#and i hate that i could also understand the nuance in the original language so it hits deeper??

[xuefangfei]

The Midnight Studio ep. 14: Overtime

[middle-earth-mythopoeia]

The latest bad take on Amazon’s Rings of Power is, “Rings of Power doesn’t contradict Tolkien’s canon, because there is no such thing as canon.”

I’ve seen more and more Rings of Power fans claiming that the show doesn’t go against canon because there are different versions of canon anyway, between The Silmarillion and the History of Middle-earth, and The Silmarillion wasn’t published by Tolkien, but by his son. They’re basically saying, “Canon? What canon?” And I just... No. The idea that “the show doesn’t go against canon because canon is so wishy-washy anyway” is SUCH a false argument to make.

Yes, Christopher Tolkien edited and published The Silmarillion after his father’s death. And yes, there are multiple conflicting versions of stories in The Silmarillion and HoMe. But that doesn’t mean there’s no such thing as being faithful to Tolkien’s stories. A lot of the choices Amazon has made in the show are completely wrong and would be wrong in any Tolkien adaptation.

The characterizations are totally off base. For heaven’s sake, hobbits wouldn’t abandon their own people on a journey. Elrond wouldn’t swear an oath like that. And the Númenoreans don’t hate Elves because Elves are stealing their jobs, they envy them for their immortality—it’s kind of the main theme of the Akallabêth. And, in the show, Galadriel—whose people were literally victims of the First Kinslaying—tries to steal a boat??? I mean, hello??????? Amazon hasn’t even tried to stay faithful Tolkien’s characterizations. Yes, adaptations usually take liberties with the source material, but holy shit.

And the very framing of fundamental issues is completely wrong. In the show, going to Valinor is portrayed as some sort of reward for valor in battle, which is not how it works in Tolkien’s books. The show also compressed the entire Second Age into a much shorter span of time, which is absurd and completely goes against what Tolkien wrote. The show glosses over the First Kinslaying, of course (I know it’s because they don’t have the rights, but it’s still their fault for mangling the story and themes), which makes it seem like the return of the Noldor to Middle-earth was some sort of righteous war, and it wasn’t. The list goes on and on.

And they can’t get basic details right, either. Obviously, the short-haired Elves are one example of this; so is the emblem that resembles a Fëanorian star on Galadriel’s armor. And it’s astounding how poorly the showrunners seem to understand the nuances of Tolkien’s names and constructed languages.

Tolkien was a linguist, and the languages he invented were extremely important to him and to his stories. So what did Amazon do? They completely ignored the internal logic of Tolkien’s secondary world. In The Silmarillion, Ar-Pharazôn banned Quenya in Númenor—but Amazon’s version of the character names his son a Quenya name. In the show, characters call Galadriel “Galadriel” even in Valinor, despite it being a Sindarin name given to her by her husband, Celeborn. It is anachronistic and inaccurate to refer to her by that name before Celeborn gives it to her, especially during the Years of the Trees when she didn’t even speak Sindarin. The show also gave one of the hobbits a Dwarven name, Nori, for no apparent reason. There are many more examples like this.

Amazon has also invented some things out of thin air that have no basis in Tolkien’s works at all. I understand that they had to invent original characters and storylines for this show. Inventing original characters could, in theory, work alongside canon instead of contradicting it, even though those characters aren’t found in Tolkien’s books. But mithril containing the light of a silmaril? What? And what’s with that weird bit where Amazon Elrond and Amazon Celebrimbor are talking about the silmarils and they say Morgoth cried when he looked at them and almost repented??? What the hell??? It makes no sense.

This is by no means an exhaustive list. The people who created this show have many many, many choices that completely fly in the face of Tolkien’s characterizations, worldbuilding, languages, and themes. (I haven’t watched Rings of Power and I don’t intend to, but this information is widely available if you read reviews and episode synopses.)

The show is also poorly written and ugly to look at, but that’s beside the point. The point of this post is just to say that no, just because there are multiple, conflicting versions of canon in The Silmarillion and HoMe doesn’t mean Amazon gets free reign to trample all over Tolkien’s stories. There is such a thing as making a faithful Tolkien adaptation, and this isn’t it.

[baiwu-jinji]

i apologize in advance if this ask sounds kinda weird, but i'm kinda curious to hear your thoughts on how the narrative treats qi rong, mostly because i think interacting only with the eng version/fandom might take some context from his character. i've seen people complaining that some fans woobify him too much, others complaining that some people treat him as a pure hate-sink when he's more than that. while i do think he's a multi-layered character, i do sometimes get the feeling that mxtx did not go easy on him, with the revised version being even crazier than before (some even say he was given a bit of onesided incestuous subtext with xl, but i wonder if that interpretation isn't just the result of weirdly translated lines in eng). i think this might be because he strikes me as a meta personification of sorts for toxic fans who place their identity and self-worth on just one person they completely idolize, and when that person is shown to be imperfect they immediately turn against them, and we know mxtx has had experience with those kinds of people.

i do think he's largely meant to be seen as unsympathetic overall, though i think there's strong nuances with his character as well. since his childhood he always lacked something and never really had a well formed identity, his prince name being symbolic of his life. he projected himself onto xl in life, and he kept on absorving the worst traits of the people around his life without really understanding them in order to feel powerful and important, from the xianle nobles to the signature traits of the other calamities. he also strikes me as very... "little brother"-coded, in the sense that he keeps looking for any sort of recognition and seems unable to mature. even when he hates xl i think he still somewhat craves his attention, and qr only developed a bit when he was forced to let go of this role by accidentally becoming a father instead. i think it's also interesting that he started out a lot like his father, but ended up sharing the fate of his mother.

i do wonder how the cn fandom views him and if he's nearly as divisive as he is here. i'd also be pretty interested in seeing some meta about him from cn fans. again, it feels like some context is missing by not speaking the language the book was originally written in...

Hi! I think the narrative basically takes the same stance as Xie Lian in its attitude towards Qi Rong, which is the sort of "I can't love you but I don't want to hate you, the best I could give you is indifference". I agree that Qi Rong isn't meant to be lovable, but MXTX isn't dismissive of him as a character either - she devoted almost an entire chapter to Qi Rong's death, let him speak his mind, and gave him some form of closure.

Qi Rong having onesided incestuous subtext with XL (!!) in the revised version is...very interesting haha, I haven't read the revised version so I can't know (someone please tell me where to get the revised version ><). Although I want to speculate that even if there is some incestuous vibes, it's not truly sexual - it's probably libido directed the wrong way when you're lusting over someone else's identity, but not over that person per se. Qi Rong lusts over XL's identity in the sense that he wants to be XL - or rather he wants to be perfect, worshipped, all-powerful etc. (bit of digression, there's an underrated psychological thriller called Cracks starring Eva Green, if you watch it you'll know what I mean)

I don't have the impression that he's truly divisive in the Chinese fandom, but then I don't engage with the Chinese fandom that much so I could totally be wrong. And I don't think any context is missing for English readers either (except maybe the humour of QR's obscene language might be lost in translation?) because human nature is the same everywhere, and Qi Rong's distorted psyche is more a matter of human nature than cultural context.

As for Chinese fandom's view of QR, there's this great meta I translated and posted a few days ago, and I found some other opinion pieces about Qi Rong on Zhihu (Chinese equivalent of Reddit), as you'll see they're quite diverse.

A lot of Chinese readers say that what stands out most about Qi Rong is his comedic role in the story because his cursing and name-calling are really funny; a lot of people also mention being really touched by his self-sacrifice to save Guzi. I found this one post that has a similar view to yours, which is QR represents MXTX's toxic fans:

"I always felt it's the author admonishing her fans in an implicit way not to be as crazy as Qi Rong [...] My guess is that the author can't ask her fans outright not to act in this way because that would hurt people who support her but are immature, however she can't turn a blind eye to these people going around provoking more resentment, so she creates QR to remind her fans not to be like QR, or they'd appear as unlikable as QR to the public. But the author still feels symathy for thse fans, so she didn't depict their representation in the novel as totally incorrigible - QR retains some humanity and is a little adorable when he starts to care about people."

I also saw opinions about the narrative (or rather Xie Lian) not going easy on Qi Rong, like this one:

"Xie Lian is clearly a very good person but why is he so heartless to QR? He eventually treated QR as a joke and a burden, but QR was once a true follower of his. At first I thought XL was perfect and cares about everyone, but he never really cared for his cousin. When I read that XL felt neither joy nor sorrow when QR died saving Guzi, my heart chilled. If XL could forgive the masses who betrayed and reviled him, why can't he forgive his cousin who once followed him whole-heartedly?"

There're also people saying that Qi Rong's potential divisiveness is what makes him a great villain, like this post:

"What MXTX's well-received villains have in common is a tragic childhood and not being loved growing up, and they only have a soft spot for one person. Although these villains did horrible deeds and are unrepentant, they all reserve some kindness in their heart for the only person who's good to them. This contrast is striking and touching, yet most likely to cause controversy. Therefore, MXTX knows very clearly how to create a memorable villain, and I admire that."

Someone else says when they read about Qi Rong they "don't know whether to laugh or cry" (XL's signature emotion hehe). They add that "this is where MXTX is successful in writing a villain - you both hate and pity him; he's infuriating, but you don't really want to see him die either."

Another view is that since Qi Rong has no filter, he sometimes serves as the truth-telling voice. For example, when XL wanted to keep Lang Qianqiu in the dark about the truth of the Gilded Banquet Massacre, Qi Rong blurted out the truth.

There's also a question posted on Zhihu that asks why people like Qi Rong, and there're some interesting answers. There's one post that says "I find him attractive because he's depicted as alluringly ghostly in a lot of fan art like vampires in Twilight" haha

Another post says they like Qi Rong "because he's guilelessly wicked, while XL and Hua Cheng are hypocrites" emmmmm

Another one says they like Qi Rong because "being Xie Lian is exhausting, he's so wronged but he just endures it all, while Qi Rong just launches verbal assults whenever someone rubs him the wrong way, it's so cathartic. The most difficult thing in the world is to be a good person, because as soon as you do one thing wrong, everyone criticises you; but if you're a bad person, even if you did just one good thing, everyone praises you for it and shows you pity".

[aquaquadrant]

Popping in to say that I’ve been following ur htp au since like,,, October last year? I’ve left some asks before about how much I love it (I was that anon who was needing out about tango and bravo’s names and the international flag code from several months ago + a few other asks)

The ending was the most beautiful and SATISFYING piece of literature I’ve ever written. Genuinely. Wtf. And I’ve read a lot of books. I’m an English/creative writing major and your work is so beautiful, the story arcs, every loose end was tied up, you’re like the new standard for awesomeness. Seriously.

every loose end was wrapped up so well, all the closure and follow up we wanted, explanations of things like Scáil, hels meanings, their admin, even other hermits at the end there that were mentioned about in asks before but I never thought would be relevant in the main story. Things we didn’t even need to know like bX I was not expecting at all, I was content with just what we knew about him but you made it even better.

also the callbacks to earlier chapters, earlier moments and little jokes, bravo and Timmy’s not a builder moment was awesome, the way you portrayed bravo and tangos mindsets was phenomenal and with such intricacies. Stunning. And you didn’t force a reconciliation between bravo and timmy either, so natural.

Everything had a reason, an explanation, even the intricacies of herobrine? wasnt expecting that at all. Or Alex???! You didn’t need to include that detail BUT YOU DID AND I LOVE IT

the way you explained the greater player universe learning about hels, also the pausing on the red stone tutorial!! Loved that part. The pov switches and pacing of the last chapter p 1 and 2 were perfect. Well executed to keep the reader able to understand but still enough suspense. Not to mention once again your way of capturing each persons way of talking. Bravo having similar vocab to tango especially really drives home their similarities.

The way atlas breaks. It’s so hard to make an ending with someone like him SATISFYING because man I’ve read so many stories where it’s just not it. But you did it so fucking well. And subjected to retail salesman lifestyle on top of that? Wonderful. His damn glasses finally broken. Good. Or The watchers and listeners in the background too! Loved that. You explained things that were talked about in asks so well that even those who don’t read the asks could understand.

Most of all emotional and moral nuance. So perfectly explained. As someone who used to have a hard time with moral ocd I relate a lot to the obsession with good vs evil that I’ve had to come to terms with in my own journey and I can really see that mirrored in this fic, just like the characters learn.

And in addition to it all, I loved the ending with the Minecraft credits end message. You not only made it interesting and beautiful story and awareness of the player’s existence without being too confusing, but perfectly replicated the voices of the end credits characters. The tone and language that the original has. Last week I beat the enderdragon for the first time. I used to only play on public servers or private worlds with friends, even in single player I was a big coward and hated fighting mobs even with keep inventory and no mob griefing, they just stress me out!! But I did it for the first time and I read through the entire end credits of a game I’ve loved for so long for the first time and it made me cry. And you replicated it perfectly which is SO hard to do. The benevolence of the universe, no plot holes to be found about the logic of hels, the voices of the two people and their storytelling and acknowledging of the story. The universe is described so similarly in cannon about the good and bad that it’s like the au fits perfectly. The “why them?” Beautiful. It was like deja vu scrolling through like the end credits with the same benevolent warmth that envelops you like a wordless, comforting presence from this fictional universe. A touching moral about games and stories and people. And just like the end credits of both the game and this fic said, there will be another game and another story. The universe still loves the player just as it did before. This was such a special story to read and I am so glad I did. Genuinely, this will stay with me for a long time, we can learn a lot not just about writing and storytelling techniques, but about ourselves and eachother too.

Thank you.

AUUGHHHH…. genuinely one of the loveliest reviews i’ve ever gotten… your reaction to the finale is everything i could’ve hoped to achieve. thank you thank you THANK YOU <333

[duckiemimi]

thoughts on this post:

https://www.tumblr.com/alluratron/729365875383222272/thoughts-on-gojo-satoru

it def gave me a different perspective of ch 236 and also Gojo… i guess i never really understood him (i mean granted i only check in on the manga to see who’s survived so far 😭)

definitely interesting and a new perspective for me, too!

that was a lovely read! i can’t read japanese, so it’s great to see the nuances in gojo’s words from the original language itself. with this post in mind, i will say that while i can understand how gege wrote him, i don’t understand why.

it’s true that gojo is different from everyone else! the way he processes information and emotions is a very obvious indicator that he is. but instead of a match in strength, i assumed the biggest lesson he had to learn as a character framed as “alone” by everyone else in the series was connection and interdependence. as in, instead of finding or making people on par with him, i assumed that the work he needed to do as a character was to realize that he could be understood despite the gap in power between him and everyone else. i mean, he’s found that place of understanding before with geto. and that was even after he became the strongest alone. but maybe he was written without the intention of growth. then why write him the way he is?

perhaps the fault really lies in the english translations because by saying “allies” in english, i assumed he meant “support,” as in supporting him as fellow jujutsu sorcerers. it implies that there is a burden to bear and that he wishes to have more people to shoulder it with him, on the same height (similar levels; “catch up with me”). i wouldn’t exactly use the word “allies” to describe a group of people fostered to be on par with gojo for fun’s sake only.

but he is a nuanced character, so perhaps he does care about his responsibilities as a jujutsu sorcerer, and he simultaneously wants other jujutsu sorcerers to have as much fun as he does. but then why doesn’t he just unilaterally establish a new system, since he hates the higher ups and how they run it? geto posed a good question; it’s possible for gojo. is the system a weakness? is his name and lineage a weakness? i don’t understand why we were given so many empathic scenes of him shit-talking the higher-ups when he could just flip the world upside down. if he were leading jujutsu (instead of being somewhat of a figurehead like before), then he could foster people who could have as much fun as he does with jujutsu, right? he could make jujutsu fun for everyone, or at least he could appoint people to make it fun, right? then why hold back?

i think the problem with the writing is that while gojo is a very self-centered character, undeniably arrogant with the power to back it up, he doesn’t exist in a vacuum. gege wrote in politics and a whole world beyond just gojo and his powers, gege wrote in characters who render gojo unmoving. so it’s strange to see gege pick and choose whether or not the canon world affects gojo that day. it’s not consistent. but i mean, gege hates the guy, i guess. so it tracks, as tracking goes.

if so many people see his character a certain way, regardless of language, maybe the problem lies in the readability of his character. assume your readers are smart, yes, but don’t leave things so vague and messy for them to figure it all out by themselves. there’s an obvious incongruity in knowledge between the author and the readers that should be leveled. is he supposed to develop and reach a resolution, like many people assumed he would, or is he supposed to die with his “original sin”? the transition between the gojo we saw in volume 0, in hidden inventory, and even right before his sealing to the gojo we see in 236 is not effective enough to answer that.

[shewholovestoread]

GYEONGSEONG CREATURE PART 1 - THE OVERVIEW (PART 1 OF 2)

Good news: I finished Gyeongseong Creature Part 1 last night, in one sitting.

Bad news: Now I have to wait till the 5th of January for the remaining episodes.

Plot: Based in Korea in the 1940s while it struggles under the Japanese occupation, a group of people enter a hospital to look for someone only to discover that a missing person is the least of their concerns with a literal monster on the rampage.

Cast: Park Seo-joon, Han So-hee, Wi Ha-joon, Kim Soo-hyun (Claudia Kim), Jo Han-chul, Kim Hae-sook, Ji Woo, Im Chul-soo, Choi Young-joon

The Overview

I went into this show pretty blind outside of the basic gist of the plot, I expected a run-of-the-mill creature feature and the show definitely delivers in that respect but it also gives us characters worth rooting for even if they don't always agree with each other and strong and complex women across the spectrum.

I know there are some who are a little annoyed about the shorter season (10 episodes instead of the usual 16-episode season) and while I understand the frustration, I think the shorter season was the only way to handle a story like this.

Another thing that is a little frustrating is the decision to split the season into 2 parts, so part 1 dropped with 7 episodes and the remaining 3 episodes will drop on the 5th of January. I knew about the split going into part 1 and.... I don't hate it. The way part 1 ends makes it bearable. It's not quite a cliffhanger (on the cliffhanger scale, this was positively kind) And that way I can do a full rewatch and then watch part 2, making it a more complete experience.

There is no respite in this show, once the story gets going and it gets going pretty quickly, there is no break in the tension. There are no filler episodes. The pace is also consistent throughout all 7 episodes, so it feels more like a very long, stressful film instead of a 7-episode show and I think that works in its favour.

The narrative is also very streamlined, we have very clear narrative arcs that we're following. The first episode opening voice over can be a little tedious but this is an original show (as in not based on a webcomic), so I could deal with that. The writer has done a great job balancing the time they spend with the people inside the hospital and those outside, coupled with competing motives even when people are seemingly on the same side. And the fact that all of this easy to follow is no small feat. This is one of the tightest, most cohesive shows I've seen in a while.

Gyeongseong Creature has one of the most visually striking opening credits and it's worth paying attention to. Outside of the visual appeal, there are a lot of clues/foreshadowing to be found there. The credits also add to the unsettling atmosphere of the show. 10/10.

The show takes place in Korea under the brutal Japanese occupation. I suggest paying attention to the language the characters use (Korean vs Japanese) because it can really give you insight about the character or the context of the conversation. When you're watching the show, there are conversations, where if you're not paying attention, you won't understand why the atmosphere is so charged. To live in a place, where the mere act of speaking in your own language could mean getting brutally beaten became an act of rebellion. It adds a whole other level of nuance and I loved that.

The show also doesn't shy away from the cruelty of the Japanese occupation, the sheer callous way that the local population was treated. It also brings in the medical experiments that the Japanese scientists conducted on the local people (both in China and Korea) Their attitude is perhaps the most chilling (I was cheering when the monster got loose)

It also makes you question who the monster actually is, the literal monster (the person who was turned without their consent) or the people facilitating this, the ones conducting these 'experiments'. Everyone from children to old people were fair game in their twisted quest for progress.

More in Part 2.

[struggle-but-its-all-ocean-floor]

pretty much just echoing what other anons are saying about the absolute lack of nuance that armys have fostered where anyone who has a negative opinion about anything the members do is just an uncultured hater who wants the entire wrath of stan twitter to fall on x member.

while i do think black armies are absolutely correct about the virtue signaling and pearl clutching that white armies tend to do when it comes to sexual references in hip hop/rap outside of bts and agree that it is largely based in racist stereotypes. i think the “bora glasses” are causing them to miss the point of a lot of the uproar. its not about lyrics being sexual bc this (for the most part) did not happen with latto’s verse. in addition, a lot of them hate to admit they find this language attractive bc its the kind of stuff we have been socialized to expect from men since we are little girls. i am latina and grew up around reggaeton (heavily influenced by rap and hip hop) where a min. 80% of the music is extremely degrading and objectifying of women. even as a queer adult woman in her late 20s while i acknowledge this issue with the genre (and have heard much more explicit things) a lot of that music is extremely nostalgic to me. so i understand the cognitive dissonance but i cannot accept that from men i expect better from (not JH obviously lol).

and yes, i do think this is a bad look for JK even if he didn’t sing or write that part bc either he’s aware of the meaning and has no problem with it or is that oblivious to not even know what someone is saying on his own damn song. the fact that an alternate version even exists with this collab tells me that the check cleared before someone in a board room went “actually maybe not”.

despite my deep respect for BTS throughout the years, at the end of the day I will always acknowledge that they are men. they are not some sexless unicorns raised in a place with no misogyny or gender roles, they are men and like most other men they engage in behavior that often betrays the respect of most women whether consciously or subconsciously. we simply may not see it bc they are celebrities with pretty curated online personalities. now, that doesn’t mean i think they’re secretly chauvinistic pigs but despite my respect for them i always keep a degree of distance bc they *could* be.

i will add that the “bora glasses” are a hell of a drug. the double standards when it comes to the members vs other celebrities is insane (and i dont even like most celebrities lol). i know not a single one of these armies would think twice about talking shit about a song like this if it were from anyone else and that’s what really disappoints me about what our spaces have turned into.

I really appreciate your perspective on what the previous anon said , given your own personal experiences and culture. I'm obviously not the best person to speak on this subject.

I agree that the "bora glasses" are a real thing. It seems to me that even "normal" Armys are complaining a bit about the song, however, which is good. But I don't know that the solo version exists simply because Hybe foresaw the original would upset people. They likely wanted to recreate with 3D what they did for Seven - two versions counting as one, or at least another version to boost streams apart from the instrumental. Since it didn't make sense to have a clean and explicit versions again, and because maybe they knew some fans hadn't liked Latto's verses or Seven being a feature, they used the same strategy they applied to TXT's Back For More recently, and recorded a solo version.

I also agree that BTS are men, so, like all men, they're probably a lot more insensitive and ignorant to sexism than we imagine, and say or do a lot of things that would disappoint us (though I don't believe they're secretly chauvinistic pigs at all).

Anyway, thanks for your fresh take!

[cvm-jpfilm]

Yukisada - GO

I LOVED this movie and its Yakuza-like protagonist. Though its a love story, I don't particularly see the movie as a romance. Instead the romance in the film serves to humanize the protagonist, who before was merely a ball of fury. The introspection that the movie presents through Sugihara really hit me hard; the isolation, the degradation, the anger, and the realization pulled me in to Sugihara's world and allowed me to sympathize with him. I could really connect with his circumstances and the absurdity of the situation surrounding Japanese-Koreans.

So obviously, the movie bases itself on the ethnic dilemma of Koreans/Chinese people living in Japan, specifically Zainichi. It's a phrase I've of before while studying Japanese and I wanted to write a little bit about it to capture how exactly this connotation impacts the meaning of the film. If you don't know Japanese, this might also explain to you why exactly Sugihara hates this label so much. So Zainichi (在日), literally meaning staying in (在) Japan (日from 日本 or Nihon/Japan) , refers to at it's simplest residents living in Japan. There is an important connotation in the phrases staying in or residents because this kanji,在, does not denote permanent stay. Its connotation might be derived from the verb it forms, which more closely aligns to "to exist (at a particular point in time)" which is one of the most basic verbs in Japanese,ある. The temporary connotation of this label is quite degrading as it literally refers to Japanese-Koreans as temporary residents or outsiders in Japan. In American terms, imagine if common English terms for people of specific foreign roots had the underlying meaning of "go back to your country". Although this isn't really that farfetched when terms like alien exists, which can be heavily demoralizing to people of foreign descent. I think understanding just how engrained the discrimination is in society and language can better frame Sugihara's fight against being labeled.

Which leads me to my next point, what is this movie about? Well, the overall film is definitely a critique on the discrimination of Koreans/Chinese in Japan. It quite clearly and harshly depicts the isolation, vulnerability, and hopelessness of Korean people like Sugihara when Japanese society turns its back on them. However, I think the film has a slightly more nuanced approached then just, "Sugihara wants to be part of Japanese society", that he wants to be just like everyone else. That's the thing, he DOESN'T. He's not Zainichi, a lion, an alien, or even me/himself, he doesn't have or is interested in any identity. I think he makes that pretty clear at the end of the movie, but what really stuck out to me is how Sakurai responds to his confusion over his identity. She doesn't "accept" him in the traditional sense. She's not saying that he's just like any Japanese person, that we're "all alike" or something to that effect. She says "Don't care what you are". The film is saying that stuff doesn't matter, its who the person is that matters. I found that very heartwarming, but also distinctive in that it doesn't label Sugihara a certain way. It doesn't fit him in a box, because the box really doesn't matter.

In this way, the movie strays away from the Shakespearean influence it draws. Its kind of hard not to notice, but the movie heavily draws parallels from Romeo and Juliet. Star-crossed lovers who cannot be together due to their social identities, Sugihara's friend is killed just like Romeo's, and the quotes all allude to this connection. However, it separates from the moral of Romeo and Juliet when Sugihara does not take revenge for his friend's murder, unlike in Romeo and Juliet. The subsequent revenge is what kicks off the war between the feuding families and leads to the lover's deaths. The separation marks a departure from the original message of play, which mocks the family clan structure at the time. Yukisada acknowledges that the relationship between Japan and its Korean/Chinese residents is not as balanced as the clans of the play. Zainichi and other phrases are an unilateral establishment of identity forced upon these people, and splitting from the original story acknowledges that relationship. Unlike the play, where clan identity is criticized because it does not affect who people are, the film disregards identity's meaning entirely because it is someone other people give to each other. In other words, only who people actually are matters.

I was much more focused on the narrative for this film, but I do want to draw attention for a bit to the use of physical objects and distance as symbolism, specifically fences. Yep, it sounds a little weird or basic but hear me out. During the first half of the film, Sugihara tries to jump over two fences when running away from the police. Sugihara is literally running from a Japanese institution, the police, and trying to escape by jumping over a fence. But he can't. He's caught twice and reprimanded. The fence in this case serves as a physical obstacle to the societal entrapment of Korean/Chinese residents in Japan.

Yet, this isn't always the case. In fact, Sakurai complements Sugihara's ability to jump over something. What is that something? A fence, the fence to his Korean school.

It is easy for Sugihara to jump over the fence to the Korean side because it is original identity, but can't do the same for the Japanese fence. It's a small detail but demonstrates Sugihara's conflicting identity.

[oumaheroes]

hii its bougie <3 if you're still taking hc requests, i was wondering if you'd have thoughts on something that's been on my mind for a while. i was interested in the nuance to english culture due to regional differences. eg.,dinner being called "tea" in the north of england, rugby being more popular in the south, the difference in how scones with jam and cream are enjoyed in Devon and Cornwall?? or how certain english accents are perceived as... "less attractive" i guess (the black country accents are unpopular apparently?) -- you'd probably know more about these particularities than me ;u;

i was wondering how these cultural differences might map onto hws England's character, and how they might influence his attitudes and behaviours. because there's such a clearly defined stereotype of the english that i think shape people's expectations of what the english are like, i usually think that Arthur usually consciously acts according to what counts as positive interpretations of himself. however, i love nuanced and somewhat subversive interpretations of his character, and am very curious if you might have any ideas on how these kind of internal regional differences might shape him.

--------------------

Bougieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee <3

I’m not gonna lie this sent me down a RABBIT HOLE of thoughts, so hang on tight cos we're gonna get messy.

Accents:

Let’s start with my personal favourite, so excuse me whilst I geek out for a second. I’ve gone into this area already in this headcanon, but I personally see England being a very proud little dragon regarding English accents, those both native and non-native to the British Isles. Focusing just on accents within England for this post, the way Arthur himself sees them, (regarding class and general preference), comes a lot down to how I see him feeling about language and the unification of England in general.

England is a tiny country. It’s really teeny, compared to some, and yet holds an incredible number of regional accents and dialects (from digging about the internet for a good source, I keep finding numbers ranging from 37 to 43). There are a number of reasons for this, but the one that I love the most is that accents are influenced by the previous/ influential other languages spoken in a given area. Accents on the East of England are more influenced by Viking invaders, both phonologically and via the dialectal words used, and accents/ dialects in the West are more influenced by Welsh, for example.

Accents and dialects tell the history of a place, all who ever came there and influenced it to some degree. The map of English accents is a patchwork quilt of old cultures and people now lost to time, but their ways of speaking have been preserved in the modern tongue. The old English kingdoms might now be mere counties- Kent, Essex, Sussex, East Anglia, etc- they may not have their own influence or language these days as they used to, but their old ways have been imprinted on their people of today whether they know it or not and they carry pieces of the past in their words and how they speak them. Older speakers of the Northern English dialects liek the Yorkshire dialect still use ‘thou/thee’ where this has fallen out in other areas, the Midlands and parts of the South-East still keep the ‘-n’ ending for possessive pronouns (‘yourn’ instead of ‘yours’, ‘ourn’ instead of ‘ours’), and there’s even some linguistic research into how Brittonic, the ancestor of Modern Welsh, influenced English structure and phonology (for references, see notes at the end).

Back to England the person (to contain myself slightly), his regional accents are a story of himself, his history being kept alive in all of its variety every day. He doesn’t hold a classist view of a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ accent because he knows why they’re all there- what languages and people influenced them and how these events affected him- the older generations now lost and forgotten being kept alive in the smallest of phonemes.

Every dialect, every accent, and every language tells the story of a people, from the smallest phonological marker right up to a language as a whole and England takes comfort and pride in his dialects and accents’ longevity and variety. He is as much of the North as he is the South, as much of the East as the West and a patchwork man born of patchwork cultures it makes no sense for him to favour one particular accent over another.

That being said, he is aware that there is a common cultural stance on accents as well as an opinion regarding ‘ugly’ ones, ‘common’ ones, and ‘classy’ ones, but he himself doesn’t partake in these ideas. I like to think that a nation takes on the speech of the people and the area they’re in, matching the person they speak to or the area they visit to relate to their people. So, for me a Chav Arthur exists as much as a Brummie one does, or a Scouser, or a Geordie, or a Cockney. They’re all English, and thus they’re all a part of him.

Class

I have to include this one, if only to touch on it lightly regarding accents and dialects. Class does influence which words you speak, arguably just as much as which accent (this is known as a sociolect). Although I said that England adopts the accent of whatever area he’s in, or whomever he’s talking to if they’re English, the class people are will also affect which words he choses to use.

Here’s a short example from here:

'It is pudding for the upper class. Dessert is sometimes used by upper middles, but afters and sweets very clearly put you below stairs.'

Have some more!

Upper class: Spectacles, Lavatory or loo, Die, Napkin, Sofa

Middle class: Glasses, Toilet , Pass on, Serviette, Settee or couch

(Working class is a mix but harder to find sources for).

This is where England treads a fine line. It could be that he again adopts more of a class lexicon regarding who he is speaking to, matching his people word for word. However, England is not unaware of the affects of class, regardless of how he himself feels, and also although class snobbery and divide frustrate him, he cannot deny using this understanding to benefit himself, which also conforms to how his own people behave. (I myself have, many times, diluted and filtered my speech to be seen as ‘better’).

Want to be seen as more reliable and powerful? Want to be taken more seriously? RP and Estuary English (a lot more so these days), hold undeniable sway and England is not above adopting a manner of speaking to come across ‘better’ or more polite, or a more ‘common’ accent to fit in with the working classes. I think of England as leaning more towards a working-class mindset- he’s very hands on, very up for and used to manual labour and this particular English class has always made up the bulk of his population. It makes no sense for a nation, who represents all of their people, to have a snide view or a preference for a particular group and England as a person I see is someone who does not enjoy the foppery and false airs of aristocracy.

That being said, England is an intelligent man. He knows how to work a room and use a crowd to his advantage, knows what must be done and what he needs to do to achieve a goal and if this entails courting the upper classes for a time then he will do so. He’s adepts at switching himself like a chameleon, blending his behaviours, accent, and dialect to match who he’s talking to to achieve a goal or to fit in with someone’s perception of him, or to gain influence or prestige. He also doesn’t hate his upper classes- they are of him too, and the middle and working class have their own prejudices and ideas against the others. But he doesn’t adopt a stereotypical distain of lower classes because to him, it really doesn’t make much sense.

Abroad, this need to cultivate a particular perception defiantly comes under greater pressure. RP and Estuary English are more well know, more heard and taught, and more recognisably ‘British’, and so these are what he uses when speaking English to other nations or foreigners, either wanting to uphold an image of himself (more so in the Victorian/ Edwardian period than nowadays) or just for the ease of being understood.

Regional Differences

Okay, this one is a lot more fun. Does England put in his milk first or last when making tea? Does he put jam first, or clotted cream when having a scone? Does he have chips with gravy, or curry sauce? Does he have dinner at 6, or 9? To marmite, or not to marmite.

Ah, that is the question, and England does not know the answer. Does he do what he does because that’s what he likes, or because that’s what his people do? He didn’t grow up with these habits, after all, they’re all relatively recent in his lifetime, and so these habits are defiantly things he cultures for a particular audience.

I’m not really sure if the above preferences are class based, (well, milk first when making tea is argued to be, but I can't find any sources I'd consider entirely credible. I put the ones I did find in the notes below, in case any one's interested), so it’s hard to get a sense of which one to use. Overall, it doesn’t matter which you do and neither is right or wrong, but the English feel strongly about them, one way or another, and often Arthur the man isn’t sure at all which one he himself actually thinks is better.

Food in another sense though is something he can be surer of. A Cornish pastie not from Cornwall is not worth eating, nor is a Bakewell tart outside of Bakewell. England can be very particular about this sort of thing and enjoys maintaining and supporting the ‘original’ flavour or recipe of a thing where he can, considering this to be the ‘best’. Sally Lunn Buns from Bath, Gypsy tarts from Kent, Eccles Cakes from Eccles.

England wants to preserve his food and culture and has what could be considered a snobbish view on the ‘best’ way of creating or eating his national foods. Some things he is more lenient with: he will eat cheddar cheese, whether or not it is from Cheddar, same from Cumberland sausages not from Cumbria. But he certainly has a preference and he is not afraid to voice this when asked for his opinion.

Okay, we're done

Phew! This had me digging out my old linguistic student brain. To anyone who has made it this far down, gosh golly miss molly thank you for reading! I hope you enjoyed the ride, and especially @prickyy who was kind enough to want to hear my opinions about all of this <3

----------------------------------------

Notes:

Brittonic influence on English:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brittonicisms_in_English

https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar_url?url=http://journals.mountaintopuniversity.edu.ng/English%2520Language/Celtic%2520Influences%2520in%2520English%2520A%2520Re-evaluation.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&ei=2ohDYdq3BoWImwHn6oWQAg&scisig=AAGBfm29zTF0FBCpd1KqDiAbjM-0X7nfoA&oi=scholarr (PDF)

https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar_url?url=http://www.oppi.uef.fi/wanda/unicont/abstracts/14ICEHL_MF.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&ei=2ohDYdq3BoWImwHn6oWQAg&scisig=AAGBfm3UvOXbJEb0b51J73eBnTJvgGaQOA&oi=scholarr (PDF)

Sociolects and class distinction within language in English:

https://languageawarenessbyrosalie.weebly.com/social-dialects.html

https://www.grin.com/document/313937

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_and_non-U_English

Milk in tea first and the potential class reason:

https://www.theteaclub.com/blog/milk-in-tea/

https://qmhistoryoftea.wordpress.com/2017/05/11/milk-in-first-a-miffy-question/

[aspoonofsugar]

Hello, I would like to know what you think about the discussion that Cinder and Watts had.

It is interesting to note that what Watts tells Cinder is that her suffering doesn't make her strong or special or worthy of anything and by extension Watts tells Cinder that as much as she pretends that her suffering made her strong in reality she is still quite fragile and vulnerable because she hasn't been able to overcome her trauma and still wants to give meaning to her life and suffering.

Hello anons!

These two asks can be answered together.

First of all, I really liked that scene! It is probably my favourite moment of the episode together with the sequence in the underground.

I think there are two ways to see Watts and Cinder’s interaction in the episode.

1) Cinder

Cinder: You’re right. Without you I am nothing. But because of you, I am everything.

As I have written here:

Cinder’s way of thinking is very similar to Mercury’s. Not only have they both endured their parents’ violence, but they have tried to give this violence meaning. It is because of Madame that Cinder has become “everything” and it is because of Marcus that Mercury has become “strong”. They must believe that it was not all for nothing and that the pain they felt made them stronger instead of weaker.

This is why Cinder thinks that deep down her “hunger” is good. It is because it drives her, but she ignores that it blinds her too.

The idea that suffering made her stronger and more deserving than others is Cinder’s main coping mechanism.

She was treated as nothing, so she needs to believe she is secretly worthy of things others are negated. As I have stated here, she deep down wants to be chosen:

I would say that Cinder wants to be chosen. She wants to be special and to be given value. This is probably why she is serving Salem. It is because Salem has chosen her for an important role.

Well, Watts’s speech is about exactly this:

Watts: You think you’re entitled to everything because you’ve suffered, but suffering isn’t enough. You can’t just be strong, you have to be smart. You can’t just be deserving, you need to be worthy.

In a couple of phrases he deconstructs Cinder’s coping mechanism and this is why she is made to feel so vulnerable.

The whole point of Cinder is that she should stop reducing herself to her trauma and pain. By doing so, she both dehumanizes herself and dismisses others.

She dehumanizes herself because she tries to overcome her inferiority complex by looking for power and she does not realize that this is turning her into a monster:

Raven: Aura can’t protect your arm, it’s Grimm. You turned yourself into a monster just for power.

She dismisses others because she is so focused on her own pain that she can’t notice others’.

In short, she must stop pretending everything revolves around her and should start working on herself and her own issues. This is thematically what Watts’s speech is about. It also ties to the teaching of the Fall Maiden about choice. Destiny is not something that is given to you, but something you work towards:

Pyrrha: When I think of destiny, I don’t think of a predetermined fate you can’t escape. But rather… some sort of final goal, something you work towards your entire life.

Cinder is looking for worth outside herself. She wants Salem to recognize her and magical powers to be strong. She misses that self-worth is something only Cinder can grant herself.

However, things are not as simple in-universe because Watts is not referring to this in his speech. What he wants is not for Cinder to overcome her issues and to realize serving Salem is wrong. What Watts wants is for her to become better at her job.

Not only that, but in Watts’s speech there is hidden also this message that @luimnigh and @harostar have discussed here. Their posts are already clear, so I won’t spend much time on it.

The main idea is that Watts is worthy, while Cinder is not and how it goes back to their different upbringings and social status. In short, Watts is an Atlesian elite, while Cinder is a no-one, who was bought as a slave. Cinder keeps feeling this difference and can’t really break free from this kind of mentality.

That said, I think this last point gains more nuance when one looks at what this speech means for Watts himself.

2) Watts

Watts’s allusion is Watson and WoG says that he is Watson if he had connected with Moriarty instead of Sherlock. Personally, I think that as for now another good way to describe his allusion is that he is Watson if he were jealous of Sherlock instead of loyal to him.

As for now, Watts’s defining trait is his jealousy of Pietro Polendina and of his creation:

Watts: She’ll open the vault and she’ll destroy herself...And our little Penny problem would be...

It is not by chance that he wants to blow her up, even if that would not really be necessary. The Little Penny Problem he is talking about is really his problem and not Salem’s, who could not care less about Penny once she has the relic.

Watts wants to destroy Penny because he wants to be better than Pietro. Still, he misses why Pietro is better than him:

Watts: She’s on a set-path now...At least she should be...As much as I hate to admit it there seems to be some part of her capable of resisting...

As we know, the part of Penny who is capable of resisting is her humanity. Penny is a masterpiece not because she is a war machine, but because she is a real girl. This is the core of Pietro’s genius and this is what Watts can’t grasp:

Watts: Our tin soldier's heart has cost him his mind. We need to keep their attention on Mantle for as long as possible.

Watts, just like Ironwood, believes that feelings make you weak and stupid. Of course, this is the anti-thematic statement which has already been proven wrong over and over. Even when it comes to the situation above, Watts is actually being baited by Ironwood and him falling for it results in his arrest. The moment Ironwood is more open about his feelings is also the moment he is acting more logically.

In short, Watts is a brilliant scientist, who bought in Atlas’s ideology that you must pursue success at all costs. You must be strong/clever because only in this way you can be successful. If you let feelings cloud your determination/mind, you are a failure.

However, it is precisely this ideology taken to its extreme that is Watts’s own downfall.

He can’t understand Pietro’s ideal and is overshadowed by him. What is more, the idea of not being the first in his field drives him to disgrace.

His backstory makes so that Inside team WTCH Watts represents Salem’s entitlement.

This makes him similar to Cinder, as well. He is different from her for upbringing and status. Still, they both have the same flaw. They believe they are entitled to things.

Cinder does so because she has suffered. She was no-one, so now she must be the most important person in the world.

Watts does so because he was born an elite and he should stay an elite forever.

Watts is there not only to tell, but to show (both Cinder and the viewers) that the path Cinder is on leads nowhere. Watts had probably everything Cinder ever wanted. He was successful and rich. He did not have to worry about food or poverty. Still, that was not enough for him. He wanted more and this led him to betray his own country and to join a nihilistic witch.

In other words, Cinder will never find what she is looking for in power or success. Watts had both, but he is empty just like her. He is hungry just like her.

This is well conveyed symbolically by Watts being one of the very few characters that never unlocked his semblance. It means he never truly unlocked his full potential. He never truly understood who he wanted to be. He tried to be who his society wanted him to be, but he was not satisfied and decided to destroy it instead.

So, when Watts talks about the need to be smart and the difference between being deserving and worthy, he is actually talking about himself, probably without even realizing it. He is projecting his feelings of failure on Cinder. He was deserving, but not worthy. Pietro was the worthy one.

Other than these two, there is also another level to this confrontation that has been underlined by @misstrashchan​ here.

It is about the parallel between Cinder and Ironwood when it comes to their reactions to Watts spelling them the truth about themselves:

Ironwood: I will sacrifice... whatever it takes... to stop her.

Watts: Oh, I hope you do, James. I hope you do.

The difference, as the post above explains very well, is that Cinder is able to listen to Watts, while Ironwood ignores his words altogether.

This ties to how Ironwood’s inability to recognize his mistakes and to change his mind (literally what his semblance Mettle is about) is why he is the main villain in an arc where we are having the first redemption arc of one of our original trio of villains:

A redemption, which will probably be followed by other defections among the AceOps themselves.

In order to redeem one-self, a person must accept they were wrong and change their mind. Ironwood is unable to do so and this is why he is dangerous.

In conclusion, I love this confrontation because it is very complex, has many levels and is gray. In terms of complexity it reminds me of Tyrian’s interactions with Emerald and especially Mercury:

 Tyrian is seen tormenting the two kids whenever he gets the chance. That said, he ironically ends up spelling out for them truths the two must face:

Tyrian: Do what makes you happy children… please? I’m begging you…

Tyrian: Of course she is! You’re surprised? Salem is destruction incarnate! Our mistress wishes to see the end of it all! There is no ideal more beautiful.

Tyrian is a great evil mentor because he manages to spell out what Emerald and Mercury should do and to make sure through his body language that they are not able to. He tells them the truth and threathens them, so that they can’t pursue what they need.

Here, Watts tells Cinder the truth by lashing out about how she is so worthless, that a machine must do her job.

It is also interesting because both Emerald and Mercury are clearly set-up to have an evil mentor figure:

Emerald and Hazel’s foiling has already paid off, while Mercury and Tyrian’s will probably pay off in the future.

I am not sure if Cinder will have a similar foiling/relationship with Watts. Still, it is an interesting possibility. Especially because one thing I would really like to happen with the original villain trio is for the abuse and the manipulation they are subjected to backfire. I would like for them to break free (with others’ help obviously because they can’t free themselves alone) by taking all these thematic truths they are told, so they can be manipulated, and to change them in teachings they can use against their abusers.

In short, I want Cinder to say...”Yeah, I do not need to be deserving of power because I am already worthy on my own”. And I want Mercury to free himself and to tell Tyrian...”This is what makes me happy”.

I think that this has partly happened with Emerald in the sense that Salem’s tactic to weaken her loyalty to Cinder through fear backfired:

Salem: Emerald... I want you to tell me whose fault this was. Now

Emerald: Cinder! We failed because of Cinder...

Salem: That's right. I want you to understand that failure. I want you to understand why Cinder must be left to toil in her isolation until she redeems herself.

The whole point of this interaction was to make Emerald submissive. It is clear Emerald is there for Cinder and not for Salem, so Salem frightened her and forced her to symbolically “betray” Cinder.

Still, this did not work for two reasons.

a) Emerald needs to see Cinder for who she is, so that she can break free from her.

b) Fear is among the factors that motivated Emerald to leave:

Yang: You're gonna have to try and summarize it. Why should we trust you?

Ren: Because she's scared. Just like us.

Not only that, but in an inversion of what usually happens with fear in the series, it is specifically because Emerald and JOYR are all scared that they can overcome their conflict and work together (as @echo-from-the-void​. noticed). Fear has separated our protagonists from the AceOps, but has brought them Emerald.

These are my main thoughts on the scene, thank you for the asks!

[doggytail-duck]

Observations from the Finnish National Opera POTO! In no particular order, may be positive, negative, or neutral

But, this is all to be taken as an affectionate jest in any case! Spoilers, of course!

The Phantom really had edgy sewer rat energy. I had a good giggle at his outfit: long swishy coat (normal), an edgy gothic-esque gold mask (pretty cool?), sleeves rolled up so he has bare arms for some reason and, of all things, fingerless leather gloves. I have no idea why I found the damn gloves so funny - maybe because they kind of reminded me of an edgy rockstar? (I feel obligated to say that this is in no way meant to throw shade at the costume department, I liked the outfit. Still found it funny though!)

I really liked the singing voice of the actress who played Christine

Speaking of, at the end of Think of Me, the second the song ended someone in the audience near me whispered “jesus christ!” And pretty much all I could think was “yeah, same”

Phantom’s face makeup looked almost non-existent to the upper levels :(

When he does his disappearing act, there’s some play with the lights and shiny glitter raining down - which leads to there being a huge puddle of glitter on the floor during the final bows. I do have to wonder how much of a bitch that is to clean up!

Meg doesn’t arrive in the lair at the end of the show

The Phantom literally pulls/wrestles Christine to the ground during Final Lair, before Christine sings about the tears of hate etc I believe? It was a bit brutal to watch, though it did happen pretty fast. The Phantom, upon realizing what he’s done, stares at his hands in shock for a moment. Shame on you, Mr. Sewer Rat!

Speaking of “Horrible Phantom Moments”, Point of No Return was probably the most unnerving version I’ve ever seen of it.

We also see Piangi’s flailing arm as he’s dying just before the song

During Poor Fool He Makes Me Laugh, Raoul sits alone in Box Five, seems unfazed by Phantom’s wrath. King

There’s an extra galloping around in a horse head during Masquerade

When the Phantom hands his opera to a person dressed like the monkey figurine, said monkey tries to hand the book to the managers. One of them refused to take it, which I found funny

During Masquerade, there’s a bit where Christine is pulled into a dance by a figure dressed in black. It’s a very tense moment and it goes on longer than expected. Spooky!

The subtitles!! The opera has screens that show subtitles for foreign language performances, and oh boy was it fun to read those! I mean, they were very condensed and had obviously abandoned any attempt at making the subtitles singable or rhyme them or anything. But, considering what they had to work with re: the massive amount of fast paced material and such a small space for the subtitles, I think it’s very understandable. They cleverly crammed multiple lines into two by cutting out a bunch of stuff and honestly I think the translator did a decent job most of the time! The overall meaning came through even if a lot of the nuance and details were lost, and I do have to commend them for using colorful and diverse language! Making the very best of a difficult situation. Although, they completely gave up trying to subtitle the ensemble scenes in Notes/Prima Donna etc. Which, honestly, mood. If I were them, I would have probably torn my hair out trying to figure that shit out!

A subtitle highlight: “Who would have the gall to send this? Someone with a puerile brain” was translated roughly as “Millainen kakara tällaista lähettää?” or something (”What kind of brat sends something like this?”), which I found HILARIOUS! Raoul also called the Phantom “nilkki” during Notes/Twisted Every Way, which roughly translates to a contemptible person, a slippery kind of creep, a punk (derogatory). I found that to be incredibly accurate and very funny considering the original text said “clever friend”.

During Phantom of the Opera, there’s a bunch of floating stairs and body doubles. It was very cool!

Fog machine my beloved <3

There was a giant corset in the background during Point of No Return. It was a Choice, to say the least

Incredibly disappointed Carlotta’s giant hoop skirt didn’t evolve into a giant dress (and when I say giant, I mean it: she stood on a pedestal with the hoop skirt taking off a lion’s share of the back part of the stage)

The lair looked very edgy. The Phantom’s bedroom (or, cave more like) had unfortunate red silk sheets. I have to admit I laughed at the gaudiness of it

The candles in the lair were never on until flickering into life when the stage was going dark during the Phantom’s disappearing act. It was nice

During the rooftop scene when Christine sings about the Phantom, turning from terrified to sad and kind of awed, the Phantom moves from behind an angel statue into view, as if lured by the things Christine is saying.

When the chandelier dropped, some people in the orchestra pit ducked

During Wandering Child, the Phantom stands on top of Mr Daaé’s gravestone, framed by a pair of angel wings. He aligned with them perfectly so it looked as if he had wings and that was the coolest thing they did staging-wise. I hope there’s a promotional photo of that moment floating around somewhere, since that was the only time I genuinely wished I had a camera ready to go!

A sword fight follows Wandering Child, and during it Christine puts herself in between the fighting men

The ballet act of Il Muto is hilarious. The ballet dancers rush in one by one, trying to put their costumes together and jump into the dance when a guy (Buquet, maybe?) runs around the stage with a prop trying to stay out of their way

The Megstine hug was super sweet. I liked Meg in general, reacting to stuff in the background

When Christine starts the “Pitiful creature of darkness” line, the Phantom is standing with his back to her. He gradually turns around as she continues and walks up to him, and you can practically see how he goes ????? from his body language alone

Me at the Phantom when Christine leaves: yeah this is sad but you deserve this The Phantom: clutches the ring Christine gave back to him, kissing the hands he’s holding it in as the lights go dark Me: ........ :(

The orchestra my beloved <3

[duckiemimi]

You know, I've seen your post about Utahime and Gojo's relationship and i must agree. It's funny to me how people cling onto the whole "She hates Gojo most of the time" direct translation from Japanese to justify that she likes him sometimes. Whereas in the original Japanese sentence, the actual wording would be "She hates Gojo rather seriously." Or truly hates even. Distaste, or aversed.

It's sad that alot of nuance gets lost in the english translation, but it's not surprising, japanese is a hard language to learn much less properly to translate alot of words so these things get lost alot along with the context. I say this because as a person that's been studying the language for 4 years, only then could i realize how much difference there is between the lines.

you must be talking about this post!

i don’t speak or read Japanese, but i understand you when it comes to the loss of cultural context because of language barriers :’) correct me if i’m wrong, but within the language in jjk itself (and other bodies of works, perhaps), there are always clarifiers above the main text, too, right? so much nuance lost! so many things left untranslated, unsaid, because it wouldn’t fit the flow of the story! and not everybody actively seeks out the possibility of a more correct translation (i’m sometimes guilty of this, too!). it especially gets out of hand when people use a mistranslation to justify their headcanons and ships, too, and then it becomes so popular that a lot of people just accept it as canon. what can you do besides inform people about it, yk?

also, props to you!! from what i’ve heard (and in my experience), Japanese has a complex language system, and with you being four years in?? that’s so cool!!

[khaleesiofalicante]

This may sound very weird, but forgive me because I'm in mood for economy analogies because *studies*

I can't help thinking that particular parts of fandoms somehow work as the stock market. Idk if you know how financial bubbles work, but we're basically artificially inflating plots and characters and whatnot in between installments, and when the final thing comes out we get disappointed because that's not what we led ourselves to believe through 12-months worth of headcanoning and theorising.

I think our understanding of characters the less in contact we are with the source material, which in turn could influence us believing the author is writing ooc characters more often than normal. Take how the fandom sees Kit, or Ty, or Eugenia, or Grace. Maybe it's just me, but I can't see that in canon.

And that sort of frustrates me, now that I think about it, because of course people are going to be disappointed when their somewhat specific expectations aren't met. And of course they're going to blame the author.

Idk, maybe it's because I'm also an amateur writer of original fic, but comments like 'xyz author did xyz character so dirty, so they're now mine' (dirty, and not when it comes to things that are just factually incorrect about cultures/sexualities/languages/etc) or 'fanon xyz is so much better than canon xyz'. Perhaps it is because the idea of people saying that about my characters and my decisions to write storylines makes me, not angry, but sad?;

Perhaps I'm exaggerating, so I'm asking you: how would you feel if someone said any of the above about David? Or criticised the way you wrote lbaf because they --unsurprisingly because everyone is different-- thought of a different way to veer the story?

I understand constructive criticism, especially done on issues you aren't 100% aware of, but if you just *dislike* an author, don't stay in the fandom to shit on them and then dote on the characters that have come out of their minds, because:

If they're a horrible person, you are still helping them --however indirectly-- by promoting their content (even if you downloaded indirectly).

The publishing industry, as everything capitalist, works by demand-offer. Something as little as shitting on an author pushes for an increase in demand ('I'm going to buy/pirate this book to hate on the author and promote their horribleness so that more people will hear of them and read their books; surely some of them will get the books illegally but many will buy them' --think of Harry Potter despite JKR's transphobia and so many people hating her). Really, you're just making their pockets thicker

If you truly want them to fail, don't consume their products. Less demand=less money=less opportunity to publish=less success=you get what I mean

Instead, promote other books you like better, nurture fandoms that are probably small by joining them, etc

If you just dislike the way they write, try not to get fixated on the characters nor the author because it sounds like something very unhealthy. And I've unfortunately gone through that

And maybe this is because I just dislike meanness in general, but criticism needs to come from a place of respect? At least the typical I-don't-actually-respect-you-but-I'm-not going-to-curse-at-you-because-I'm-polite. Especially if the author is doing more than average authors: chances are, they made an ignorant mistake they need to be talked about, just not cancelled for (mostly self-projecting because I recently wrote an Indian wedding I had many mistakes on, I was asked in a respectful manner to change whatever I had wrong, and was so glad to learn of traditions of a country so foreign to me while correcting mistakes my stupid misunderstanding wrote).

But, yeah. Thoughts?

First of all, this is very nuanced. Thank you for sharing this with me.

I share most of your sentiments actually.

A few thoughts on few things you addressed.

1. I also wonder why people are in the fandom if they hate the author or character or series so much. The rationale of "if you don't like it - then don't read it" seems so obvious and simple to me. But I guess, it's easier said than done. Maybe it's because they still have hope? They wish there would be some sort of change? Maybe they just like critiquing things? Maybe that's just how they consume media? I don't know. It never made sense to me. So, I tried not to bother myself with it.

2. I generally dislike meanness as well, so I feel you. Something I learned by going to an extremely strict school was that - you don't have to be mean when you give feedback. It is 100% possible to give criticism without being rude about it You can call someone out without being an asshole. It's not the calling out that is problematic, but rather how people go about it. I think it's an overall social issue, you know?

Think of the way some teachers give "feedback" to students. The way some parents give "advice" to children. The way some bosses give "coaching" to their employees. All of this is supposed to be well meaning, but the way they say it results in more bad than good. Their delivery is bad, so it defeats the purpose of constructive criticism/advice.

People DO NOT like to learn from a place of inferiority. Whether we are talking about learning in the classroom or in life or on tumblr or fandoms or wherever.

When you are trying to 'educate' someone, do not make them feel stupid. It's an awful thing to do. Your insight and feedback should not come from a place of (intellectual or moral) superiority. Because then, you are not trying to educate someone, you are trying to belittle them.

You don't make them more aware or woke. You make them feel humiliated and embarrassed.

So, that's that.

3. About David/LBAF - If you have noticed, I have already received quite a bit of criticism for lbaf - especially focusing around malec. I think as an author, I have learned how to differentiate between useful and useless criticism. For example, I've got a lot of crticism/feedback in terms of language (French) and culture (Spanish) and that is useful criticism. That's something I can actually work on and improve and learn from.

But criticisms about "no Alec wouldn't do this" or "you are writing malec wrong"... I don't find that criticism to be useful.

I can only write how I see malec. I cannot perceive how my readers see malec. As the writer, the challenge is to convince my readers that my way of perception makes sense - that this is behaviour is not unrealistic or out of character.

But of course, I cannot convince everyone. And I am fine with that. I don't think I would have been a long time ago. But I am now.

So if someone thinks 'I did *insert lbaf character* so dirty', then that's their perception. I cannot control how they think. I can only control how I write.

And my writing has a purpose. Everything that happens to everyone in lbaf has a purpose. If I made a decision as a writer (good or bad), I want my writers to believe that decision had a purpose.

So, yeah. I believe in my writing, so I try to ignore those who don't. It's easier said than done of course. But it's a process like anything else.

This was very interesting. Thanks again. Very Ravenclaw of you <3

[ducavalentinos]

How would you rate Sabatini's biography on Cesare? I love it, but I wondered if you had any other (English) recommendations? Also take a shot everyone Sabatini interrupts his narrative to talk about how hot Cesare was sfhttjjggj

I think as far as Cesare bios goes, I’d rate his biography 7/10. I have conflicted feelings with Sabatini’s work, because I love his writing style, his sense of humour is great, it matched mine right away, and he has such a genius way of pointing out the hypocrisy and double standards applied to the Borgia family. He cleverly shows how much of the Borgia myths and general accusations thrown their way are connected to politics (shocker!) and to their Spaniard, and less nobly origins. Not to mention how he exposes the historical bias against Cesare, and general dishonesty with him, from primary sources to modern historians such as Gregorovius, that paragraph Sabatini wrote about him was truly a moment in the Borgia historical literature for me, I'm glad he said it. I just wish he hadn't fallen so hard for the Machiavellian Prince archetype about Cesare. The more I re-read his work, the more it becomes clear to me he took Machiavelli’s writings about Cesare at face value, fell in love with the image presented by him, and then proceeded (whether consciously or unconsciously) to apply this interpretation, one that has its limitations and flaws on their own, to all the facets of Cesare’s character, and all the other aspects of his life lol, which resulted in this too strict, robot-like persona. There is no nuance, no deepth to Cesare’s Sabatini, he exists only as the stoic, unscrupulous, unfeeling Machiavellian Prince. It’s a mistake I see being made time and again by most of Cesare’s biographers, many who follow Sabatini too blindly, or just Borgia biographers in general tbh, but Sabatini’s bio acutely illustrates this particular issue better than the other bios I’ve read I think, (with the exception perhaps of Beuf’s “work”, who somehow managed to outdone Sabatini in this Machiavellian presentation of Cesare, taking it to new extremes with super dramatic and misleading writing, for the most part). And you know, I always get the impression Sabatini had his own conflicted feelings in regards to The Prince, and its clear-headed, pragmatic politics. He seemed to admired it and feel repulsed by it at the time. And those mixed feelings sometimes ended up leaking into his view and writing about Cesare and some historical events, and what he believed had happened (e.g., the take of Urbino), and I find that very interesting. In any case, the point is: Sabatini’s Cesare is unrealistic, and it constantly enters into conflict with what Sabatini also presents as evidence for his history. I mean, he insists throughout the book in reaffirming Cesare was a utter egoist, cold man. Only moved by his ambition and thirst for power. He was incapable of kindness, or of being considerate with others, of feeling compassion, without ulterior motives involved. All of his actions were always calculated to only serve his own interests. Everyone around him were pawns to be used and discarded when they were no longer of any use to him. We are to believe he was a cynic, a block of ice, essentially. We are also to believe he never had genuine emotional bonds with anyone, much less with women. Women were interchangeble to him. Sabatini was convinced he was a man incapable of having a sentimental side, of loving or of having any connection with them beyond the physical aspect. But then, in between chapters, sometimes pages, he also tell us how Cesare seems to have deeply grieved the death of his cousin, Giovanni Borgia, whom he refers as Mio Fatre in his letters. He gives an honest, if quick, account about the marriage and relationship between Cesare and Charlotte d’Albret, in which Cesare’s obvious feelings for her can be seen, as well as his kindness and respect towards her. Sabatini admits the evidence shows they may well have loved each other, and that when leaving Charlotte in charge of all his affairs in France, as the governor and administrator of his lands and lorships there, as well as his heiress in case of his death, Cesare shows “his esteem of her and the confidence he reposed in her mental qualities.” And of Cesare’s policies and behavior as its ruler in the Romagna, it reaches a point where his mere self-interest doesn’t quite alone explain his relationship with this romagnese subjects and many of his decisions. It undermines Sabatini’s claim that it was for show and for his political gain. Last but not least, what is one supposed to make of the hypothesis he posits to the what I like to call, the Dorotea affair? This event is the peak of his contradiction and his mental gymnastics, because to be sure, his hypothesis is not far-fetched. I will concede I thought it was the first I read his bio. But over the years, between carefully separating fiction from history and reading other sources, then going back to his bio, I recognized his hypothesis is one of the plausible ones, certainly more plausible than the official sensationalistic narrative of Cesare simply abducting the innocent maiden Dorotea out on a whim, to satisfy his lust, (the fact Borgia scholars  are still repeating this narrative with a straight face is beyond my comprehension), I can see Cesare doing what he proposes, it def. aligns better with my understanding of him, and all the historical material I’ve read about him and his times, however, this hypothesis is completely irreconcilable with Sabatini’s Cesare. So, he says one thing, then he says another that’s incompatible with the first thing he said, and then proceeds to show evidence that either puts into doubt or confirms the opposite of his characterization of Cesare. And that’s only considering the historical info he dedided to include in his bio. If he had included some of the info Alvisi presents in his Duca di Romagna, a work he must have checked out, if not read it all, given one of the languages he spoke was Italian, and Alvisi’s bio is the best and most authoritative historical work made to date about Cesare and his life, I believe he would have struggled a lot more than he did. It just seems like he enters into a trap of his own making. Turning an already difficult task more difficult than it needs to be, honestly. Ironically, his stance is as messy and contradictory as the aforementioned Gregorovius in his Lucrezia Borgia, where you also have two Cesare(s): the one he sees and wants to present versus the one that emerges from the his own writing at times and historical material he himself exposes it. Overall, his work frustrates on some fronts, and I think it could have been better. It has its faults, some the typical faults/vices fond in Borgia biographies, others very much his own, but nevertheless I have a fondness for his bio which I do not share with others bios on Cesare, or the Borgia family. It is the only bio in the English language I find myself reading again and again, and the one I would put it first as better, or more decent, in this language about Cesare. I admire his honesty, and his bravery in challenging a little bit of Cesare’s dark legend, and the baseless accusations attached to his name. I appreciate what he tried to do, the very least of what I expect from a serious historian when dealing with figures as infamous in popular imagination as Cesare and Rodrigo Borgia. There is no denying his work was one of the main works which advanced Cesare’s historical literature, and the approach to his figure. Moving slightly from the literary, colorful, villain-like character of the Italian Renaissance, towards starting to be more seriously studied as a historical figure properly. And oh my god, yes, interrupting the narrative to talk about how hot Cesare was. It’s funny you mentioned that, because I don’t remember him doing that so much (time for a re-read!), but that's one of the characteristics of the Borgian/Cesarean historical literature heh. I’m yet to read a bio where authors do not feel the need to take a moment to talk about how hot he was, some even a poetic way lol, it’s so amusing, and always the one thing I know I will agree with them, if nothing else. Also, I think Borgia bios have huge potential for drinking games! Like: take a shot of tequila every time Cesare gets badmouthed for no reason, or baselessly asserted guilty of questionable murders, fratricide, rape, and abduction. Or when Juan and Cesare envied and hated each other narrative is repeated. Or when Guicciardini, Sanuto, Cappello and Giustinian are uncritically used as credible sources for Rodrigo and Cesare. Every time Lucrezia gets painted as the Good Borgia, the pretty, passive doll who was the helpless victim of the terrible Borgia men. Or when authors get uncomfortably shippy with the Cesare/Lucrezia relationship resulting in exaggerated claims such as: Lucrezia was Cesare’s only exception, or they were unusually close as siblings, etc. And of course, whenever Cesare’s hotness and allure has to be talked about dsjdsjsj, the list is long, and I think it will get you drunk very quickly. I know I couldn’t keep up back when I was reading Sacerdote’s bio, and I was drinking wine so. As for recs in the English language, I would say Woodward’s bio has its value in terms of sources and historical documents. I also think his analysis about politics, about Cesare’s goverment in the Romagna, and also concerning the conclave of 1503 are generally good. His last five, four chapters are the best ones imo, so if you are interested in these points I mentioned, it might be worth checking out. I would just open a caveat saying that as far as a biography about the person of Cesare Borgia is concerned, it is weak and to be read with a grain of salt. I was mostly unimpressive by his work on that front, and I thought about quitting time and again. He likes presenting himself as the impartial historian, (a big red flag that only makes me twice as cautious when reading any historical work) writing in a mostly sober tone, but of course like all scholars, all people, he has his bias, and they do come to surface from time to time. He displays an peculiar antipathy and ill will towards Cesare at times, which leads to harsh, confusing, unsubstantiated claims about his character and some of the events about his life. In contrast, you can see he is more benevolent and fair towards Rodrigo Borgia, and a constant thought I had while reading his bio was that he obviously chose the wrong Borgia to write a bio on. Had he chose Rodrigo as his Borgia subject, I believe we would have had a pretty good bio about him and his papacy.

[kouhaiofcolor]

Have you noticed many black people say they’re Indian, Native American, or something other than just black? Now that I’m out of high school I don’t see it too much but I remember mostly girls always lying about that. I don’t know if it was internalized racism and shame. I had a friend who lied to the whole class saying she was from Trinidad (she was obsessed with Nicki Minaj) but she’s not and has never been there. I didn’t say anything but I noticed it’s a common thing with young black girls, probably boys too.

Bearing in mind that millions of Black People were smuggled from our original places of ancestral origin, & our closeness to & understanding of our cultures literally brutalized out of us for 400+ years, that accounts a whole lot for why many (but certainly not all) black ppl from the US don't know or cannot properly identify w their roots — even w alot of us knowing for sure that we're 100% black. Also have to consider how white supremacy is a form of profound brainwashing in itself — & that it was violently weaponized to malnourish, break & stunt black pride, black representation, black family structures, down to how black ppl could even identify as Black.

Being black is something that not even just white ppl have made a full on mockery of; nbpoc have had historic involvement in antiblackness & malicious pillaging from Africa as well. So regarding how some black ppl will or have claimed being something else entirely as opposed to black has more to do w how stigmatized being phenotypically black has always been. We can reference things like colorism, featurism, texturism (etc) in that respect as just a few things incredibly relevant to that. Its also important tho to keep in mind that blackness isn't an umbrella term that speaks for or identifies all black culture & ppl as one & the entire same.

Blackness is a diaspora, meaning it encompasses nuances of itself. There are Black ppl from Haiti; Black ppl from Africa; Black ppl from South America; black ppl from Jamaica; Black ppl from the US; Black ppl from the UK; black ppl from Mexico; there are aboriginal black ppl; there are tribes of black ppl that are not exactly the same just bc blackness is a common denominator between them. So we shouldn't assume black ppl claiming to be black from particular regions is untrue or self hating — but I do kind of understand how it can be off-putting in certain contexts to hear black ppl just outright claim to be totally different races as opposed to identifying confidently & w certainty w their blackness.

As for your friend claiming to have been Trinidadian, she could have v well been Afro-Trinidadian but had no way to prove it (cus again, white supremacy is a bitch & fucked up a loooot of cultural awareness for black ppl what w us being sold & quite literally strewn all over the globe having our languages, spiritual belief structures & other cultural exercises being prejudicely decentralized & destroyed by white & non black ppl for centuries). What proof did anybody have that she wasn't Afro-Trinidadian?

White girls will claim being Norwegian-Scottish, German-Icelandic or Romanian-Czechoslovakian instead of just saying they're white w no proof or family relevance to back it up whatsoever — & no one bats an eye or questions that. White ppl have gotten as ballsy as to even claim being Black themselves, speaking of. How many ppl are even reasonably skeptical of that w/o proof? 👀 How normal is it to skepticize their ethnicity when even they've never been to the countries or regions they claim to have heritage from? Literally almost never.

Can't put this on young black girls like being on the receiving end of misogynoir most of our lives isn't a staple in our upbringing & how we're convinced we should identify — or rather shouldnt to even be perceived as acceptable. Black boys do this too. I've been witness more times than I can count on both hands to black teenage boys openly tearing black girls down ab their natural features, hair & complexion for the sheer sake of it or to flex in front of an audience. Enough grown black men do to & project so much worse ab black women. I've come across adolescent black men & grown men alike who will identify as anything under the sun but black — w 4c hair, dark skin & fully black parents. On the other and more prevalent side of the extreme, an increasing quality of Black men these days have more pride in being fetishized for being Black while being the same men who are so aggressive about their hatred of Black culture and Black Women at large. Incredibly backwards.

This is not unique to black girls. This is, however, at its core, a colorism, white supremacy & misogynoir thing that has conditioned black girls to internalize — again, from v young ages well into adulthood — that being fully black & female is stigmagized in a way that 1) no longer affects their male counterparts the same way; 2) they’re made to believe they are not & cannot be pretty based on their heritage and phenotypes, & 3), that the last thing they should want to identify as or be open ab being, is fully black.

*TLDR: No, this is not a black girl thing.

[mallowstep]

holy fuxk i prommy it's not intentional and i will change it if it makes you uncomfortable but i just realized i ALSO renamed hollyleaf as hollyshine in my own au stuff zicjxjdhxhhs

u know what they say about great minds n all that i guess lol

yesss more hollyshines <3 it's such a pretty name.

uhh look y'all imma ramble under the cut about fandom & transformative works but i basically have a blanket permission statement for fair use. i expect y'all to credit stuff when it's more than just a concept, but you're welcome to Go Wild without asking for permission.

want to write a fic with the same concept as stolag? go for it! etc.

anyway this is to say: you do Not need my go ahead to use hollyshine as a name Especially if u came up with it first. (but obviously you have it.) like if i came across it in the wild i'd just think "aw sick someone else thinks hollyshine is a good name"

(also if ur comfy doing so pls share link? i like checking out this kind of thing and hollyshine is a pretty name.)

anyway idk like. obviously it doesn't bother me when people ask for permission to do something. like if u ask for permission to make fanart or write a fic or anything Like That i'm not gonna b upset and i'm not gonna say no but at the same time idk.

it's fic, like, i didn't ask wp if i could write about gay cats murdering each other and causing trauma, i just did.

and like idk i know there's a lot to be said about this, more than i can say right now, but i want to promote the attitude that like. in general you don't have to ask.

and it's definitely. a line.

i think i would be a little upset if, say, someone took the lore in "the elders' den" stories and didn't credit me.

that's not to say y'all can't, by the way. if you want to use "full moon" (story of how cats know when the gathering is), "there's holy water, undiluted; i see the divine" (riverclan creation story), etc., you're more than welcome to. i'd be honoured. just link to the original/cite it somehow, and don't plagiarize. (i.e., you can't copy the actual work text.)

right but those stories are all my creations. like the meat of the story revolves around my own characters and ideas.

buuuut you don't have to ask? i mean i don't expect that. and i know there's a variety of opinions on this but i'm of the opinion that to a wide degree of tolerance, you shouldn't have to ask.

there's. like okay, i understand why authors want people to ask before translations are written, that makes sense to me. i'd be uncomfortable if someone started translating one of my works without telling me, mostly because i'd want to be around if they had doubts about intentions/phrasing. doubly so if it was a language i didn't speak.

and when you get into Original Characters, Original Lore, that kind of thing, there's definitely. idk, we're all fic authors, right? like we're all out here writing without permission. and i'm not sure, i'm honestly not sure what conclusion i want to draw, because it's kind of this fuzzy thing like. i Don't know when it's acceptable to just do something and when you should ask.

and usually i just copy my faq or link to it, depending on how much energy i have. because i don't really. egh.

but i think something about this ask (and anon, i'm not upset with you or anything, big /nm, i'm just rambling about attitudes towards this and philosophy) hit something in me because like.

if you had the idea before me, or even without Intending to do it because i did it, i think you shouldn't feel like you have to ask, and you shouldn't feel like my opinion matters.

and bluh i hate saying "shouldn't feel" it's a very ineloquent way of saying a more nuanced thing but it's also shorthand for a more nuanced thing.

but i digress; i think it's just. i know when you're just on ao3, the general attitude seems to be a Lot More open. someone wrote something inspired by "what is our ending and beginning" which was a Huge shock to me because. inspired by My Little Hollyleaf One-Shot? what?

and i certainly like. when i posted "funerals. mourning. prayer." i didn't ask...fuck can't remember the author of "Tell Me About Your Ancestors" but i didn't ask them, i didn't ask solacefruit, for permission, i just cited my sources and moved on.

(altho i did forget to add "the light that shines on you" for way too long whoops so ig plugging for it now go read it it's really good.)

ig what i'm saying is, i'm making Transformative Works, right? that's part of what makes fic legal, is that it's meant to be substantively different from the original. i think but you get the point.

and so if someone wants to make a transformative work of my transformative work, i don't see why they should ask for permission any more than i did.