've taken the liberty of doing so because I've read several fanfics and seen too many posts both here and on TikTok, in which it's more than evident that many people don't know how British noble titles worked in the 18th and 19th century. This is something I've seen more in the Bridgerton fandom, but many content creators or writers from other fandoms have made the same mistakes when interpreting noble titles.

First of all, I would like to clarify something. English and British noble titles are not exactly the same, although they are related. The following explains the difference and the historical context:

Historical Context.

England:

Before the formation of the United Kingdom, England had its own system of noble titles.

Titles such as duke, marquess, earl, viscount, and baron were common.

2. Great Britain:

In 1707, with the Act of Union, England and Scotland united to form the Kingdom of Great Britain.

After this union, noble titles became titles of the Kingdom of Great Britain.

3. United Kingdom:

In 1801, with the incorporation of Ireland through the Act of Union, the Kingdom of Great Britain became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

This further expanded the scope of noble titles.

Noble Titles.

Despite these political changes, the titles themselves (duke, marquess, earl, viscount, baron) remained consistent in terms of hierarchy and honor. The main difference was the realm and origin of the title:

English Titles:

Referred specifically to those created in the Kingdom of England before 1707.

Examples: Duke of Norfolk, Marquess of Winchester, Earl of Derby.

2. British Titles:

Refers to those created after 1707 in the Kingdom of Great Britain and later in the United Kingdom.

Examples: Duke of Marlborough, Marquess of Rockingham, Earl of Chatham.

Differences and Similarities.

Similarities:

The hierarchy and responsibilities of the titles remained the same, regardless of the change in the kingdom's designation.

Titles granted by the British crown maintained the same forms of address and privileges.

2. Differences:

British titles cover a broader scope, including Scotland and Ireland (later Northern Ireland).

English titles were specific to the Kingdom of England before the formation of Great Britain.

In short, while English and British noble titles are part of the same hierarchy and nobility system, the main distinction lies in the political and historical context in which they were created. During the 18th and 19th centuries, this difference was based on whether the titles originated before or after the unions that first formed Great Britain and later the United Kingdom.

Now then, with that said, I want to mention that my main reference for this is the article 'ENGLISH TITLES IN THE 18TH AND 19TH CENTURIES' by Jo Beverley, who is a Member of the RWA Hall of Fame for Regency Romance. Here is the link if you want to read the original article: On Titles (jobev.com)

It is also important to mention that, as Jo Beverley said, this brief run-down of English titles is for use by fiction writers. It is by no means comprehensive, but covers the more common situations arising in novels set in the above periods.

Now, the peerage basically runs according to primogeniture, ie the eldest son gets nearly everything. If a peer has no eldest son, the title and possessions that belong to it go to the next male heir, probably a brother or nephew.

There are a very few titles that can pass to a female if there is no direct heir, but they will revert to the male line when the lady bears a son. (Such as the monarchy.) Some titles can automatically pass through a female heir (when there is no male heir) and most can be revived by subsequent generations by petitioning to the Crown. But that's getting into more complicated areas. If your plot depends on something unusual, please do research it thoroughly before going ahead.

As Beverley said, this is a bit more complicated and requires further research if it's something you wish to incorporate into your work, especially if it's set in the 18th or 19th centuries. In the 20th century, this was more common. A clear example would be Lord Mountbatten (1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma), who had no sons, only two daughters. Therefore, he passed his title to his firstborn, Patricia Knatchbull (n��e Mountbatten). Thanks to this title, the Countess was entitled to a seat in the House of Lords, where she remained until 1999, when a House of Lords Act removed most hereditary peers from the chamber.

But returning to the main topic, the eldest son is called the heir apparent, as he is undoubtedly the heir. If there is no such son, the next in line is called the heir presumptive because, however improbable (such as the duke being on his deathbed), there remains a possibility of a closer heir being born. Therefore, an heir presumptive does not hold the title of heir, if there is one. (See below about heir's titles.)

If a peer dies leaving a wife but no son, the heir inherits unless the widow says she might be with child. It is for her to do that. If she stays silent, it is assumed that she is not. If she's pregnant, everything waits until the child is born.

These last two paragraphs can be perfectly illustrated by an example that many know. In 'When he was wicked', after the death of John Sterling, Earl of Kilmartin, Michael Sterling is not immediately named as the new Earl upon his cousin's death, as Francesca announces her pregnancy. But since she had a miscarriage, there was no longer a possible heir to the late Earl of Kilmartin, and therefore, the title is immediately inherited by Michael.

Continuing with the main topic, an heir must be legitimate at birth to inherit a title, though that could mean a marriage ceremony performed while the mother is in labor. A peer may raise bastards with devotion and/or marry the mother later, but a bastard child can never be his legal heir.

It's also crucial to mention that peers automatically had seats in the House of Lords. Note, however, that courtesy titles (those held by heirs) do not give seats, or any of the other privileges of the peerage.

Something else that is highly important to clarify, as confusion is quite common, is that most peers do not use their surnames as their title. Thus, the usual pattern would be something like Sebastian Burgoyne, Earl of Malzard. He is Lord Malzard NEVER Lord Burgoyne. (Or, for that matter, Lord Sebastian.) As an author, you might like variety, but take as a general rule is that no one ever had two forms of address.

THE RANKS OF THE PEERAGE

Duke.

Leaving aside royalty, this is the highest rank. His wife is the Duchess. They will be duke and duchess of something.

If we use the famous main couple from Bridgerton Season 1, the example would be: Duke and Duchess of Hastings. Address is "Your Grace", though familiars may address them just as Duke and Duchess. Like, "Fine weather for shooting, eh, Duke?" or may address the duke by title. "Care for more port, Hastings?"

The duke will also have a family name, that is, a surname, but he will not use it in the normal course of events. And something crucial that is also commonly confused, the duchess does NOT use the surname at all. Continuing with the same example, if Daphne Bridgerton marries the Duke of Hastings (whose surname is Basset), she will be the Duchess of Hastings and will informally sign as Daphne Hastings, NEVER as Daphne Basset.

The duke's eldest son is his heir and will have his father's second-best title as his courtesy title. Nearly all peers have a number of titles marking their climb up the ranks. The heir to a duke is often the next lowest ranking peer, a marquess, but the title could, however, be an earldom, or even a viscountcy. For example, the eldest son of Daphne and Simon, the Duke and Duchess of Hastings, holds the courtesy title that his father had when the Late Duke of Hastings was still alive: Earl of Clyvedon.

Important note, a courtesy title does not give the holder a seat in the House of Lords or other privileges of the peerage.

If the heir has a son before the heir becomes duke, that son will take the next lowest title as a courtesy title. If the heir dies before his father, his eldest son becomes the heir apparent and takes his father's title.

Apart from the heir, a duke's sons are given the courtesy title Lord with their Christian name. (Lord + firstname + surname). Continuing with the example of the Duke and Duchess of Hastings, assuming that like in the book, they also have David and Edward in the series, their courtesy titles would be: Lord David Basset and Lord Edward Basset. They are NEVER Lord Basset or Lord David Hastings and Lord Edward Hastings.

All duke's daughters are given the courtesy title (Lady + firstname + surname). And continuing with the same example, the daughters of the Duke and Duchess of Hastings, Belinda and Caroline, would be: Lady Belinda Basset and Lady Caroline Basset. Also, they are NEVER Lady Basset or Lady Belinda Hastings and Lady Caroline Hastings.

And also, if they marry a commoner, they retain the title. Let's say Lady Belinda marries Mr. Sticklethwait, she becomes Lady Belinda Sticklethwait. But if she marries a peer, she adopts his title. If Lady Belinda marries the Earl of Herrick, she becomes Countess of Herrick, Lady Herrick. And if she marries the holder of a courtesy title, then she may use his title or her birth title as she wishes.

I make this clarification because it's the most common mistake in these types of novels. Note that in all cases, titles like Lord or Lady with both first and surname (eg. Lady Anne Middleton) and Lord or Lady "last name" or "title" (Lady Middleton) are exclusive. No one can be both at the same time. Moreover, Lord or Lady "firstname" is a title conferred at birth. It CANNOT be gained later in life except when the father accedes to a title and thus raises his family.

So, Lady Mary Smith is not Lady Smith and vice versa. Lord John Brown in not Lord Brown and vice versa. If Mary Smith marries Lord Brown she becomes Lady Brown, NOT Lady Mary. (If she marries Lord John Brown, she becomes Lady John Brown. Yes, it may sound odd to modern ears, but the past is, as they say, a different country. That's the charm of historical fiction.)

Marquess.

This is the next rank. (As above, it can be spelled marquis or marquess, but in either case is pronounced markwess.)

Similar to the duke, he will be the Marquess of something, for example: He is Richard Byron, the Marquess of Salisbury, or Lord Salisbury, or simply Salisbury to his family. His wife is the Marchioness of Salisbury or Lady Salisbury. She would sign with her firstname and title, for example: Diana Salisbury, NEVER Diana Byron.

His heir apparent takes his next highest title as a courtesy title (eg. Earl of Cranborne). All other sons have the title of Lord with their first and surname (eg. Lord Arthur Byron and Lord Albert Byron, NEVER Lord Byron or Lord Arthur Salisbury and Lord Albert Salisbury). All daughters have the title of Lady with their first and surname (eg. Lady Alexandra Byron and Lady Amelia Byron, NEVER Lady Byron or Lady Alexandra Salisbury and Lady Amelia Salisbury).

Earl.

He will nearly always be earl of something. His wife is the Countess. If we take another famous couple from Bridgerton, they would refer to him as "the Earl of Kilmartin" or "Lord Kilmartin," or simply "Kilmartin" among family. His wife will be the Countess of Kilmartin or Lady Kilmartin, and she will sign as Francesca Kilmartin. In the same way as with the wife of a duke or marquess, considering that the Earl of Kilmartin is named John Stirling, Francesca will NEVER be called Francesca Stirling. That's why in the series, when she introduces herself to Michaela, she says that her name is now Kilmartin and NOT Stirling.

It's important to mention that some Earls do not use 'of' like Earl Spencer, and in that case, the family surname is the same as the title (following the previous example, the surname would be Spencer), but this is quite unusual and I think it should be avoided in fiction unless it's a crucial plot point.

As with a duke or marquess, the earl's heir will take the next lowest title as a courtesy title, and the heir's son, the next again. Continuing with the example of the Kilmartins, it's not very clear what the courtesy title for John Sterling II (son of Francesca and Michael in the books) is, but if Michael Sterling is the Earl of Kilmartin and has a subsidiary title of Viscount, then their eldest son, John Sterling II, would use the courtesy title of Viscount Glenmore or Lord Glenmore. If there is no specific subsidiary title, then the eldest son would simply be known as Lord John Stirling.

All the daughters of an earl are given the courtesy title: Lady + their first name. Again, using the Kilmartins as an example: Lady Janet Stirling and NEVER Lady Janet Kilmartin. Younger sons of an earl, however, are merely "The Honorable" which is not used in casual speech. So, assuming in the books Michael and Francesca had another son, for example, Michael Stirling II, he would simply be The Honorable Michael Stirling, but in casual speech, he would simply be referred to as Mr. Michael Stirling or just Mr. Stirling.

Viscount.

His wife is a Viscountess. He will not use 'of'. He will be, for example, Viscount Bridgerton, usually known as Lord Bridgerton, or just Bridgerton. His wife will be known as Lady Bridgerton and will sign herself Kathani Bridgerton.

His heir has no special title. All children are known as "The Honorable". Continuing with the example of the Viscount and Viscountess Bridgerton, their children would be called:

*The Honorable Edmund Bridgerton, and simply be referred to as Mr. Edmund Bridgerton.

*The Honorable Miles Bridgerton, and simply be referred to as Mr. Miles Bridgerton.

*The Honorable Charlotte Bridgerton, and simply be referred to as Miss Charlotte Bridgerton.

*The Honorable Mary Bridgerton, and simply be referred to as Miss Mary Bridgerton.

Baron.

This is the lowest rank in the peerage. His wife is a Baroness. NOTE that the terms baron and baroness are only used in the most formal documents, or when the distinction has to be made elsewhere. General usage is simply to call them Lord and Lady.

She will sign with her name and title. The children are known as "The Honorable".

Using another character from Bridgerton, if we assume that Colin and Penelope Bridgerton's son is named Elliot, then Elliot Bridgerton, the new Lord Featherington, would sign as Lord Featherington and NEVER as Lord Bridgerton. Therefore, his wife would also sign with his title, that is, Featherington. For example, if the wife's name is Elizabeth, then she would be Lady Featherington and would sign as Elizabeth Featherington, and NEVER as Elizabeth Bridgerton or Lady Bridgerton.

Baronet.

The next in the ranking—and not of the nobility—is Baronet. A baronet is addressed as Sir + first name + surname. For example, using another couple from the Bridgerton universe, Sir Phillip Crane. His wife would be called Lady + surname. For example, Lady Crane and not Lady Eloise Crane unless she is the daughter of a duke, marquess, or earl (which is not the case). She would sign with her full name, as Eloise Crane.

His children have no special distinction. However, the title is inheritable. So, continuing to use Sir Phillip as a reference, when he dies, his baronetcy will pass to his eldest son Oliver, who will then be called Sir Oliver.

It's worth mention that although in the series Oliver is NOT Sir Phillip's biological son, he still married Marina before the birth of the twins and acknowledged them both as his own, so the baronetcy title will pass without any issue to Oliver. In the event that he did not acknowledge them as his children or that Sir Phillip and Marina married after the birth of the twins, then the title of Sir Phillip would pass to his next legitimate son, Frederick (son of Sir Phillip and Eloise in the books).

Knight.

A knight is essentially treated the same as a baronet, but with the difference that it is a lifetime title only. His wife will be Lady + surname.

OTHER MATTERS

Dowagers

When a titled lady is widowed she becomes a dowager, but the practice has generally been not to use that title until the heir takes a wife, since there can be confusion about who the true Lady Bridgerton is, for example.

And even if she has a daughter-in-law, in general usage she would still be referred to by the simple title unless there was likely to be confusion. So, if the Dowager Viscountess Bridgerton was at a house party while her daughter-in-law was in London, people would not be constantly referring to her as the Dowager Viscountess.

Female titles in their own right

There are a few, very few, titles that can pass to a daughter if there is no son, as in the Royal Family, for example. In this case, the usage is the same as if they were the wife of a peer of that rank, but their husband gains NO title from the marriage, just as the Duke of Edinburgh was not king.

A Peeress in her Own Right retains her title after marriage, and if her husband's rank is the superior one, she is designated by the two titles jointly, the inferior one last. Or she can say what form she wants to use. (eg The Marchioness of Rothgar is also the Countess of Arradale by right. She chooses to be Lady Rothgar and Arradale in the most formal situations, Lady Rothgar in general, but Lady Arradale in private, especially when attending to her duties as Countess of Arradale. Unusual situations do tend to get complicated.) Her hereditary claim to her title holds good in spite of any marriage, and will be passed on.

Since the husband gains no title from such a marriage, it's possible to have the Countess of Arbuthnot married to Mr. Smith.

Her eldest son will be her heir and take her next lowest title. If she has no son, her eldest daughter will be her heir, but until she becomes the peer she will hold only the title that comes from her birth — eg. Lady Anne — if any, because an eldest daughter is always an heir presumptive. There might still be a boy.

The most common errors observed in novels:

Interchanging courtesy titles like Lady Mary Smith and Lady Smith.

Interchanging peerage titles, as when Michael Downs, Earl of Rosebury is variously known as Lord Rosebury, Lord Downs, and Lord Michael Downs.

Applying titles that don't belong, as when Jane Potts marries Viscount Twistleton and erroneously becomes Lady Jane, a title form that can only come by birth.

Having the widow of just about anyone, but especially a peer, remarry before time has elapsed to be sure she is not bearing a child. Or rather, whose child it is that she bears!

Having the heir presumptive assume the title and powers before the widow has made it clear that she's not going to produce an heir.

Having an adopted son inherit a title. Legal adoption was not possible in England until the twentieth century, and even now an adopted son cannot inherit a title. Even if the son is clearly the father's offspring, if he wasn't born after a legal marriage, he cannot inherit the father's title. However, since they didn't have DNA testing, a child was assumed to be legitimate unless the father denied it from the first. Even if the son turns out to look suspiciously like the vicar, the father cannot deny him later. This, I assume was to avoid the chaos of peers coming up with all sorts of excuses to switch heirs on a whim.

Having a title left in a will, which follows from the above. A title cannot be willed to whomever the peer in question chooses. It goes according to the original letters patent, which almost always say that it will go to the oldest legitimate male in direct descent. The property can be left elsewhere, unless it is entailed, but the title goes by legitimate blood.

Having an heiress (ie a daughter without brothers) inherit a title and convey it to her husband. It could be done — anything could — by special decree of the Crown, but it was not at all normal.

Now, when you've arrived at the title you want to give your character, perform an internet search to see if it exists. You can also check The Peerage or do an advanced search on Google Books. You wouldn't want to give your fictional character a title that was already in use at that time. Additionally, some readers will be knowledgeable about the real nobility and it could disrupt the fictional reality you're trying to create.

If you really like the title but it already exists or existed, you can modify it while still retaining its appeal. For example, if Lord Amesbury exists, you could create Lord Aymesbury or Lord Embury. If your character's family has been in Suffolk for generations, names of places in Suffolk can provide ideas for names.

I hope this helps, although I'm sure it can be subject to debate and improvement.

[kankuroplease]

Firstly, I apologize for the errors in the text. My first language is not English so I needed to translate some things.

Second, I want to congratulate you on your 5K. I love your art and I love your OC. You are very creative.

Third, I know you avoid couples among team seven so I probably already lost this battle, but NaruSasuSaku is a couple so wronged by this fandom that I need to try to make a request about them.

Naruto is usually the most talkative about his feelings and constantly makes Sasuke and Sakura blush passionately with everything he says. He is the joker in the relationship, although nothing is more serious and sacred to him than his feelings. Sasuke, on the other hand, is the type who shows more than he says, he will do anything for Naruto and Sakura, even hiding a body if he needs to. He loves them and feels that saying it would never be enough, because this feeling is much bigger than himself. Loving them is his salvation from the world and he always wants to protect them. Sakura, however, is like a shining star to both of them. She brings life and warmth to them with her determined and sassy personality, challenging them and putting them in line when needed. She is the one who takes them to all the most incredible places and usually shows her feelings both with words and gestures of affection. Both, Naruto and Sasuke are jealous of how popular she is among people in general. And the three know very well how to understand each other when they fight, as their disagreements exude sexual tension.

Anyway, I would love a piece from you about the three of them in a romantic or sensual context.

And thank you very much for your art.

Thanks and I hope you enjoy it!

[lisafication]

Digging Graves for your Morals; Or, The Ethical Problem of Outlawry

Hello, yes, I am here again. This one is shorter, I swear (it’s under four thousand words, even). If this is the first post from me you’re seeing, this is a follow-up to my prior essay posted here on the game The Coffin of Andy and Leyley, although it should be able to mostly stand alone.

At the end of my last essay, I touched on both the game’s nearly uncompromising moral scepticism and relativity, but I didn’t really dig into it. I outlined that the game only textually frames actions as ‘morally bad’ in the context of a morality set by the society and the world that has treated them as no better than farm animals raised for the slaughter. Well, I have a lot to say on the topic of ethics on the topic of The Coffin of Andy and Leyley, so buckle in, this one’s going to talk about the social contract, moral scepticism and everyone’s favourite topic: Mrs. Graves.

As usual, this was originally posted and formatted for on Sufficient Velocity and you can perhaps more easily read it there. Spoilers abound, and my content warning from last time still applies.

She’s not too hot on either ethics or her mother

The Meat of the Matter

Since a lot of this is optional or otherwise missable information, let’s review the premise the game gives us. If you’re already aware of all of this, I apologise, it won’t take long.

First off the bat, the quarantine at the start of the game was a hoax-driven money-making scheme of which you can pick up more-or-less all the relevant details of. This is entirely missable and by the time it’s possible to discover, our protagonists have better things to dwell on and have dialogue about, so I’ll give you a summary of what you can deduce from reading the notes and thinking about it.

The quarantine is an organ harvesting operation, as per some documents you can discover in the wardens’ office. They entrap the residents, test their blood types and starve to death those they deem surplus to requirements — alternatively the starvation itself could be their method of ‘preparing the harvest’, there’s evidence in both directions and it hardly matters — harvesting the organs of the others for sale. As our protagonists are AB-typed, the ‘universal recipient’ or ‘most selfish blood type’, they’re some of the first on the chopping block.

If you read through the newspapers and the documents in Mr. Washing Machine’s car, you can discover that ultimately ToxiSoda are responsible, and a similar thing is happening in a different city under the guise of a ‘chemical leak’.  Should you further investigate matters, you will find mentions of the ‘man behind it all’, the doctor, or the Surgeon, as the fandom have been referring to him — you may recall Mrs. Graves mentioned someone similar! Yeah, he’s the guy who runs ToxiSoda, who are themselves partners with the water company that faked the parasite outbreak in the first place.

It’s all a life insurance scam, apparently

How much the details of the operation matter is something open to interpretation — it might just be something for players to figure out and Episode 3 will not cover the Surgeon at all, or he might play a major part; it's not particularly relevant to this essay. What matters is that it happened at all — indeed, it’s fairly easy to justify Ashley and Andrew in everything they did in Episode 1 (flashbacks aside), arguing that if they’d made any other decisions they’d have died — an argument that the victims dug their own graves, even if the Graves siblings put them in them. How correct that is is a matter of debate, but that you can make the argument at all matters, and we’ll be returning to this later. In my last essay (and again in the introduction here), I made an analogy to farm animals, raised without love and for slaughter. Let’s put a pin in the ‘for slaughter’ part for now and take a look at the ‘without love’ part. 

That’s right, it’s time to meet the parents.

As Andrew notes, there are significantly more compelling reasons for you to say that

They Fuck You Up, Your Mum & Dad

They really do. 

Our charming protagonists are, as with many things depicted in this game, an exaggerated, almost farcical example of this phenomenon — one that’s just grounded enough to still feel very real, just like the siblings themselves. 

The late and lamentable Mrs. Graves is just the same: originally a teen mother, hopelessly out of depth with two difficult children — even if one was good at masking it — and an unreliable, emotionally unavailable (at least to their children) partner who can’t hold down a job, ends up foisting them off on each other and doing a Parental Negligence because she simply Cannot Cope. That’s the real part. The part where she gets paid off by an organ harvesting operation to leave them to die, that’s the borderline-farcical exaggeration that throws all the nooks and crannies of her character into sharp relief.

Mrs. Graves does not have a good relationship with either of her kids. Having self-admittedly fobbed the job of raising Ashley off on her son, to the degree that they did not even celebrate her birthday as kids, both of them hold differing degrees and types of resentment for her.

For Ashley, it’s hate — perhaps not quite so clear cut as that, as it’s her that calls for the eulogy and she shows some potential signs of discomfort while cleaning up her parents’ corpses, but by and large, it’s fairly simple and straightforward, as usual for Ashley. The sentiment is not exactly unreturned, either.

This brings Ashley’s heart great delight!

The most clear incident raising her from everyday ‘neglectful’ to ‘wow she wanted nothing to do with this kid’ is the optional ‘birthday cake’ scene, obtained by finding the present in Ashley’s first ‘transitory world’ dream, in which we see Ashley’s birthday  and the founding of a lemon cupcake tradition between Leyley and Andy. She has received nothing from her family, notes that her ‘friends’ would say they were busy before she even told them the schedule and Andy takes her out to buy cupcakes with his pocket money.

This scene gets a callback in Andrew’s dream later. Just remember to Ask Nicely, rather than Kill Her.

Parents of the year, everyone.

So with Ashley it’s as straightforward and obvious as she herself is — she hates her mother, her mother hates her. With Andrew, as with Andrew himself, it’s a fair bit more complicated. His mother is a much more nuanced figure, who is believable in her role as an unfortunate teen parent who was trying her best. He has a degree of trust in her against, seemingly, his own good judgment In her conversation with Andrew, she acknowledges her fault in raising him and seemingly sincerely tries to offer him a ‘way out’, an olive branch.

I think many people have had relationships where they might say this

This scene in particular intrigues me, because she is acknowledging fault in a way that Andrew strictly avoids doing — and well, there’s nothing Andrew likes more than a good way to avoid acknowledging any fault of his own. With her dominant relationship over their father as a model for Andrew to draw comparisons to his own relationship with Ashley with, it’s no surprise that the narrative resonates with him to the point of ‘Accept’ being many people’s first completion.

Of course, that’s not all there is to it. There is a fascinating contrast with her later conversation with Ashley, where she — despite accusing Ashley of brainwashing Andrew — refers to Leyley and Andy as ‘two psychos’ and states that she always knew they were responsible for Nina’s death and that, implicitly, they owe her for not turning them in. 

There's something about mother-daughter relationships here that I just do not have the time or reading to dig into, unfortunately.

Meanwhile, when Andrew interrogates her on her possession of their death certificates, she has… an interesting, plausible story about a life insurance scam and claims that she really did think they died in the fire, implicitly denying the claim that she sold them. It’s entirely possible that she’s describing the details of the ‘scam’ correctly — you can even buy that she genuinely does care for Andrew in some way, if not Ashley, but her claim about being an honest, grieving parent shocked at their deaths… doesn’t add up?

This is a very normal reaction to your supposedly dead children showing up in your house.

As Andrew himself notes after hearing her story, she’s full of shit. This gets into speculation, because there are a few ways to read this, but the most plausible ‘gist’ is that she and her partner were paid off in money and jobs to not raise a fuss — the surgeon she mentioned is almost certainly the founder of ToxiSoda, remember?

The overwhelming difference in presentation between how she speaks to Andrew and Ashley invites investigation — and when Andrew turns down her offer and tells her he isn’t interested in her offer in Decline, her reaction isn’t… despair, it’s shock — and well, there’s a good reason for that.

Why do you think she did it in the first place?

This is the happiest we see her

Well — it’s so she can finally fit into society. That white picket fence, that idyllic 1950s life — hell you can call it the American Dream. She wants that, or as close to it as she can get — the working-class teen mother, living in poverty, aspiring to the middle-class. It’s a very common, very real and very grounded motivation.

And to that end, she effectively sold off her children. It’s no wonder she can’t fathom why Andrew wouldn’t choose the same.

That’s the part that makes you think — just like the deaths in Episode 1, well- maybe the siblings are justified here, too. It’s a weaker argument, but it’s still one you can make under many common moral paradigms today — what goes around comes around, all that jazz. Just look at how awful she was to Ashley.

She’s finally found what she’s been striving for.

Here’s the thing, here’s the thing though — what, reasonably, could she have done? Andrew and Ashley briefly highlight this in conversation about Ashley’s ‘friends’ in Episode 1 — was she supposed to fight gunmen to try and break them out? Throw food to the balcony from four stories?

Moreover, as she herself says to Andrew… would anyone really have been able to do better than her in her position? She was seventeen when Ashley was born, living in poverty with a partner who couldn’t even remember Andrew’s name when he was a kid. Anyone would have had difficulty, let alone with these kids.

Her evils are — they’re not any deliberate action, but rather… prompted inaction. She didn’t have the emotional energy, resources or plain capability to properly parent her children, she didn’t have any solutions to their murder of Nina in a state so blatantly hostile to its underclass, she didn’t have a way to connect with Ashley and she took the money rather than fight a futile and likely suicidal battle against a corporation and its armed goons in a dystopian setting.

Ashley, notably, does not deny this.

Her sin is the one we’re all, I think, guilty of — that of not trying hard enough, that of inaction in the face of difficult tasks, of not standing up on principle because it’s just too much that day and you don’t have the spoons, you’ll do it tomorrow (no you won’t). It’s a petty, everyday kind of evil — that of not doing enough. 

Is that enough to condemn her? Certainly, there’s a pretty manipulative read of her that likely has some truth to it — in the locked door in Ashley’s dream in ‘Decay’ you can discover that she has a ‘not-hatched’ tar soul — but consider that lens — the game won’t make up your mind for you, so you’ll need to choose that for yourself.

The dad is interesting in terms of negative space — but he’s mostly important in that he doesn’t matter, so I decided to not fit him in here. He has art, though — just no sprite, because, well, he’s never mattered to either sibling.

The Contract We Call Society

Right, it’s time to get a little bit Theoretical in here. Not much, but a little. Social contract theory is a complex topic with a lot of nuance, much of which I will be eliding in the name of not writing a twenty thousand word paper on semiotics, law, and anthropology, but the short analogy is… the idea that as long as you play by society’s rules, as long as you are a good citizen, a good person, the state, or the community, will take care of you.

In a number of ways, the harshest penalty levied by many historical states and legal codes was not death, but rather the criminal status of outlawry, a practice that’s cropped up a number of times in history — the practice of no longer being protected by the law. This meant one could be killed or worse with impunity — you were no longer protected by mob justice and, while overexaggerated as a term of reference, certain texts from Medieval England refer to outlaws as bearing a wolfshead, ‘for the wolf is a beast hated by all folk’. Never minding that wolves are actually delightful, this was a time when wolves were actively hunted and sold by people — and the same was intended to happen to outlaws. They were ‘fair targets’ as far as society was concerned, no longer to be treated as your fellow citizens.

This was the gravest punishment on the books, for most of these legal codes — something saved for those who had broken the social contract so completely that there could be no turning back (civil outlawry is… a bit different, that’s not the topic here). Among others, a modern critique of the concept is that it offers no incentive for improvement, no incentive to change or to cease harming society — if an outlaw has none of the social contract’s protections, what reason do they have to obey… any of the social contract? If that seems familiar, well, let me ask you this:

What if the state or community fails its end first? What responsibility does the innocent outlaw have to that contract?

It’s an interesting phrasing, that the world is better off.

It’s time to talk about the incest, and part of why it’s there. The cannibalism too, but that’s less impactful here. If you’ve seen me elsewhere, you might have seen me say that the incest is a load-bearing narrative pillar — in large part due to it being a critical facet of the siblings’ relationship, but in another large part due to it being an equally critical part of how the game uses taboo.

A taboo is in this context something that is considered repulsive and to be avoided by society. It’s a more complex term than that — you can also use it for certain sacred actions or utterances that are only permitted to certain people, for example — but that’s what it is here. Swearing, premarital sex, BDSM and murder are, approximately from weak to strong, some example taboos held in modern Anglospheric society. 

Strong taboos are a staple of horror — they shock, they disgust, they draw people’s attention and it’s that last one that’s critical here. Incest is a very strong taboo — while I am absolutely not segueing into its historical context, the very well-established Westermarck effect gives it a certain timelessness and immunity to desensitisation that most other taboos don’t have — murder, to contrast, is a taboo we’re largely desensitised to in modern media and works of modern media have to put in actual work to make a murder seem horrifying — through atmosphere, cinematography, evocative prose etc.

And this is important because the use of taboo I’m covering in this essay is that the incest is used to invite judgment — it is so ingrained as a ‘wrong thing’ in people’s brains almost regardless of background that it forces the player to engage with the work morally. And that’s where the fun starts.

I’ve mentioned before, very briefly, about the juxtaposition of tone between the Burial & Decay endings, contrasting with the very monstrous difference in morality. Burial is remarkably light-hearted — they play around with the drain blockage, they joke about their mother’s personality and this is further exaggerated on the Love path, where Andrew is much more comfortable with casual contact and the two make a game out of how far they can throw their parents’ skulls, the humour is directly contrasted against their abhorrent actions.

I’ll be real Ashley is far more merciful than I, I’m shuddering at the thought of that gunk in my hair

In comparison, Decay is… bleak. I’ve seen it being referred to as being ‘emotionally sandblasted’ and, yeah I think that’s fair — it’s uncomfortable, it’s heavy and it’s just not fun. And this is the route in which, if you chose Trust into Accept, Andrew has bought into the narrative that his mother’s offered — that he can fit just fine into society if he wasn’t stuck, if not for Ashley — the route that ‘fits’ most closely to the social contract, to Andrew feeling the guilt that we think he should and hating the monsters that they’ve become, as the social contract deems them. Given the pains the game takes to attach the player to the protagonists, this normative moral ending is very easily interpreted as the bad ending.

And well, isn’t it?

Thing is, as mentioned above, the social contract has never held up its end for them. The game takes careful pains to point out to a viewer that they’ve never had the life that society promises people, so why do its moral standards apply?

The game invites you to judge the characters, and in the same motion, asks you from what principles you judge them, making a pretty good guess in that, like most people who haven’t spent a large amount of time navel-gazing and reading some very boring books by very dusty old men, they come from the society around you.

Love even has Ashley express this sentiment directly after the incestuous dream — she asks you — well, Andrew, but this is also something for the player to mull over — why this is what’s engaged your morality or sense of revulsion, rather than the desecration, cannibalism or murder.

Andrew and Ashley are both very funny and very fascinating in this scene.

And that’s the framing that it casts all of its own moral judgement in — even the ‘tar-soul’ aspect is… well, it’s unclear what it even means. Mrs. Graves was a ‘not-hatched’ tar soul, after all. Other than that, it’s society and the world being better off without them, rather than any kind of assertion of objective morality. Due to the present of ‘soul colour’, we’ll presumably see the game make some moral statements in Episode 3, but as it stands?

It’s nearly completely morally sceptical, in and of itself — it’s not interested in moral assertions or education, it’s interested in making you question your own morals. Deconstructive (not that kind), rather than dialectic, to be mildly pretentious.

It uses taboo and shock to invite moral judgement, but then uses tone, charm and our instinct to look for the happiest end for our blorbos to get you to recognise that these are principles you yourself brought into the game, rather than any it’s handed you. 

To summarise: you’ve brought these principles in from society, but what do the siblings, the protagonists, the villains to the world, owe society? Enough that they should follow them? It failed them first, after all.

Closing Thoughts

This one is a bit less energetic than the last, tragically — my sleeping schedule is the stuff of nightmares recently, I love windy weather. Wait, no the opposite. Huge thank you to everyone who commented on the last one, you are the wind beneath my wings and the main reason I managed to get this out this week.

This essay is a bit more interpretative than my last one — certainly, there are alternative readings and I’ve been toying with the idea of deliberately taking a reading I don’t like very much and writing from that perspective as a demonstrative exercise recently — mostly that you shouldn’t just take my word for things!

Otherwise, if the last bit at the end seemed murky, I apologise — I did try to write a more detailed version, but firstly, it was three thousand words and secondly, I re-read it the next day and I could not understand what the fuck I was talking about. Personally, I blame Derrida — suffice to say that I strongly recommend playing through it with an eye towards considering culpability, morality and why you think certain characters are more or less forgivable than others, and for what deeds. See what you get out of it.

I managed to keep one particular thread open to wrap up with here —  I try to keep speculation on Episode 3 content to a minimum in the main essays, but it should be fine here — you might have noticed that I refer to Episode 1 and Episode 2 being on something of a spectrum of justifiability, with the siblings’ actions being ‘more’ justifiable in Episode 1 and ‘less’ justifiable — but still justifiable if you try — in Episode 2. 

To continue the thought of the happiest ending being the one in which they step the furthest away from common morality and to further jar the viewers’ sense of morality by contrasting societal morality and blorbo-oriented morality, Episode 3: Burial could continue this trend in having a major victim be someone who, well, has done nothing wrong and isn’t even guilty of bystander syndrome.

I wonder if there’s any good candidates, someone who’s sweet, harmless and will indisputably be an innocent victim…

…I’m sure she’ll be fine

[fan-fan-tastic]

MEME FULFILLED PROPHECY

Despite being a mass of potholes and quite repetitive, PIDW is very popular, popular enough to have a community of fans. This means not only having fanart, fics and even merchandise, but also an entire culture, with fandom lore and yes, even memes.

One of those was “When Mobei-Jun gets married” it was used to indicate something that would never happen, like “when hell will freeze over” or “when pigs will fly”. It was so popular that there were even some variants, like “it happen at Mobei-Jun’s wedding” or “when Airplane marries Mobei-Jun off”

Shen Yuan really liked this meme because it was supported by canon: there had been several scenes where after a fight, Luo Binghe would look over the spoils and let his right hand man pick a boon. Despite the ever-present trembling maidens, Mobei-Jun would always pick a weapon, or in an instance an ancient relic that had once belonged to his clan. So yeah, Shen Yuan used it pretty often, once he even let it slip out IRL, but luckily no one got the reference.

He even used it once in a thread that went viral: it was a pointless debate over OP’s incorrect interpretation of an arc. Shen Yuan was clearly right, he even had quoted several chapters to prove his point and so the other user had resorted to personal insults. OP had typed something like “You are ridiculous! When will you admit that you are actually a fan of the novel and not an hater?!” To which Shen Yuan had responded with “When Mobei-Jun gets married”

Now, this should have ended the discussion in Shen Yuan’s favor: the meme usually got lots of likes regardlessly of the context, and so he would have won the debate.

But OP for reason had decided to tag Airplane Shooting Towards the Sky himself.  “Great Master Airplane, would you marry Mobei-Jun if it means getting Peerless Cucumber admitting that he likes your story?”

To everyone’s surprise the author (sleep deprived an high on caffeine and energy drinks) actually did answer “Damn, I would marry Mobei-Jun for free”.

True to his writing style Airplane dropped the bomb to never addressed it again. That comment had started another meme, although less popular than the other about Mobei-Jun having been married the whole time to the author himself and the ship AirplaneXMobei became the most popular for the character. There few fans that had written crackfics had been insufferable about it, even resurrecting the ‘I shipped X before it was cool’ format just to flex.

After transmigrating into the scum villain and masterfully avoiding the original good’s fate, Shen Yuan one day receives an invitation to a wedding, accompanied by a mission by the System that just says ‘True to your word: User must respect the vow he once made’. Shen Yuan immediately understands what this is about: he would rather jump into the Endless Abyss than do that.

[howiscallmewhateveridctaken]

Lmfaooo what a week 😅

So a lot of people are, understandably, leaving the fandom. Drama like this always tends to put people off and unfortunately that affects the media they’ve come to love. I’m not going to be one of those people bc honestly, I don’t even know if I was ever that “in” the fandom in the first place to even leave it. My account isn’t and never was a nevermore account, yes I’ve made a few nevermore post but those were infrequent and amongst posts and reblogs of multiple other fandoms. I’m also in the discord server but I’ve only ever been a lurker, and usually only ever go in it when I want more context to something I’ve seen on tumblr. With that being said however, I still plan on reading nevermore when (or if) it continues because in THIS particular instance I can easily separate art from the artist and I’ll explain why in a moment.

Like I said I’m not and never have been very active in the fandom. I learned about this drama through a post from an account I follow and went through the server to find more context. I was not present through any of the actual conflicts but I’ve seen the conversations.

So why am I commenting on this?

Well mainly I want to make a point about para social relationships as well as moderation of servers and fandoms as a creator.

I just want to preface this by saying that after reading through all possible context, perspectives, takes and evidence I could find or come across, I genuinely don’t think red is necessarily a bad/morally wrong person. I DO however think she is in the wrong in this situation especially due to how she handled everything. As for how a lot of people are reacting to everything, there’s a couple of things I’d like to note:

From what I’ve seen, all of this is just one big thing of “he said/she said” and pointing fingers as well as just picking sides. If your absolutely distraught because red didn’t turn out to be the person you thought they were simply because she said things you didn’t like, I understand the disappointment and frustration but please remember that content creators in general aren’t your friends. You don’t know these people, they just do things you happen to like. Now I’m not saying you SHOULDN’T feel upset about it, it’s ok to and you even should if it’s an issue to you feel strongly about but please keep in mind that this isn’t a “sign of their true colors” or anything because you don’t know what they were actually like to begin with. Ofc I don’t mean that to say “expect the worst from people” but more as a reminder that can hopefully help you to look at the situation more critically and logically before jumping in guns blazing. It’s understandable if it affects you emotionally, you were emotionally invested in their work; but please realize this before you let it get to that point. Now on the other side of the coin, there’s the people who I feel as though will just pick the creators side simply because they’re fanboys and will stand by them no matter what. I’m DEFINITELY NOT saying that’s what everyone who’s on red side is, but naturally there’s bound to be a few that are going to dickride for the sake of dickriding. Regardless, there’s a lack of willingness to listen and understand from both sides (at least from what I’ve noticed) and that’s a problem because when no one wants to listen then what’s supposed to be a community coming together to resolve an issue just turns into a giant flame war. Also this should go without saying, but at least give the mods a chance. They obviously handled the whole situation horrendously but they aren’t going to do their jobs any better when they’ve got people coming at them with pitchforks.

Speaking of the moderators. I genuinely can’t wrap my head around how red and the other mods have managed to fumble this badly…….like it’s almost funny. All said and done they all had ONE very simple job and they blew it. Although I very much disagree with it, I do understand red’s decision to unban crimson. They wanted to give them a second chance, sure whatever. What I DONT GET is why would they not at the very least check to see if anyone else would be comfortable with a decision that would possibly affect them or even impact their safety. At the very least a warning to or a discussion with the victims would have been something. Not only that but even after they unban them, once red saw the NUMEROUS amount of people that were upset about it they, they should have immediately banned them again and then apologize after instead of some rushed explanation. But I get it stress gets the better of you. I understand their desire to keep things as transparent as possible (which i appreciate and I’m sure so do many others) but from that first apology/explanation it felt more like red trying to shake responsibility off themselves and pointing fingers in the guise of being transparent. I did see where red was trying to get at in her first statement, but there was also things that she honestly should have just had the foresight to realize wouldn’t put her in a better light, and this is aside from the victim blaming-esque wording. red basically says that she felt like a group of people (including Laci the one who reported crimson) were just out to get crimson, which is absolutely insane but then again it’s the internet so who knows. However it’s super clear that Laci obviously wasn’t lying bc the things she accused crimson of did in fact happen. So even bringing that up was enough for me to raise my eyebrow at but I digress. Then red practically says it was hard to handle the situation bc the evidence provided was censored, but Laci literally offered to give the uncensored versions so that was completely disingenuous on red’s part at best. To me it just seemed like the mods were looking for excuses for what could be there own laziness at best and negligence at worst. Their biggest fault so far is not being very good at actually listening to their audience and taking them into consideration. She also brought up that fact that Laci was apparently the only person to report crimson which I did not like to say the least. One of the victims confided in Laci and Laci brought it forward. I understand reds suspicions about Laci not being in the actual server where it happened but how are you going to immediately jump to “well why did no one else bring it up” instead of stopping for a sec and thinking “ hm clearly these victims feel uncomfortable stepping forward”. Which they had to do now anyway because of how bad the issue became. They should not have had to do that. Better it be just one person reporting, even if it’s someone you don’t like, than no one reporting and the issue persists under the radar.

And then there’s red’s formal apology…

First off, girl why are you dropping names??? A bunch of who are supposedly minors? Like let’s be so fucking for real right now😭

And then the audacity to be like “please don’t go after or dm these people” like babes if you were genuinely worried about them you wouldn’t have used their names at all. ESPECIALLY when in the end it was completely irrelevant and borderline inappropriate since it really had nothing to do with crimson, their actions or how you handled them. Not to mention the act of calling them “cliques” when literally all they were was side servers. Like if they’re cliques then what does that make red and everyone who’s on her side? It was very clearly just a biased reaction to people saying things she doesn’t like about her, which by all means she has the right to respond to but not in a way that is clearly trying to sway how everyone else sees them. The way red describes everything is as if it’s middle school drama and then proceeds to play directly into it. Don’t get me wrong her apology was fine, when she was ACTUALLY apologizing. Everything else felt like a last ditch effort to drag others under the bus with her. It was lowkey embarrassing to say the least.

Again, it’s important that I make it clear that I don’t believe red is a bad person. I just think she’s an immature person, or at least she is in how she handled everything and continues to handle it bc like I said I don’t know her, and don’t care to frankly. I didn’t start reading nevermore to be buddy buddy with her. Like if we look at the grand scope of things, this is a grown woman beefing with kids. Obviously they aren’t all kids, most of them aren’t I believe but she’s practically stooping down to school yard conflict in how she’s responded so far. Especially at one point in the server when she was being called out and jumped to “yeah I guess I’m the bad guy and totally evil. You all should hate me”. Like actually cut that shit out, what are you doing. I mean honestly.

And my final point because I’ve ranted long enough. I mentioned before that in this instance I am willing to separate the art from the artist, I stand by that because I genuinely do think this is a situation where red could hopefully grow from this and rectify things. The actual unbanning was a stupid and inconsiderate move on her part, but I don’t think she meant any ill-will or had any malicious intent. I disagree with the people calling her a r@pe apologist because that’s honestly just a huge reach. I’ve also seen some accusations of red and/or Flynn being racist, promoting inappropriate art knowing there’s minors around and from what I’ve seen it’s pretty iffy. Regarding the racism, I don’t believe that they are. Their characterizations of the characters regarding their ethnicities IS stereotypical and was obviously just very surface level research into those respective cultures but I chopped that up to ignorance rather than racism. As a woc I was frankly just relived they didn’t make the poc characters centered on some kind of discrimination or tragedy from their era, which yes is something that shouldn’t be ignored but also I don’t know if rednflynn could accurately and more importantly, respectfully portray those types of issues. Nor is it even their place tbh. With that being said however I don’t belong to most of the cultures the characters belong to. To me it never seemed like they were making a caricature out of these cultures, especially since their ethnicities are barely relevant to their stories anyway but I acknowledge that it’s not my place to deem what’s offensive or not.

As for the promoting inappropriate art of the characters and creating some themselves. Yeah they do. I’ve never been shocked about that nor did I think it was something that they are wrong for doing, I mean it’s their own work. Granted I didn’t realize how many minors were in the fandom but that’s literally every fandom, there’s only so much you could do about it. I don’t know if nevermore has a rating but it’s not like it was something ever promoted to be kid friendly, it’s obvious that some scenes are just straight up fan service. While I personally don’t like fan service it never was enough to impact the story so I personally never saw an issue. But point is I don’t think they should have to monitor what is and isn’t appropriate for minors but things get tricky when they have a server where they are clearly aware of minors.

And then there’s other things like people accusing them of promoting SA or some shit like that bc of a lot of stuff involving Montessor which frankly, that’s just a media literacy issue on the readers part. So yeah with that being said I don’t think red is a bad person, although I understand why a lot of people are done with them which is completely fair. I’m pretty much in a grey area about it, who knows if they end up getting in an even bigger scandal, hopefully they come out better from this but only time will tell. The best/smartest thing red has said throughout this entire debacle was that they’re taking a step back from the fandom. I think it’ll be good for everyone, especially them. It seems like it’ll take stress off them anyway. Plus the hole they’ve dug for themselves is already halfway to china by now so there’s that

[niceandaccurategoodomensanalysis]

I was not able to find the source for this pic! If you know about it, please let me know in the comments or via direct! Thank you!

Religious trauma in Good Omens: Aziraphale's case

We talk about religious trauma and the state of constant psychological abuse and manipulation experienced by those who suffer it, using Aziraphale as an example.

DISCLAIMER

This post is about painful experiences and the different ways you can react to them. This may affect you in particular and be difficult or stressful to deal with.

Here I intend to speak to you about the trauma of Aziraphale. I use the singular not because it is a single event, but because it is a very specific type of trauma to which ours has been subjected continuously since the beginning of time: religious trauma.

WHAT IS RELIGIOUS TRAUMA

Religious trauma is a complex type of trauma that usually has its greatest impact during the period of development: a person grows up in a social context that is regulated according to the dictates of any sect, which greatly influences the way they approach reality and, above all, themselves.

Often, this trauma begins to affect the existence of the victim even before they begin to speak and thus have the capacity to articulate the memories associated with it. It is not necessarily this trauma that is marked by significant events: very often it is its impact on everyday life that literally conditions the people who experience it, placing them on a well-trodden path of conventions and moral imperatives from which they must not deviate.

We are all (obviously, given the fandom) familiar with the concept of original sin. When a person is brought up with the view that we are all born sinners because we have literally inherited that sin and must spend our lives making amends for what is in our nature, several things happen:

_we live with a constant sense of shame and fear of not making it, of not being enough; _we blindly trust those who raise us and show us the way, and we may not want to see the inherent hypocrisies and contradictions because that would bring us into conflict with reality; _as a result, we have an incredible fear of authority and will tend to respect hierarchies even when they do not make much sense to us, and also try not to question what we are told; _we want at all costs to be 'part of the herd' and conform to the group, so we will suppress anything that we feel is different and might cause us trouble.

Now let's consider that, growing up in such a context, we become aware that something is not quite right for us. It could be anything from realising that we have sexual urges, to being attracted to someone of the same sex, to feeling uncomfortable in our own bodies, and so on.

In response to all of this, we experience feelings of shame, self-loathing and a desire to repress that which takes us away from what is the right way to be.

All these things are cruelly represented in our beloved angel Aziraphale.

AZIRAPHALE'S TRAUMA

It is really difficult to talk about Aziraphale's pain, although it is probably the most obvious and easiest to explain in the series. Because it is tangible, it is realistic, many of us experience it all the time and can relate to it.

Aziraphale has won us over with his almost childlike tenderness and joy, with his tenderness for the little things, with his tendency to take to heart the well-being and happiness of every human being in front of him. He is pure, genuine, sensitive and always on the side of good. But behind his façade of a happy and enthusiastic little creature, there is a frightened, abused, insecure child full of shame and self-reproach. This will always condition his actions and will lead him to the painful and, as we shall see, inevitable epilogue in which he rejects Crowley's love to follow Metatron to Paradise.

TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT OR TO DO WHAT I MUST?

We immediately see how Aziraphale lives in a state of perpetual contradiction due to his strong sense of morality: in the series, the first thing we see of him is the moment when he gives Adam and Eve the flaming sword he received as guardian of the Eastern Gate, so that they would not be completely helpless in their escape from the Garden of Eden.

As well as entertaining Crowley (and winning his immediate admiration), the episode shows us from the outset that Aziraphale has a moral compass that always points in a very precise direction: the good of others. This will often lead him in the series to act on impulse, only to have to face the consequences of constituted authority, and create in him an everlasting sense of remorse: almost immediately he is asked by God himself to account for the sword, the very sword that was in danger of becoming an instrument of destruction in the hands of one of the Horsemen of the Apocalypse - except that it was then the key to preventing it.

Unable to fight his nature, Aziraphale finds himself repeating the same actions over and over again: in the miniseries about the life of Job, his tenacity to save innocent creatures at all costs leads him to confront Crowley head-on, discovering his plan to circumvent the orders he was given and not kill anyone. But the web of lies he and the demon have woven tightens around him as Gabriel, Michael and the other angels descend to give Job the good news that he will be able to have more children in exchange for those who have been killed.

Aziraphale is thus forced to make a choice: tell the truth, exposing Crowley's deception and leading to the presumed murder of Job's children, or lie, saving everyone but tarnishing himself with what he sees as an unforgivable guilt. Our angel, as we know, chooses to lie. This causes him tremendous pain and leads him to believe that his fate is sealed and that he must fall. Despite having made the right choice.

Fortunately, as we know, none of this happens. But the fear of doing the wrong thing is always with him.

NATURAL ENEMIES

Aziraphale never makes it a secret that he despises Crowley's demonic nature. Never.

It is painful to compare the admiring look he gives him in S2E1 when he meets him in his angelic version, intent on starting the nebula he has been working on since the beginning of time, with the veiled look of shock (not to say a little disgust) he gives him in S1E1 when they meet again as an angel and a demon, on the walls of the Garden of Eden.

However, as soon as it starts to rain and Crowley gets close to him, Aziraphale immediately takes him under his wing. Aziraphale is an angel, and as such he loves no matter what. It is his peculiar and almost poisonous trait that leads him to help and to forgive even those who have wronged him.

Aziraphale believes that Crowley should be forgiven and loved, but he cannot accept that he has feelings of love for him. This leads him to reflexively despise himself for what he feels, and to push Crowley away whenever he gets too close: think of the argument under the gazebo, or when, confronted with Crowley's suggestion that he take him for a ride after giving him the thermos of holy water, he tells him that he "runs too fast".

It is already obvious to us viewers, and to Aziraphale himself, that he has feelings for Crowley that go far beyond camaraderie, but he cannot let go of them: the fear of retribution and the contempt he feels for anything that is not angelic leads him once again to flounder in contradictions and adopt that yo-yo attitude that characterises all his interactions with Crowley.

THE FINAL TEMPTATION

Crowley is a demon sui generis: he is not really evil and does not mind harming others. In fact, if he can, he actively avoids doing so. However, he does enjoy temptation, and one of his favourite targets is our beloved angel. Still during the miniseries on the life of Job, we see Crowley's first successful temptation of Aziraphale: while the two are patiently waiting for the storm to pass in the cellar of the mansion, Crowley offers him a drink, but Aziraphale refuses, not wanting to succumb to the intoxication of the wine.

Crowley then suggests that he try some human food. The angel is initially disgusted, but makes no objection, and is so impressed by what he tastes that he devours the entire roast beef on the table. Crowley is delighted, and this gag of temptation for an invitation to dinner is repeated throughout the series. Whether the invitation comes from him or from Crowley, each time Aziraphale eats contentedly and our demon watches him eat with satisfaction.

Crowley can therefore be said to be initiating Aziraphale into the pleasures of the flesh, which he will indulge in to the fullest. Aziraphale is a hedonist who loves refined and special things: from antique books to bespoke clothing, passing records, tea and sushi. He loves the objects he surrounds himself with and treats them with care: remember the white gloves he wears before leafing through the only existing copy of Agnes Nutter's Prophecies!

Aziraphale delights in touching his surroundings, and we have already talked about how his predominant love language is physical contact. As much as he can control himself, he touches our demon every time he gets his hands on him. He cannot help it. He desires it, and while Aziraphale has not realised this for the better part of 6,000 years on Earth, in the last century he has come to acknowledge it openly.

This leads Aziraphale to experience another contradiction: he wants to have more physical contact with Crowley, but he cannot. Crowley is a demon, he is the enemy, he is everything he abhors, but the angel he was is always there, alive, before his eyes, and it is out of love for that angel that Aziraphale accepts Metatron's proposal, faced with the prospect of being able to take Crowley back to Paradise with him. So they could be together, in the sunlight, with the approval of God and all, in an angelic way.

But Crowley unexpectedly, desperately, refuses.

Our angel feels betrayed, but has no choice but to accept Crowley's will.

Here is the irreparable, the ultimate temptation our demon could offer: a kiss, a last desperate cry for love, a plea for help, a series of meanings too great to be expressed in words. Crowley grabs Aziraphale by the lapels and for a few very long seconds their lips meet.

Aziraphale has never experienced anything like this before (probably not even Crowley) and feelings stir inside him that he has never even been able to name. Feelings that frighten him, feelings that bring back his contempt for himself and his being far from angelic nature. Aziraphale desires Crowley, discovers that he wants to be kissed by a demon (as the writers of the show themselves have revealed to us), and all of this clashes with everything he has ever been. He has just witnessed the contempt of angels and demons for the love of Beelzebub and Gabriel, he has just risked extinction for helping the fugitive Archangel, and yet Crowley tempts him with a sweet and terrible kiss.

But Aziraphale is an angel, and as such he loves and forgives.

So he forgives Crowley.

But Crowley, by definition, is unforgivable: disappointed and embittered by his beloved's rejection, he leaves.

Aziraphale does not really want to go to Paradise, but his desire to be part of the herd, his need to be loved and accepted by his faction, drives him to go, to do what is right, what is expected of him as an angel.

As he gets into the lift and asks Metatron what his task will be, he discovers that he will have to deal with the very thing he had already averted in the past: the Second Coming, the Last Judgement. He realises his mistake, realises that he is trapped, and once again wonders if he should do what is right or what he must do.

This time, however, it wins what he must: after one last look at Crowley, watching from afar, Aziraphale climbs into the lift with Metatron that will take him to Paradise. His trauma is so deep and ingrained that it has removed any prospect of being worthy of love except in the light of divine approval.

Although leaving everything he loves - Crowley, Earth, the Library - causes him enormous pain, Aziraphale must return to Paradise and fulfil his destiny.

More infos at Religious trauma syndrome - Wikipedia

Read this post on AO3

Subscribe to my series: The Nice and Accurate Good Omens Analysis and The Science behind Good Omens

Find me on Facebook

[maxphilippa]

A lot of the neg claims about II are really just making a problem really big/treating it as , or taking things out of context, so let's talk about some of them, ESPECIALLY because of a certain someone(s) lately. Let me clarify that I know that II's writing ISN'T perfect, but nothing is perfect really, and most of these issues are misinterpretation, the choices of the fandom and/or even AE TRYING to fix the writing of a character because a certain SOMEONE was fired on early stages of the writing of said character.

So.

Let's talk about Inanimate Insanity Invitational, and the usual claims that come with it.

1. Cabby's Writing, Interpretations of Her Relationships, and ableism.

Cabby is one of the most... "controversial" characters when it comes to talk about III's writing, which it really shouldn't be like that at all, although I get where people are coming from expressing their concerns when it comes to the writing of her. Let me clarify something. Yes, I am aware that Cabby's writing changes A LOT and that it isn't perfect by any means, but I think that what people fail to understand most of the time is that Taylor was the one that started the Cabby-Test Tube storyline as a whole, and at some point as early s3 was being made, Taylor was fired from the team due to. Well, you guys know it. Pretty bad stuff. So of course, they had to figure out what direction they could go with Cabby as a whole, and to giving her character more depth than her just using her files for the game.

Now, it is obvious that they didn't plan from the start to have Cabby as a disabled character, but again, writing isn't always perfect. They had to somehow make things work. And even IF it wasn't planned, you guys have to remember the other factors that came with the writing on general. So of course her writing isn't as consistent as the writing of the other character on s3, but on later episodes it does get more better. I can see why people don't really like her arc, but those factors really matter when criticizing a form of media.

Cabby's writting and her disability isn't bad. Yes, it could've had better ways of execution, but it's not bad.

When it comes to relationships, I have seen someone seeing Cabby's relationship with Test Tube as a canonically sapphic thing because apparently Cabby's VA had that sort of intent, and therefore even claiming that Cabby suffers from lesbophobia(via claiming that she had a crush on Test Tube) and misogyny.

And that's not true. First of all, Cabby's and Test Tube's relationship is pretty much an example of friendships that don't work, and Test Tube pretty much exposed Cabby to the world and made her feel bad about herself for the rest of the episodes. A headcanon doesn't mean that the whole thing changes on canon, it's just that, a headcanon/interpretation, and claiming that what they did to her was lesbophobic is. Pretty weird. Since it is shown that Test Tube hurted Cabby a lot. As well, just because the Voice Actor had an intention, IT DOESN'T mean that the writers had said intention.

When it comes to the claims of misogyny, I still don't quite get why people try to see what isn't there.

The thing is that there isn't a lot of femenine characters on II and such, but Cabby isn't treated like that because "she doesn't do anything for men", she helps everyone on general, she cares about people. But she isn't put as a bad woman because of this. What you guys tend to forget is that. Cabby WAS kind of a prick on early s3. She DID commit mistakes and wasn't a great person, but that doesn't mean that misogyny is there just because for that. Just because people treat a fem character badly/not great BECAUSE OF HER PAST ACTIONS, doesn't mean that there's misogyny. The cast on general didn't like Cabby at all until she "redeemed" herself/changed/was true to herself. So that claim is. Pretty out of nowhere.

Now... with the ableism. I do get where you guys are coming from, but if you look into it deeply, they genuinely did have other intentions. The thing that people usually tend to forget is that the II characters aren't all white and black, they're gray. They do messed up stuff when they don't understand things. What the characters do to Cabby before she becomes more open about her disability is NEVER glorified and they always end up learning about it one way or another. Is it reasonable? Yes, was it ever justified on canon terms? Nope! People can be assholes without knowing that they're assholes and THEN learn! Things like that happen all of the time. Writers don't condone the actions of the characters.

Let's take an example at the scene with Bot and Cabby on episode 14. The main problem here was Bot giving fake information to Cabby, which yes, I agree that was a very bad move to do and you should NEVER do that to a disabled person (especially taking in count that Cabby suffers from a sort of memory disorder), but they didn't have an malicious intent whole doing so at all. Bot was still figuring out themselves and didn't want to be written down by somebody (because. THAT'S WHAT TEST TUBE AND FAN DID.), and Cabby doing the file thing was also easy to take on a bad light, but after Justin's explanation, it makes sense.

Could've it been treated on a better way? Yes. And YET, Bot apologizes for what they did to Cabby and DOES the disability aid themselves for her, and apologizes on EPISODE 15, just a few hours later probably or some days later. And on the same episode, Lifering tells Cabby that she shouldn't be ashamed of using her aids and that she shouldn't feel bad about those. Test Tube RESPECTS Cabby's space once she gets that she was wrong about her too. She knows she messed up too badly.

Later on, on episodes 16 and 17, everyone finally gets Cabby's files and respects them, because they finally saw that she actually needs those and that hey, she changed a lot. They treated her good. Characters can be human and can make mistakes, but they can also get better and learn. Although Cabby's arc is not flawless, it is still good. And all of the issues are easily explained just like that.

2. Bot's creation, and how it's never justified by them.

One of the main points that some people tend to bring on "III's poor writing" is the fact that Bot was pretty much built based on a parasocial relationship of sorts. However said people dare to say that AE portrays it as something good/thought that it was okay, and never did anything else to show Bot being uncomfortable by it, but this is NOT TRUE.

Ever since Bot found out that they were a replica of someone, they knew it was pretty fucked up coming from Test Tube and Fan. Meanwhile it is not explained the loss these two went through (The Shimmer egg probably does not count, since traces of "Bowbot" have been seen on early-mid s2), we know for a fact that what happened was pretty bad for the two of them. But, Bot never really forgave Test Tube. "What about the chat they have where Test Tube apologizes to them?", Bot is willing to give her another chance for the fact that Test Tube offered to help them to be themselves.

Even then Bot explains on their interview that the main reason they acted poorly towards Cabby, was because they got attached to Test Tube, the "only" person that could've helped them to change at the moment. However, again, III doesn't justify what Test Tube and Fan did. Sure, Bot considers them their parents, but they just created them and even when Bot was discovering themselves, Test Tube was. Still pushing the fem terms on them.

So, Bot is fully aware about their existence being fucked up, but they're just trying to live their life as well. These claims do not make any sense despite it being the easiest part to look into.

3. Invitational's writing. (And how The Bright Lights not being themselves is part of the fandoms fault, but also what happens when you try to expand an character who's arc is over).

Ah... one of the most... complicated points here. People tend to absolutely want to kill AE over the writing feeling weird or unprofessional on S3, but I think that all of you just kind of forget many factors at hand that came with it.

The reason as to why the most of the main Bright Lights were there IS because of viewer voting. The Bright Lights had their arcs finished on s2, and trying to have an story where something is going on with characters that are pretty much done in their stories is VERY difficult, and should not even happen at all. The only characters that did have something going on were Nickel, Balloon and Yinyang on s2 terms. Even OJ was just not having it.

So of course the viewer voting getting those 3 Bright Lights there kind of made things so much more mid on a building up relationships term. Other characters had a lot going on that needed to be solved, not them. I do think that AE should NEVER let the viewers do anything anymore because that's one of the weakest points of s3: most of the s2 characters. When you try to develop characters who's arc is closed, you kinda pretty much go nowhere with it. But you can't just have them sitting doing nothing till their elimination.

However... it's not bad when you forget those 3 characters (Fan, Paintbrush and Test Tube) and have the remaining s2 guys and the new characters. It isn't bad at all. In fact, their arcs are pretty consistent for the most part (except for Cabby's if we count the start of it), and the arcs of Nickel & Balloon AND Yinyang show some real growth and ARE proof that AE does know how to write characters. As long as they ACTUALLY HAVE something going on for them.

As well, something that people forget a lot when it comes to III's writing, is that it is more lighthearted on comparison to S2. Which I can get to an extent, but then, let's remember this: AE made S3 because they were burnt out from S2's writing.

They wanted to make something more fun, something that was more S1 like, and meanwhile I do get people not liking S3 at all because of this, please do remember that S3 is meant to be more silly. More funny. Less serious stuff. Until the last episodes dropped that is, but it is still it's main intention.

4. ...Transphobic? Allegations/accusations.

This point makes me feel so SO tired at this point and it's how people say "AE gets the trans characters out just when they came out" and get so SO tired of people missing the point with Bot's design, but also missing the whole Paintbrush thing.

The reason as to why they get eliminated is because they get closure to their arc, and they have to get growth off-screen. On both of Paintbrush's eliminations, they were gone as a way to have closure, because the competition wasn't a healthy place for them, and Paintbrush's growth off screen is subtle, but it is still there. Back on s2 they were scared of saying their identity, but after they got eliminated, they got comfortable enough to the point of having the non binary flag on their shared room with Fan, and are pretty respected by the whole cast afterwards.

On s3, their elimination is pretty much the same, but it's them knowing that they don't have it on themselves to keep competing in the show. They get closure with Mephone4 instead.

When it comes to Bot, I have genuinely seen people complain about AE getting rid of the "fem traits" because Bot is... nonbinary. But. That's. That's fucking dumb at this point. The pink and the EYELASHES are FROM BOW. Bot's whole arc is about finding themselves and showing their true self to the world, and Justin has confirmed that Bot still DOES like those things, but that they're trying to find themselves! Trying to be their own person! And them getting out was also them getting closure because they finally know who they are, and they know that no matter what, no one can change that for them.

And for the last part of this... it is pretty obvious that s1 and early-mid s2 had quite some poor humor regarding Painty's gender, but this can be explained by two things: 1- They were still quite young when these seasons were made, 2- Taylor was still on the team (and he was the main reason as to why there were slurs on II, please do correct me if I'm wrong), but they ended up getting treated with respect and decency despite all things. Again. It wasn't perfect. But they managed to fix it and make it work.

Now, are those factors worth pointing out? Yes, they are, but are they arguments to try and say that AE is transphobic on actual times? No. They showed growth and tried to fix their mistakes. And meanwhile it isn't flawless, it's still pretty good.

5. Nickel's Writing Is Actually Good, You Guys Are Just Too Convinced In Your Own Headcanons

Oh boy, now, if you are quite familiar with the plots I usually analyze here, you must know already how strongly I feel about Nickel as a character and his arc with Balloon as a whole. Because everyone gets them so so wrong and misses the whole point of it. You may know this but people complain a lot about Nickel's arc taking "too long" or "being way too rushed", and both of those takes are pretty much wrong. Some also say that Nickel was worthy of a big villain just because, oh, what was his crime? Sucking at communication and trying to protect his alliance from someone he saw as dangerous at the time? That's called being a complicated character. That's literally it. Some even complain about him "not getting what he deserves" but he pretty much does get called out on the series, but also yelling at him and telling him to die won't help.

That's now how it works. Nickel's arc makes sense and it was long because he had to solve a lot about himself and about learning how to be a good, genuine friend. He became soft because he ended up having people (ex: Box) that told him to get his shit together and to stop putting his petty feelings first to focus on the team. Nickel's whole arc is about knowing what you did was wrong, and wanting to become a better person despite all odds. Even if those who you care about might never forgive you. It was necessary for The Grand Slams arc to make sense and to keep on growing.

You guys want a character to get better, but then complain when one character does become a better person, a more genuine version of themselves. And no, Nickel's actions were never justified by the show or by himself, although he did excuse his actions with fear at some point, but even then, he fully recognizes that his actions were terrible and understands if Balloon won't forgive him.

Just because you hate a character it doesn't mean you can just mischaracterize them and or forget the whole point of their arc. Nickel's arc alongside Balloon's MAKES sense and it's pretty much the best arc on s3 all factors considered.

6. Is Invitational a bad season overall?

It isn't a bad season. Yes, I keep repeating myself, it is not perfect, but that doesn't mean that it's a bad season. It doesn't stand up to the point where s2 is, but that's the goal, it's meant to be a season made for fun and to chill, and meanwhile I can agree that there are things that can be better or could've been executed on different ways, and it got way better on later episodes due to better structure.

I can get people not liking s3 because of it's flaws but it's not the WORST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED AND A MOCKERY, it's genuinely just something made for fun. And people tend to forget that.

There is not a media that is perfect. Inanimate Insanity isn't by any means.

But man. Isn't it a good show anyway? Isn't it a show that made you feel for the stories and it's characters? Isn't it imperfectly perfect on it's own way? Isn't it made with care and love? Isn't the fact that it has flaws makes it feel more genuine?

I personally think it is. But that's just me.

Thank you for reading.

[cecilysass]

I was thinking about how back in the day there was a really popular genre of fic called MulderTorture. I don’t hear this commonly anymore, but it used to be huge. Do you remember this?

And there was ScullyTorture, too, although I feel like MulderTorture was way more popular, or maybe that’s just me remembering it better because I enjoyed it more.

I think now people would call this whump. The style of fic definitely still exists, although I feel like it used to go WAY further than it does now, sometimes disturbingly so. (In XF fanfic. In other fandoms I think it goes plenty far.) It’s just fic with Mulder suffering physically, mentally or emotionally for angst purposes and then usually hurt/comfort. It could be MSR or slash.

It was VERY popular. Sometimes very extreme. For sure a kinky dimension to some of it. And authors used to brag in notes and in atxc posts about how much they hurt Mulder, which I feel like read out of context now seems kind of weird, but I mean people talk the same way about pretty guys in really popular AO3 ships now, so I guess same same.

Here is the fanlore page about MulderTorture.

Here’s one MT fic page.

You all remember this, right?

[romanarose]

Triple Frontier Write-A-Thon

Hosted by @romanarose and @for-a-longlongtime

Hello everyone! March 13th of this year is the 5 year anniversary of Triple Frontier, a movie that was underrated but very precious to all of us. To me, it is a comfort movie and something that through fics and fandom has helped me process a lot of things. 

Charlie Hunnam announced recently that there is potential for a sequel and he is trying to get it in production and has signed on as a producer. Me and @for-a-longlongtime want to both drum up a little noise and celebrate this media we all love so much!

How it works

Write a fanfiction of Triple Frontier, following the content rules listed below. This is for both art and fanfiction. We encourage you to utilize twitter or instagram if you’d like to share either, and #triplefrontier or #triplefrontier2019 on any site you post on. If you don’t want to make art or write, we encourage you to use social media platforms with the hashtags to help make some noise.

We are highly encouraging LGBT themes and for you to think outside of x f!reader. 

All fics that fall under the rules are encouraged, so if you write Santiago Garcia x afab!f!reader, that’s great! But we’d like to take this time to encourage gay/bi pairings, trans readers, or even trans interpretations of the boys. Branch out!

When you post, tag @triplefrontier-anniversary on tumblr and we will reblog it there. We also may reblog onto our main, so consider tagging one or both of us so we know what’s up! Please follow that page to see what other people are writing! In the tags, please tag it triple frontier write a thon, just to make everything easily found.

If you want to post art that tumblr doesn’t allow like nude art, link the content in a tumblr post, like a twitter link, and we’ll reblog that!

If you exclusively write on ao3 or wattpad or other, you can either make a link on a tumblr post and tag us. Other option is to message me (RomanaRose) privately and I’ll make a post and link you and reblog it to the page.

Rules

We will run from March 1st to March 14th. Fics and art posted before or after will not be counted.

This is not a dark event, sorry! Some of us enjoy dark content but wanted to keep this particular event mostly non-dark. That being said, we will allow dub con in the context of mild alcohol use, power dynamics etc. Kidnapping/arranged marriage etc is fine as long as consent is given for anything sexual. Mostly we are looking to avoid non-con/violence. If you have questions, don’t be afraid to reach out to us!

All participants must be 18+, although smut is not required

No incest, including Millercest. None of the usual ‘no’s’, such as underage content apply in addition to no dark.

We have the right to exclude any fic that makes us uncomfortable. It’s our event.

However, we will NOT be excluding people for personal biases, unless it encroaches on our boundaries. I.E. If we have you blocked, please don’t try to enter the event. However, if we’ve had petty beefs or you and one of our mutuals don’t like each other, we generally will include your work. This event is to promote Triple Frontier, not about us.

LGBT themes are highly encouraged, not required.

Tom is allowed. We’re not gonna tell you not to include him if that’s what your little heart desires. However, we highly encourage that your work includes at least one of the usual 4

Leave me alone I love Arrested Development, RIP Carl Weathers.

We hope everyone has fun and this drums up more Triple Frontier fics, in which we are severely lacking!

Remember to reblog and comment to support artists!

Please come to us with any questions!

[cartograffiti]

An intro to the historical Zheng Yi Sao

Ruibo Qian's character in Our Flag Means Death is based on a real person, though like all its real pirates, she is a loose interpretation. In particular, the real Zheng Yi Sao wasn't born until 57 years after the real Blackbeard died!

In real life, she lived from 1775 to 1844. She was known by a variety of names; her birth name is usually given as Shi Yang. Zheng Yi Sao is the name most often used, which literally means "the wife of Zheng Yi" (more on him later), and you may also see variations like Ching Shih or Madam Cheng, depending on transliteration. Calling her Zheng, as Oluwande does, is good, or ZYS in fandom chat, but if fic writers crave a more personal connotation for a scene, Yang is a good choice for a given name consistent with the real woman. It's like the difference between Mr. Buttons and Nathaniel.

She was born in the Guangdong province, and many bios of her claim she worked on one of the boat brothels there, but this is speculation only.

When she married Zheng Yi, he was a successful member of a pirating dynasty, working as a privateer for emperors of Vietnam. The couple collaborated to unite six different pirate fleets operating off the Guangdong coast into a confederation, sealed with an agreement signed by the captains of each. Zheng Yi was informally recognized as the overall leader of the confederation until his death in a storm two years after the signing.

Zheng Yi Sao had the respect of other key figures in the alliance, and her smooth assumption of leadership was followed by a period of huge success and expansion for the pirate confederation, driving the Chinese government to desperation. This is where her reputation as a pirate "queen" comes from in real life, though I'm excited to see where the show goes with her fictional conquest of China!

In 1810, Zheng Yi Sao recognized that the confederation faced internal fractures and additional opposition, as Portuguese and British military forces allied with Chinese ships, so she led the confederation to bow out on a high, and use their immense power to bargain for a peaceful retirement, surrendering ships and weapons for pardons, supplies, and money. Although it's fictional that her crew was predominantly women, when Zheng Yi Sao surrendered, she did so accompanied by a delegation wholly composed of women and children who belonged to the confederation. At that time, the confederation consisted of 226 ships, 24 of which personally reported to Zheng Yi Sao.

If you're doing the math, she was only in her mid-thirties, and was far from done with life. She remarried, to one of her former captains, Zhang Bao, and accompanied him to the Penghu Islands, where he commanded a garrison. After his death, she returned to Guangdong and had another career of twenty-odd years, becoming the owner of a casino until her death at age 68 or 69 (nice).

She was one of the most successful pirates in history, both because of her power and her ability to survive it. I think she's neat as hell, and so have a lot of fiction writers! You might have encountered versions of her, or characters inspired by her, before, in things like Pirates of the Caribbean, the Bloody Jack novels, Assassin's Creed, and Doctor Who. It's fun to see a form of her in this! We can expect her arc to progress differently, but I hope having some context will help.

The most helpful things to note for the rest of the season for ofmd fans will be that Zheng is her surname, she wasn't really a contemporary of the other historical figures, and that her connection to sex work should not be treated as a fact, whether you want to include it in this fictional interpretation or not.

[mamapyjama]

I’ve been rereading the current anime arc in the manga, and finally got to The Apology™️, and I wondered what words Katsuki used before translation.

Disclaimer: I’m sure others must have posted about this before but I couldn’t recall reading it myself. I do remember there was a lot of talk about the way he used “gomen” as the Japanese fandom were saying how cute and childlike it sounded, so I thought I’d see if there was anything else interesting there.

Oh, my sweet sweet baby boy…

So, just before he says ‘Sorry for everything’ (ima made gomen), he says:

言ってどうにかなるもんじゃねェけど

本音だ

出久

“Itte dōnika naru mon ja nē kedo… Honne da…Izuku”

Which in the English translation, gave us:

And “speak my truth” is lovely and all, but the word from the original that stuck out for me was ‘honne’.

I’m not sure how familiar most people are with honne–tatemae (I only know about it because I go way way too in-depth when researching for my fics lol), but it’s a concept that every Japanese person is deeply aware of, and underpins much of their society.

Here’s the Wikipedia intro:

Ohhh, that is some extra juicy context for Kacchan’s speech. Essentially, he is saying that everything up until now has been his tatemae, a public façade to protect his own position (strong, powerful hero etc), but that he can’t keep that up and he wants Izuku to see his honne, his true, private self.

Excuse me while I melt from the cuteness.

But WAIT! There’s more!

How much do you know about second-person pronouns in Japanese? (Nope, this isn’t about ‘kare’ again this time hehe).

You’ve probably noticed in the anime that Kacchan says “Temee” a lot, and you may have also noticed that it tends to get translated as cursing. So it actually just means ‘you,’ but like a really rude way of saying it, such that the only way of reflecting that in English is to replace ‘you’ with something like Bastard or Asshole.

Again, have an expert explain:

This and the below are from a very excellent article about second-person pronouns and how they are used for context and drama in anime specifically. I’d recommend reading it as the context is really interesting!

So although pronouns aren’t actually commonly used or necessary in much spoken Japanese, when they are used, it’s a deliberate way to tell you about the relationship dynamic between two characters.

But why, you may ask, am I talking about pronouns again?!

Because, dear friends, throughout the first half of his speech, Kacchan uses ‘temee’ as usual to describe his past with Izuku. I’ve highlighted it below, and pls also note the shaky speech bubble showing his nerves during the ‘honne’ section. 🥺

HOWEVER, straight after he says he wants Izuku to see his Honne, Katsuki switches pronouns from ‘Temee’ (v rude), to ‘Omae’ (very casual/familiar). Below is the page after the apology.

Considering we now know pronouns are not necessary to convey meaning, that’s a hell of a lot of omaes on one page!! Boy cannot get enough of saying it.

If you want more about the different pronouns, see below for a helpful table of common uses for both. And please indulge my shippy heart for highlighting the second usage (but, like ‘kare’, you never know)…

Katsuki is showing Izuku immediately and repeatedly that this is who he wants to be to him and how he wants the world to see them. His honne, his inner desire, is to be close to Izuku, to treat him as an equal.

He’s not just saying sorry, he’s showing that—at least from his perspective—things are going to be different from now on. But, like, also, that this was how he felt about him in private the whole time?! GAHHHH.

So there you go, the apology that was already a massive turning point in their story/relationship was actually even deeper and more beautiful than we all thought. Yet again, Japanese conveys nuance and intention far beyond what can be translated. 😭💕

[cripplecharacters]

something i see a lot in certain fandoms is when people writing about characters with prosthetic limbs (usually arms) describe the character’s non-prosthetic limb as “real.” is this ableist? it strikes me as kind of bad, but i’m not physically disabled so i wanted to ask.

Hello,

So, I'm not an amputee, but I think it would depend on why. On one hand, someone's prosthetic arm is very much "real." It's a thing that exists. Two things on the other hand- if they're referring to it being real as is "it functions like a flesh arm but metal," that's bad because it's disability erasure and we've covered why extensively. Or are they saying it's real as though "Yeah, this character is actually an amputee and genuinely has, uses, and needs a prosthetic arm and they aren't being a con artist." And that's bad because it implies that people with prosthetics who don't genuinely need them are the default, as though most people using prosthetics have their arm hidden down the side of their shirt which is not good because it leads to the real-life "faker" debate that disabled people have to deal with. People who are using prosthetic limbs to fake being disabled are very, very, very far from the majority. It's entirely possible that it doesn't happen at all because prosthetics can cost tens of thousands of dollars and that can be after insurance.

Although they could also mean "I based this character's prosthetic off of real-life prosthetic limbs," which is a step in the right direction, two steps if they're replacing a character's canon bionic arm with the kind of prosthetic real people use. It depends on the context.

Mod Aaron

Hi, not entirely sure? I have seen some amputees call their prosthetic leg their "fake leg" in the sense to mean "artificial limb", but "real" for the non-prosthetic one is kinda weird? Like they're both real. You'd probably be better off just differentiating the arm (non-amputated) and the prosthetic (amputated) rather than designating one to be the "real" one.

mod Sasza

[lemotmo]

Yes allow us to be positive and excited about the possibilities!!

Q. Full disclosure the Buck/Tommy kiss brought me in but I wanted to know the story so I went back and watched the entire series and by the time I made it to season 7 Tommy was toast. It was Eddie all the way. The behavior of his fandom was also extremely off-putting. But obviously I am new to the BTS stuff, have Oliver and Ryan not always been like this? I went back and found as much BTS content as I could from last season and there definitely seemed to be an enthusiasm gap between the first half and the back half of the season, especially for Oliver. I was just curious what their norm is. Love your blog btw!!!

A. Aww thank you, anon, and welcome to the family! I promise it's usually much nicer around our parts than it has been this off season. There is nothing wrong with the B/T kiss bringing you into the fold. You did the right thing by going back and getting the context of the entire story. That particular fandom not wanting to understand or learn about Buck's character will never not be dumbfounding to me. Although the reason they refuse to go back and watch the history is because of what you said in your ask. Based on the asks I, and many others have received, much like yourself everyone who went back and watched ended up pro Eddie not pro Tommy. Because context is everything. Context is the enemy of Tommy so his fans don't want people to have it. But the ones who had been around understand the Eddie of it all and that's why they tried so hard to steal Eddie's entire characterization and headcanon it as Tommy's. Because of course they did.

As for Oliver and Ryan the short answer is no. They have not always been like they were in the early BTS of least season, and they definitely have never been the way they are now. They've been friends but they went through a rough period for a bit and have seemingly come out the other side closer than ever. I am not in the camp of people who believe that means anything romantic on their part. I just genuinely believe they love and care for one another and what they went through has made their bond stronger. I also think the chains fox very clearly constricted them with have been removed by ABC and it shows. They both seem much happier where they are now. It's one of the things that was so hard about 7b. Oliver was so excited in every single interview right up until 7x6 filming was complete, which of course was the bachelor party episode, and the last episode before the rewrites took over. We literally watched his enthusiasm die in real time and it was awful. The enthusiasm level from the cast as a whole changed entirely following episode 6. It was obvious none of them were fans of the 7b changes. Oliver was just the worst at hiding his annoyance. Oliver is like Buck in that when he is excited about something it's obvious and when he isn't happy about something it's equally obvious. He completely shut down and it made what was already turning into a massively disappointing second half of the season even more difficult to watch. I think that's partly why the Lou cameos took hold of that fandom like they did. He was the only one who seemed remotely interested in the story, such as it was. They wanted someone to fan girl with and it became very clear very quickly that person wasn't going to be Oliver. He wanted nothing whatsoever to do with it after 7x4. Which, to me, should have told that fandom something but whatever. I think Buddie was supposed to happen last season. I think they were told about it. The scripts were written and they got excited about finally getting the greenlight. But they got renewed so fast that Tim decided he wanted to slow it down, and everything got put on hold. And as a result Oliver mentally checked out. It was fairly telling when he wasn't the one doing the interviews anymore. He is their PR unicorn. He's always the first choice and they stopped sending him because it was clear he wasn't into the 7b storylines. He couldn't fake any enthusiasm for it. They sent him on one interview to promote the finale and it didn't go well. He clearly didn't want to be there. Following that interview, show wise, we didn't see him or hear from again until production started on the new season. We also never heard from Lou again shortly thereafter. And before anyone tries to start anything that was not typical behavior of Oliver so that tells you everything you need to know about how unhappy he truly was by the end of the season.

Ryan wasn't much better. He just didn't have the luxury of being left alone. He was the off-season promotion. The tone his interviews had immediately following the finale made it clear he also wasn't happy. It was an abysmal back half of the season and forcing him to try and spin it in any kind of positive way was never going to work. He couldn't be bothered to try and spin it. He didn't want to talk about it. His interviews that came later all had a distinct tonal shift in a far more positive direction. That's also when he started using gender neutral pronouns and talking about Eddie learning to love himself this season in order to be ready for his person. I believe whatever the plan was last season is what the plan now is this season. And whatever that plan is has made Oliver and Ryan both noticeably more enthusiastic and engaged. But as you know, anon, saying that out loud is both homophobic and also somehow racist so fair warning. But I'm going to be positive and I'm going to take my cues from Oliver and Ryan. I'm not going to let that fandom suck my joy anymore. I'm glad you found the show and I'm glad you've chosen to stay. Here's to a better season for us all. Cheers 🍻

Thank you Nonny for dropping this into my inbox. :)

I'm not going to add anything here. I think Ali said it beautifully.

Also, shout out to a viewer who was smart enough to go all the way back to season 1 and see why we are all still here rooting for Buddie. :D

IMPORTANT! Please don't repost this ask and/or a link that leads straight to my Tumblr account on Twitter or any other social media. Thank you!

Heads up! For anyone who is giving me the shifty eyes for reposting Ali's updates instead of reblogging. Read this.

Remember, no hate in comments, reblogs or inboxes. Let's keep it civil and respectful. Thank you.

If you are interested in more of Ali’s posts, you can find all of her posts so far under the tag: anonymous blog I love.