#and an adaptation will never be the source material

[doyouknowthisanime]

Do You Know This Anime?

[booklovingturtle]

There are (some) valid critiques about the pacing and story telling

Just remember not turn your constructive criticism for the show runners into hate directed at the child actors

[thunderboltfire]

I have a lot of complicated feelings when it comes to what Neflix has done with the Witcher, but my probably least favourite is the line of argumentation that originated during shitstorms related to the first and second season that I was unlucky to witness.

It boils down to "Netflix's reinterpretation and vision is valid, because the Witcher books are not written to be slavic. The overwhelming Slavic aestetic is CDPR's interpretation, and the setting in the original books is universally European, as there are references to Arthurian mythos and celtic languages" And I'm not sure where this argument originated and whether it's parroting Sapkowski's own words or a common stance of people who haven't considered the underlying themes of the books series. Because while it's true that there are a lot of western european influences in the Witcher, it's still Central/Eastern European to the bone, and at its core, the lack of understanding of this topic is what makes the Netflix series inauthentic in my eyes.

The slavicness of the Witcher goes deeper than the aestetics, mannerisms, vodka and sour cucumbers. Deeper than Zoltan wrapping his sword with leopard pelt, like he was a hussar. Deeper than the Redanian queen Hedvig and her white eagle on the red field.

What Witcher is actually about? It's a story about destiny, sure. It's a sword-and-sorcery style, antiheroic deconstruction of a fairy tale, too, and it's a weird mix of many culture's influences.

But it's also a story about mundane evil and mundane good. If You think about most dark, gritty problems the world of Witcher faces, it's xenophobia and discrimination, insularism and superstition. Deep-seated fear of the unknown, the powerlessness of common people in the face of danger, war, poverty and hunger. It's what makes people spit over their left shoulder when they see a witcher, it's what makes them distrust their neighbor, clinging to anything they deem safe and known. It's their misfortune and pent-up anger that make them seek scapegoats and be mindlessly, mundanely cruel to the ones weaker than themselves.

There are of course evil wizards, complicated conspiracies and crowned heads, yes. But much of the destruction and depravity is rooted in everyday mundane cycle of violence and misery. The worst monsters in the series are not those killed with a silver sword, but with steel. it's hard to explain but it's the same sort of motiveless, mundane evil that still persist in our poorer regions, born out of generations-long poverty and misery. The behaviour of peasants in Witcher, and the distrust towards authority including kings and monarchs didn't come from nowhere.

On the other hand, among those same, desperately poor people, there is always someone who will share their meal with a traveller, who will risk their safety pulling a wounded stranger off the road into safety. Inconditional kindness among inconditional hate. Most of Geralt's friends try to be decent people in the horrible world. This sort of contrasting mentalities in the recently war-ridden world is intimately familiar to Eastern and Cetral Europe.

But it doesn't end here. Nilfgaard is also a uniquely Central/Eastern European threat. It's a combination of the Third Reich in its aestetics and its sense of superiority and the Stalinist USSR with its personality cult, vast territory and huge army, and as such it's instantly recognisable by anybody whose country was unlucky enough to be caught in-between those two forces. Nilfgaard implements total war and looks upon the northerners with contempt, conscripts the conquered people forcibly, denying them the right of their own identity. It may seem familiar and relevant to many opressed people, but it's in its essence the processing of the trauma of the WW2 and subsequent occupation.

My favourite case are the nonhumans, because their treatment is in a sense a reminder of our worst traits and the worst sins in our history - the regional antisemitism and/or xenophobia, violence, local pogroms. But at the very same time, the dilemma of Scoia'Tael, their impossible choice between maintaining their identity, a small semblance of freedom and their survival, them hiding in the forests, even the fact that they are generally deemed bandits, it all touches the very traumatic parts of specifically Polish history, such as January Uprising, Warsaw Uprising, Ghetto Uprising, the underground resistance in WW2 and the subsequent complicated problem of the Cursed Soldiers all at once. They are the 'other' to the general population, but their underlying struggle is also intimately known to us.

The slavic monsters are an aestetic choice, yes, but I think they are also a reflection of our local, private sins. These are our own, insular boogeymen, fears made flesh. They reproduce due to horrors of the war or they are an unprovoked misfortune that descends from nowhere and whose appearance amplifies the local injustices.

I'm not talking about many, many tiny references that exist in the books, these are just the most blatant examples that come to mind. Anyway, the thing is, whether Sapkowski has intended it or not, Witcher is slavic and it's Polish because it contains social commentary. Many aspects of its worldbuilding reflect our traumas and our national sins. It's not exclusively Polish in its influences and philosophical motifs of course, but it's obvious it doesn't exist in a vacuum.

And it seems to me that the inherently Eastern European aspects of Witcher are what was immediately rewritten in the series. It seems to me that the subtler underlying conflicts were reshaped to be centered around servitude, class and gender disparity, and Nilfgaard is more of a fanatic terrorist state than an imposing, totalitarian empire. A lot of complexity seems to be abandoned in lieu of usual high-fantasy wordbuilding. It's especially weird to me because it was completely unnecessary. The Witcher books didn't need to be adjusted to speak about relevant problems - they already did it! The problem of acceptance and discrimination is a very prevalent theme throughout the story! They are many strong female characters too, and they are well written. Honestly I don't know if I should find it insulting towards their viewers that they thought it won't be understood as it was and has to be somehow reshaped to fit the american perpective, because the current problems are very much discussed in there and Sapkowski is not subtle in showing that genocide and discrimination is evil. Heck, anyone who has read the ending knows how tragic it makes the whole story.

It also seems quite disrespectful, because they've basically taken a well-established piece of our domestic literature and popular culture and decided that the social commentary in it is not relevant. It is as if all it referenced was just not important enough and they decided to use it as an opportunity to talk about the problems they consider important. And don't get me wrong, I'm not forcing anyone to write about Central European problems and traumas, I'm just confused that they've taken the piece of art already containing such a perspective on the popular and relevant problem and they just... disregarded it, because it wasn't their exact perspective on said problem.

And I think this homogenisation, maybe even from a certain point of view you could say it's worldview sanitisation is a problem, because it's really ironic, isn't it? To talk about inclusivity in a story which among other problems is about being different, and in the same time to get rid of motifs, themes and references because they are foreign? Because if something presents a different perspective it suddenly is less desirable?

There was a lot of talking about the showrunners travelling to Poland to understand the Witcher's slavic spirit and how to convey it. I don't think they really meant it beyond the most superficial, paper-thin facade.

[ode-to-fury]

I dont understand why people are having aneurisms about george spoiling helaena's death in his blog post? Like the book has been out? Isn't that like complaining about someone telling you that both romeo and juliet die in the end before you go see the play? And I am genuinely asking here because it's not an isolated thing i've seen upwards of ten people say he shouldn't have done it

[ayrennaranaaldmeri]

So many things wrong with these chars now but I need to mourn a min bc we are never getting "The rats play while the cat is gone, but my son Aemond will return with fire and blood."

which just...this show sucks man. this show fucking sucks.

[skyshipper]

@PSCENTRAL​ EVENT 18: ADAPTATIONS THE HANDMAID'S TALE

[roz-boz]

Love how Disney Percy Jackson, Heartstopper and Shadow and Bone are healing our souls broken by all the horrible book adaptations from the 2010s

[eclipsewxtch]

some of y’all, and i do not want to name names, do genuinely lack media literacy and comprehension. now there’s nothing wrong w that… except that there is. gain reading comprehension. media literacy. understand the importance and value of significant events in media. i’m begging you. learn how to read a book, or watch a show, before you fix your fingers to type a script. the world will thank you for it.

[transannabeth]

im trying to be normal i promise!!!!! however do you remember how i keep moaning about not being about to go back to grad school for literature because i want to talk about books 24/7 but not do anything else? um.

[beesinspades]

am I the only one who's a little annoyed that trigun stampede has its own ao3 tag but trimax and trigun '98 share the same tag? they're all vastly different it doesn't make sense to me to have one adaptation share a tag with the source material and then have the other adaptation on the side when that other adaptation is already more faithful to the manga than the one that's sharing a tag with it

like either there should be a tag for each + a "trigun (all media types)" tag (please) or might as well make them all share the same tag at this point (please don't)

[bohemian-nights]

another one of my issues with the whole michaela twist besides the lack of consideration for intense misogynoir that they’re forcing masali to experience, is that the season is YEARSSSS away. so we have to wait for a black female lead that’s so far removed from right now? so now we can’t ask for a darkskinned black female lead because we’ve already been promised one for a season that might not happen, who knows what the future of the show will be? also the book is going to shape shift so much already and i don’t trust jess one bit to be able to handle that. changing the gender changes a lot, and fine, whatever, but she is not capable of writing anything decent so.

Yep. She’s basically meant to silence us. While everybody else gets their rep and happily ever afters we have to wait until 2030 for a glorified stereotype who chases after a white woman married to her cousin(probably going to make her sex crazed too and call it “empowering”) whose “happily ever after” will consist of living in hiding with said white woman.

That’s supposed to be our representation, but you know we are jealous greedy bigots for pointing out the obvious….

[moe-broey]

Well I can finally post these now!!!!!!!! Even though Awakening was my first FE, and ofc I liked Chrom a lot, I never really thought too deeply about the Ylisse siblings... I spent some time replaying Awakening, going through supports, and drew up some character sketches!

Also these sketches in particular have some funny lore to them, that day I was off my meds and fighting for my life and only got. These four things. The entire day. The more detailed notes on the same page came after having them again, what a fucking difference it makes 😅🧍

Fave doodle from it tbh world's most normal girl 😇

[deanpinterester]

hi what

[troublerats]

Day 11 of posting two pieces of my old art a day

Hey look gay people. Did this artpage as a result of winning people's vote in a dumb twt mutual battle.

It's Felix Solomon paired with his two romantic partners in the comic, depending what universe he's set in. In Purpleside he's with William Afton, and in Yellowside he's with Jack Davis.

More just, au stuff that I'll explain at some point. Probably.

[likehandlingroses]

AMC’s IWTV…could be TV show adaptation of all time but also!!

[sentys]

PSA: DISREGARDING HOUSE OF THE DRAGON.

due to the unfortunate revelations which have originated from the production behind House of the Dragon, my portrayal will henceforth be adjusted to support book canon. what does this entail?

the source material Fire and Blood will serve as the groundwork for most of my portrayal of aemond targaryen. yes, there will be headcanons aplenty, but expansion of the character's perspective will stem from how he was written by author george r.r. martin. anything stated by ryan j. condal and sara hess will remain unacknowledged.

any and every development regarding the character which occurs on the loosely based television 'adaptation' will not be applicable to my portrayal. this means no brothel backstory involving madame sylvi, no foolish attempt at fratricide/regicide in the middle of a civil war, no overruling his mother (the dowager queen, no less!) in favor of his own political ambitions, etc. for all his faults, aemond will abide by his family.

while i will continue to use ewan mitchell as the faceclaim for my portrayal of aemond, the subpar and inconsistent writing of the show in which he is featured does not lend to my interpretation of the character. as talented as i believe ewan to be, the direction given for his character within season 2 severely neglects the foundation that was laid in season 1, thereby creating a disconnect that doesn't hold up to scrutiny which ultimately undermines his efforts as an actor. i choose not to let his embodiment of aemond go to waste.