#and i personally don't think Moriarty was a villain

[aflockofravens]

Holy shit, I'm eight minutes into the finale of Moriarty the Patriot and it's so gay you guys.

This man literally writes Sherlock a love letter and then Sherly says he felt the same way. They wanna fuck each other so bad it makes them look stupid.

[empress-of-snark]

more cohesive OMITB finale thoughts now that I've had time to sleep on it

(spoilers below!)

First thing's first: I think there's a bigger villain at play here that hasn't yet been revealed. Marshall killed Sazz and Glenn and was (apparently) working alone, but there are things that happened this season that haven't been explained, namely:

Who put the cameras in the trio's apartments?

And who was texting them pictures and saying "I'm watching you"?

That wasn't Marshall. Or if it was, they didn't bother to explain how or why he did it. Not to mention the season one plot holes were mentioned multiple times but only ended up being a red herring? No, I think we've still got a Moriarty-type villain that'll come into play again next season.

Speaking of which, I was so excited for the mystery next season to be a missing person's case and not quite so murder heavy until I remembered the name of the show 😭

It's gonna be rough, that's for sure! I'm devastated that Lester is the victim, but I'm so excited for all the flashbacks to come in season five, exploring his whole backstory! It sounds like the mystery will be centered around the mob, which might make it the most dangerous yet.

I'll be very interested to see where they go with the Loretta/Oliver storyline. If she stays in New Zealand, then we'll either never see her again, save for the odd cameo over FaceTime, or the writers will have to break them up. I don't love either option--honestly, I'd rather Loretta move back to New York and become a semi-permanent guest star, but it might be too expensive to have Meryl Streep on retainer like that lol.

The wedding was gorgeous, though! Absolutely loved Loretta's dress, and I was so happy that Will and Dickie walked her down the aisle!! (Yes, I'm salty that Theo didn't make an appearance, but it's fine, it's cool, it's whatever...)

I do hope that this next season will be a little less celebrity-studded. I'm hoping that it's because season four was the Hollywood season, but after a certain point, the cameos were a little distracting. I get that the show is really popular now, but I'd love it to return to it's roots and give us more season one vibes. Less rubbing elbows with stars and more actual mystery solving, y'know?

But how did y'all like this season/finale? Send me your thoughts!

[starlostlix]

Moriarty the Patriot and crime as a performance (The Noahtic crime vs Whiteley's crime)

[I am back again to talk about some themes, I don't know how much i'll be able to post with a-level exams coming up but in about a month's time i'll be able to post however much i want. I do have another post on the go but I don't know when that will be done]

As I read volume 10, I took an interest in how Milverton explained his plan to turn Whiteley into a murderer. And there was one line that really made me think, where Milverton says that "The 'hero' of our performance will be arriving at home soon." It seems like a simple enough statement but it really is indicative of a larger theme - the performance of crime. A theme explored by both this arc and the majority of William's crime, and even links to Whiteley's eventual demise.

To begin, an explanation of Milverton's plan to force Whiteley into murder. Milverton is somewhat of a free agent - as much as he represents the House of Lords when conversing with Whiteley, he is not affected by their reputation. He doesn't care about Whiteley possibly publishing the documents because he will not be caught up in the consequences. His main reason for his plan is pure thrill - the thrill of drawing the good man into sin. By blackmailing Sturridge, one of Whiteley's police bodyguards, over the safety of his family, he is able to eliminate every person Whiteley cares about, forcing Whiteley into killing out of rage. Essentially, Milverton is the snake tempting Adam (instead of Eve) to eat the apple (commit sin, in this case murder) for his own enjoyment.

In this plan Whiteley is made to become a villain through his own rage at the murder of his family. With this act, his goals of equality are tarnished and the equality movement is heavily pushed back due to the public seeing a figure of good draw to evil. Milverton actively manufactures a situation to make this possible through his go-to method of blackmail. Milverton has set the scene and has put the events in motion - he is the one in control of this performance as the writer type figure.

However, a wrench is thrown into the projected plan. With the Moriarty Brothers plan of killing Whiteley and blaming the Lord of Crime for his family's deaths, Whiteley is made into the tragic hero of the story, someone with virtuous traits who (because of a fatal flaw) meets an untimely end. The public may see him as a martyr for the cause of equality, but the reader sees how his fatal flaw (the murder of Sturridge) leads to his early death at William's hands. Yet, Milverton insists that he is still in control - not only has his plan to corrupt a good man worked, but it's also pushed his new rival into a corner where he has to take the blame for something he didn't do. His performance may have changed, but these unexpected changes have made it more compelling for his audience.

With this change, it is quite good to compare this plan to that of William's plan on the Noahtic. In this plan, William manages to drive a man to commit murder and exposes his crime to the world, much like Milverton planned to do. However the key difference is the motive - William does this to expose an evil man for previous evil deeds. His target, Lord Enders, was kidnapping random civilians to murder for his own enjoyment, and was also very dehumanising towards the lower classes. Enders is a textbook target of the Moriarty Plan - a rotten noble abusing his inherited power to hurt others. The plan to expose his crimes involves a stage and a performance in more ways than one - not only did they utilising an actual opera performance, but they manufactured a situation to expose Enders for murder. With his murder and eventual suicide, Enders' deeds are exposed to the world and he received his punishment.

Another aspect of performance is the entire Moriarty Plan in itself. By turning London into an audience for the staged crimes, the classes will unite to condemn the murderer (the Lord of Crime) and to support the heroic detective (Sherlock Holmes). Sherlock is a later insertion into the narrative, yet a very important one - a detective exposing the crimes of the nobility through solving cases that William has set up. He is turned into a symbol for the people to root for, much like Whiteley was with and without William's intervention. Sherlock is much more than a chess piece in the plan by the tower bridge confrontation - he is the centre of it besides William as the Lord of Crime. The protagonist of the plan to match The antagonistic Lord of Crime. To the people of London, the entire Moriarty Plan is a performance of crimes solved by detective Sherlock Holmes' heroism, much like the books that Watson (or Conan Doyle) writes.

Milverton and William both use crime as a performance of sorts, but for very different goals. Whilst William uses staged crimes/exposés to bring awareness to the crimes of the nobility and unite the classes, Milverton uses it as a personal experience of the thrill of turning a good person to evil deeds. It also directly ties in to their definitions of their own crimes - The Lord of crime as a 'necessary evil' vs Milverton as 'pure evil'. And whilst The Lord of Crime's performance is made for the wider audience of the public, Milverton's performances are his own personal works of art, made to give him the thrill of manipulating others into sin.

Essentially, there is a face off between two different performances of crime - the selfless performance of one's downfall created for the greater good vs a twisted performance of someone else's downfall created for one's own selfish thrill.

[I tried to keep this one shorter since I have revision to do, but I wanted to talk about this a little bit, causing it's just recalling interesting. It's quite hard to explain but I love themes and characters like this. Hope people enjoy!]

[miwhotep]

MILVERTON AND DEVIANCY SOCIOLOGY

This was originally an additional reblog meta I did half a year ago to this amazing post regarding Moriarty the Patriot and deviancy sociology but I decided to post it on my own too (because I am way too obsessed with the topic and I wanted to link the analysis about it among my pinned posts.)

I am a master's degree sociologist and my specialization is deviancy sociology. Deviancy sociology studies deviant behaviours - for example, alcoholism, drug use, crimes - and the reasons behind them. Why people turn into criminals is a big part of the field so Milverton is obviously especially intriguing to me. I actually chose my specialization because I found Milverton's speech on society and evil to be really interesting and decided to get into the topic more. Milverton in Chapter 37 talks about how crimes are entirely defined by the values/morals/laws of society which means what is considered to be a crime is different for the different cultures. This is basically the main thought behind deviancy sociology.

If we want to talk about why and how people gets criminalized in society Moriarty the Patriot-wise, Milverton can easily end up in focus as a villain whose main villainous activity is blackmailing people into committing crimes. We can see it three different times how he tempted people to sin - all during the White Knight arc. I will analyze these occassions by the theories of deviancy sociology.

OFFICER BART FOWLER

The first occasion was blackmailing one of the police guards, Officer Bart Fowler into killing the man who tried to assassinate Whiteley. It was a really easy blackmail: Fowler's mother was ill and he didn't have enough money to cover the medical bills - Milverton offered him 500 pounds for killing the assassin. Fowler agreed to the deal (and ended up getting murdered, too, after it).

This situation is a clear case of Merton's strain theory deriving from Durkheim's anomie theory - anomie is a state where the norms of society are weak/unclear. Merton developed this theory further as his own strain theory: anomie is a state where you don't have the means to achieve the goals of society and this causes strain what leads to deviancy. Phrasing it easier, you lack something what would be necessary to lead a - by society's view - standard life. For example, money.

Officer Fowler didn't have enough money to cover his mother's bills and was surely frustrated (the strain is already there) and Milverton took advantage of his frustration, conflicting his morals with the high amount of money he offered - and the officer murdered the assassin.

STURRIDGE

The second occassion was another officer, Sturridge who got appointed to be Whiteley's bodyguard by Whiteley himself. Whiteley had a good grasp about the people's personalities and morals (he called it a hunch) - he chose Sturridge because he was clearly a trustworthy and reliable person. To corrupt him, Milverton needed to drag him into a situation first what could make him extremely frustrated, what could make him panic and unable to think his situation through - he used Sturridge's weak point, his family and he kidnapped and blackmailed Sturridge with them: he either kills Whiteley's family or his family will get killed. Sturridge fell for the blackmail and murdered Whiteley's family.

This is the strain theory once again but instead of Merton's theory where the criminal activity involved with financial gain, let's move to the general strain theory of Robert Agnew. In Agnew's opinion, strain causes negative emotional responses and if people doesn't have a non-criminal way to cope with these negative emotions, they will cope with crime. Agnew's strain theory lists three causes of strain: loss of positive stimuli (pl. family's death), presentation of negative stimuli (assaults) or the inability to reach the desired goal.

In Sturridge's case, we can talk about option two: presentation of negative stimuli. Milverton needed to create the strain first - Sturridge was shown to be a morally good person at the start of the story - with kidnapping Sturridge's family and Sturridge was unable to cope with the negative emotions coming from this: the extremity of the situation dragged him into an extreme action - murdering an entire family in hope that he can get his own family back.

ADAM WHITELEY

The third occassion was Whiteley himself and turning him into a criminal was Milverton's goal the entire time - he was hired by the House of Lords to get Whiteley out of the way and due to how much he enjoys making the good-hearted into evil and ruining people's reputation, he chose to make him a criminal (a method which came in handy after Whiteley getting hold of documents he tried to blackmail the House of Lords with - to neutralize this threat, Milverton needed to make Whiteley to be a person the public wouldn't trust anymore). Important to note, based on what his bodyguard and what his secretary, Ruskin said, the way Milverton made Whiteley to commit a crime is Milverton's usual method of tempting people to sin so he was sure about the outcome. He blackmailed Sturridge to murder Whiteley's family and confess his crime to Whiteley with offering him a knife he can kill him with. Whiteley first refused to kill Sturridge... then, remembering his brother, he couldn't hold back anymore and murdered him.

This is another example of Agnew's strain theory and the cause of the strain is option one - loss of positive stimuli, aka the death of Whiteley's family. Whiteley was a selfless man, a true hero at the start - the pure good in the contrary to Milverton's pure evil. Making Whiteley commit a murder and creating the strain what led to it was Milverton's most complicate plan with first investigating Whiteley's circumstances, finding his weak point and the way how that weak point can get exploited (through another person' Sturridge's weak point). Milverton knew that Whiteley was already stressed after the assassination and he chose bodyguards for himself. The articles in the newspapers were another mean to increase Whiteley's stress. (The Moriarties' test in the park could also cause Whiteley frustration - and they were the ones who started conflicting his morals with handing him blackmail material about the House of Lords.) Milverton talked about putting suspicion into Whiteley before making him murdering someone - this was why the murdered Officer Fowler's body was placed where the police could find it. First, to put some distrust into Whiteley againts the police - at this point, Whiteley knew that Fowler was the one who got blackmailed into murdering the assassin, so even the police can be bribed he got his bodyguards from. Second, to let Whiteley know someone as well-versed in psychology as him is after him to stress Whiteley even more and get him to act inmediately - this happens, since after this event, Whiteley chose to start negotiations with the blackmail materials. When Whiteley found that Sturridge murdered his family, the suspicion what Milverton planted into him, awakened: he started doubting Sturridge's reasons for the murder and it undeniably made committing the murder for him easier - but the main reason behind his crime was that he was unable to cope with his family being murdered otherwise.

A THEORY REGARDING MILVERTON'S EVIL

At the end of this analysis, I really want to add the deviancy sociology of Milverton as a criminal himself. We don't know how he became evil - but he has white hair despite not being old enough to it and a strong trauma can turn someone's hair white. The only thing we know about his background that he is not a noble and he mentions that he built up his companies himself (most likely with blackmail). Another reason why Milverton is so sure about his method of making people commit a crime with getting them through a trauma first can be because this happened to him as well. The cause of Milverton's evil might be found in Agnew's strain theory as well: unable to cope with the negative emotions otherwise. Dragging here addiction theories, too - like alcohol functions as a substitution for those who are not satisfied with their lives (this connects to Merton's theory on the means and goals of society), tempting people to sin can be Milverton's very own substitution what can give him the pleasure he lacks in his life. I'm sure Milverton is actually really unhappy - but he is so damaged that he is unable to realize it anymore.

[johnnygma]

After reading your answer about Irene, it got me thinking. How would you like Moriarty to be adapted?

Would you make him the ultimate evil to defeat which ends Holmes' life like ACD intended or would you make him a villain to defeat after whom come others?

Personally, I'd love to see both his professor persona and his criminal mastermind persona. Kinda like how Mads Mikkelsen played Hannibal Lecter and his "person suit".

Oh, that's a good question! On the one hand, I always get a bit giggly when Moriarty is introduced in a Holmes adaptation since he is THE Holmes adversary. On the other hand, I've always said that Moriarty's importance within the Holmes canon is often overemphasised because he literally only makes one in-person appearance in the entire canon of 60 stories.

I certainly want his professor persona to be more focused on as well. Just as many adpations sometimes tend to forget that Watson is a doctor, they equally tend to forget that Moriarty is a professor of mathematics. I would love to see an inclusion of his knowledge of maths and numbers, I think you could easily connect that to his high intelligence and ability to create/organise an entire criminal network. Maybe something along the line of a "gentleman villain"; someone who doesn't have to rely on violence or evil speeches. The sheer reach, power, and superior intelligence Moriarty has is threatening enough (as a recent example: Robert Downey Jr. movies actually kinda nail that aspect of Moriarty).

Personally, I would like to say that it depends. If the adaptation is a TV show, like Sherlock or Elementary, then I would like to see some build-up to an eventual Moriarty reveal. However, I would not make him the THE final big villain of the story. After all, he wasn't that in the original canon either. Have a build-up to Moriarty, deal with him, and then move on. I didn't like how, e.g., in BBC Sherlock, EVERYTHING seemed to be connected to Moriarty in one way, shape, or form. He is not THAT big of a deal, there are other interesting villains in the canon to draw from.

Now, if you make a movie, I would approach it differently. If you make a single, stand-alone fun Holmes movie, the villain doesn't have to be Moriarty, it really doesn't have to be. You can have an interesting Sherlock Holmes mystery without getting Moriarty involved. Now, if it's a movie series, I guess it kinda depends. Again, you would need a bit of build-up, but I also wouldn't mind if there isn't much fanfare surrounding a Moriarty reveal. However, if you make a movie that's only, like, 2 hours long and you want Moriarty to be in it, he HAS TO leave a memorable impression. Actually similar to what you mentioned, Moriarty has to be a bit like Hannibal Lecter: a sense of unsettling calm and high intelligence, but he shouldn't overshadow the story and other characters too much (like Lecter in Silence of the Lambs).

I know, I don't seem like I can give a definitive answer on this one 😅 I definitely would love to see Moriarty more as a gentleman-ask mastermind who relies on his knowledge of mathematics and the psychology of people. I understand why he is treated with great fanfare, however, I sometimes think his importance to the Holmes canon and character is overemphasised. I would love to see other antagonists/criminals from the canon be used for more adaptations, e.g. Sebastian Moran, Charles A. Milverton, the Baron from The Illustrious Client, or the King of Bohemia. Adpations basically need to learn that Moriarty was (only) special because he was created to kill off Sherlock Holmes, but that the detective has dealt with many other criminals as well.

[illamda-spaminations]

Very specific MTP anime scene we need to talk about more

Cuz I really like it :]

Spoilers for Moriarty The Patriot anime and manga [specifically the "Noahtic" and brief mentions of "The final problem"]!!

Warning: long post lol

->The "Noahtic" Act 1 and 2

This has to be one of my favorite anime openings to an episode in MTP. It starts off with a man getting hunted by, who we later learn, is Blitz Enders, the "villain" in William's play. The opening itself has a very dramatic look to set the mood. This blood red lighting is usually seen when an important death is about to happen [example: Og William's death].

We don't really learn about the man who got hunted, but rather, we learn more about the hunter; a bit about his personality and why he is the target of William. It shows us that Enders is a man who hunts humans, his targets being peasants [if we analyze the clothing the victim is wearing], and is definitely not going to come out of this experience alive.

Not only that, this scene is important because it plays again at the end of Act 2, when Enders tries to escape from the guards. The scenario is turned on its head, with the hunter getting hunted; the victim in the opening now being Enders, the hounds being the police men and finally, Moran taking the role of the "hunter".

I kid you not, I was so hyped when this scene came to play. I genuinely love the juxtaposition in this specific scene; the differences, the similarities and, the final cherry on top, William's smug smile being the final thing Enders sees before he plunges into the ocean.

I also really like the fact that Enders goes absolutely insane in this episode. Him slowly but surely breaking down, eventually snapping and seeing himself as some sort of savior is so fucking good I was that shit up.

[To expand on the savior complex point, random tangent incoming] When Enders had the whole "I'm getting rid of the rats in this ship" speech, it made me think about William for some reason?? I think it was because of the similar yet very different sense of "justice" between the two. William's sense of justice is more righteous, as he doesn't deny the fact that, yes, he is one of the "devils" he is trying to exterminate, he is very guilty of his crimes, no matter the motive. Hell, the whole Moriarty plan hinges on his death as a way to end the murders. Enders, on the other hand believes that he is righteous and can do no wrong, a very stark contrast to William's methods and beliefs. He is "killing the rats", not because the "rats" have done wrong, but rather the "rats" very existence is wrong, and that the upper class is perfect without them. I'm not sure if this was intentional but yea, it's still pretty interesting.

If there is one thing I noticed about these episodes, its about the victim of this case. In the manga, the victim was a peasant who didn't do much wrong. We don't really know who he is. Maybe William didn't really look into him that hard and was waiting for Enders to choose a random man to hunt, all he needs is to have Enders commit murder and be in the spotlight; it doesn't matter who the victim is.

In the anime, however, we get some information on him; what crimes he committed and how he was paid by Moran to annoy the shit out of Enders. William did look into him, we know that this man, whoever he is, has been specifically chosen by William because he is a criminal.

This difference in both the manga and the anime shows William in two different lights. If we go by the manga's version, we can interpret William with "the end justifies the mean" principle. He is willing to sacrifice a possibly innocent person just to get what he wants, that is, Enders death and putting his crimes in the spotlight. It paints William in a morally grey light, that he is ambitious, and sometimes that ambition can get in the way of his righteousness.

In the anime, William knows and actively guarantees the fact that he [the peasant] is the victim of Enders' crime. He makes sure that the victim is someone who is no better than Enders and that made him William's target, killing two birds with one stone. It paints William in a morally light grey light, that he is much more calculating, and while you can say he is ambitious in his goals, his ambition does not get in the way of his righteousness.

I honestly prefer a mix of the two. I think it was interesting that the victim was possibly innocent, further justifying Enders' death and a reminder to the audience that William is not THAT righteous, that he is willing to bend the rules to his favor, even if it costs an innocent life. It makes William much more nuanced and fits well with his character.

I also really like the plot point where Moran paid the victim to actively annoy Enders; it shows that William really has orchestrated the perfect crime, accounting for every single detail, down to the victim as well.

In short: the Noahtic is a very good episode and I'm glad the anime didn't really shy away from certain details of the story. Do I like the manga better? Yes, while the animation is really well done, I still prefer the manga as it has more plot to it, not to mention the episodes the anime left out [example: The hunting in Baskervilles]. Whenever I recommend MTP, I'll always say "read the manga first if you want more plot", since it's gonna take a while for the next season about the NYC arc to come out lol.

I'll prob make another tangent related to Liam and Sherly but for now I'm gonna go study since that's the reason why I stopped posting online too much.

Have a good day everyone :D

[rey-jake-therapist]

@maryholmes94 and @aveline-amelia if you don't mind I prefer to keep our discussion here, because I feel like we took over the other thread with unrelated discussions way too much already ;)

@maryholmes94 please tag me when you post about the antagonistic figures in Sherlock! I'm looking forward to reading it :)

You said you disagreed about what I said about Mary. I also think myself it wasn't pulled under the rug the same way John's violence towards Sherlock was (if that's what you meant), but I still think something was missing in the way her situation was treated by the writers. I'm of course interested in your thoughts!

@aveline-amelia I agree Sally was never a villain, but she was still an antagonist in the strict sense of the word. She isn't a bad person, but she's definitely not Sherlock's ally. I agree about her use of the term 'freak'. I reckon that if the show was written in 2023 she would call him something else, but back in 2021 it was very commun to use "freak" as an insult against anyone who thought out of the box and didn't have good social skills. Not saying this to excuse the writers, but for having been called 'freak' a shit ton of times in the early 00s only because I was different, I think it's more a reflection of the time in which the show was written, than of the character's opinion that Sherlock had a mental illness.

I TOTALLY agree about Greg Lestrade! Pointing Sherlock as a mastermind criminal was a team effort: Moriarty implanted the idea, Sally and Philip thought they finally had a proof of what they always suspected about Sherlock, but Greg listened to them and along with his superior, decided he could be guilty. We see a couple of newspapers pointing at the cops for being wrong about Sherlock's guilt, but... That's it? Sherlock and Greg act as if nothing happened, while idk..... Maybe a "sorry I thought you kidnapped two children and fed them with poison while you were my friend" would have been nice :/

Yep, Wiggins had potential. In a board game I have, Sherlock trained him to be a detective and gives him and his team of street kids some of his cases to solve. It's said John didn't have much faith in him but Sherlock saw his potential. They could have given him a similar arc in Sherlock, instead they hinted at his deduction skills but finally turned him into.... I don't even know what Wiggins was for Sherlock in TLD. His sitter?

[twistedtummies2]

So Then seven fandoms you said...

Twisted Wonderland

Disney (general)

Kung Fu Panda

The Bad Guys

My Hero Academia

Hazbin Hotel

Fullmetal Alchemist ...Name one character from each franchise that you would use as butt pillow

Oooooh, interesting choices...gotta think about this...

You'd probably expect me to say Leona, but I think he's more likely to use my face as a pillow for his butt. >///> I think the one who would tickle my fancy there most would be Jack Howl. I can see him letting an S/O do that while blushing all the while, claiming he's only doing it so they won't bug him...but he secretly enjoys it. Plus, he's canonically got one of the biggest butts at Night Raven, so that helps. XD

Disney on the whole? Oooooh...oh, that's tough...there's so many options, I'm not sure. And I don't want to cheat and use TW again. XD Hmmmmm...I'm gonna saaaaaay...Pete. As in the Mickey Mouse villain. Him being a big smug lummox about some adorable little "pipsqueak" and their kinks, laughing that heavy, mean laugh of his, or maybe even getting flustered himself for comedy's sake...both are yes please. <3

Po. This was the only easy answer. LOL Moving on.

While Mr. Wolf is my favorite crush from "The Bad Guys," I feel I have to say Mr. Shark on pure principle. XD

Oooooh, another toughy...hmmmm...I'm gonna saaaay...Kirishima. Which may seem like an odd choice, especially with the hardening ability, but a.) he doesn't HAVE to use that, after all, and b.) I think he's got the right balance of personality, if that makes sense. My other immediate options would be Midoriya or Bakugou, and one of them is way too innocent and the other...well...FREAKING INSANE. :P Kirishima I think has the right blend of being able to be playful and kink-teasing while also being sweethearted and maybe slightly flustered in his own way as well, which I think fits this type of scenario best.

Ahhh...this is tough, because the thing about Hazbin Hotel/Helluva Boss is that most of these characters don't really HAVE magnificent rear ends to speak of. The art style is very angular, with the characters having more sharp points and strict lines than major curves. And with all three of my top three biggest crushes for "Hazbin," specifically, the same rule applies...plus, NONE of them seem like they'd be remotely into that. XD I actually don't know with this one. I'm into a lot of characters sitting on me, but allowing my head to just rest on their rear like a pillow? (shrugs) Maybe Husk? Because it would be hilarious for the Grumpy Cat to just be all, "...Seriously? What the Here? -_- " And try to shake someone off with no success. Hey, when in doubt, use comedy. :P

FMA: Brotherhood is SUCH a weird show for me. There are so many characters that SHOULD be kinkable for me, but...well...almost none of them ARE. There's always some kind of caveat involved with them, where I go, "They could be majorly appealing to me EXCEPT...!" There are only two characters who are exceptions, and even they aren't among my STRONGEST crushes: those characters are Greed (both versions of him, pre-and-post-Ling Yao) and Envy. And between the two, Greed seems the most likely to ALLOW that WITHOUT horribly murdering me, so I guess we'll say him. 'XD

And now, SURPRISE EIGHTH FANDOM: "Moriarty the Patriot." I choose William James Moriarty himself. For no other reason than he's my favorite character, my biggest crush, and canonically looks QUITE curvy in several pieces of official artwork. >///>

[tiger-moran]

The thing is...

The thing is I've seen people more than once complaining about Moriarty having to turn up in every Sherlock Holmes thing and saying basically ditch Moriarty, don't use Moriarty any more.

But this always ignores the fact that most of those 'Moriartys' have little to no resemblance to actual Moriarty. Or that in most cases one and only one facet of Moriarty's character is ever used and that facet isn't actually even canonically accurate anyway, it being 'Moriarty is Holmes's nemesis who's the ultimate criminal and Big Bad behind pretty much all crime and also is obsessed with committing crimes and antagonising Holmes and nothing else'.

So yeah, I'm sick too of people just creating characters who fit that idea, that not even canonical thing, and that are otherwise just totally original characters where pretty much everything is changed - gender and age often especially - and just tacking the name Moriarty on them. I'm sick basically of the 'Moriarty archetype' where... it's treated like it's enough to just slap the name Moriarty on a character and then change practically every single thing about him as if none of that matters. But it does annoy me that people just want to dump Moriarty and they try to justify this by going on as if we've had endless portrayals of Moriarty that were actually decent and canonically faithful, when we've just not had that, really at all. In a lot of adaptations and things Moriarty is actually a rubbish villain really, he does nothing clever, he's easily outwitted and easily beaten. But even amongst the better portrayals I can't actually think of any version that's got everything right - had Moriarty actually being a professor and having a life outside of crime; not had him just obsessed with Holmes above all else; actually had him in a canonically accurate relationship with Moran where Moran is vital to him professionally and also very close to him personally; actually had him as a 'consultant' instead of giving him a more direct and personal connection to all the crimes he plans. Some have got some elements but not others. Some come very much closer than others. Like, for example, listen, I love Jared Harris's Moriarty with all my heart, and I love that he's actually properly a professor and he has other interests and while yes, he's intrigued by Holmes it's without it becoming so that every single thing he does has to revolve around him, and yes he actually seems to be close to Moran, who also gets portrayed pretty well. But there are still elements about him I wish they'd done differently. Like I don't really feel like his Moriarty was really someone who planned crimes for other people, who was consulted by others to solve their particular 'problems', more he is someone who's just plotting and carrying out crimes for his own personal gain. I'm not saying doing one's own interpretation that fits whatever the universe is is bad or you can never change anything but I just hate how it gets ignored that... no version of Moriarty has ever really done all of it, included all those elements, and so yeah, people complaining about 'why's it always got to be Moriarty' when I've yet to find a single version that's actually done Moriarty absolutely right, it's very annoying. Almost as annoying to me as this plethora of Moriartys that are basically only Moriarty in name and bear absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the character I care about.

[chadillacboseman]

Which of the Character Archetypes is your OC?

I was tagged by @theelderhazelnut and @cloudofbutterflies92

The Hero

You think you're strong. Well, you have to be strong. You're some flavor of goodness, you're a defender and an avenger and an attacker all at once. The world isn't a kind place and some part of you cries at that. The others don't. You're tested, every day, every week, and you keep picking the morally right choices, yet it feels like you never get rewarded for that. People think you're flawless, but you don't think you are. You have too many regrets, and you always think you could've done more. You are in the company of Wonder Woman, Harry Potter, Luke Skywalker, and many more heroes.

The Villain

You should be happy you're getting this. Instead, you just nod and stare at your device blankly before clicking off to another quiz. The person who said all villains are created by villains was correct. You were innocent once. The world spit in your face, then was offended when you spit right back. Your only (initial) crime was having an objective in conflict to the hero's. Welcome, you are in the presence of Valentine from The Mortal Instruments, Professor Moriarty from the “Sherlock Holmes” stories, and Shere Khan from The Jungle Book

The Trickster

No legends will be written about you, but you deserve a place in them anyway. Although most think of the hero, villain, or mentor archetypes, you may be even more iconic or liked. Before storytellers were repeating tales of Beowulf and King Arthur, they were gathering around the fire listening to stories about Coyote, Raven, and the spider god Anansi. You don't classify as necessarily good nor evil, you follow your own agenda and do whatever you need to accomplish that free of black/white morals. You probably stan antiheroes and antivillains. You are in the company of Puck from A Midsummer Night’s Dream and Loki from Norse mythology

[soleminisanction]

Now that Robin: Tim Drake has been done for awhile, what are your thoughts on it? Parts you enjoyed most? Least favorite things? 

Overall I enjoyed it. It's not the greatest comic I've ever read or anything but I did like it, and I feel sad looking back on it because I wish it'd gotten more time. I wish more people had given it a shot rather than dismissing it just because they didn't like the artist for the first arc.

There's a lot of things I enjoyed about it. I think the marina made for a unique setting and the people who lived there were all interesting characters. I liked the fact that the development of that setting and those people highlighted the way Tim almost instinctively looks out for and cares about the people around him, making a point to get to know all of his neighbors personally.

I liked how the first arc honed in on Tim not just being a detective but a detective fanboy, bringing back his canon love of Sherlock Holmes and filling it out with other classic detective fiction. Moriarty himself was a little meh but the idea of his character as Tim's dark mirror, an obsessive fan of the detective narrative who treats other people like pieces in his game or dolls to be molded to his whim and is obsessed with finding a detective to match his villainous "brilliance" -- that's a solid concept.

I also liked the supporting cast. Bernard of course was great, I do actually enjoy his relationship with Tim and I think his development was interesting. They got some great romantic moments too, particularly after the artist switch, and I really like the fact that he figured out Tim was Robin on his own -- it makes total sense given his Bat-conspiracy focus and, to me, is almost certainly a big part of why Tim likes him.

But I also really liked Detective Williams and Sparrow, who I hope don't get completely shelved. Gotham can always use a few more good cops kicking around and I kinda like that some of the We Are Robin kids like Darcy and Izzy are still hanging around as a step between the Bats and the civilians. Plus it was good to give TIm someone to bounce off of that didn't have all the baggage that comes with the other Bats.

I would've liked to see a full version of the second Chaos Monsters story, it's a shame that got cut short.

My least favorite part was the marketing. I don't know who it was that decided to lean into stuff like, "Move over Damian, the world's favorite Robin is back!" but it was just... embarrassing and unnecessary and completely against the tone of the story and just, ugh. That sucked.

I also was not a fan of the idea that Tim, quote, "Wanted to be like [his] dad," with that Dad here meaning Jack, but that was a minor thing. Meghan Fitzmartin is well-meaning and seems very sweet but she's also sometimes just, painfully straight.

Still overall I liked the book. It's not what I would give people if I wanted to give them an introduction to Tim or even just catch them up on his modern incarnation -- I'd sooner start with the Urban Legends story and then point them straight to Zdarsky's Batman -- but it was ultimately fine. Had potential, shame it wasn't allowed to reach it.

[inevitably-johnlocked]

Hey Steph, I just re-watched TST so my brain is on Morstan mode. What do you think about Mary? Personally, I always liked her. I was a bit weary with the whole shot Sherlock thing but I have got to give her credit for being a fabulous character. Amanda did a great job portraying her, Mark and Steven did a great job writing her. -- I just wondered what your pov was because you are like a deity to this fandom, or at least to me.

Anonymous asked: Hey, I was just wondering, is it bad that I like Mary. I honestly love her character and I think she works great with John, only rivaled by my love for Johnlock. Of course I don't enjoy her shooting Sherlock but all-in-all, I think her character is great. Also, I think Amanda played her beautifully. I know that when Mary was first introduced, the character and actress got quite a bit of hate. Personally I don't get it. Maybe people are blinded by the shot... Personally I love her...

======

Hey Nonnies!

Oh gosh sorry I missed these asks, I dunno why I never replied to them... I hope y'all don't mind me putting them together since they're so similar and my answer would have been the same for both anyway.

First off, thank you for your kind words, Nonny One, I hope you're still around and I hope that I'm still worthy of your love.

Secondly, if you've both been here a long time, you'll know that I was a HUGE advocate for villain Mary Pre-S4. I was the biggest Mary stan there was because I loved the direction they were taking her character. I coined the term "the mary problem" and wrote a tonne of meta about her and her potential reveal of being the main villain, possibly working with Moriarty, because quite honestly, it was the only thing that made (and still the only thing that makes) sense with the show's narrative pre-S4, AND with all the red flags Sherlock was pointing at in TAB. You can check out some of the MANY meta I wrote about her on this page here and some on the TAB meta page here. Her character was fascinating to me, and I genuinely believed that they were going to make her a villain and that the climax for S4 was going to be epic.

But then S4 actually happened. She was still a villain but now more deplorable and unlikeable than ever because Mofftiss tried SO hard to convince us she wasn't and to just ignore everything before S4. They ruined her character, just like S4 did for all the characters. I suspect some behind-the-scenes shenanigans with a petty AA went down – and this is ALL hearsay and my speculation so just take it with the teeniest grain of salt. I think it pissed me off more because they tried to redeem this irredeemable character who abandoned her husband and child and subsequently put all of them in danger. The flip was so out of left field and made NO fucking sense.

S4 is a clusterfuck of bad writing and bad ideas and plot holes.

My feelings these days about Mary are complicated right now. I like what she COULD have been, not what she inevitably became because of bitterness behind-the-scenes.

Again, my speculations and nothing more.

Cheers, Nonnies, and thank you for your questions.

[honeycreammilkshake]

"What do you think are x and y’s greatest personality strengths and weaknesses? Why? What do you love about their dynamic?"

So, just found this kinda ask for various ships, I was thinking to ask you, if you don't mind and have free time, of course.

For your fav ships: Sukuita, Lawlight, Sherliam, or Tenjoh (feel free to pick whichever you want to answer). 🌻🌷

hi, anon! thank you so much for this ask! so sorry for the late reply.

i know sukuita is my number one ship and all but i kind of feel like talking about tenjoh more, since it's very underrated, so i'm going to go ahead and rant about those two.

spoilers ahead if you haven't watched monster yet!

i only recently started in on this series, but i'm already obsessed with it. what first drew me to it was, of course, johan. i love a complex, chilling, deeply philosophical villain, especially one who people think they understand when they really don't. and even johan doesn't fully understand himself either.

though his presence is a very dark and disturbing one that hangs over everyone, johan himself doesn't have much screen time for the majority of the series (much like james moriarty or hannibal lecter), and it's only towards the very end that we actually come to understand more about him and who he really is. even his true name is never given. and this is essential to his role in the story as it gives him a lot of nuance and complexity.

johan is depicted at first as the very embodiment of evil, a literal monster, yet his relationships with characters like his sister nina and his savior tenma give him a lot more depth and even contradict the idea of him being solely "bad."

arguably, johan has no "positive" traits initially, but his greatest strengths do like in his immense intelligence and incredible understanding of the human mind. he is able to come across as charismatic, compassionate, and kind-hearted to many others precisely because of how adept he is at essentially slipping into other people's lives, much like the monster from the storybook he read over and over as a child. his worst personality traits, morally, are his murderous intentions and manipulative nature.

like johan, tenma is also very intelligent and perceptive, too, but unlike johan he's truly kind-hearted, caring, and puts other people ahead of himself. i would say that the greatest strengths tenma has are his uncompromising optimism and empathy as well as his intelligence and sense of purpose. i would say his worst weakness, though, are his lack of self-preservation and his unflinching sense of morality, although his experience with johan does change him a bit towards the end.

for me, personally, i think the best thing about johan and tenma's dynamic is how unconventional it is. unlike the "heroes" in shows such as death note or psycho pass, tenma is not well-versed in criminology or psychology, as he's a doctor and not a detective. johan's relationship with tenma is also different from how a lot of traditional hero/villain dynamics are written, especially because tenma didn't create johan (bonaparta did) but still feels such a strong sense of responsibility towards him.

it's common for villains, especially the ones in comics or literature such as frankenstein, to have a vengeance against those who created their monstrosities. but tenma never did anything negative to impact johan or drive him into becoming a villain. in fact, tenma was the one to save johan's life as a child, even going as far as to prioritize the boy's life over the mayor's, which inevitably led to the ruination of tenma's successful career as a neurosurgeon.

though tenma was briefly bitter about this, he never regretted saving johan's life, even though the boy would grow up to become the "one in the shadows" who orchestrated so much of the death and destruction in the series.

johan was at the brink of death due to asking his sister to shoot him and kill the monster inside of him, but tenma chose to save johan's life, which led to johan returning the favor - in his own way - by killing the people responsible for the downfall of tenma's career. it was almost like his really messed up way of saying thank you. but learning that fact drove tenma to feel like johan was his responsibility. and even though tenma could have left johan's fate in the hands of others, he chose to pursue johan - obsessively and single-mindedly - for almost a whole decade.

although his personal mission was to kill johan himself, tenma failed to do so multiple times, mostly because of his overwhelming sense of ethics, his unshakeable belief that "all lives are created equal." his position as a doctor, as someone who wanted to live to help others, makes him almost completely opposite from johan, who believes that only death is equal for all and puts no value in even his own life.

even though johan kills pretty much everyone who remembers or knows about him, he spared tenma's life out of thankfulness that the doctor saved him... and also so that tenma could be the one to destroy him. he puts tenma through a living hell in order to create his own "perfect death" and wants to die from the very hands that saved him by driving tenma into breaking his ideals (which i find beautifully twisted and almost poetic).

but instead of coming to despise johan enough to kill him without regret, tenma actually uncovers the truth of johan's past and even feels an intense empathy and desire to forgive him.

johan wanted his own life, the life tenma gave back to him, to end so that he could prove his point that life has no meaning. but tenma saw meaning even in the monster. and even though johan killed so many people for no apparent reason or motive a lot of the time, tenma comes to understand that johan isn't a mindless monster with no other purpose than to destroy.

i have a lot more to watch before i actually finish the story, but based on what i already know and have gathered so far, the relationship between johan and tenma is one that i find really fascinating and complex. i would highly recommend more people try out this series - not just for them but also for the many amazingly interesting side characters and the thoughtful philosophical elements.

[vivihar]

hello vivi !! it’s ME again !!

im here to yap again so BE READY !!

—

first i love tomerus i want them to smooch but i also want them to have a billford dynamic…please here me out with tired stressed severus being tormented by an entity (tom ahah TOMENTED) who wants to take over the universe and finds fun in torturing humans with a whole ‘let’s see how many times i can rearrange your atoms without you ceasing to exist!!’ but in a TOM way yk ?! like severus who shouldnt like this weird demon but he’s also kind of hot in a way he hates himself for. like please my man wanted to research creatures and potions and instead accidentally made a deal with a god damn trillion year old psychotic masochistic interdimensional demon ????

—

THE SECOND YAP is i want them…sherlock johnlock coded…severus just looking for an apartment and meeting up with an old friend (insert whoever you want here) and who says ‘wow, you’re the second person to ask me that.’ and he’s like ‘wtf r u talking abt’ and there tom is whipping a dead body because he wants to know if bodies bruise after death ?? and everyone’s okay with it except for severus who’s stood there wondering who tf this guy is and why is behaviour is normalised ?? or you could make it sheriaty which i now realise while writing this is slightly better. moriarty as tom and severus as sherlock with their homoerotic rivalry where neither of them actually want to kill the other because what’s the fun in that ?? this is what severus needs, the thrill of the chase and the only person that can give him that is tom and while toms reading out this pre-rehearsed villainous speech severus is thinking ‘this guy talks to much…i should kiss him. or shoot him. both is good.’ and tom is thinking ‘maybe i should kill him…no then i wont be able to see him. maybe i could just rob his grave after. i’ll see what he does first.’ because honestly they’re ALL THE OTHER HAS !! they’re ALL THE OTHER WANTS !! no matter how much tom does, severus will always be there to stop him and the thrill of the chase is what gets them off !! they’re insane !!

and i love them and then concludes my yap LOVE YOU VIVI !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hello Dori lovely how are you 🧡

I confess it's been a long time since I watched both of them so I don't know if I could make them as you said but I did understand the dynamic you're referring to which thank you love, it's perfect especially the first one.

Maybe not a deity (or maybe could do) Tom has psychopath tendency which if we make Severus some type of a creature Tom would want to play and test everything about Severus like a kid playing with his toys. But if we think him as a 'deity' I think we could go with Canon. Like V winning the war and playing with Severus, torturing him and making him live forever so he could play with him forever etc etc.

I kinda have Moriarty and Holmes thing au. Not really same but similar chasing and playing game. Muggle au where Tom is a criminal Lord or something and Severus journalist or detective who looks for him. More likely journalists tho. Tom would have fun how his newly graduated 'stalker' finds things about him(he lets him) and Severus would be excited to discover more and more things about Tom. And at some point Severus gets good, he finds things Tom doesn't want him and rather than being angry Tom would kinda feel proud lol anyway I hope I tidy the plot soon so I can start making the au because it's fun.

I love you too 😙🧡🧡

[miwhotep]

One of my pet theories about yuumori Milverton, which I'm sure is wishful thinking on my part, is that Sherlock is incorrect about his motivation and he does have a purpose with the way he chooses to blackmail.

I think he is searching for someone that will not cave to the pressure.

I don't have a good reason to think this, of course, textually. But it is dissatisfying for him to be written as a 2-dimensional villain, with such obscure motives, and I think this would add something without changing his alignment.

[Finding someone who does not cave would mean finding someone unafraid of their authentic self- the worse things they do, I think the more interesting.]

Hi! I absolutely agree with you, seeing Milverton ending up as a two-dimensional villain is such a disappointment - especially how complex the other YuuMori characters are. That's why I started thinking about Milverton's background and motivations, too.

I chose the hero-to-villain trope for him because before he appeared in the manga, I expected him to be a hero-like character, too - since Moriarty the Patriot has a tendency to turn canon villains - like Moriarty or Sebastian Moran - into more heroic beings who want to achieve a good cause with evil methods. The other reason why I headcanon Milverton having the backstory I gave him to show that even if you use the evil methods for a good cause, if you don't watch all of your steps carefully and don't set lines you never cross, the evil methods can darken your soul and turn you evil in the end, too. This was a thought I wish YuuMori explored more to give a contrast, a dark mirror to the Moriarty group what remained on the good side despite their actions. I chose Milverton to be that type of villain so I can finally have that dark mirror.

But I like your idea, too! It is really interesting. Milverton blackmailing others because he wants to find someone on whom blackmail doesn't work because they are not afraid showing their real self. That also means that that person doesn't care about the public's opinion about them at all. That person is someone who doesn't have a weak point and whom against Milverton cannot win. (Playing with your thought, maybe Milverton is being bored and want to find a formidable foe?)

If I think this through further, Milverton actually found a person like that in the end - at least, from a certain point of view: William James Moriarty! While the Lord of Crime is not Liam's authentic self, but when Milverton blackmailed him to get arrested or he will reveal his identity in the newspaper, William didn't care. Yes, he actually sacrificed his reputation for the people he wanted to save - but he was someone blackmail just didn't work on. (I know this was not what you originally meant, but I wanted to add this idea, too).

Thank you so much for sharing your thought with me! I love hearing other people's viewpoint, because they always inspire me for further thinking. I especially liked your theory, I find it a quite believable motivation for Milverton to have. If you have more thoughts about him, don't be afraid to share!

[silvfyre-writings]

Genichirou Thoughts (Bungou Stray Dogs)

Time for Fyre’s Genichirou thoughts! I don't know how much sense this will make, but I'll try my best. Note that these are my personal thoughts. I love studying characters (although this is my first time sharing thoughts), so feel free to discuss with me!! :D

To start with, I am a baby when it comes to BSD, cause I have only been in the fandom since season 4 aired last year, and boy it’s been a ride, especially when it comes to Genichirou’s character. Because my first ever encounter with him was during the Untold Origins where he made a cameo—and well, from the comments on that episode, I legitimately thought he must’ve been the worst character on earth. Like, Shou Tucker bad, that’s how much hate Genichirou was getting on this episode.

And for the longest time, I avoided his character because of that (I wasn’t yet caught up on the series), but then I finally reached Genichirou’s first proper appearance and suddenly I was more confused than anything. At first glance, a drunken, exuberant man wanting to uphold the justice of what he believed to be the truth at the time. At a deeper glance, a complex and interesting character, yet I still refused to give him the time of day because the fandom hated him.

Then I met a certain someone who loves Genichirou, asked some questions about his character, and yeah, that was that, I now love this man and his complexity.

---

With a newfound appreciation for Genichirou’s character, I went back and looked into him more deeply (mostly because I wanted to write fics, and needed to understand him more), and found him quite the interesting character. Because underneath that drunken, joking persona of his, is a man who has been traumatised and hurt by the world and his closest friend, and it changed him drastically.

As a child, we see Genichirou as a happy child, he has fun, he’s friends with Fukuzawa, and he seems to genuinely enjoy his life. But then he becomes a soldier and that’s where things change.

To start with the obvious; his relationship with Fukuzawa. Genichirou tries and fails to convince Fukuzawa to go to war with him, which puts a strain on their friendship, but ultimately what I took away from that, is despite him being upset with Fukuzawa, he still respected Fukuzawa’s decision.

I personally think that it was the lack of contact that fractured their friendship instead of this decision as I see people think, especially since in the recent chapter, Genichirou apologised for not staying in touch.

The next is the war. I don’t think I need to explain that much, since we all have a solid understanding of it, and how it changed Genichirou. Genichirou says himself that “it was in that battlefield, that I was born” which is a pretty powerful message in itself. War changes people, that’s a fact, and Genichirou is no different. He went to war, witnessed the brutality and futility of it, and it changed him, it gave him a goal, which is the goal we strive to see him complete within the series.

Genichirou’s goal is a world without war, as we learnt in 112, after receiving a vision from Amenogozen, and his way of doing that was by making himself out to be the villain to try and unite the world into stopping him. In a way, similar to how William (MtP) works to unite London by becoming the villain if you need someone to compare to. Some would say that Genichirou’s goal of ridding the world of war by becoming its villain is the actions of a morally grey character. Some would say it’s an anti-hero. Personally, I think it’s a mixture of both. Mostly because unlike other morally gray/anti-hero characters we see (William Moriarty, Eren Jaeger, Lelouch vi Britannia, and Koko Hekmatyar to name a few), Genichirou worked alone.

Yes, he’s the head of the DOA, and yes, Teruko knew of his plans, but really, he worked alone to make his plan work.

The main issue with Genichirou’s goal is that he worked alone, but despite that, with the state of the current arc, we can’t say his goal failed or not yet. For that to be certain, we simply need to be patient and wait for the next arc. I would say though, that while his goal may not have succeeded as intended, he still managed to succeed in some aspect. The world will change because of his actions, but it remains to be seen how it will change (I am choosing the 2 hours later part until we know more).

As for why this goal of a world without war exists, well we have the sword, Amenogozen to thank for that, as it showed Genichirou a vision of a battle so terrible, that it prompted him into having this goal in the first place. The problem with this vision, is that we don’t know when Genichirou was shown the vision. All we know is that this fight takes place 36 years after he was shown the vision, which shows the severity of the situation for Genichiro to take action when he does.

All in all, Genichirou is not a simple character, and never was; he's always been complex, and always will be. We see him laughing, we see him joking, we see him caring, and we've seen him brutally stab his childhood friend, and cause the Agency so much pain with his actions. I truly think Asagiri has done well in writing his character, and I’ll be genuinely sad to see his arc end.

That’s my thoughts, thank you for sticking around, I probably didn’t make much sense, but I tried, and I wish to share