#analysis writing reference

[iwritenarrativesandstuff]

Hi! I adore your analyses.

If it isn't too much to ask, I would love to hear about your general approach to analyzing works. I wanna learn how to analyze things better from other people, and I really like the way you methodically break things down.

In other words, pls sensei teach me your ways HAHAHA

No trouble if you can't, though! Your blog is always a joy.

Have a wonderful day!

Sensei... 🫢

Ah, thank you, this is really flattering! I don't think I really do anything that special. Honestly, all it is was that I got misinterpreted a lot when I was younger and it made it difficult for me to express myself - so I ended up creating something of a system which I found seems to make things clear to others!

I can do a quick overview of it, for sure! I hope it helps! (It's under the cut :D)

Tip 1: Analyze things you love.

Look, this isn't school and I'm not a literary critic. I don't bother forcing myself to analyze things I'm just not feeling. Sometimes, I'll really enjoy something, but have nothing to say about it in particular. (Ex. Akutagawa. I adore him but for some reason don't feel compelled to analyze him as much... even though he's this blog's pfp...) That's not a commentary on the character/media nor my engagement with it. No need to analyze something you don't particularly care to - these write ups take a fair amount of time and effort, so you'll want to have enough raw energy at the start to sustain yourself. You should want to talk about it, is what I'm saying.

Tip 2: Understand the core themes of the story.

I cannot stress this enough! It's so important. The best stories will have their characters, plot arcs and settings all serve to enhance the major themes of the story in some way - figure out what these themes are, and keep them in the back of your mind. I think of themes like a filter - it should change the way you look at the story, and with any luck, draw a lot of seemingly loose threads together in interesting and surprising ways. There are typically about 2-3 major ones (Ex. BSD - living through uncertainty, good as a choice / Trigun - morality and autonomy, life after loss / Hatoful - love as salvation or corruption / there are other themes of course, these are just examples). From this point on, assume you have your "themes filter" active for completing the other tips.

Tip 3: Pick a small detail and think about "Why" and "How".

See, I used to go too big when doing analyses. I used to try and analyze everything there was to examine in one go, and it would become unwieldy and just have far too much information for me to juggle and process. So, it's better to start small. What's something that caught your attention? What was something you liked? Was there anything that confused you? Pick one thing... then ask yourself why and how. Why did I like this? Why did this character act in that way? How does this aspect of the story work? Etc. This will be your topic!

Tip 4: Read other people's thoughts.

I know we all hate going into tags and seeing some of the worst takes out there... so I don't actually do that. I only look through meta and theory tags, and most of those are done by people who put a lot of time and care into their theory crafting, so they at least usually bring the receipts. It always helps to read other's opinions. This is just a good thing in general - you need to open yourself up to different views. Even if you don't agree, you might be better able to articulate why you don't. There's some god-tier stuff in these theory tags, you just gotta look. :)

Tip 5: Pay attention to context and setting.

For most of the stories I analyze, the characters do not exist in a world or situation that is comparable to mine. Asking yourself "where did this character come from?" "what's the overall state of the world they inhabit?" "were this character's experiences different or similar to the rest of the cast? different or similar to their childhoods?" - this is really going to help you understand motivation, far more than core personality traits will alone. (Ex. remember that BSD is a newly post-war society. Tensions are still high. People are being hired at young ages. A lot of people grew up in the slums, and violence is common. How did the different characters interact with this world? What sides might one character have seen to this world that another didn't?)

Also, it's good to at least be somewhat aware of the author and the context they created their story in. Many of the works I analyze are from Japan. It's good to know where a work is from - typically you're going to see at least some expression of cultural values, and I find this is helpful to keep in mind. Some decisions made in story will make a lot more sense when you remember the story's place of origin.

Looking at author influences is also helpful! BSD has a great built-in source of background info, since the entire premise incorporates classic literature. This can be an excellent supplementary source!

Tip 6: Tell a story with your analysis.

Again, I'm doing this for fun. I'm not a literary academic, so I try to use conversational flow. I tend to write like I'm speaking - in fact, this is very much how I talk in real life. It's up to you the tone you set in your writing - just make it something that flows naturally. You can always go back and re-read it if something seems unclear.

What I mean by story is to break your analysis up into chunks. There's no hard and fast rule on how to do this. You can see a clear example of it in my "Dazai Likes People" post, which was long enough that I bolded the sections. It should have a beginning, middle, and end, roughly - beginning where you say what you want to analyze or lead into it somehow, middle (which I typically break up into individual topics), and the end, which honestly is just a rephrasing of the beginning (or sometimes I just leave it out). Sometimes, to break things up I'll add quotes or images that help me with my points; these serve as visual interest so the reader is not faced with a continuous wall of text. Bolding and italicizing key points can also do the trick.

A good way to see if the analysis flows is to see if you can say "so then..." between each paragraph. (Ex. Point 1 -> "so then..." -> Point 2 -> "so then..." -> Point 3, etc.) Each point should flow into the next - I try to make something of a narrative out of it. (It's why the word "so" pops up a lot in my analyses haha.) I'm sorry, I feel like this is the part that's the hardest to explain in a way that's easy to follow. It's mostly practice, really. It's also subjective how you want your analysis to read.

Tip 7: Fact check!

I hate spreading misinformation. Mostly because it's frustrating to have constructed a theory only to get called out that it's based on something misremembered, but also because, as a science student, I'm really mindful of keeping track of my sources. Always have your sources on hand! I spend at least three re-reads of my analyses consulting books, episodes, and manga to ensure that everything I've added is correct. (I might go a bit overboard with it sometimes... I can be a bit paranoid about this...)

And finally, my Golden Rule: ✨Explanation, not Justification!✨

If you have no other takeaway from this post, please remember this! Every character in the story should have their actions be explainable! This does not mean justifiable! Explanation is not just logic, and should always take into account character values, emotions, and situation. This will help prevent analyzing characters only from the perspective of relatability, and is very useful when analyzing antagonists/villains.

Character analysis is always about drawing a throughline between motivation and action. It's not about whether you would do the same, or whether you agree, or whether it is a choice you would forgive.

Everyone has their reasons for doing what they do. This is true in fiction, and it's also true in real life. I try to always keep this in mind.

I hope this was helpful to you, or to anyone who might want to read it!

[blueskittlesart]

in the nicest and most non-confrontational way possible. i feel like some of you think that anything that isn't directly openly spelled out for you within a story is "missed potential" or "unexplored." like. sometimes there are implied narratives. sometimes the point is that you as the reader are supposed to think and draw your own conclusions and participate in the story. the writers not directly spelling every little detail out for you doesn't mean that the story is poorly written or missed its own plot details somehow. PLEASE.

[liauditore]

Equally Invalid

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Notes: Literary Character

In a literary work, characters are the persons who are given certain moral, intellectual, and emotional qualities by the author.

Two Major Types of Characters

Static. The static character is one who is "flat" and two-dimensional. Such a character is usually recognized by one or two simple traits. The hallmark of a static character is that he or she will not change in spite of experience or conflict. This type of character remains unchanged by events and experiences. An example of a static character is Mistress Quickly in Henry IV.

Dynamic. The dynamic character is one who is "round" and three-dimensional. His or her personality, motives, and attitudes are complex. Such a character cannot be summed up by one or two traits. The hallmark of a dynamic character is change. This type of character will be changed and influenced by events and experiences. An example of a dynamic character is Pip in Great Expectations.

Criteria for Analyzing Character

The reader can use the criteria below in order to analyze, interpret, and draw conclusions about a character.

Appearance. Appearance generally falls into two categories: external and physical. External appearance consists of extrinsic qualities, such as clothing, jewelry, tattoos, or hairstyle. Through these external factors, you may determine a character’s taste, social status, occupation, or personality. Physical appearance, on the other hand, consists of intrinsic qualities, such as height, weight, facial expression, or tone of voice. These physical factors can suggest different personality traits. For example, a muscular physique might suggest strength; a skinny physique might suggest weakness. Be careful, however, not to judge a character on appearance alone. Appearance and reality are not always the same.

Behavior and Actions. In literature, all behavior and actions help define character. Nothing a character does is arbitrary or incidental. Small nuances of behavior need to be interpreted, as well as major decisive actions. Therefore, when trying to define what a character is like, consider what that character does. Do his or her actions reveal courage, ignorance, cunning, or generosity? For your analysis to be complete, consider involuntary behavior, such as nervous twitching, fast talking, or profuse sweating.

Biography. Often in short stories or novels, biographical information about a character will be revealed: place of birth, era of childhood, type of education, early careers, successes, failures, even the identity and occupation of the character’s parents. Such information can be used to sharpen the picture of a character, or to give added credibility to traits and values that have been identified.

Dialogue. Closely scrutinize what characters say and how they say it, for dialogue is significant. A character’s speech reveals traits and values in 2 principal ways:

Direct Expression. The correlation is patently clear between what the character says and who the character is. Nothing is hidden; nothing is subtly suggested. Direct expression requires little or no interpretation by the reader. What the character says provides immediate insight. For example, in Paradise Lost, the fallen angel Moloch states how he would like to deal with the angels left in heaven, “My sentence is for open war.” Moloch’s hostile nature is revealed directly.

Indirect Expression. The correlation is implied between what the character says and who the character is. The meaning of words may be hidden or suggested. Thus, the reader must determine the unstated meaning of a character’s words. For example, at a ball in Pride and Prejudice, Mr. Darcy is asked if he’ll join in the dancing. He replies, “All savages dance.” At its face value, the statement could be a harmless observation about dancing. Instead, it reveals Mr. Darcy as a haughty man whose sense of superiority makes him disdainful of his company.

Emotions. When interpreting a character, you will be trying to get below the surface of that character to see deeper meanings. To do so, take into account a character’s temperament. Temperament may manifest itself in some general traits, such as whether a character is introverted or extroverted, optimistic or pessimistic, sensitive or indifferent. Or, temperament may reveal itself in specific emotional states, such as anger, melancholy, anxiety, compassion, or happiness.

Thoughts. If an author uses “direct expression” to reveal a character's thoughts and values, you need only to note what these thoughts and values are, explaining why they are significant. However, a character’s thoughts are rarely revealed directly. Therefore, you will need to interpret, infer, and draw conclusions about a character's thoughts. To do so, gather evidence from the above criteria. These criteria can all come together to form a composite sketch of a character, revealing his or her true opinions and beliefs.

What other characters say and think. The statements and thoughts of one character regarding another can be a valid source of information. However, this information can be double-edged. While you may learn about a character based on the statements and thoughts of another, you will have to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of those statements and thoughts. A reliable character will usually be perceptive and a good judge of character; an unreliable character will be flawed in some way that inhibits his or her judgment.

How To Write about Character

When writing about character, you may use the following 3-step process. Keep in mind that this is a general approach.

Establish major character traits. Pin down the character’s traits. Because the main characters in a work will have depth and complexity, you should be able to distinguish at least three prominent traits. These traits may be closely related, but they must be distinctly different.

Support major character traits with examples. The traits you establish in step 1 will be based on general impressions. In step 2, however, you must support these traits with concrete examples. For example, if you assert that “vindictiveness” is a trait, you must substantiate vindictiveness with examples from the literary work.

Explain how and why your examples substantiate a particular trait. Step 3 is the most important (and most difficult) stage of your paper. You must go beyond merely linking examples with traits; you must elaborate your views of a character’s traits with explanation. Your explanation must tell how and why your examples reveal a particular trait, whether the trait is moral, intellectual, or emotional.

Note: Other non-human entities can perform in the role of “characters.” For example, animals, nature (rivers, mountains, oceans, etc.), and man-made creations (cities, machines, houses, etc.) can function as characters.

If these writing notes help with your poem/story, do tag me. Or send me a link. I'd love to read them!

Writing Notes & References

[twistmusings]

Character Analysis of the Twisted Wonderland Dorm Rooms - Savanaclaw

Thanks so much for your input on the first post everyone! Honestly a lot of you have much sharper eyes that I do, so I'm making it a habit to add addendums when people spot things that I don't.

At any rate, here is the examination of the rooms for Savanaclaw!

Dorm Room Character Analysis Series

Heartslabyul | Savanaclaw | Octavinelle | Scarabia | Pomefiore | Ignihyde | Diasomnia

Leona Kingscholar

To start with the obvious, Leona is probably the most disorganized dorm that we've seen so far. He's noticeably left his clothes lying around the room. It's of note that he's got an empty hangar in his closet, which could mean that some of these clothes are clean and he cba to hang them up.

Leona has a chess set with three pieces displayed - what appears to be a Knight, a Rook, and a Pawn. I believe this may be a reference to the story arc of book 2, considering that Rooks are a powerful piece in chess. If we consider in terms of chess, if I had to guess, I would say the Knight is Leona (known for it's unique movement which can be used to strategize and take tactical advantage of board placement), the Rook would be Ruggie (known as one of the most powerful pieces in chess because it can move any distance in a single line so long as it doesn't jump another piece, thank you anon for correcting me on this!) because of his unique magic being the lynch pin of Leona's plan during book two, and Jack, or more generally, the rest of his dormmates, being the pawns, that are used to set a strategic defense.

Also of note, Leona has a plant in his room. Of course, it could be fake, but if it is real, it shows a nurturing aspect to Leona that is interesting given his characterization that we know of. Minor Spoiler Warning for Book 6 that has definitely been pointed out by other people, but we know that he lets Riddle rest on his lap during the book when he's knocked unconscious, so he does, indeed, seem to have aspects of a nurturer in his characterization that he tends to hide by being prickly. If I had to read further into this, I would say it's another aspect of his motif overall - Leona has the capacity to care a great deal about everything, but he doesn't because he isn't given the same opportunities as Falena, and so you see those parts of him come out in other places.

This may be a bit of a stretch, but I believe this pillow in Leona's room is intended to be a call-back to Lions and their manes. When Leona lays his head down on the pillow, the pattern would be splayed out around his head like one.

Leona, of course, has textiles in his room, which is mentioned to be important for his homeland in the Tamashina Mina/Cloudcalling event as they are handmade and the primary source of income for Sunset Savanna. This is of note because Leona is not the only one in Savanaclaw to display tapestries like this, but these tapestries are notably similar to those shown in the Tamashina Mina.

So this is going to be a very long and not particularly important sections, so feel free to skip if you CBA to read it, but I wish there was a little bit more information about the inspiration drawn for Leona's homeland because it could be particularly informative of the actual symbolism in the textiles. If we are considering what we know about his homeland, Leona mentions a few things that give us some hints as to the location.

Generally speaking, the Lion King is considered to be set in Tanzania, and this is in line with the Hibiscus and the Baobab that Leona mentions in the Cloudcalling event, however from my most definitely not expert research, a lot of textiles produced in Tanzania are wax dyed. (Mind, I am far from an expert in African Textiles.) This becomes important when Leona mentions that the tapestries and clothing in the Sunset Savanna are woven. While it's not always a rule, typically woven clothing and tapestries are dyed before they are woven, and weaving is what produces the pattern. With wax dyeing, the textiles are produced first, and then waxes are used to create layers of dye that are arranged in patterns. (This also gets called batik dyeing).

The left, above, is a Tanzinian Batik Kitenge Fabric from east Africa, while the right is a Ghanaian Woven Kente Cloth from West Africa next to Leona's Tapestry to show more of what I mean, which throws a wrench into examining this further because we are talking about two different cultures across the continent from one another.

The gist of this being, it does seem that Leona's tapestry and blankets would seem to be more in line with woven fabric as opposed to batik dyed fabric. If anyone has more information who is more versed in this subject, I would love to know more! Basically, this is the long way of me saying I can't exactly identify whether or not any of the tapestries or blankets in his room hold any particular meaning in their patterns or colors because I wouldn't know what culture it would be drawing inspiration from! To be quite honest, it is entirely possible this is a case of Twist mixing several cultures together to paint a more general picture of African culture.

To change the subject back to the room - Leona has a notable lack of study materials in his room. In fact, I don't see a single book in his room. If Riddle is the one who is the king of the little readers club, Leona was the kid who filled in all the stamps on the summer reading list to get the prizes without reading anything.

While it's not as prevalent as Cater or Trey, Leona's room features a lot of darker yellows and reds. It's possible that Leona favors these warmer colors, which is funny considering his rather gloomy outlook on a lot of things, as these colors are generally associated with happiness and passion.

The hidden mickey in his room is just below his overhead lamp.

Jack Howl

Jack, as we know, has a little cactus garden in his room. it is of note, his cacti are flowering, which is a sign that his little cacti are as happy as could be.

This might be a bit morbid, but if I had to guess, I would guess that Jack's rug is a synthetic wolf-skin rug given the jagged design on the edges. This is only a guess of course, as the bedrooms and backgrounds in twist tend to have a slightly flatter style than the rest of the game, so it's hard to tell if it's actually fur or not. Regardless, we see see a lot of the members of Savanaclaw's animals represented in small touches in their room.

Jack is pretty organized in comparison to the other freshmen! All of his books are put away, and even his weights and resistance bands are tucked away as much as they can be.

Jack seems to have soy protein, a protein shake container, and a stick of deodorant ready-to-go! Jack might be a bit extra with his workout routine, but at least he seems to be responsible about it by making sure he's getting the nutritional support he needs to build muscle and taking care not to smell rank.

Jack also has a textile on his wall. Given the Shaftlands seems to be generally inspired by Europe, I would guess that the tapestry is most similar to Nordic knitted and woven fabrics. The motif of the tapestry seems to be floral designs or snowflakes and pine trees. This seems to be a cute callback to how Jack likes to snowboard and how he comes from a snowy place.

Like the other first years, Jack doesn't seem to have decorated his bedsheets much. He does have a bedrunner in a flamestitch sort of pattern. Though the flamestitch pattern isn't commonly attributed to any one country, it is generally considered to be of European origin, adding to the European inspiration of the shaftlands.

The hidden Mickey in Jack's room is next to his tapestry.

Ruggie Bucchi

Mr. Pig. More seriously, Ruggie found it abandoned on the street and took it home. There's a meerkat version as well that Ruggie has mentioned getting in his Birthday Boy Vignette. He also mentions that it sings or lets out a happy squeal when you put coins into it.

Also, Ruggie has a framed photo on his desk, similar to Deuce. I would guess this is a photo of him and his grandmother.

Ruggie actually seems to read quite a bit! He has books in his bookshelf, as well as stacked next to his bed within easy reach to read there if he would like to. These don't seem to be textbooks, so it's an easy conclusion that Ruggie probably reads in his free time. My guess for the textbooks is that Ruggie likely downloads them online from a library resource. Or illegally. To be quite honest, good for him, textbooks are expensive for no damn reason.

Ruggie is also quite well organized - he doesn't have a lot of personal items in his room, but the ones that he does have are put away.

Following on that last point, Ruggie's lack of decorations aside from a handful of things likely lends to him being raised in poverty.

Interesting note, but Ruggie has roommates. In fact, a lot of the Twisted Wonderland cast do, but you can actually see snippets of Ruggie and Jack's roommates space in their cards. The freshmen are mentioned to have four to a room, so though I didn't include this in the first post, Ace and Deuce have two other roommates.

While it might be easy to assume that Ruggie's comforter is giraffe print at first glance, the coloration and spacing of the pattern actually leads me to believe this is meant to be the pattern of a spotted Hyena.

Ruggie's hidden mickey is on the wall next to his closet.

[avelera]

*clutches my head* I can’t believe Viktor was actually Akemi Homura. I can’t believe I didn’t see it. Of COURSE it’s Viktor who is sickly in the first time loop and uses magic to cure his illness and then in every subsequent time loop is trying to save Jayce’s life and prevent a catastrophe of course of COURSE HOW DID I NOT SEE IT

[unboundprompts]

Character Name Ideas

-> a masterpost of name ideas for your characters.

-> requests open for names with specific vibes.

If you like what I do and want to support me, please consider donating! I also offer editing services and other writing advice on my Ko-fi!

I also have a Patreon! Become a member to gain access to a Member's Only Community where you can chat and message other members and myself. Also gain access to my personal writing, which includes completed short stories, chapters from novels in progress, as well as completed scenes.

Alphabetical First Names:

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Other Name Ideas:

Cottagecore Names

Dark Academia Names

Greek Mythology Names

Pirate / Sea Names

Refined Names with Cute Nicknames

[shyjusticewarrior]

Other writers writing Jason and Barbara interacting: "Men and women being just friends? Sound fake, they must have romantic tension."

Rosenberg writing Jason and Barbara interacting: "If Jason guilt tripped Barbara she'd crumble immediately."

[thesillypirate]

I think Swansea is meant to be a foil to Jimmy. Take what I’m about to say with a grain of salt seeing how I need to analyze the game more but yeah. Here’s why I think that (spoilers for Mouthwashing)

They’re both bad people. But only Swansea is self aware of that. Jimmy tries to claim he’s good, claiming he’s the hero when all his efforts just hurt everyone else around him. Jimmy (horribly) attempts to overcompensate. Swansea accepts he’s bad

Curly and Daisuke is one of the reasons I think these 2 characters are meant to be compared and contrasted. Jimmy, when dealing with someone suffering, prolongs it. Torturing them because he wants to be morally correct, because killing them be “wrong”. Swansea just puts them down and out of their misery (literally a perfect showcase of both their characters)

What makes Swansea different from Jimmy, (besides knowing he’s a bad already) unlike Jimmy, Swanson cares for others. He knows he’s bad so he has no reason to attempt to be a hero, so he’s willing to do “bad things” for others (putting down Daisuke, attempting to kill jimmy, lying about the cryogenic pod). Jimmy just cares for himself, so he does “good things” that would make himself the hero (keeping curly alive, drugging Swanson, manipulating Daisuke to go into the vent)

Also in the dream scene with Swansea they’re both try murdering the other, showing how they’re similar. But yet again look at the motives. Swansea is attacking for the people who died (and curly), Jimmy is fighting for himself. They’re both at the same extreme for 2 completely different reasons.

Speaking of death and murder, despite Jimmy being the reason everyone dies he doesn’t actually kill them himself. Anya was pushed to take her own life by Jimmy and Daisuke was killed by Swanson. The only people Jimmy kills in a literal sense are himself and Swanson

Also just look at Swansea’s monologue when Jimmy kills him, it’s literally everything I said but poetic

So in conclusion:

Jimmy is a selfish monster who takes. Swanson is a man who has nothing left to take, so he gives.

(Also I been editing this a lot whenever I make new discoveries :3)

[rlyehtaxidermist]

vote in your primaries.

Americans: Check your state's primary date here.

Pro-Palestinian activist groups are already calling for an "uncommitted" vote in the Democratic primary in Michigan specifically as a protest against the atrocities in Gaza and more broadly the lack of any real challenge to Biden's candidacy.

This is something that every data analyst in the parties will see and have to deal with. If "Uncommitted" gets enough votes, party delegates can even officially be listed as "uncommitted", which is very visible.

"But Orange Man-" This isn't the "if you don't support us you support them" of FPTP general elections. This is the Democratic Primaries. Harm reduction rhetoric is irrelevant here; Biden has no serious primary opponents.

1500 voters in New Hampshire voted in "Ceasefire", which was enough that the Biden campaign had to acknowledge it - even though their response was "see, only 1500 people cared?" And for one primary - yeah, that would be the response. Let's not make it one primary.

let's make number get bigger people

[pinkytoothlesso11]

Reasons why Jinx is alive– A fully comprehensive evidence analysis

Right. So I've seen a lot of people with conflicting views on if Jimx survived at the end of Arcane season 2, and I have been itching to do a meta post on the subject, so here it goes!

The first piece of evidence that I found particularly noteworthy was the explosion itself. By going frame by frame it was possible to see this:

It's a blink and you miss it kind of scene, but this is right after the explosion, and you can see the clear pink line going into one of the vents. Now why is this important? Well, it's simple, it's the shimmer effect that happens when Jinx is moving very fast! I know that Warwick was holding onto Jinx, but in a explosion its perfectly plausible for her to get out of that grip using the explosion of her monkey bomb.

Then we have the scene where Caitlyn is inspecting the plans for the Hexgates.

There is literally no reason for her to look at these plans. Not unless she thought there was something she missed...

There's no dialogue here, so it's really just based on what she does and how she reacts. Most notably what she's holding.

It's the head of one of Jinx's notorious monkey bombs. What's more, it's clearly damaged and singed. So likely this is the very same monkey bomb Jinx used in the Hexgates. This also suggests that Caitlyn might have been searching for evidence of Jinx's dead body... and clearly didn't find it for her to be holding Jinx's bomb head and then searching on the plans. Which brings me to the focus changing to this:

The vents we see the streak of pink shimmer light go inside correlate to the plans as shown above. The vents connect to the air ducts which connect to the outside. After this, the camera goes back to Caitlyn and we see her look at the monkey bomb head and then smile.

Then we get to the most telling piece of evidence that Jinx survived and left Zaun and Piltover behind, which is definitely a controversial choice on the writers part and does come across that they just want the option to bring in Jinx whenever they want in later stories taking place in Noxus, Ionia and Demacia. Which is very Marvel like lol. This is namely the air blimp at the end shot of the show.

What I find interesting is the fact it mirrors exactly the very first time we see Powder in episode 1 of Arcane season 1 when we see one of these air blimps.

The difference in these shots is that the one from season one is going TOWARDS Piltover, and the one from end of season 2 is going AWAY across the sea. The only difference in the ships themselves is the streak of blue you can just about see on the side of the hull. Maybe a further hint that Jinx is indeed on board that blimp.

Obviously it is what Powder says about the air blimp in season one that truly gives some solid evidence Jinx escaped on the air blimp heading for the sea:

Well, it seems Powder was right about that... the shots being so similar is clearly not a coincidence.

This is made all the more evident with the very last seconds of screen time of the show. It ends with Jinx's signature scribbles taking over the screen for three seconds with the words 'The end' written across.

Some people I've seen commenting on the fact the letter E on 'the' is reversed, but I think that's just a style choice in line with Jinx's graffiti so far. What is significant here is the fact it's so evidently Jinx's mark straight after the air blimp that resembeled the one in the first episode of Arcane season one.

Annnnd there's just one more thing now. I promise I'm almost done lol.

The lyrics to the song Wasteland that plays during episode 8, when Jinx is about to try and end her life are as follows:

This world is a wasteland where nothing can grow

I used to have strength but I ran out of hope

I know it’s my fault that I'm here all alone

This world is a wasteland

Please let me go, go, go, go, go, go, go

But then the lyrics change in the last chorus, they go from Jinx preparing to end her life for good, to THIS:

This world is a wasteland where nothing can grow

If it weren’t for you I’d be here all alone

I know in my heart this is where we belong

This world is a wasteland

Don’t let me go, go, go, go, go, go, go

Don't let me go

I feel it's likely that the line 'if it weren't for you I'd be here all alone' is referring to Ekko. Because it's Ekko who stopped Jinx from killing herself. And then of course the biggest change, from 'please let me go' to 'don't let me go' Jinx isn't ready to say goodbye. She wants to stay living. And I think it's this that plays in her 'sacrifice' scene with Warwick. It's not her giving up on life, it's her accepting that her life has changed and she needs to break the cycle by moving on. Not for anyone else, but for herself.

Let me know in the comments or reblogs your thoughts on this! And thank you for reading if you got this far lol.

[welcometogrouchland]

I feel like for the first few years of guardianship Darius and Hunter really struggle to figure out how to refer to each other.

Like it's easier for Hunter, he pretty quickly settles on "guardian" for explaining their relationship to other people and just referring to Darius by name when talking to the man himself. Overtime the phrasing gradually warms, becoming "foster parent" and eventually, once Hunter's already an adult old enough to move out, "Dad".

(Sidenote: he doesn't move out til he's in his mid to late twenties, bc he's under no obligation too, Darius low-key doesn't want him too, and the two of them want to make up for lost time in a sense, since Hunter only had 2 years of legal dependency on Darius before aging out of the system. Darius adopts Hunter retroactively as an adult)

Darius on the other hand has a real conundrum on his hands for those first few years. He has a lot of options! But "ward" is too formal and makes it sound like Darius picked him up off the street like after his parents were murdered, "apprentice/student" isn't really accurate considering the focus of Darius and Hunter's relationship has less to do with Hunter learning magic and more to do with Hunter being housed and fed. "Kid" and "foster son" are there...but...

Look, Darius isn't going to refer to Hunter more familiarly than Hunter refers to him! He's not gonna make it WEIRD. He's not a dad, because Hunter doesn't want/need him to be (and also parenthood is scary <3). Darius doesn't know the first thing about being a dad, despite how his friend group teases him.

Eda and Eberwolf are the two who are worst about it. They torture him with how 'fatherly' he's allegedly being (allegations Darius will DENY til his GRAVE!!!) And Eda specifically compares his journey to hers, saying it always starts off with you referring to them as your apprentice (again, Darius doesn't plan on doing that), as your roommate (...kinda weird in Darius' opinion? But okay Eda), or even your pet (????HELLO???). But eventually, they always become your dumb kid when you least expect it.

She's had a couple cups of appleblood by this point, but Darius knows on some level she's right and he's steadfastly ignoring that fact, even as Eber continues to refer to Hunter as his "cub" (kinda cute but Darius doesn't know how Hunter would feel being compared to an animal). The only people who are even remotely reasonable about all this (besides Lilith who's a bit disinterested in kid talk) is Raine and Alador, who both sort of neutrally, a bit awkwardly refer to Hunter as Darius' Boy.

Darius referring to Hunter as "my boy" is funnily enough what sticks the longest before it evolves to son boy. Hunter's crushing it at a derby match? Darius is whooping and cheering, yelling "THAT'S MY BOY!!!" At the other parents in the stands. Hunter is doing something dangerous or inadvisable where others can see him? "Darius, your boy-" "AHH! MY BOY". Hunter, a year into his stay with Darius finally comes clean about everything to do with him being a grimwalker, and is afraid that he's going to go back to seeing him as just an inferior replacement for Darius' beloved mentor? Darius (who has just had to process some of the most bonkers, emotionally heavy information in his life) gently, hesitantly puts a hand on his shoulder (the 'good' one Hunter doesn't mind people touching), and says that Hunter's much more than that. He's Darius' Boy and he's not going to kick him out or get angry or love him any less for things out of his control. It's good. They're good.

Like I said, it evolves over time and 'boy' becomes somewhat obsolete as the two get caught up in the joy of finally feeling able to explicitly refer to each other as family. But unlike "guardian" or "ward" the word never gets fully retired. Even when Hunter is 30 and is arguing that he's more of a man than a boy now, he is still getting referred to by Darius as "his boy", the way some parents never really stop calling their adult kids baby or kiddo (Camila and Eda respectively btw).

Hunter makes one of those corny matching shirt sets at some point for a father's Day gift when he's 17/18, where the two shirts say "if lost, return Boy to me" (Darius) and "I'm Boy" (Hunter). Hunter mostly did it so he could own a funny shirt that says "I'm boy". Darius openly weeps upon seeing them. Like Oh my Titan he's boy. He's my boy. Oh wow

[banefort]

Already seen a lot of people use the Cain and Abel archetype to describe Aegon and Aemond’s fratricidal relationship, when more importantly I’d argue that they represent an inversion of the trope.

Traditionally, the tale represents settled lifestyles (Cain the farmer) overcoming nomadic Neolithic customs (Abel the shepherd) through the allegory of fraternal murder- aka, the Cainist cultural revolution defeating Abel’s tradition. Given Aemond is the one who, possessed by jealousy over his brother and a desire for control, turns to fratricide, one would expect him to be characterized as the homicidal Cain-figure, and Aegon as the unsuspecting Abel-figure. However, due to Aemond’s continual fulfillment of tradition and the status quo, and reliance upon Valyrian tradition as the basis for his claim, ideologically-speaking he’s a closer match to Abel. Not to mention, given he also flaunts the qualities which his father continually attempted to emulate (dragon-rider, scholar, fluent Valyrian speaker, pious, etc) - he closer matches the image of the father’s ‘prized son’, we can argue that the Viserys-Aemond bond closer matches the God-Abel dynamic.

Conversely, Aegon is constantly affirmed to be a break from ruling tradition - from a psychological standpoint he departs from the archetypal image of the ruler by being shown to be melancholic and tempestuous, not to mention alienated from his paternal culture and language; whilst from an ideological standpoint, he openly argues against the practice of Valyrian sibling incest and advocates for an embrace of monarchial socialism, departing from the wishes of his advisors, and the traditional customs of the kingdom. Thus, Aegon embodies a cultural revolution, and aligns better with Cain.

The Cain-Abel reading of Aegon and Aemond’s actions doesn’t work out because their fratricidal actions align Aemond with Cain as an antagonist, and Aegon with Abel as a victim - but their ideologies match Aemond with Abel as traditionalists, and Aegon with Cain as revolutionaries. One can make the argument that the analogy still works, due to it being a deliberate inversion of the tale, with tradition striking down any act of upheaval, as opposed to revolution destroying tradition, but I feel that there isn’t enough evidence to support that decision. Naturally, creatives always reflect on Cain and Abel to some extent due to its prevalence as a touchstone of fratricide in the arts, but due to caveats like the action-ideology dissonance and the lack of a father figure endorsing Aemond (or either of them for that matter), amongst others, I think it’s a tenuous stance on its own.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Analysis: Narrative Elements

The purpose of this resource is to assist in the critical reading of narratives, and to help you explore how the effect is created and the meaning is made.

Fiction is best understood by breaking down and discussing terms common to most stories, be they novels, short fiction, movies, TV shows, etc.

Includes: plot, characters, point of view, setting, theme, conflict, and style.

Understanding how these elements work helps us better analyze narratives and to determine meanings. Seven main elements of fiction are defined below followed by a sample of questions to help readers uncover meaning of a given narrative.

Theme

Perhaps the most important literary concept because it is the overarching idea that the writer of the story wants to reader to understand.

All other literary concepts are used to create theme.

The theme is the author’s commentary on a subject.

Example: In Shakespeare’s Othello, one of the major themes is how easily human perception can be manipulated when powerful emotions are at play.

To determine the theme, examine other literary elements of the story.

Questions to Consider: First identify the subject(s) of the story and then ask: what is the writer trying to say about this subject? What literary tools does the writer use to create this theme?

Plot

The structure of the narrative as it moves through time.

Most narratives (but not all) follow a traditional plot structure.

It consists of:

the exposition (introduction of setting and characters),

rising action (events that build conflict for the protagonist),

climax (tension of conflict reaches highest, most intense point),

falling action (the events following the climax), and

denouement (the resolution of conflict).

Questions to Consider: What is the relationship between the events of the story? How do the actions inform the theme of the story?

Characters

The people involved in the narrative.

Characterization - process by which a writer creates a character.

Protagonist - main or central character, often considered the hero.

Antagonist - main character who opposes the protagonist, sometimes considered the villain.

Literary analysis of characters often focuses on whether or not, and to what extent, a character changes throughout the story.

Questions to Consider: What is the motivation of each character? How do characters grow or transform throughout the story? Or do they fail to grow or change at all? What does their growth or lack of growth say about the theme of the story?

Conflict

The issue or problem characters in a story are confronted by.

The narrative is structured around how the characters face the conflict.

The 4 general types of conflicts (with examples) are:

person vs. person (a couple going through a divorce)

person vs. self (protagonist wrestling with depression)

person vs. nature (protagonist trying to survive a natural disaster)

person vs. society (protagonist fighting for civil rights)

The interaction of character and conflict creates the central effect of the story and is the main indicator of meaning.

Questions to Consider: How does the conflict affect the main characters in the story? How is the conflict resolve d and what does the resolution say about theme? How does the conflict change the main characters?

Setting

A time and place the story is set in.

The location can either work symbolically or it can simply be a backdrop for the story to take place in.

Questions to Consider: How does the location, time, and/or date of the story affect the theme? How does the setting affect how the characters respond to conflict?

Point of View

The perspective the story is told from.

This element includes:

First-person narrator: Tells the story from the perspective of one or several characters with the word “I” or “we.” The readers, as if from their own eyes, can envision the characters actions.

Third-person limited narrator: Tells the story from an outside perspective from the perspective of one of the characters (usually the protagonist). The third-person limited narrator can relate events, thoughts, actions, but is limited to that single character. For example, if the narration is from the point of view of the protagonist, the narrator cannot relate events that are happening across town from where the protagonist is, nor can they relate the interior thoughts of any other character. Third person limited narration uses the pronouns “he,” “she,” or “they.”

Third-person omniscient narrator: Also tells the story from an outside perspective but this narrator is not limited to actions and thoughts of one character. This narrator knows all of the in formation of the story and can relate the events of the story, the actions and speech of each as well as the interior thoughts of any character. There are no limits for this narrator.

Questions to Consider: Does the narrator reflect an inner or an outer perspective on the story? Why did the author select this point of view? What would change if the story were told from a different point of view?

Style

The way the writer uses language including diction, voice, tone, sentence style, etc.

Paying attention to these details allows the reader to identify how and why word choice and sentence style, etc. can help create the effect and meaning of the story.

Questions to Consider: Is the diction hard or simple to understand? Are the sentences short or complex? Why did the writer make these stylistic choices? How do these choices add or detract from the effect of the story?

NOTE: Of course, these aren’t the only literary devices narrative writers use to create their stories. Imagery, symbolism, metaphor, foreshadowing, and ambiguity, for example, are other important devices that should also be considered in the analysis of narratives. Source ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

More: Notes & References ⚜ Critical Reading ⚜ Active Reading How to Read for Historical Research ⚜ How to Identify Character Descriptions

[fromtheseventhhell]

One major factor missing from most debates on Arya and Lyanna's beauty is that they're being judged by their society's extremely patriarchal values. In both looks and personality, that context is essential to understanding how others perceive them. George explores the misogyny experienced by non-conforming women, especially with Arya, and it's interesting how he plays with that regarding their physical beauty.

Her mother used to say she could be pretty if she would just wash and brush her hair and take more care with her dress, the way her sister did. (The Blind Girl, ADWD) "You never knew Lyanna as I did, Robert," Ned told him. "You saw her beauty, but not the iron underneath. She would have told you that you have no business in the melee." (Eddard VII, AGOT)

These two quotes offer a nice summation of this idea. With Arya, her supposed lack of beauty is defined by her being a non-conforming wild child. Her hair is messy, her face is dirty, and she's often in "lower class" clothing while engaging in unladylike activities. None of this says anything about her physical beauty but it tells us everything about how she's perceived. Arya could be pretty...If she conforms to society's standards for a highborn Lady. With Lyanna, however, we get the opposite. Where Arya is judged based on her personality, Robert's romanticization of Lyanna is rooted solely in her looks. He doesn't know anything about the person she really was. There is an assumption that, because she looked a certain way, her personality must fit and Robert imagines her much softer and more passive than she actually was.

That Arya isn't pretty or Lyanna wasn't wild are two perceptions that George specifically pushes back against. This is where people miss the brilliance of them being linked as literary mirrors; it is largely about us learning more about Lyanna, but it touches on more than that. The significance of them being written as wild, willful, and with their own beauty is that George isn't writing his female characters around patriarchal expectations. When people debate their beauty, that's often the trapping they fall into. Beauty and non-conformity are treated as mutually exclusive factors when the story itself never makes that point; this is also the logic that leads people to the (incorrect) conclusion that Lyanna and Arya aren't meant to be similar. Arya's self-esteem issues around her looks and being a Lady make this a topic certain to be addressed in the future; George has made it a part of the story. The conclusion shouldn't be that "looks don't matter", but that looks aren't indicative of a character's value, personality, or morality.

[howtofightwrite]

Does Ser Arys Oakheart’s performance in The Queenmaker in AFFC (killing a handful of men and jumping clear of his palfrey before being swiftly dispatched by Areo Hotah) suggest a decent amount of martial competence on Arys’ part, in your view?

I’m going to make George R.R. Martin fans angry again and say, no. However, this is because I don’t feel any of Martin’s characters (throughout his work) really demonstrate any degree of martial competence. A lot of Martin’s characters aren’t supposed to possess any martial competence, but even the ones who are meant to don’t have it. Their “martial competence” is roughly the equivalent of action figures being angrily smashed together. For me, his fight scenes/battle scenes are the weakest part of his writing and I tune them out. Martin heavily focuses on “ironic” surprises and subversions of expectations like in the scene with Arys Oakheart, where everything is going well and then the character is just randomly and unceremoniously offed.

Boom. Goodbye.

“Like they would be in real life!”

I’m going to imagine someone yelling that because I’m sure someone, somewhere wants to.

Look, unlike Starke, I read A Feast for Crows and I genuinely have no memory of this character. They have been memory holed. They are gone. (Which is wild because I remember random minor character deaths from a lot of other major and minor fantasy properties that I read as a tween ages ago.)

The thing about reality is that real people are also capable of the following: Strategic and tactical awareness, long term strategic planning, working in unison with their fellow soldiers, and, yes, that includes knights in the Middle Ages. Knights in the Middle Ages might’ve (sometimes) been wealthy bastards, but they had to be functionally aware of violence and its impacts or they weren’t knights for very long.

Martin does not understand how armies and professional combatants function, their purpose, or their place in maintaining order in a feudal society. The irony is that politics are not his forte. His combat sequences read like they were written by someone who spent a great deal of time reading original historical accounts and not enough time thinking from the perspective of the people committing those gruesome atrocities. Make no mistake, medieval warfare was far, far more gruesome than anything you’ll find in Game of Thrones and the most terrifying part is the reasoning behind those atrocities was actually sound. Once you’re past the shock value, GOT is fairly comforting because the majority of the time no one makes sense. There’s a moral lesson hidden in the undercurrent ready to bludgeon the audience when they least expect it and all the violence works from that perspective, and all of it is written very specifically with the audience’s reaction in mind. Martin doesn’t seem to care how it works both on the technical front or in the utilization of violence to deliver narrative catharsis, he cares how the audience will react.

His violence doesn’t feel good, which is his intention, he doesn’t want it to feel good, but it also doesn’t feel bad. The violence just sort of exists.

One of the pieces of tragedy that is fundamentally important is a sense of foreboding. In fiction, death flags aren’t necessarily bad. In a tragedy, they’re necessary. Character death doesn’t need to be surprising to be meaningful. In fact, death is often more meaningful when the audience knows it’s coming. Whether it’s because they want the character to die or because they don’t want them to die. Their death creates narrative catharsis. The catharsis releases the tension, it feels good. Satisfaction through tears. When the audience and the narrative knows death is coming, it creates tension. If you invest early, the tension builds, and builds, and builds until it pops. The trouble is that, one way or another, the author has to invest in the character for that to happen. The surprise can be how the character dies, the manner of their death, and even who kills them, but not the fact they die. Shock value is sudden. The reason to use shock sparingly is that it lacks a lasting payout and eventually the audience acclimates. Too much shock obfuscates the narrative importance of a character’s death and shortens the long term impact of their loss. The impact of the death ends up as sudden as the death itself. Here, then gone, then forgotten.

In a well-structured tragedy, it doesn’t matter whether the audience cares about the character who dies or not. It helps, but the focus of the impact is on how it affects the other characters, how that loss is felt, and the way it’s internalized. An observation that’s always stuck with me is when I was in college studying Shakespeare, and my professor told us that Shakespeare structured his tragedies and his comedies the same way. They’re the same until the fourth act, and it’s the characters’ decisions leading into the final crisis which ultimately decides whether the story will end happily or tragically. All Shakespeare’s characters are important cogs in his play (including the bear.) When one of them goes, the narrative and the characters feel it. If a character is never important to the story, then the impact of their loss can’t be felt.

Martin’s characters don’t fight smart. They don’t fight cleverly. They don’t really fight stupid either. They fight with the combined equivalent of a single brain cell failing to function harmoniously. Probably the standout sequence for me that demonstrates this point is the Battle of the Crab from House of the Dragon. They had two dragons, a beach, an isolated cave system where their enemies were hiding to get away from the fire. They had corpses, and they had tar. And what didn’t they do?

Set shit on fire.

Smoke. Cave. Smoke. Cave. Smoke. Cave. Smoke.

The easiest and most low energy plan in the world that should be obvious to anyone who has ever cooked in an enclosed space. While this is a great way to signal that your characters suck at warfare, the characters involved were supposed to be the ones good at it! People being burned alive as they got smoked out of a cave is more gruesome than what actually happened and would have demonstrated the power of the dragons a lot better. Instead of, you know, the mighty House Targaryen being outwitted by… a cave.

If the dangers of dragons could be mitigated by a cave, people would just live in caves and not castles like they do on Pern.

Thank you for listening to my fanwank.

(No, the presence of saltwater would not have, in fact, saved the pirates. However, the Targaryens could have tarred the driftwood, set it ablaze, and let the tide carry it inside in addition to setting fire at every entrance like real military tacticians. Which shouldn’t be a reach given that half the army was made up of sailors.)

(They could’ve also used the crabbed up bodies for this with the added bonus of it being extremely horrifying, smelly, and gross.)

(We’re not talking about the Crab Army.)

(I mean it!)

-Michi

This blog is supported through Patreon. Patrons get access to new posts three days early, and direct access to us through Discord. If you’re already a Patron, thank you. If you’d like to support us, please consider becoming a Patron.