#and c) MAKES NO SENSE NARRATIVELY ANYWAY

[astudyinfreewill]

honestly i joke a lot about maggie's crimes of omitting adam from the narrative but let's not forget the real crime here (making us read three books of ronan descending into a morally grey arc / the looming presence of the Lace as a possible apocalyptic big bad only to make her Final Big Bad neither of them but rather an Arab Guy With A Metaphorical Bomb)

[cherrymoonvol6]

.

[sethdomain]

the narrative that c!tommy used c!techno is kind of diabolical tbh, people often forgot that c!tommy is fresh out of exile and doesn't consider the place that he's in.

He's running on pure instinct, fresh from suicide attempt and running from his abuser and the only one he can confide in is c!techno the criminal that destroyed his home country. Despite their history c!techno still took him in, but why? He could of just kick c!tommy from his house and let him run lose in the tundra of snow and let him survive on his own while c!drm sniff over his trails of footstep. But he took him in and protect him from the looming threat of his abuser.

And its sad, its very sad that even if c!Techno took c!Tommy in he used it as an opportunity. An opportunity to use c!Tommy as a pawn in his quest for anarchy. Now, you might be thinking, but c!techno took him in, take care of him and even defended c!tommy ,why are you painting him as this heartless villain that used an abused child for his own gains? Frankly, I try not to and maybe its also in the way i'am awful with articulating my words into something that make sense. I truly do not think c!Techno is heartless and his relationship with c!tommy does have a sincerity in it.

But I think my main point is that, there was a power imbalance between c!tommy and c!techno that people often overlooked. Like I said c!Tommy is fresh out of exile n traumatized n stuff and he's in a weaker position and his only hope in escaping his abuser is c!Techno since he is the only character thats is deadass near logstedshire and also one of the most powerful people in the esempi.

And also I just do not think painting an abuse survivor trying to find help as an act of... That, is a nice message you know 😁 haha- not to get real and get to the implication of stuff- but ahahaha, yk haha. ANYWAY.

I don't think c!techno is a heartless monster, like I said i think his relationship with c!tommy has sincerity within it. I think as time goes on, i think techno grew actual care toward tommy evidence by his interaction with tommy as time goes on growing more closer and affectionate and his strong reaction when tommy left him for tubbo.

But still, c!Techno treats tommy more of a pawn in his quest for anarchy, you also have to remember that he will send off c!tommy to his abuser again without a second though if c!drm used his favor. Of course, if you were in c!tommy place, why would you stay with a guy like that? He goes againts everything you stand for and you don't even know if you're safe with him. Maybe because he saved your life? Do you really owe him that much that you are willing to destroy your home and even fight your own best friend for him? Was it all transitional? Do I worth anything? Do I not matter as a living breathing human being? Am I not worth of safety?

I just wanna talk about my feeling about c!tommy and c!techno relationship in post-exile arc, because i think i find the narrative a bit icky if you are maybe a survivor of abusive relationship. I also wanna talk about the interesting bit of sincerity their relationship actually kind of have, that despite c!techno using c!tommy as pawn he does actually cares in the very end. Which is sad to think about

[meloodyxx]

"anyways, my point is, i dont wanna sacrifice myself. I dont want it. i was the recipient of a bunch of sacrifices in secret life. and i decided, you know, i dont wanna do that. i dont wanna be part of it, we are just not doing that." - gem, ep 6 (her thoughts about sacrifising herself to jimmy because she is allied with him, in parallel to doing that last season with scott, but being on the other end of it.)

i love the whole narrative of gem not being able to let go things that happened in secret life. it makes so much sense too because it was her first season.

all the significant events that happened to lifers in the first three seasons are still very important to their current dynamics. the whole 3gs arc, desert duo, renchanting, bigbs betrayal, bdubs' betrayal, scar burning the ranch, secret soulmates, literally every single soulmate pair?? but in secret life and wild life, they were starting to just acknowledge the events but also let go of them in a sense of "we cant keep these grudges forever"

and since everyone was taking the "oh well, this happened, but its pretty much in the past now" approach to the series this season, (the outside sources like quizbot driving everyone's attention to the past events doesnt really count because it was wilcard-based, and even if it counted, lifers just used the past life series events as a wink wink nudge nudge to the audience and treated it like inside jokes between themselves rather than changing their alliances/thoughts about other people) gem, just in her second season, being spiteful about pearl and scars 1v2 and scott's sacrifice stands out a lot more.

anyways, as ovbious it is that gem is willingly playing into the narrative of the shinyduo divorce, her other decisions this season resulted in my thoughts above, so i felt obliged to make it a post!!

(this is very much a c!gem post, i love watching cc!gem's content and this is not meant to be negative in any way whatsoever <3)

[team7-headquarter]

ABOUT THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE LAND OF THE WAVES ARC, THE ACTIONS OF TEAM 7 AND WHY ITS ONE OF THE BEST ARCS OF THE ENTIRE FRANCHISE:

I'll never shut up about the Land of the Waves arc.

Here are the facts:

A corrupted man —who was believed to be the richest man in the world due his shipping and transportation business— decided he wanted to make his a small land made out of islands, better known as the Land of the Waves.

In Tazuna's words: "Nami No Kuni (the Land of the Waves) isn't a real prosperous land. Even our local lords are poor..."

The name of the corrupted man is Gato. He was affiliated with drug trafficking and contraband, as well as being a criminal who employed gangs and teams of shinobis to help him (through violence) to take over companies and countries alike. That's what he did to the Land of the Waves, taking hold of all the marine transportation and their shipping industry. Since the Land is made of a number of islands, Gato successfully isolated them. He was now the owner of the local economy and had the power to decide how people lived there.

Tazuna is an old man with no money at all who had been tasked to be the architect and overseer of the new bridge. If completed, it would mean that Gato no longer had absolute control over the Land of the Waves. It'd free them all, bring more movement to their economy and stop the crazy violence promoted by Gato's gangs.

To make sure we all understand the severity of the mission and the power of Gato, let's remember that he employed Zabuza Momochi.

Zabuza is one of the Seven Ninja Swordmen of the Hidden Mist. Kirigakure was known for one of the cruelest traditions regarding shinobis: they'd have to fight each other to death and only the survivors would be promoted. Zabuza put an end to it himself, killing an entire year of graduates. He was not even a student yet.

Zabuza also plotted a coup against the Mizukage, but he was betrayed. He became a rogue nin after that, taking money from men like Gato in order to keep living.

That's the first Team 7 mission.

Sakura, Naruto and Sasuke are staked to help Kakashi free a land of a corrupted businessman and in the process have to fight one of the most legendary shinobis they can encounter out there. We're talking about an entire small nation!!! We're talking about the insane irony of Zabuza being a rogue because he fought against the corruption of his own Hidden Village, and he lost and now he has to work for a man doing the same to others.

The first Team 7 lesson was not only to work as one, to value their teammates, but to question the world around them. Kakashi told them to not follow orders blindly and the narrative throws the Team on a mission to test it.

Kakashi accepted to continue the mission without telling the Hokage anything. He knew he had the jinchuriki and the last Uchiha with him, that it was a great risk, but he accepted because he wanted to help Tazuna and the Land of the Waves and he knew Tazuna had not enough money to pay for a class B mission. Hell, he was lucky Kakashi got a genin team. One of the best jonins of the Hidden Leaf could give his service under the disguise of a rank C. Kakashi was using a loophole to disobey orders and he complains the whole time in his head because he knows it's gonna be a mess of a mission, but he does it anyway.

Do you want to know why is my favorite arc?

The reality of the Land of the Waves is a perfect scenario to force Team 7 to wake up. Naruto and Sasuke sure know loneliness and misery, but they were also part of a very rich land and a powerful Hidden Village. Sakura didn't go through anything like Sasuke or Naruto, which is worse in the sense that she was more naive than them.

Their world falls apart when they meet Haku and Zabuza, when they realize this is not s fairytale of good heroes and bad villains, but people who had to become violent to survive.

Like Kakashi said, the only reason he and Zabuza are trying to kill each other is because they were paid to do so. Zabuza works for Gato, Kakashi for Konoha, that's it. Kakashi didn't want to kill Haku and Haku didn't want to kill any of them, but the Naruto world is old and messy, the customs and the means to survive are others.

Shinobis are no heroes. They're mercenaries, they act as the military force for the strongest nations. They are tools and weapons. It's not advanced in any sense, so many years after the Warrant Era and the world was just as cruel and wild. People with kekkei genkais were forced to practice that violence to protect themselves, like Haku, Sasuke and Neji. People with bad luck like Naruto and all the jinchurikis were the same. People like Sakura, who loved and cared for those others, devoted their lives to joining the fight, to try and protect the ones dear to them.

That's why the final conversation of Team 7 —the one after the events of the bridge that ended with Zabuza and Haku dead— went the way it did. The members of Team 7 weren't happy with the reality of the shinobi life. Naruto even ended up saying that he would make his own ninja way, basically denying such reality and promising to break the traditional ways that kept all shinobis chained to violence, fated to kill each other.

Just look at it:

Sakura: ... But still... Master Kakashi...

Kakashi: Hmm~~?

Sakura: ... I can't help wondering. Were those two right about what a ninja should be?

Kakashi: A Shinobi shouldn't be concerned with a reason for her own existence... It is important merely that we exist as a tool for our homeland to use in whatever way they need. That's as true for us in Konohagakure as it for any ninja anywhere else.

Naruto: Is that really what becoming a full-fledged ninja's gonna be about? I don't like the sound of it!

Sasuke: Do you really feel that way, master Kakashi?

Kakashi: Well... No. And that's why all we ninja live our lives with that ideal always bubbling beneath the surface of our minds, disturbing us. ... Like it did Zabuza ... And the boy.

Naruto: That's it. I've made up my mind! I am going to create my own nindo— my own ninja path. My own destiny!

This arc plants the seeds of what should be the rest of Naruto and Naruto Shippuden. Team 7 is frustrated and they don't agree with the tradition. None of them, not even Kakashi. Naruto promises to be the change, to make his own destiny.

Sadly, it doesn't happen. The manga changes its tone halfway through. Naruto ends up becoming part of such tradition and he ends up being the fated reincarnation, the chosen one. His destiny is not his exactly and his own ninja path gets lost in the way, replaced by a hollower desire to become Hokage. Naruto doesn't evolve to deeply question the order of his world or his society.

Instead, Sasuke occupies his place and the story turns him into an antagonist (someone who wants the direct opposite of the protagonist, someone who is on the way of the protagonist to reach his goal). The story radicalizes the dream that was so innocently spoken in this chapter. It also ends up chaining Kakashi to the same system, uses him as someone to fill the Hokage role until Naruto is old enough and then gives Naruto the hat, forgetting the themes set on the Land of the Waves arc.

What started as Team 7 fighting corruption and people sick with power while trying to help the victims of the system, understanding that their world is made of greys and not moral absolutes, ends up becoming a kids tale of ninjas = heroes and aliens = villains. All the complexities of politics get softened by Black Zetsu's manipulations and Kaguya's existence.

It wouldn't be a reach to say that the Land of the Waves belongs to a very different type of manga, one that never got its continuation.

[yasssgiveusnothing]

Radiohusk Analysis: Husk Cares or Nothing Makes Sense (Part 2)

Husk cares about Alastor. It makes no narrative sense otherwise.

Let's talk about it!

Husk goes out of his way to help Alastor when it would be in his best interest to not care AT ALL about that man:

Husk goes to Al to warn him of Mimzy and ARGUE with him for Al's benefit.

Husk gets frustrated when Al doesn't heed his warning and thinks Al will get hurt.

These screenshots are from season 1 episode 5.

Here's the scene:

Let's delve deeper into it!

Narratively, that whole scene serves three purposes:

1. To tell the viewer Al is also on someone's leash.

2. To tell the viewer Husk worries and cares about Alastor.

We are shown Husk going out of his way to help Al, only for Al to tell Husk that he does not need to worry because Al has everything under control. We then see Al was correct as he jovialy kills and consumes his enemies without effort. In other words, what the viewer learns from this scene is that Husk needlessly worries about Alastor's well-being.

3) To draw parallels between Angel & Valentino and Husk & Al.

You might be thinking, Exactly! If Husk and Al are just lke Angel and Val, why would Husk care for Al or vice versa?!

Vivzie has been pushing this narrative that Al and Husk are parallels for Angel and Val this entire season. I don't think there are enough words to describe how this parallel doesn't work, but I'll try anyway.

A) Angel does not care for Val's well being.

Angel would not go out of his way to help Val like Husk helps Alastor.

B) Val does not care for Angel's well-being.

Val doesn't need to bribe his soul contracts to work with him.

Val straight up gives Angel no free will. (Unlike Al who does not force Husk to attend the bar, instead chosing to bribe him).

If Angel gives the slightest of attitude, Val does not hesitate to get physical immediately. (Unlike Alastor, who not only lets Husk shove a finger into his chest, but let's him speak his mind and does not immediately maim him for disrespecting him.)

C) Husk is not afraid of Al.

A man scared of Al would not argue with him or his benefit, nor go up to him and jab a finger in his chest. And yes, Husk was scared of Al when Al threatened him, but Husk fucking started it! He literally made a jab at the guy where it would hurt! If you made a jab at your pal and they start foaming at the mouth, you'd be scared too, but also know you lowkey deserved it and shouldn't be surprised it happened. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Al and Husk sit together without Husk shitting himself. Could you possibly imagine Angel sitting next to Val without wanting to disappear through the floor? Nope!

D) Al trusts Husk. Refer to my previous theory for more information.

E) Al does not regularly assault or overwork Husk.

Husk chills at the bar all day with access to infinite alcohol. This is the closest Husk will ever get to Heaven.

Alastor has not assaulted Husk ever. Unless we're calling the time Alastor pulls on Husk's chain and makes him fall to the floor an assault. Which, sure, fine. But that ONE push that left NO INJURIES was the only time Al has ever gotten aggressively handsy with Husk. And funnily enough, Husk was the first one to put hands on the other.

This 'assault' in comparison to the treatment Angel gets from Val pales CONSIDERABLY. In fact, the two duos are NOTHING ALIKE beyond there being a Overlord owns your soul dynamic, but with Radiohusk, that dynamic barely takes place as Alastor treats him more like a trusted pal than an object to be abused.

I also want to quickly go over how I feel Husk is out of character for the second half of this scene.

Husk is perceptive. He understands other people extremely well, which has been shown numerous times throughout the show as he reads the entire main cast and Mimzy. He is also a gambler, which means he knows when to bet and when to fold.

So you expect me to believe that Husk would say THAT to Alastor and expect him to take it well, especially when Husk knows it is a sensitive subject to him?

And Alastor's reaction is kinda valid. I mean, someone who you trusted with this information weaponizes it against you by spitting it back in your face! If Angel can have a meltdown over being someone's bitch, why can't Alastor? I mean, Angel throws a broken glass bottle at Husk's head, but Alastor pushes Husk and suddenly Al is as bad as Valentino?

With this, I conclude thtat:

Husk cares about Alastor

Alastor cares about Husk

Angel & Valentino's relationship does not parallel Alastor & Husk's.

Husk was out of character during the second half of that scene and was possibly a result of Vivzie desperately trying to parallel Valdust with Radiohusk.

[gideonnavtheninth]

FINALLY name time! Abigail name time!!!!

Once again, Pent and Quinn are 5 in Greek and Latin respectively, which we all know is the pattern. NOW, first names are fun! Abigail, meaning-wise is biblical. It shows up a couple times, as the name of the wife of Nabal and one of David's wives, and as the name of David's sister. Jewish Women's Archive describes Abigail (Nabal's wife) in this way

Abigail, the wife of Nabal of Carmel, is the only woman in the Hebrew Bible who is described as both intelligent and beautiful ... She is “of good sense and beautiful in looks,” while he is “hard and evil in his deeds” ... Alternatively, according to the written text he is just “like his heart” Later, the narrative recounts that “his heart died within him and he became like stone". Mean and inhospitable, he meets his fate, measure-for-measure, in the petrification of his hard heart. It accounts for Abigail’s motivation: why she intervenes secretly to provide a feast for David and his men without consulting her husband. In a subtle twist, she simultaneously saves her household and allies herself with David, eventually in matrimony when she is fortuitously widowed.

The things that feel noteworthy here are A. Abigail being very defined by having a husband (But, in this case, her husband sucks) B. Several mentions of the heart, which... they are the heart of the emperor! and C. She's widowed! Continuing down her story, we see some more stuff that feels of note

She further portends that God will establish a “sure house” for David, foreshadowing Nathan’s prophecy of an everlasting dynasty for the king. She ends her speech with a hint: “when the LORD has dealt well with my lord, then remember your handmaid”. David then praises her good sense and expresses gratitude that she restrained him from bloodshed, uttering an oath to counter the prior violent one

Every time I see the word "house" alarm bells start ringing. Anyway, an everlasting dynasty feels particularly familiar here. I mean, Abigail doesn't have all that much to do with Jod, but it still feels relevant to be drawing connections when I see them.

Based on her prescience, the Talmud identifies Abigail as one of the seven female prophets in the Hebrew Bible. More likely, she is keenly perceptive about the shifting tides of history.

Not anything extraordinary here, but the concept of Abigail being "keenly perceptive about the shifting tides of history" feels pretty accurate to our Abigail!

When Abigail returns home, she finds her husband drunk from feasting “like a king” and waits until the morning to tell him what she has done. His heart then strangely turns to stone and he dies ten days later, struck by “the Lord”. David, hearing that she has been widowed, sends for her. She obsequiously prostrates herself, calling David “lord” and herself “maidservant prepared to wash [his] servants’ feet”; though, ironically, she follows the messenger with five maids on donkeys in tow. She then becomes his wife

Feels like she's very defined by being people's wives. If anything, I feel like Magnus is the wife guy in TLT. But, again, we're seeing a whole lot of heart talk, which feels like it has to mean something. The whole point of this reread is rereading so I'm certain I'm missing things, but I never got the impression Abigail was all that zealous in her religion. I will say, I will be keeping an eye out for anything that really makes Abigail feel particularly Jod-sympathizing. In GTN, we don't really blink at people supporting the emperor outside of times where it really stands out, like the Eighth, but I do wanna watch out for Abigail mentioning the emperor at all. Just something to keep in mind.

Good old' Wikipedia describes her name as derived from the Hebrew word ab, "father", and the Hebrew root g-y-l, "to rejoice," Meaning it probably means "father's joy". Again, not all that sure how this relates to Abigail the character, but still gotta cover my bases.

Abigail's self-styling as a handmaid led to Abigail being a traditional term for a waiting-woman, for example as the waiting gentlewoman in Beaumont and Fletcher's The Scornful Lady, published in 1616

The aesthetic makes sense to me. Abigail is very gentlewoman in my eyes.

Nooo Magnus don't get your own post. Nooo don't make the fifth house like 4 different posts nooo Magnus

[bromcommie]

so I was digging through the Vast Legally Grey Junkyards of the Internet in search of better quality footage from AoU for my edits, specifically the scene with the CA FASCIST grafitti in Sokovia—which I unfortunately didn't find, but what I DID find was a bunch of deleted/expanded scenes that I didn't know/didn't care enough to pay attention to before. Which is fine. Most of it is techno babble and rushed plot setup. However. This stupid-ass ten second clip makes me literally insane. It makes me. Want to kill and maim and chew on the bars of my enclosure. And not in the sense that the contents make me oh-so-emotional, but because the potential of them could. Because what do you mean.

What do you mean those four and a half lines were cut for pacing/time when it's a ten second difference and the rest of the scene is in the film anyway. What do you mean you cut it because it didn't fit the narrative. It's literally couched in two minutes of plot it could've been so easy to slip it in there. A passing reference that would add at least a smidgen of depth to both the (already fucking incomprehensible) plot + politics of the antagonists, and to one of the main fucking characters. Like you were SO close what do you mean you cut every feeble attempt that was made to scratch the surface of Steve's character outside the whole nightmare scene we're supposed to feel so bad about what do you MEAN.

The fact that this minimal exchange—paired with that graffiti scene where Steve is confronted with the actual legacy of Captain America and what he's come to mean to people around the world and then quite physically discards the identity + him still circling back to the mantle at the end of the film anyway because he doesn't know how to do or be anything else, feels like he's too changed for this idea of a normal life that stems from before the war and the ice and doesn't know how to live without carrying that, without being useful in this one specific way—has more meat on its bones in the whole lead up to Civil War and ultimately Endgame than half of this movie's sledgehammer-over-the-head lines about home and family with Barton's kids laughing in the background or whatever like some fucked up C list hallmark movie is downright infuriating to me because like. You clearly thought about it. It passed through your head. You wrote some version of it into the scene. You shot it and edited it and watched it a few times and then you went "nah off it goes to the cutting room floor, we have enough of that. Add those seven and a half seconds to the 20-minute long, entirely CGI Hulk sequence, that we need more of. Surely that will fix the pacing issue".

Side note: this is me not even getting into the fact that, at this point in the franchise, this would have been one of the few lines we'd get of Maria actually saying something or interacting with anyone in a way that is even marginally removed (which this barely is) from simply delivering plot information. This is the only time we kinda get her view on something or even an inkling that she used to be a goddamn intelligence agent. And how that history informs her view of the situation and how it could possibly clash with Steve's own. And that woman is in every fucking movie. (Not to mention the fact that the two of them were just in a movie together, for Christ's sake, and going through something together you could pretty fairly characterize as traumatic and bond-inspiring to boot—and in AoU we can barely tell they even know each other. I mean the bar is so low and they still managed to limbo right under it.)

[sgiandubh]

Lights, camera, shit show

I was just cleaning my OL folders (all those Chinese paintings and scrolls do take a horrendous amount of space, heh) and I just stumbled upon something I completely forgot to share and discuss with you. I found this particular article during my solitaire lurking months and I remember being befuddled by it for a long time, then thought I've lost it for good.

I don't remember ever seeing it shared or discussed in here, either and if, by any slim chance, I am wrong, kindly forgive me. That professional website is now closed, but its content is still available to browse:

Anyway, there goes: https://www.studiodaily.com/2018/06/outlander-dp-stephen-mcnutt-asc-csc-saucy-scottish-show/

We discussed Terry Dresbach and her inebriated rants, Vanessa Woman's devastating impact on set as Intimacy Coordinator, RDM's jealousy and many other aspects of life on the OL set. Rumors likely to have originated there peppered our shipping trail like flickering lights in a sea of darkness. So yes, we dissected these things to death. But not Stephen McNutt's interview to Studio Daily, on June 22, 2018 - please keep in mind the date, it is essential!

Stephen McNutt is a well-established professional and a member of the American Society of Cinematographers (ASC) and the Canadian Society of Cinematographers (CSC), as he hails from British Columbia. He also has a consistent track record of previous work with RDM, both on Battlestar Galactica and Caprica (its prequel). Therefore, one has to immediately suppose he was handpicked and brought on set by the same RDM, of course: set a very low bar on your expectations, I am warning you.

By the grace of RDM, he was one of the main Directors of Photography for OL during Seasons Two and Three. IMDb is not the best source for corroborating things, because they credit him with 13 episodes in Season Two (including La Dame Blanche- he is the Blue Room guy!), but only one for Season Three (First Wife), which is completely wrong. I even had to check some opening credits on Netflix (at reduced speed, ugh), because he speaks at length of A. Malcolm, something that would have made little sense otherwise. He was there, of course: and his is a first-hand account, heavily loaded with both innuendo and TPTB bullshit, up to the point of complete incoherence.

We focus on the three final questions:

This is a study in bullshitology, right here. The question asked is very clear and very technical: how did you approach those famous love scenes?

The answer is a mumble jumble of retcon, deflections, slips and overall impossible scramble for a logical explanation. I am doing a line by line, because this is almost too good to be true:

'(...) But as far as Cat and Sammy making love (...)' : um, hello and excuse me, I thought the question was about Jamie and Claire?!? And then we are delusional and can't fucking separate, when your own henchman, the Director of Photography no less, seems to be totally unable to do so, too? Hello? Also: 'Sammy'? 'Sammy'? What. The. Total. Fuck, and I LOLed then and I am still LOLing now. Terms of endearment overheard on set - but no, here comes the 'friendship' shite, hitting the narrative fan with Mach 5 speed. Objective? Explaining in a plausible way the hugging and 'keeping warm'. And I am sorry, but this begs the question: what the hell did this man see on that set? And how many people did see the same, hence the need to release such a gratuitous lie, for pure retconning purposes?

'They are not an item at all - I think she just got married'. Oh, fuck my life, man: you are such a terrible, terrible liar! Remember, that interview was taken in June 2018: after the OZ EFH and just about when C. was gleefully answering 'oh, God forbid!' every time she was prompted by press about her marriage plans. How can somebody with a pretty high trophic level and personal rapport to both S and C be totally unaware about C's marital status at the time? How can a long time acquaintance and coworker of RDM say no both to a friend and to a current boss (same person, the worst case scenario) asking for a favor, in that particular context? It also goes to prove that the shit show plot mainlines never originated with S and C and that the Remarkable Week-end was already planned for quite some time. By TPTB. With the full knowledge of RDM.

Let's suppose Mr. McNutt was so deeply engrossed in his work as not to notice all the people who must have congratulated C on set. I mean, I know who our (spinster) colleague from Accounting is currently banging and that guy is (mercifully) not among our staff (I totally wish them well, btw). Maybe because nobody congratulated C on that fakegagement? Also, you know them well enough to confidently say 'they are not an item', but don't know she was not married at the time and state an enormity with the same confidence? What in the name of the hoo-ha did I just read, here?

'I was always in such amazement of that.' In amazement of exactly what, Mr. McNutt? Surely not a woman holding hands or keeping warm with her gay co-star on set, huh? I mean, I need the best American English dictionary, here:

Again: what the heck did this man see? What comments did he hear? Surely, 'amazement' is a very precise choice of wording, with particularly enlightening synonyms:

Hence the need to end the demonstration with a deflection: 'They would just have fun.' You know, there is no such thing as a virgin whore, Mr. McNutt: you either are in such astonishment or you think your pals, good old S and C, such a funny girl, were having, well... 'fun', what else? You can't logically have both in the same paragraph!

And there we go: 'a very collegial atmosphere on set'. The answer is pure fool's gold, if you ask me: 'Nobody goes to sit in a trailer or says they aren’t showing up that day. '

And I laughed. And I laughed. And I laughed. I really don't know what this man is talking about. I never heard McTavish telling S to get out of that trailer ('nephew'). I never read the 'two very loved-up birdies' in a trailer a-rockin' Anons. I never watched that 2015 Anglophile SDCC interview, when S mentioned listening in their shared trailer to Erasure's Oh, l'Amour and C immediately reacted ('oh, did you just admit to that?'). But unlike me, McNutt must have been legally bound by a big cojones Non-Disclosure Agreement and morally bound by loyalty towards RDM, his friend, boss and benefactor.

This. All of the above. This is the real reason for all the bullshit you've just read: explaining a real, shocking love story by socially progressive regulations, allowing the cast to be 'much more happy'. I would laugh some more, if this was not sinister and cruel, in fact.

It is Love. A deep, strong one. But the seeds of the adverse narrative were planted early and deep, forcing even decent people like this guy to lie and smear himself a bit in the process. What we see and hear now are but better worded and more refined consequences of that fateful January 2016 morning in LA. And since I am allowed the dubious luxury only a healthy distance in time allows, let me remind you a simple, fun fact about this interview who stated they were never an item:

About ten months after McNutt uttered these words, the fandom was hit by the Covfefe Pics.

I rest my case.

[myhandsarentsmudgediusedigital]

So!

Delphine.

One of the last Blades, undercover as an inn owner, hates all things dragony, bossyass old Breton lady. Like all Skyrim characters, she's underused and underdeveloped in the vanilla game.

I have thoughts on her now.

Warning: SPOILERS FOR A BARD'S TALE BY GABBICAV (link to the story here)

I was going through and revamping one of my old Dragonborns I hadn't worked with in a while*. And I got an idea for a scene that happens right after the fight at Kynesgrove. Minerva and Michel** drag Delphine out of town to finally get an explanation as to who she is.

And as I was writing her dialogue, I realized that her motivation isn't just about the Blades.

Of course she wants to reform the Blades, that much is obvious, but I don't think that's the end of it. It's not just the Blades she wants back, she wants everything back: the Dragonborn, the Empire being whole, and the Blades being the Emporer's most trusted bodyguards.

Delphine wants the Third Era back, or at least the idealized version of it she has in her head. As far as she's concerned, everything started going wrong as soon as Martin died.

Here's a quick quote from what I wrote that I think helps lay it out:

“That’s what we’ve been doing since the fourth era began. We’ve been waiting for a new Dragonborn, a new emperor, to appear, and become the true heirs of the Empire.” Michel let out a low whistle. “True heirs, huh? The Mede dynasty might have an issue with that.” Delphine scowled. “The Medes can go suck an egg. Ever since Martin Septim sacrificed himself, the Empire has been going downhill! If there’s one thing these past two centuries have proven, it’s that only a Dragonborn can keep Tamriel together!”

Of course we know this isn't entirely true. While the Empire did fall apart in the Fourth Era, cracks were already starting to show even back in the Third Era, what with the Simulacrum and the War of the Red Diamond and all. The Third Era might have been more stable, but it was hardly peaceful.

But Delphine either doesn't know this or doesn't care. She wants that idealized vision back.

A while back, I read A Bard's Tale by Gabbicav on AO3 (if you like bards, intrigue, sibling rivalry, and a new perspective on dragons, this is for you).

Delphine is (probably unsurprisingly) an antagonist in the story. I'm going to put what exact actions she takes between spoiler warnings just in case.

In the story, Delphine, not the Dark Brotherhood, assassinates Titus Mede on his visit to Skyrim. At the time I believed it was simply for narrative convenience and to make her more villainous, but thinking about it from this new perspective it makes sense: Delphine views the Medes as imposters unworthy of the throne. They're not Dragonborn, that's why the Blades didn't serve them and why the Penitus Oculatus had to be created.

Plus, y'know, she probably hates him on a personal level for signing the Concordat.

Anyways, I forget if she and Esbern work with the Stormcloaks in the story or if they just happen to also be an antagonistic force, but her working with Ulfric wouldn't be out of character.

You see, Ulfric:

a) Hates the (current) Empire

b) Hates the Thalmor

c) Has charisma enough to have at least a cult following

d) Obviously doesn't agree with the Greybeards because he left their order

e) Idolizes Tiber Septim/Talos

Add to that the fact he can Shout, even if he isn't actually Dragonborn, it might be tempting for Delphine to forge an allience.

Hell, maybe that was her original plan before the dragons and last Dragonborn showed up.

And now she has someone better then Ulfric: a real live Dragonborn that can absorb souls and kill dragons. Who can shout naturally. A true heir to the Ruby Throne.

All that goes a long way towards explaining her behavior. First, she makes sure you're the real deal. Then she sets you on the path to seeing the atrocities the Thalmor commit (even if they're not actually behind the return of the dragons) and reopening the old Blades temple.

And it explains why she's so huffy about Paarthunax. She and the Blades are supposed to be your most trusted advisors, not a dragon who's committed several atrocities (let's ignore that was thousands of years ago and he's been trying to make up for it since)! She has the very specific idea of what a Dragonborn is, and when you inevitable don't measure up to that for whatever reason, she gets angry.

Delphine is a frustrating character, even with development. She longs for a bygone era of peace that didn't ever exist, where she and those in her organization were held with the highest respect and not hunted down and killed, where the Thalmor don't exist, and all is right with the world (in her view).

And that is why you will never change her mind.

...sounds pretty familiar. Maybe she and Ulfric should team up after all...

*Minerva, if you're curious, may post art of her and her brother soon...if I remember...

**Previously known as Gildas, he's become Minerva's twin dragonborn instead of her older mundane brother

[transmutationisms]

I don't necessarily disagree with your take on David Lynch but I feel like at least part of Twin Peaks is about deconstructing or questioning the myth of the idyllic small town, like everyone in Twin Peaks has a dark secret, most of the men were abusing or complicit in abusing a teenage girl, etc. and the Return to me is about showing that it's kind of fundamentally impossible to return to that glamorized nostalgic past. I could totally be missing something though.

wow ok this was my most controversial david lynch statement yet... so first of all i disagree that there's any tension between the kind of conservative nostalgia i see in lynch's work, and the idea that the past is impossible to return to. in fact i think that kind of lament is pretty central to quite a lot of reactionary rhetoric: it's that emotional appeal of, look what we've lost / damaged / destroyed forever. it doesn't need to be a coherent political platform because it's an appeal on the grounds of pathos.

anyway if i can just quote from my own post lol:

i simply cannot read the series in any way besides as being deeply conservative lol. this becomes especially clear to me in 'the return’, which is largely motivated by a narrative of the loss of american innocence (the double r subplot, the numerous instances of drugs and violence tearing nuclear families apart, the encroachment of electricity and processed snack foods and gambling, &c). but this viewpoint is seeded too throughout the first season-and-change of the original series, and fwwm; because what was laura palmer if not the series’s first use of rape as metonymous for what lynch sees as a broader process of social breakdown and irreversible change? i understand that some people try to read bob and laura as a critique of the family, in the sense that the violence comes through the father, but i don’t think this reading holds even in the original series and it certainly doesn’t after part 8 of 'the return’, in which bob is explicitly and directly invoked in reference to the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki, here construed as an originary act of american evil.

i think in david lynch’s mind, the spiritual forces and influences in the show are literal and apolitical, and frequently he seems to mean to depict them more as sources of artistic inspiration than anything else ('twin peaks’ is in many ways a tv show about making a tv show, hence the double use of electricity throughout 'the return’ and fwwm, in particular). but i find this really irritating frankly, because it’s at best ignorant of the inherently political nature of the constructions of small-town americana, teenage innocence, violence as an act of moral corruption, and so forth—and also because, after the return, it’s simply impossible to deny that the show’s overarching narrative IS plugged in to political and historical lines of critique. like, i am not trying to 'force’ a reading that deals with us imperialism—lynch put the show on this discursive terrain explicitly and deliberately, through not just the bomb footage and the penderecki threnody but also the inversion of classic symbols of american 'greatness’ (the unlucky penny, the evil lincoln impersonator), culminating again in the violation of a young girl’s body by the forces of evil. what this all adds up to is the invocation of american empire as a kind of universal moral struggle, stripped of its historical specificity or even the barest pretense of material critique or commentary. if it sounds like i’m asking too much of network television… i mean, maybe i am, but again, these were deliberate choices lynch made and specific historical events he invoked on purpose, lol. see also the jacoby trump commentary in 'the return’ (cringe and yawn).

i’m not a lynch scholar but i do think there’s a tension throughout his work (what i’ve seen) between the desire to make art about what he sees as the purely spiritual process of making art (heavily informed by his own TM beliefs), and the conservative elements that creep in anyway, noticeable especially in his commentary on american history, corruption, modernity, &c. the idea of any pure, transcendent, apolitical spiritual dimension of human existence is itself, i would argue, at best a misguided conservative fantasy, and 'twin peaks’ ultimately shows these cracks more blatantly than some of his other work (say, 'inland empire’) because it tries to subordinate the material to the spiritual in a kind of fantastical historical parable. but, you can see this recurring tension throughout his filmography, eg, the loss of small-town innocence ('blue velvet’) and a kind of generalised modernity anxiety ('eraserhead’, though taken on its own this one would permit other readings depending on how you interpreted the role of german expressionism in it).

i don’t think lynch is an ideologue or even considers himself particularly political, but nevertheless his narratives do idealise a certain conservative vision of post-war america, mourn its loss, and wax nostalgic for its perceived ethos (& it’s not a coincidence lynch is/has been a reaganite, lol). anyway, i thought 'twin peaks’ had some really incredible moments of visual artistry (part 8 of 'the return’, for example!) and i found much of it frankly beautiful and compelling to watch. so, i don’t mean any of this to dismiss lynch as a filmmaker—he is, if nothing else, highly technically adept.

[hunter470]

Here’s my imagination having fun.

TM: Let’s break up Buck and Tommy and make it really hurt. It’s gonna be great.

Writers: But, Tim, this doesn’t make sense. We’ve been laying the foundation for a long-term healthy relationship for Buck. You even brought Tommy back because of all the connections he had with the 118. You wanted Buck’s love interest to be connected so they wouldn’t be off on an island. This just feels like it’s coming out of left field.

TM: True, but I keep getting texts from Oliver and he wants “Buck to f**k” and I think that would be fun. I mean, he’s newly bi so he should sleep around with a bunch of people before finding the one. We can have a lot of fun with that. Just think of the possibilities.

Writers: But that goes against all the character development we’ve done for Buck over the last seven seasons. We wanted him off the hamster wheel and to get into a long term relationship. Plus, aren’t you being a bit biphobic with your statement?

TM: Nope, I like Oliver’s idea so let’s do that. Oh, and make Tommy the bad guy and don’t let any of the other characters encourage him to talk to Tommy. We can have fun with that…maybe have Buck baking to get over him or he wants to call Tommy and Eddie steals his phone. Yeah, I like that. Use it.

Writers: Are you sure? We’re gonna get a lot of pushback from the audience. We’ve all seen the overwhelmingly positive response the Buck and Tommy relationship has gotten online.

TM: That may be true, but because the audience is so invested in the relationship, it just makes it more fun when we break them up. Remember, based on our ratings, the audience will watch whatever we put out there. Besides, Tommy’s just a side character so they won’t care. They only care about Buck. Oh, and I wrote a whole scene about Tommy being engaged to Abby. Make sure to work it in. It’s genius.

Writers: Abby? As in the Abby Buck dated? That doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t fit the timeline or the previous episodes’ narrative. So, Abby was engaged to a firefighter from the 118 and then dates another firefighter from the 118 and what, it just slipped her mind? Seems like a bit of a stretch. Also, why didn’t Tommy tell anyone he worked with at the 118 that he was engaged? Wouldn’t that have helped him stay hidden from his team? Kept his secret safe?

TM: It doesn’t matter. Just retcon the timeline or ignore the timeline altogether. It’s not like anyone will notice. The audience doesn’t pay that close attention. Plus, they’ll be too upset over the breakup to care. It’s just such a great idea that I got from the fans who sent me that red string theory video. They’ll love the fact that I used it.

Writers: We’ve seen the video but that was to show how Buck and Tommy are meant to be together and not to cause problems. Won’t that upset people?

TM: I doubt it. They’ll just feel acknowledged that I used it and be grateful. The audience loves everything I do. Remember, these are the viewers who loved a bee-nado and my obvious ripoff on a 1975 airplane disaster movie. They even bought a 66 year old police sergeant and a 10 year old boy landing a heavily damaged plane on an active freeway in LA. So, it’s not like they expect reality in our stories.

One day after episode 6 airs…

ABC Executive: Tim, have you seen the number of saddened and upset viewers commenting on social media about last night’s episode?

TM: It’s amazing, right? I knew people would love it! We’re doing great things over there. You can expect this level of storytelling for the spinoff. You’re gonna love it!

Executive: I’m afraid you didn’t hear me. People are upset and saying they’ll stop watching the show. We’re even getting hundreds of feedback messages on the ABC site. People are not happy. How are you going to fix this?

TM: Don’t worry. People won’t stop watching. They’re all lemmings and love everything I write. Anyway, it will all blow over after the next episode. I threw in some Tommy crumbs that will make viewers think he’s coming back, which they’ll live off of and keep watching. Oh, and if that’s not enough, we have a scene with Buck and Jee baking that is so cute they’ll forget all about being upset over the breakup. Cute kids are the answer to everything.

Executive: 🤦🏻‍♂️

[txttletale]

what do you think of "extremism". i see it used often in the context of like, horseshoe theory, the "extreme" right is like the "extreme" left, or at least the two sides of the same coin, and i do have to wonder if that's not obscuring what's actually happening to profit a "both sides" narrative.

like for example, i think that right-wingers becoming "extreme" is simply a natural conclusion of their ideology. tbc i don't think that becoming, like, a fascist isn't "extreme", but whenever i see the word "extremism" used in this context the implication is "passed the tolerable threshold for bigotry" even tho i think that any kind of sustained bigotry was just going to turn into that anyways.

meanwhile for the left, i can actually sort of see an argument for that being the case, but most cases of "extremism" there usually seem to be fundamental misunderstandings in the ideology they're pushing for which leads to blind dogmatism rather than actual social-political analysis and activism, if that makes sense. i don't know if that counts as "taking it too far", which extremism would imply.

what do you think?

'extremism', much like 'totalitarianism', is an obfuscatory tactic to delegitimize radical positions by posting a false equivalency to fascism, racism, &c.

furthermore, because what makes a position 'extreme' or 'not extreme' is of course profoundly contingent on the status quo, the broad and nebulous concept is similarly used as a repressive cudgel against all dissent and the existence of marginalized communities. for example, prevent (the uk's "counter-extremism" program) is basically just a vector for state-sponsored islamophobic harrassment. in fact, the uk government has recently unveiled plans to use broad and far-reaching charges of 'extremism' against any group or ideology that 'undermines the uk's institutions and values' (!)

so, yeah. i don't think that the concept of 'extremism' has any value outside of that paradigm of proscribing acceptable relations to the status quo & power and tarring socialist, anti-imperialist, and social justice causes with the brush of some unspecified equivalency to fascism and hate groups. silly concept for unserious people

[talkativeanxiousturtle]

TW: Mention of death, mention of su*c*de.

I saw the description for "Psych", on Netflix. And if you don't know, it's basically about this detective helping the police who has to convince everyone he's a genius but actually he's a psychic.

So I had this idea for a AU. What if Sherlock could see ghosts? Now, when I write fantasy, ghosts already have a set of rules in my universe, that makes them juuuuust unhelpful enough that they can't fix the characters' problems, and just important enough that they haunt the narrative, quite literally. So I used those rules for my ghosts. That would mean that Sherlock, although he would have a huge advantage in solving the crimes, still wouldn't be able to like, deduce everything about you. Like he's still a genius for doing that. It's just... Now he also sees ghosts. He can't really talk to them with people around (people already dislike him, if they think he's crazy he'll lose all credibility), and ghosts don't like communicating with the living anyways, unless you're willing to trade something away. Sherlock is NOT. So, his power seems pretty useless, right?

But what if he had a ghost friend? A ghost bonded to him, haunting him, but still on good enough terms that he's willing to help Sherlock in his endeavors. His ghost friend interrogates the ghosts on the scene, asks questions, makes sure they get as much info from the other side as they can. Sherlock uses the clues to find out WHAT question to ask.

Now all that's left is to figure out just who that ghost is... The easy answer seems to be John. A dead soldier haunting 221B, Sherlock moves in, and John gets so enraptured in Sherlock's adventures that his unfinished business becomes writing about him. John uses a haunted pen to write it all, by hand.

But then, Johnlock just becomes tragic, doesn't it? Sherlock is constantly lying awake, fearing that John will finally tire of writing about him and move on to the next plane. And John doesn't want to leave Sherlock alone! He's scared of what Sherlock might do, if left behind. John is refusing himself Heaven, to make sure Sherlock doesn't end up in Hell. Sure, he had no reason to think that Sherlock would end up in Hell, but... It's Sherlock. Come on. So when Sherlock does something wrong, John is WAY more on his case about it. He's terrified for Sherlock's soul. The fic would end with the Fall, because why, pray tell, would Sherlock bother faking his death? Just join your boyfriend. Sure, he could envision a way out, but all he has to do is lie to John, "there is no other way", and John would let himself be convinced.

That's all well and good, but a story where the happy ending is "main character kills self" is not like... A GREAT moral for a story to have, especially in THIS mentally ill fandom. So you know what would be a better moral? Learning to let go of hurts past, and choosing to live. We all know Sherlock would die for John, would kill for him. What if, in this one, we make him live for him?

I propose Sherlock's ghost friend should be Victor Trevor. Sherlock's dead childhood friend never stopped haunting him, quite literally this time. Sherlock was so traumatized, his desire to grow up with Victor, to not be left alone, so strong that he accidentally tethered Victor to the mortal plane. He doesn't know he's the one who did it, of course, and Victor doesn't want to tell him. He knows Sherlock would hate himself too much for it. So, they cohabitate. They get to grow up together. At first, they think Victor is just going to stay a child, but for some reason he's able to grow older. Makes sense, since he's a manifestation of Sherlock's desire for them to age together, but THEY DON'T KNOW THAT. Sherlock isn't as bitter about being alone, in this version. After all, he still has a best friend. And no one could ever replace him.

Then he meets John.

Oh! The guilt of Sherlock, as he begins to feel things for John! Oh! The jealousy of John, for this unknowable, apparently much smarter, funnier, handsomer friend than he! Oh! The torn feelings of Victor, both fearing losing his place in Sherlock's heart, and wishing his friend would move on!

... Should I write it.

[peachyfnaf]

ik yer on mayb still on hiatus from the vids, but the post-death nexus interview :(

never seen people try so desperately to push a specific narrative, felt like such a big 'fuck you' in personal opinion. like the complete flatness and all the self-pity blame and just how hostile 'solar' was??? not to mention the complete sun blame is so contrasting to the sams arc??? i guess they want us to agree w/ moon that sun has no reason to grieve???

i actually liked when nexus called 'solar' eclipse, b/c he was treating nexus so roughly it must have felt like a slight. why do you get to change your name and leave all your associations behind but i cant? imo

not 2 mention how much they switch up how nexus was plotting. he had one motive and then another and then a different one. and they brought up so many diff theories and then just didn't? answer them? or blew them off? just felt weird. bad.

...I ain't just on hiatus no-moaw, I stopped watching the shows entirely since Nex went kablooy hun JDFHSDF

But yeah, friends told me about today, and I do be out here agreeing. Then again the canonicity of the afterlife episodes is all wishy-woshy anyways so. Shrugs.

I do think the "flatness" of how Nexus was acting in the ep is because. He's literally 100% defeated in it. And also bc Nexus is depressed as shit, and people seem to forget that. In another podcast episode, he talked to Eclipse about how he was trying to "die faster". Aka suicidal. Which yk. Nawt gooaurd.

I like the way you think about him calling Solar Eclipse because of that reasoning. That is good and a gut punch. Ourgh

And also me friends were wondering why Solar and Nexus were so hostile to each other- but it does make sense to me after thinking about it. To Solar, that's not his Moon, his Moon is no longer there, and to Nexus, that's not his Solar, his Solar is alive with the family. They are not each other's best friends, they are strangers wearing their best friends names and/or skin.

AAAND lastly Nexus being so aggro towards Sun and all the unanswered questions- I think this is just more of Nexus being broody, emo, and petty lmao. If he really wanted Sun dead the most, he had MULTIPLE TIMES TO KILL HIM when he was alive. If he really hated everyone and never saw anyone as family, he would not have felt bad for what he did to Earth, and he would have never tried to have gotten Solar back in the first place.

Nexus is (shOcKiNGlY) a lying liar who lies, and he's also all bark and no bite. Because he talks a mean game, but then 90% of his actions fall/fell short. He is like a pancake that was left out for too long and is now all cold and soggy. It smells bad and might look bad too but bro it's just a pancake

Does that analogy make sense? Who knows

[captainuranium543]

I'm gonna say smth maybe controversial, I do not fw star dresses.

Listen I'm all for a Lucy power up but idk it just feels too close to erza's thing ig, especially with the fact she can mix them now.

Like my favorite thing about erza's fighting style before was how versatile it was with her main fighting power being her physical strength Which she could apply to almost every situation and, because of how low cost requip was magic wise, she could constantly switch armors and weapons to exploit any weakness.

Now all the versatility aspects I liked about erza's fights before seem to be going more to Lucy's fights, which is fine, but because of that erza's fights tend to be a lot more like natsu's these days where she relies on raw power to beat everyone which I honestly just don't like as much. I love natsu but I really never liked his fights and even then raw power battles make more sense for him than her just because of his magic type.

Erza and Lucy had similar summoning abilities before, the difference was in magical cost. Erzas was low cost and mostly relied on the physical strength and weapons skill of the user so she ended up being a very reactive fighter, meanwhile Lucy's magic has a much higher cost so she had to be careful about her summons and strategize a lot more.

With the star dresses though it is cool and all but it just feels like there was other things she could have gotten. If I'm being totally honest I think enchanting as a magical ability makes more sense for her then it does erza just based on magic style. Like I said earlier, erza is a reactive fighter, enchantments take thought and patience to complete and it's not the kind of thing you can do on the fly

The only way I think enchanting works for erza as a power up is if she was enchanting her own armors in her downtime, then using those armors in battle, I think that would be perfect actually because it would

A) give her a new ability connected to her mother

B) explain where she's getting the armors to remove the ambiguity of where she's picking these MFS up from

C) just fit better with her fighting style as a whole.

Besides this however I think using enchantments in battle is a perfect magic for Lucy because Lucy is that kind of wizard. We know for a fact she has an insanely high amount of magic power from the fact she can summon several golden keys at once and use a star dress when not even 2 silver keys were thought to be possible. She also already has several other casting based spells like urano metria. You wouldn't even have to make it the same kind of enchanting you could make it some kind of celestial based casting thing because tbh I think that kind of ability makes more sense to me as a gift from the mustache king than a bunch of cool outfits.

Hell if you wanted to make Lucy more of an active fighter then you can just do that. Half the time the weapon erza is using is just a regular ass sword, she's just really good at using a sword. Just let Lucy take a martial arts course, I know lucy "Lucy kick" heartfilia has some crazy strong legs so honestly get her into a karate class or smth and let her go nuts for a year.

I like Wendy as an enchanter for sure but girl is already dual wielding healing and attack magic. I think she's pretty good in terms of how much magic she can use honestly. Also before anyone gets on my ass about this I KNOW that enchanting makes most sense for Wendy and erza to use NARRATIVELY, I just mean from specifically a fighting style perspective I just think that type of ability makes more sense for Lucy then erza.

Anyway this isn't a hate post I just think star dresses feel kinda same-y and I'd like it better if she had some kind of ability, like something similar to heavenly body magic but obv not that exactly. Also I liked erza's more physical attacking style because of how unique it was and though it's nice that she has a power up It just doesn't really feel like it matches her style of fighting as well as it could.