#and if i can give even more depth to already existing characters in the process

[the-crow-binary]

So i've been thinking about where on the chronology i could put Benedict, knowing i didn't want him to be too close to the modern times... I've looked at every Belmont from Trevor to Richter, and after quite some time, i came to this conclusion:

It would work very well if he was Juste's big bro. And here's why:

It makes a very neat contrast beetween the two. Juste is very talented at magic, so much he relies on it more than on the Vampire Killer. But it's the "good" kind of magic, in the clan's eyes. The same kind of magic Sypha used. Meanwhile Benedict has the worst kind of magic you could possibly have (if i go by Isaac's one dialogue, when talking about Devil Forging: "The most forbidden of arts"). And he is just like Juste, unfortunately, in the sense that he is born naturally talented (and only got stronger and stronger).

There's something... poetic in having your first child born with incredibly dark powers, and the second one being the total opposite. Juste would be the "blessed" child while Benedict is the "cursed" one, in a very obvious way. One is pure and the other is tainted. (Juste literally has WHITE HAIR. It's like God asked "how pure do you want him to be ?" and the parents just went "yes")

It's also quite funny that the parents choosed those names for their children. Benedict meaning "blessed", and Juste "righteous". Like those people really wanted their offspring to be morally perfect, didn't they ? (and then you realise they called their second child "Juste" because the first one was, in their eyes, destined to be "evil" and it makes it actually dramatic. They were clearly desperate for a "good" child)

There's also this obvious parallel, of Juste wishing he could escape his family's fate, while Benedict only wish he could belong to it. Benedict wish he could wield the whip, and Juste only feels like he's forced to wield it, even though he would rather use magic (the VK is a very strong "your family is cursed to hunt the night forever and so are you" reminder to him, while magic and interior design gives him an "escape route", but that's just my interpretation).

Also, Benedict being Juste's bro means Simon is his grandfather. Benedict would be born in 1720, making Simon 51... yeah we can safely assume he was alive. And it's nice, because then we can imagine a very strong "oh shit" moment for him when the baby's born very obviously "cursed"... i mean HE HAD SUFFERED A CURSE HIMSELF IN THE PAST. Granted, it wasn't anything like Benedict's, but still. You can bet he had a moment of panick, wondering if Dracula's curse on him somehow had a different, lasting effect that ended up affecting this child, even though it hadn't done anything to his children. Like it was some kind of twisted game of "okay you can rest now- SIKES YOUR FAMILY'S ACTUALLY CURSED LOL" Anyway i'll tell you right now: the two incidents have no correlation (Benedict is just built different y'know). And Simon will understand it soon enough and calm down eventually, but i still like the idea of giving him a little scare :3

Now regarding how neglected and excluded Benedict will end up being by his own family, one might think that it would be OOC of Simon to be part of this big problem. However: Simon being one of the oldest, he knows more than anybody how dangerous "dark beings" can be. He knows how destructive a curse is, having suffered from one himself before. Of course he would have try to see how to "cure" Benedict, but with no success because you can't just "cure" a power. Eventually he just gave up, cuz he can't "save" him, but he has to protect others (even tho he's getting old and tired), but also, well, he can't just kill him. And then Benedict would slowly stop talking to everybody, or, very little. He would naturally distance himself to everyone because he doesn't feel loved nor accepted. And Simon would be know even less what to do.

AND ALSO JUSTE WOULD BE BORN. And it's so much easier to take care of him than it is for Benedict. There's no complications, no moral dilemma, he can just enjoy his second grandchild's company and help him grow.

Talking about him, since i already established Benedict's younger sibling would've secretly meet with him regularly and learn things from him... wouldn't that be interesting if Juste really was them :3 Little Juste, asking questions and being interested in the dark arts when he was young... :3 Only to be traumatised by it (when Benedict almost killed their dad) and growing to hate it but still thinking fondly of his big bro who he misses very much but can't even talk about. I also think the whole "erasing Benedict" thing would've start before the... incident. With his parents forbidding Juste from talking about him to Lydia and Maxim, for example. The less people knew Benedict outside of the clan, the less shame they would have to suffer.

And then Maxim turns "evil" and Juste has trauma flashbacks :33 We can even take it farther and make him think Benedict was behind Lydia's kidnapping and the apparition of two identical castles (at first), making him ready to face his own bro once again at any moment... but it never happened. At least, not in-game

So anyway, just a few things i've been thinking about... uwu (and i'm not yet finished thinking about it)

[miraculouslbcnreactions]

Sorry if this seems confrontational, but for the life of me I can’t get into your “Chloe has no growth” point when the show itself retracts growth from everyone and is inconsistent with everyone. You saying “The show just lays down basic character traits in Chloe” doesn’t make sense when her basic character traits are supposed to be her being selfish and spoiled.

S2 built off of that and despite what you say, had Chloe doing things that in S1 she wouldn’t have done. She apologized multiple times to the people she wronged, she willingly put herself in harm’s way to help the people she cares about and she was openly vulnerable to Ladybug in “Malidiktaor”. Something S1 Chloe wouldn’t have done. If there’s a distinct difference between a Chloe back in S1 and a Chloe in S2, then growth HAS taken place. But it doesn’t stay because of the formula (and the writers just don’t want her to keep that growth)

So what I’m asking is…what do you mean “Chloe doesn’t have growth”?

I can understand the “No arc” argument because an unfinished arc feels like there’s no arc at all (even though they are fundamentally not the same)

I wouldn't say that the show retracts growth from everyone. It's more that no one is ever supposed to grow. Every episode resets the cast. That's just how pure formula shows work and Miraculous is being sold as a pure formula show. The characters are meant to be static (one of the writers literally compared Miraculous to Dora the Explorer).

That static nature is why pure formula shows normally avoid giving their good-guy characters major flaws. It's the wrong medium for that type of thing specifically because the characters cannot change in meaningful ways throughout the show. They can learn little lessons that don't really change them and maybe have big change between seasons via a special or movie, but that's about it. Thus things like the season four conflict working so poorly. It's just a terrible choice for a formula show! The conflict is literally not allowed to develop properly because of the chosen format.

But sure, let's talk about Chloe and why I will die on the hill that she never demonstrated meaningful improvement even with the issue of the inconstant writing. In fact, seasons-one-to-three Chloe is one of the most consistent characters in the show. For this discussion to work, we need to start off by discussing character development and the two main forms it can take: character establishment and character growth.

Character Establishment

When the audience meets a character, they know nothing about said character. It's up to the writer to guide the introduction process. To choose when to reveal already existing elements of the character's personality, skills, and backstory. This is called character establishment. It is the writing telling you who the character is on a baseline level. Those reveals don't need to happen at the start of the story, though. They can be - and often are - held back for when the time is right.

When these reveals are delayed, it's important to remember that these elements were always part of the character. The reveal isn't changing who the character actually is. It's just changing how the audience views the character.

For example, we spend a good chunk of season one uncertain why Gabriel is doing what he does. Then, in Origins, we learn that it's all for Emilie. This is new information that adds depth to Gabriel's character, but it doesn't change him in any way. This is who he always was. We just know him better now and can recontextualize past events with our new understanding of his motivation.

Character Growth

Character growth is when writers take a character's personality or world view or even just their skills from point A to point B, allowing the audience to watch the character change and become a new better - or lesser - version of themself. This is usually part of a larger character arc where all the moments of growth add up, but it can take the form of small moments of growth that don't fit into a bigger picture, too. I'd probably still call that an arc, but we'll use the word "growth" a lot in this post, so let's just call it growth to be consistent.

Miraculous doesn't really have either arcs or growth because - once again - formula shows don't allow characters to meaningfully change, so I'm going to have to make up an example here. I'll use one that illustrates how character establishment and character growth can and do intertwine as that's an important thing to acknowledge to help guide this discussion.

Let's say that we have a character who lost their family at a young age. We'll call this character Mary. Mary's loss guides her character throughout the entire story, but the other characters and the audience are never told that this is what's going on. We just know that Mary acts in seemingly illogical ways at times and that she trusts no one.

Throughout the story, Mary learns to trust her costars, leading to a big, dramatic scene where she finally tells them - and the audience - about her past. This big dramatic scene is both the culmination of a character arc and a piece of baseline character establishment that allows us to understand Mary's character better no matter what part of the story we're reading.

Because these combo growth and establishment moments are so common in stories, it can feel like character growth when we learn new things about a character in a dramatic moment, but that's not always what's happening. Sometimes dramatic moments are just there to reveal what was always there by forcing a character to act differently than they usually do through the power of extenuating circumstances. These extenuating-circumstances moments are not character growth because, once the moment is over, the character resets to their normal self. The moment wasn't there to let them grow. It was there for the sake of the plot.

This is actually a really important thing that writers need to know how to do. Figuring out what circumstances will make a character say or do a thing they generally wouldn't say or do is part of how stories work. I have started stories with characters acting wildly "out of character" because I put them in the a situation where the behavior suddenly was in character!

Oh, you don't want to talk to this total stranger because you're an introvert with social anxiety who has yet to learn how to love yourself and open up to others? That's nice. Your leg is broken now and you're stuck in the middle of nowhere. What you gonna do sucker? Lie there in the dirt or talk to the nice lady who wants to help you? Your choice! (Spoiler: he talked to the nice lady. He even let her physically support him when he'd usually never let a stranger touch him!)

As soon as that scene was over, the character reverted because it wasn't growth. He didn't become a more open person. He just did something he normally wouldn't do because the situation demanded it. It was extenuating circumstances so that the freaking plot could start.

This is what happened with Chloe in season two. Everything that people call growth is really just extenuating circumstances that reset by the end of the episode or even by the end of the scene.

Let's Talk About Chloe

Chloe does not have a character arc, aborted or otherwise. She is never taken on a journey where we watch her change. All we get is delayed character establishment via extenuating circumstances, but it's given in ways that make some people feel like she was being given an arc. Let's talk about why that is.

Season one Chloe is a one dimensional mean girl. She has almost no depth. She's just here to be petty and cause akumas. She is not a fully realized character.

Season two takes those traits and keeps them, but also gives Chloe a lot more depth to round her out and make her feel like a real character. She's just as petty and mean as she always was, but we're finally allowed to see her in some moments that make her feel like a well of potential to become something more, which the writers basically had to do if they wanted to let her be a hero. The audience needed to feel like Chloe could be good in the right situation.

The feelings evoked by her newly discovered depth are why people go "oh, she had a character arc! My feelings about her changed in a big way!" But she didn't have an arc. You just got to know her better by seeing her in moments where she was forced to be vulnerable. That's not growth. Growth is meaningful, lasting change, not situational change. Everyone changes based on the situation! It's why the "True Selves" stuff is such nonsense. It implies that there's one set way that we're supposed to act in order to be authentic and anything else is some kind of lie which just isn't how the world works.

Let's look at some examples to drive home what I mean.

Season one established that Chloe idolized Ladybug. It's why we get things like this moment from Evil Illustrator:

Ladybug: Fine! You stay! Later! Cat Noir: What do you mean later? Ladybug: I mean, you're the one who wants to protect her, so you don't need me. So, later! (swings away) Chloé:(looks over balcony) Ahhh! Ladybug! Text me! OK!

And this confession from Antibug:

Ladybug: [Chloe] pretended she was me?! How often does that happen? Armand: She idolizes you.

So Chloe adores Ladybug and wants to impress her/be her best friend. Cool. Got it. That never goes anywhere in season one because season one doesn't see Chloe and Ladybug interact much. The most we get is Ladybug saving Chloe from akumas, which doesn't allow for deep conversations. I don't think that they're ever alone in a moment where they can actually talk.

That changes in season two. In season two, they get to interact a lot and it's often in moments where there's a big threat and no one else is around, letting us see a new side to Chloe. But that's not Chloe changing. It's just the writers revealing that Chloe has more to her than the mean girl stuff because of course she does! Pure mean girls don't exist. Everyone has depth. We simply never saw that depth before because Chloe was never put in a situation where she needed to be open. We can't say that season one Chloe wouldn't confess things to Ladybug or chose to sacrifice herself to let Ladybug win because she never had the chance to do those things!

In fact, I'd go so far as to argue that season one Chloe probably would have done the same things as season two Chloe because season two Chloe doesn't really contradict season one Chloe. Antibug showed us that Chloe was pretty desperate to be loved and welcomed the way that Ladybug is loved and welcomed:

Chloé: Jagged Stone! Jagged: (thinking she's the actual Ladybug) Ladybug! What are you doing here? Chloé: Um… when I find out you were here, I knew you'd wanna see me! I had to come say hello. (Sabrina waves at Jagged)

and Chloe has always been a stubborn girl who stands up for what she wants even if what she wants is something bad. Antibug also showed us that Chloe can be genuinely nice to the people she cares about. Her and Sabrina's relationship is shown to be complex with them often having a lot of fun together.

Similarly, Origins sees Chloe showing her father genuine affection after she's saved from Stoneheart:

[Image description: Chloe and Andre hugging and looking very happy to be together]

Origins is the baseline episode that tells us who the characters are on day one, so I never once doubted that Chloe loved Andre, but Andre didn't get akumatized because of Chloe's actions in season one. He didn't even get akumatized for something that Chloe had nothing to do with! His first akumatization is in season two, so it's not shocking that we don't get a Malidiktaor type scene until Malidiktaor.

Chloe was vulnerable with her personal hero when her beloved parent was in danger, but not before? Shocking! Who would have guessed?

Me. I would have guessed. I didn't even realize that people were reading it as some sort of character growth because it clearly wasn't. Malidiktaor didn't feel like something new for Chloe's character. It just felt like the writers were leaning into things that we'd always known about Chloe and using them to better establish her character as someone who genuinely cares about select people. She just doesn't show most of the time.

The same thing goes for Chloe's sacrifice and apology in Zombizou. Chloe only sacrifices herself when there's no one left but her and Ladybug. When the choice is to let the terrorist win or take the hit and let you personal hero save the day. Brave? Sure, but also not growth. Chloe is team Ladybug for all of seasons one, two, and three! She wants Ladybug to like her! Plus even a petty brat can have moments of goodness where they pick a hero over a literal terrorist.

This honestly would have been a damming moment if Chloe didn't sacrifice herself. She functionally had no other choice here. The entire episode builds itself to the self-sacrifice moment so that Chloe is forced to make that choice even though she's been her petty bratty self throughout the whole attack. It's genuinely solid writing.

Then, in the heightened emotions directly after the Zombizou win, we get this:

Miss Bustier: But I hurt a lot of people... Chloé: No... I did... I forgot your birthday, once again. And when I saw everyone had prepared a gift for you, I totally lost it. Because I, too, would've liked to offer you something. I'm sorry, Miss Bustier. Miss Bustier: Thank you, Chloé. Those words are the best possible gift you could ever give me. (hugs Chloé) (Chloé hugs her back, forgetting herself for a moment.) Chloé: Huh?... Uh, yeah. Okay then, we're all good.

A brief moment of vulnerability that quickly ends and does not stick around because Chloe's change was situational, not true growth. The next scene of that episode starts with Chloe being her usual self:

Chloé: Me? You want me to apologize to the entire class? Ridiculous! They should be thanking me for saving everybody.

And ends with the reveal of Chloe's gift to Miss Bustier, which was given in private via a note.

Once again, nothing new for Chloe's character. She acts as she always has, being mean to everyone while having moments of vulnerability when things get tense. Remember that hug between her and her father that we talked about earlier? Same concept. She had just almost died from an akuma attack and so she needed some emotional support, leading her to act more openly loving than she usually does when he's around. Once the moment is over, she reverts to the petty mean girl default.

Giving gifts to placate people is also something that we've seen before. A pretty similar thing happens at the end of Evil Illustrator, it's just played less sympathetic towards Chloe because the writers weren't giving her depth back then:

Sabrina: Too late. Chloé and I are doing the project together. Marinette: You mean, you're doing the project? Sabrina: Well, of course! After all she's been through... Marinette: Ughhh.... Nice new beret, by the way. Sabrina: I know, right! Chloé lent it to me. She really is my BFF! Chloé! Your geography homework's ready!

For any of this to be character growth, we need to see Chloe act differently over time. For her to be put in similar situations and get different outcomes, but we don't see that in part because Chloe didn't change and in part because season one didn't do much to develop Chloe's deeper side. We rarely see her alone or in moments of extreme vulnerability, but you need those moments to show her depth. That's why Despair Bear had Chloe crying alone after Adrien threatened to end her friendship and not before. Chloe is very reluctant to openly show depth. You have to force it out of her, which perfectly fits the character we met in season one.

Even her standing up to Hawkmoth and rejecting the akuma isn't character growth in my opinion. Chloe has always stood up to authority and demanded whatever she wants. She has wanted to be Ladybug's friend and be seen as a hero since season one, so it's not shocking that her extremely strong will would allow her to defy a terrorist. If there is anyone in this show who can stand up to a terrorist on shear "no!" power alone, it's little miss I-always-get-what-I-want. I could see a variation of this happening at any point in the show, just change Chloe's reason for defying Gabriel to match the situation. Rework these lines to be about a party that she wanted to go to and I'd still totally buy it:

Chloé: No, Hawk Moth! I am a superheroine! I am Queen Bee! Ladybug will come and get me when she needs me! I WILL NEVER JOIN YOU! (throws her photo onto the ground as the akuma exits it... and pants)

Chloe acted like a hero here because she wants all the perks of being a hero and can't believe that Ladybug would actually bench her. That's impossible! Ladybug wouldn't do that!

As soon as Chloe accepts that she won't be a hero again, Chloe stops acting heroic because acting heroic wasn't growth. It was her playing a part the same way she played a part in Despair Bear. She was doing what she needed to do to be Queen Bee again and not because it's the right thing to do. This would only be real growth if she rejected the akuma after accepting that she wouldn't be Queen Bee again, but that's not what happens. As soon as she accepts that she's out, she no longer has any reason to play nice. She never grew into a character who did what's right for the sake of doing the right thing. It's always been about getting what she wants or being seen how she wants to be seen. Until that changes, she hasn't changed.

So no, Chloe didn't have an aborted arc. They didn't start to redeem her and then change their minds. All they did was make Chloe one of the most complex characters in the show only to then not do anything with the character they wasted our time establishing, ignoring the complexity they gave her while also cranking her mean dial up to the point of absurdity where she's not even fun in her original role anymore.

I get why it feels like she had an aborted arc. The fact that the character establishment was delayed makes it feel like something shiny and new about Chloe. There's also the fact that the character establishment we get in season two is the kind of character establishment that you'd do if you were setting up for a redemption arc, but that doesn't change the fact that it was all establishment work. None of it was a true arc where we watched Chloe grow. We just saw her put in situations that revealed hidden depths.

Her showing depth is not her growing because when in the world does she show off this supposed growth? She only acts differently in the type of scenes that we've never seen her in before or around characters that we've never seen her truly interact with before. When she's around the established teen characters or in her usual scenes, then she acts the same way that she always has. We never see her be genuinely nice to Marinette or something like that. She's only nice to Ladybug and she's still rude to Chat Noir. That's not character growth! That's character establishment that can then be used to guide character growth!

Same thing goes for the stuff in Despair Bear. We learn that Adrien can push Chloe to be better, but he never does it again and she reverts as soon as he lets her off the hook, so it wasn't character growth! It was just Chloe establishing that she can play nice when she needs to. This means that she could grow if the story chose to take her down that path because we've established that she knows what being nice looks like. Fake it til you make it plot go, go, go! But the plot never went, went, went so meh?

Add in the fact that season one was a bit of a test season with lots of elements that got dropped and the fact that characterization in this show has always been wildly inconsistent from episode to episode and I'm really not seeing a strong argument for Chloe having an intentional arc that somehow got aborted. People just saw the potential for her to have one and argue that potential is the same as an aborted arc when it really, really isn't.

To give an analogy, Chloe's story is like walking into the kitchen and seeing grandma laying out the ingredients for her famous chocolate chip cookies. We get excited because, hey, cookies! Then we come back an hour later and there are no cookies. Nor is there some other sweet that uses the same ingredients. There's just ingredients, sitting unused in their original packaging, making us wonder what the heck grandma was up to. At the same time, she never really started making cookies. She just set out ingredients. They're still there, totally unused, waiting to be made into something, so we can't call them a failed cookie attempt. That implies a level of commitment that was never there. She didn't even say that she was making cookies! We just assumed she was because we, understandably, wanted cookies and wanted to believe that grandma had a purpose to her actions.

[le-trash-prince]

Em, I came into the whole 'Benz-Garfield are desperate to get paired and/or make KimKenta happen' thing halfway through and I feel like I'm still desperately playing catch-up. Congratulations to them on making Part A happen and good luck with Part B, though! But in the interests of me continuing to play catch-up on this whole fascinating process, do you know if there's a timeline of events or a tiktok folder or *something* out there to help me piece together when all of this properly took off and when Benz in particular decided to go full unhinged with it?

Thanks for your help!

Anon if you weren't watching Pit Babe as it aired, I hope you are prepared for the emotional roller coaster that happens when you are waiting every week to see if Kim and Kenta even get screentime together. I felt like I was watching the last several episodes of Pit Babe on a fever high.

I am actually working on a timeline, but it’s not fully cohesive nor complete yet, since there’s simply so much to sift through on multiple social media platforms, and no platform has a perfect search function. It also doesn’t yet include social media posts where they were simply just… flirting with each other, but all the social media posts on the blog should at least be dated.

If you want to go through things more quickly, the archive page has a tag filter (one of my favorite tumblr features), and you can swap in any tag you like in the url, since the dropdown only lists featured tags.

It’s also hard to pinpoint a single moment when Benz decided to go unhinged with it, since he’s been pushing it from pretty early on. There also aren’t any dedicated translators in BenzGarfield fandom who are fluent in both Thai and English, so we either get machine translations or translations that are few and far between. There's also a lot of old posts that have been deleted, or accounts that have gone private, so even just the act of gathering everything is an effort, let alone organizing it into a big picture.

Here's what I can give as a highlight timeline though.

They met in late 2022 (Love Fest Thailand in November or December I think, I couldn't find pics, but I did just watch an old interview last night where they talk more in depth on their first impressions, which I plan on recording and uploading, but Garfield said something that can be paraphrased to the extent of "Do people this friendly and charming exist in real life?")

Benz was mingling with Change2561 actors, but they officially became coworkers in Feb 2023 when they were both cast in Pit Babe

Boys Journey started filming very shortly after—I don’t have a sharp timeline but the range is sometime from Feb to May. Benz was already going at it in Boys Journey (“BenzGarfield forever” - ep 10), when they ostensibly didn’t know their roles or if they’d be put in an actual ship (they were somewhat rotated around with ppl until later in Boys Journey, when I imagine the staff had chemistry based partnerships in mind)

In March, Garfield said he would choose Benz to flirt with out of all the cast.

By August, Benz was asking Garfield to take his last name 🤷‍♂️ (but Garfield keeps trying to take Benz's first name instead)

There was a lot going on while Pit Babe was filming (Sept-Nov). They were excited about filming the two whole scenes they had together, they tweeted about it the night before, they were improvising what communication between Kenta and Kim might be like, Benz was visiting set even when he didn't have any scenes (albeit likely for the free food, but keeping Garfield company while Charlie fakes his death is a nice bonus)

I haven’t been able to find it again (yet)(thank you YT’s horrible search function) but there was a livestream last year where Benz talked about Kenta calling Kim and inviting him to Thailand, which… never happened, so I can only assume they were at the point of making things up (which actors sometimes do when they need a better grip on a character), and probably explains the really loaded look they gave each other in the elevator, bc to them there had been more interactions between their characters.

The first event they did together (outside of full-cast stuff) was the RealMe sponsorship in September 2023, but it was presented as Garfield & Benz (didn’t stop Benz from once again asking Garfield to take his name). The first time (that I’m aware of) that they had an event with their ship name was the GarfieldBenz x Central Rayong event in December 2023. Filming was completed in November, so they obviously had known for a while that KimKenta weren’t a couple, but that wasn’t going to stop them from bickering over which of their characters would like the other first

In February, they were posting really shippy stuff right before the Pit Babe finale, which felt like queerbaiting at the time, but we didn’t know that Long Beans was being planned (they would begin the physio workshop a month later), so I think this was either a “we’re excited we get to play a ship but can’t say anything yet” or a “staff hasn’t made up their minds on casting us so let’s just show some potential.”

Also at the finale in February, Garfield said he wanted to be Kim's faen.

By the time Long Beans was announced in March and they were officially announced as BenzGarfield, there was no holding back, especially on the KimKenta front. Benz made a fuss during Long Beans presscon about them not getting any screentime together, and during the Changing event in April they talked about going to the writers and begging for KimKenta/KentaKim.

Anytime they're asked about S2, they're vague about it, and I imagine they will be until we see something onscreen (they have to keep me desperate and foaming at the mouth), but they have expressed that they want to continue working as screen partners for a long time. If KimKenta happens I don't think anyone will be happier than those two.

I hope this helps, anon! Trying to capture and organize all of their moments is a daily task, and it sometimes feels like I am Sisyphus.

[theromanticrationalist]

I am not okay. Not even a little bit. 😭😭😭

Young Sheldon is special to me. I have not been a fan of it super long, but it was an unexpected surprise when I had given up on any American show ever making any profound impact on me again. (Yes, I am being dramatic, but so it is.)

It introduced me to Sheldon Cooper, which finally forced me to give in and watch The Big Bang Theory, and then I fell in love with Shamy and the rest was history.

Sheldon Cooper is a special character for me in that I never had a character so closely be relatable to me. It was kind of shocking and I still kind of can’t believe that this character exists. Things Sheldon Cooper has said and thought have been quite literally things I have said and thought. His struggles are my own struggles. These things of life that come more easily for other people, do not for me. I mean I am going to be 38, and I am just now getting my drivers license! I am pretty proud of myself for this achievement, but it is just one of many examples of how I totally understand Sheldon’s way of processing and navigating this world. It is slow. It is hard. It is a constant uphill battle that pretty much no one understands. Everyone thinks you are weird, and you might as well be speaking Klingon whenever you talk about the things you are passionate about. Even your own family thinks you are a little strange, even if they love you. You wish you could just live as a brain, as that would be SO much easier, but nah, you gotta deal with complex and frightening emotions and biological processes and somatic experiences!

So yeah, Sheldon is dear to me. I am upset to have to say good-bye to the character when I literally have just met him. (Thank you binge watching!) I mean I have rewatches and future meta analyses to look forward to, but there won’t be anymore of his story. It makes me sad.

And of course, the whole Cooper Family I have come to love, and I think this whole show is absolutely brilliant, despite its flaws. I hope to be able to talk more in-depth why I think it is such an important show for American television and the state of our current culture. It might be a spicy take, but necessary. 😏

Sheldon Cooper can teach us a lot. He can teach us that the human experience is myriad, and that the world becomes ever the more beautiful by that which is obtuse, weird, and bizarre. Human beings weren’t meant to be neatly categorized, and life wasn’t meant to be quantified. There is beauty in the imperfection. Not because the Ideal does not exist, but that somehow, in a mysterious way, that which is already Perfect becomes fuller, more realized, deeper, and more itself - through - imperfection.

I don’t know. I’m still figuring it out and discovering this life myself…

“For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy…” | Hebrews 10:14

[tigreblvnc]

BLUE LOCK MATCHUP + ONE SHOT — @bibururokku

Your match is...

— Michael Kaiser

✦ Pardon, but who are you? What’s with this amazing bio and incredible personality?

✦ The first thing I thought when I read your bio was, wow, the vocabulary!

✦ I love reading people who have a unique writing style. You can tell there’s depth behind it, that there’s life experience.

✦ Also, the way Kaiser came to mind, as usual, shook me a little because it was reading a very specific line in your text that suddenly made his entire character take over my thoughts, and I realized this bio could only belong to him.

✦ Conclusion: there’s no other match for your profile.

✦ It’s almost like he directly whispered to me, “This one’s for me.”

✦ And the more I read, the more I confirmed: yes, this is for him.

✦ There were also details that made me smile because I thought, “Hmm, if I put Kaiser in her path, she might actually end up hating him a bit, right?”

✦ But that’s what makes the relationship interesting and human: that it’s full of complications, that it’s not easy, that you have to fight for it.

✦ I can’t see Kaiser settling for a simple relationship where everything is easily won. It wouldn’t be worthy of his character.

✦ On the contrary, the harder it is to obtain, the more he’s the type to persevere. You can already see it on the field when he bluntly tells Ness that he no longer wants the freedom of his football because he thrives under restriction.

✦ In other words: in absolute misery.

✦ And what represents a greater misery for Kaiser than human relationships?

✦ You might think, “No way, the guy is a pro at psychological manipulation!”

✦ But to me, he studied psychology precisely to blend in with the human crowd, to understand it, and then to manipulate it. Probably because, at his core, he grew up isolated with his father, didn’t see many people, and couldn’t grasp social norms. You can see for a long time that he struggles with others, that he even fights when someone offers him something because violence is the only form of communication his father taught him.

✦ He knows how others think, but in a mechanical way. Like learning a concept by heart and regurgitating it as learned. Deep down, he doesn’t grasp the essence of it. It reminds me of that part in your bio: “I treat most like a business partner, so in that sense, I am pretty closed-off and predictable; I’ll give basic respect without letting personal feelings interfere.” It’s an automatic, learned behavior for dealing with specific social situations. Deep down, you’re not like that, but it’s simpler, and it works.

✦ All this to say that I think your existence plays a major role in this whole play.

✦ Oh yes, the passage that directly made me think of Kaiser is this one: “As for motherly, I’m just the type of person who likes to care for and nurture others, which I suspect stems from me having to mentally mature quickly due to a difficult childhood, so if I’m fond of a person, I want to make sure they’re alright and have support in all aspects as I didn’t get that.”

✦ For me, it speaks for itself.

✦ I always thought that what Kaiser needed, besides a few sessions with a therapist, is a general detox where he could purge all the evil that’s been eating away at him since birth, and that the only cure is the sincere affection someone could give him: a mother’s love.

✦ The one he never had.

✦ It’s hard to imagine Kaiser in a healthy romantic relationship because his view of humanity is so skewed, but I think that by starting a healing process, everything in him could blossom — pun not intended, of course, given his affinity with roses...

✦ At the same time, I think one has to be able to handle the responsibility of a relationship with someone as psychologically unbalanced as he is, and for that, besides having thick skin, you need the temperament to match. “Funny and sassy probably go hand-in-hand with the things I say since I’ve got quite a mouth on me, which is surprising for peers and acquaintances who see me with friends. It’s fluent in sarcasm and doesn’t mince words, which can be amusing.” I think when he meets someone (typically Isagi), Kaiser tries to establish dominance right away to secure personal safety — that is, to ensure the other doesn’t dominate him first. It’s a typical defensive mechanism.

✦ On the other hand, I think he can quickly be destabilized by someone who doesn’t falter in the face of his attempts at dominance. Someone who responds, who stands up to him, and who even manages to challenge him in areas where he usually feels comfortable.

✦ And you see it multiple times: the stronger Isagi becomes, the more he gains the upper hand over Kaiser, the more the latter is completely shaken because all his certainties crumble, and that’s when we start to understand who he really is. You have to slip into his cracks to see him in his most human, hidden aspects.

✦ He clearly resembles that bully in the schoolyard, who’s quite pleased when everyone bows down to his reign but gets scared when a teacher comes to grab him by the ear and put him in his place. A bit like with Noa: Kaiser despises him to the core but doesn’t challenge his status in the hierarchy.

✦ Kaiser, with his very complex psychology, could be a real challenge for you.

✦ “an ‘elegant strength’ about me due to my ‘intelligence and talent’ that I ‘carry all so gracefully’” Oh damn. So much power and beauty…

✦ “I’d make for a good lawyer since I’m very persuasive as I make good arguments and am good at playing semantics and twisting things in my favor thanks to those traits.” Someone skilled with words… Someone who knows how to stand their ground and defend their opinions… Hmm. Could I have stumbled upon our German emperor’s ideal?

✦ (Honestly, I can hear Kaiser melting over a description like that)

✦ (The attraction of the challenge, meeting someone of his caliber…)

✦ I’m quoting a few details from the things you like that clearly connect with Kaiser: “acting, documentaries, flowers, floriography, food, learning, music, psychology, reading, researching, social studies, symbolism, traveling.” All these keywords fully evoke me Kaiser, really, these are exactly the interests I imagine for him. Damn, I’m so glad I received your description.

✦ To me, he’s a man who presents himself with a lot of elegance and distinction but who deep down prefers very simple things, whether it’s in terms of food (we learn this in the pages of the latest released volume) or even in the small pleasures of life.

✦ I even wonder if he would let you touch his tattoo, from his jugular down to his biceps, then the tip of his elbow, forearm, and the back of his hand.

✦ (^ his ultimate love language, in my humble opinion.)

✦ (Especially since I think his neck is a very sensitive area for him, both for the worst and the best reasons *cough cough*)

✦ OH, speaking of physical contact. I was particularly struck by your testimony about the experiences you’ve had. I won’t go into details since this post remains public, but: “dislike: unsolicited physical contact.” That and the whole part where you explain it to me really resonated with me, and I’m sure it would have resonated with Kaiser too.

✦ Honestly, it gave me chills, and I even felt a wave of sadness because it could so easily echo within him as well. I mean, in the deepest parts of him. His entire childhood was built on the unhealthy relationship of violence he experienced with his father; he grew up with beatings as the only form of affection. It’s acknowledged by the manga that he inflicts pain on himself as a traumatic response to his past.

✦ In my understanding of his character, he can’t stand being touched, and this is one of the reasons he paradoxically allows himself to touch others and cross boundaries without any shame, like he does with Isagi, grabbing his chin and then his wrists during their first meeting. Kaiser attacks before being attacked.

✦ Deep down, I think even a simple caress on his skin deeply unsettles him, possibly provoking sudden violent reactions that no one could have anticipated.

✦ He resembles you.

✦ (Another thing regarding your dislikes; I’ve rarely read dislikes as specific as yours in the bios I read for matchups) (Quite funny, I won't lie)

✦ “Behaviors I’m not fond of in a person are abusive, controlling, impatient, inflexible, obsessive, possessive, prejudiced, tactless, uncooperative, violent and volatile.” This is the part that made me smile and think, “This will create sparks between these two.” These are traits Kaiser exhibits at various points in the manga or that I can perfectly imagine him displaying in a relationship with someone. Obviously, most of them are consequences of his traumas, which he projects onto others. It reminds me of the moment when he admits he wants to be the “father who inflicts suffering on others on the field.” He’s repeating a behavior he experienced in the past.

✦ Someone once told me, “Children are mirrors: they reproduce everything they see, hear, and experience.” And it’s true.

✦ Daaamn, there are so many things that match!!!

✦ I’m as excited as a scientist who’s just made the discovery of the century AAAAARGH

✦ (I’ve noted down plenty of little details to create connections with Kaiser, no worries)

✦ "My love language(s) are quality time and acts of service." "If I were on the receiving end, though, I'd probably prefer quality time and physical touch." It's funny because I think Kaiser has the exact same love languages, in the same order. That is, he comes across as the king who has all the servants doing everything for him, but with someone he genuinely cares about, he'd be the one to offer acts of service. The same goes for you, which doesn't surprise me given your backgrounds: letting people touch you is actually the ultimate proof of your love. It's such a sensitive and intimate thing for you both that you can only imagine it as the purest expression of your feelings for each other.

✦ Wow, that's beautiful.

✦ In my opinion, Kaiser does everything he can to protect his inner self from others, even Ness, who’s been closest to him these past few years, doesn’t truly know his deepest motivations and wounds (at least, that’s how it seems to me). So someone like Kaiser, who works hard to keep emotional distance from others... can only become obsessive once he falls for someone. It’s inevitable. It’s like the reins have been loosened, like a hungry beast has been set free. To me, Kaiser is starving for affection, and he needs it so badly that once he gets a taste... he won't be able to turn back.

✦ It becomes addictive for those who’ve missed it the most.

✦ And that can be just as dangerous as it can be the start of healing; it’s all about the right dose and timing.

✦ "I’m also extremely touch-starved" I don’t need to say more. I know you understand exactly what I’ve explained about Kaiser.

✦ Now, a little compilation of common traits with our German prodigy: "I also tend to write one-shots that fall under those genres since I like them." Without saying he writes fanfics or anything, I think anything related to creating a character might really captivate his attention. I can totally picture him sitting in his chair in the evening, wearing a bathrobe like we saw in the video room, reading your script, the pages you've written about your characters and universe. He’d do it very carefully in complete silence, with his glasses on and one knee crossed over the other. He’d silently turn the pages, and if he had nothing to say at the end of his reading, it’s not because it left him indifferent: I think it would keep turning in his mind, eventually deepening his interest in other people’s art. In your art.

✦ "The same goes for my other hobbies, like baking and cooking." I don't see him as extraordinarily talented in the kitchen, and his current appearance might suggest he enjoys fine dining: but nope. As I mentioned earlier, I think his culinary tastes are actually the same as when he was a child, and he loves the simplest dishes. Family meals... Oh wow, a good beef stew. A fondue!!! A Sunday barbecue at noon in the summer...

✦ A turkey on Christmas Eve.

✦ The symbolic evening of his birth...

✦ Now, I’m not sure he’d be very expressive because I think his relationship with food is a bit peculiar, especially when someone offers him something—like cooking for him. So I think it would take a lot of time and effort for him to finally accept tasting your dish. Not because it disgusts him, quite the opposite—the delicate smell of smoked meat would make him crack—but because he doesn’t know how to accept kindness from others.

✦ And you know what? I can totally see him being moved to tears by tasting a warm, delicious meal cooked just for him. He wouldn’t show it, he’d try hard not to show anything, but the expression in his tear-filled eyes would say it all.

✦ (Though he might eventually give his dish back due to the overwhelming emotions, but I promise: he loved it.)

✦ "Dancing and singing are covered by the clubs I’m in, and since I picked them, I’m satisfied with them, especially when we perform and make covers." In the category of more specific hobbies, I think he might eventually enjoy opera and museums (culture and art in general), and also come to watch your performances. He’d probably start in the back, discreet, a bit withdrawn from the crowd. And then he’d be the first to applaud you at the very end, you know, and that would prompt everyone else to clap along with him.

✦ He’s proud of you, and you leave the room together. He’s planned something and insists it’s just for the two of you. He’s never liked crowds or groups; he prefers small gatherings where he can focus on the one person who truly matters to him.

✦ The kind who’d wrap a scarf around your neck because it’s cold. You’d comment on it, and of course, he’d reply, "The cold? I’m used to it. I don’t feel it anymore."

✦ "There’s also cosplaying, but I only do it for conventions, meetups, and photoshoots with friends. But there are time and financial restraints, so it’s much less frequent." He might come to see you, not necessarily standing directly in front of your booth but watching from afar. Watching people line up at your stand for autographs and photos, maybe gritting his teeth or furrowing his brows because there’s a hint of jealousy. But he’d never interfere because he knows it’s your moment. His moment will come later.

✦ And the fact that he puts himself second is a sign of his devotion in itself.

✦ "For appearance, I’m honestly built like Hoshino Ai" Honestly, I can totally see Kaiser preferring people with a physique that’s the opposite of his, meaning shorter people with dark hair and a somewhat innocent look, but who have a strong personality.

✦ "from the way her body physically looks down to her height of 4’11” or 151 cm" Hehehe, shall we talk about hugs between 151 cm and 186 cm?

✦ "Lastly, my MBTI is INFP-T" (I won’t lie, I was a bit surprised by that MBTI, I thought you’d be something else) Kaiser is really hard to type due to his unique childhood, which, in my opinion, forced him to develop cognitive functions that he didn't have in order to survive. These functions are called “shadow functions,” and according to Carl Jung’s theory, they shouldn’t be developed at all in someone whose cognitive stack doesn’t include them. I have my own idea of Kaiser’s type, which is nothing like what Personality Database gave him, and I think it’s the most complementary to INFP.

✦ "my enneagram is 4w5" It’s commonly accepted that Kaiser’s is 3w4. You both share the 4, which in his case is a wing. This means that his 3, which represents the achiever profile, is supported by the 4, the profile attributed to the individualist. When combined with the 3, the 4 makes Kaiser someone who is motivated by achieving success while asserting who he is through his work. This is exactly what we see when he seeks to develop "a shot that defines me" and when he wants to be recognized for his work. There’s a strong identity quest in Kaiser’s relentless journey, and this is represented by his 3w4 enneagram. We can also see it throught the "wholistic restrictive ego" that Isagi describes in chapter 267.

✦ Well, because you both inspire me so much, here’s a little one shot.

Content warning: angst, self-harm, hurt/comfort.

The room was dark, silence hanging like a heavy shroud. It was late, and a bad dream had pulled you from sleep. In the bed, an immense coldness lingered. Your hand groped blindly. You could hear the sheets crumple under your grasp. The place beside you was empty.

This was usual.

And because it was usual, you got up, rubbing the corners of your eyes with your fists. Then you slipped out of bed, pulling on a robe before heading downstairs to the living room. There a light was on.

The TV was on but it was strange, you didn’t even hear the sound because all your senses were focused on the figure on the floor.

"Michael!" you cry out.

He was slumped on the floor but not asleep. Your first instinct was to approach, drop to your knees to lift a hand... Then you remembered not to touch him unless he gave his consent.

"Michael, look at me..."

There was something around his neck. His own hand, clenched like a vise. His breathing was short and erratic. A clammy heat battled across his forehead, down to his temples. The sound from the screen continued to crackle in the background. His gaze lifted to it, revealing the replay of an old match.

"It’s... the first one I saw." his murmur barely escaped his throat. "Before I started playing."

His grip gradually loosened on its own. You watched, helpless, worried.

"It was Christmas Eve, I was on the street. There was the store window. A sports shop."

"Micha..."

"I saw a vision of my father."

He slowly straightened up on his knees, his palm wiping away the sweat clinging to the roots of his hair. You moved to brush a few blonde strands behind his ear, always careful not to touch him directly.

"Fuck..." his head tilted back, exposing even his Adam’s apple. "It’s been a while."

"Is there anything I can do?"

His blue eye landed on you.

"...Nothing."

"Alright. Then tell me when..."

"There is. Hold me."

Your heart began to pound harder in your chest. A fire ignited within you. Your arms opened to welcome the one who let himself fall against you. The tattoo encircling his throat seemed to emit a faint scent of roses. You inhaled its fragrance, wrapping your arms completely around Kaiser.

"Like this. I... feel okay." His face nestled into the curve of your neck. His warm breath settled there. "You’re not leaving, right?"

"I’m here."

"You’re here."

A word about your match: You’re the sexiest Hollywood couple of all time, hands down. I absolutely LOVED writing this matchup, thank you so much. Give Kaiser all the love you can; I'm convinced he has so much to give too. He just needs time to blossom...and love.

And OH MY GOD I see on your blog that you were born on 10 December like me????

© TIGREBLVNC 2024 | AUGUST '24 MATCHUPS EDITION.

[hawkogurl]

What do you think about Norman's pre death line ("Peter don't tell Harry")?

Alright once again reiterating that the tag Norman slander exists simply to allow people who don’t wanna see this to block it. I get it. Negativity is just gonna come with the territory of who this character is, but I also understand if you simply don’t want to see it. That’s why that’s there.

I really don’t think this is as well intentioned as people make it out to be. Frankly I think it’s arguable that it’s mainly just a plot device that’s probably easier to try and retrofit into any interpretation than it’s actually meant to align with anything but that’s beside the point.

I have gone into a perhaps frightening amount of depth onto why the like, main Norman defense scene in the Raimi trilogy doesn’t actually make him look that good. I won’t rehash that all here, if anyone is interested in reading it’s linked.

That being said, considering the selfish and malicious undertones to how he interacts with Harry in pretty much every scene, I don’t know if I’m really meant to read it as a benevolent or well intentioned move. I can’t even say if many of my points here that I would have would even be conscious for Norman or really just be more of a subconscious desire to preserve his power and his image. At the end of the day, because this line is primarily a narrative device, I don’t really care about the intention of that line. It’s secondary to what it represents later on for Harry, Peter, Norman’s flaws, and Norman’s lingering presence.

Norman functions both as a character and a narrative device, because at the end of the day all characters are narrative devices. The perceived humanity of any character is, unless it breaks the suspension of disbelief, often less important than what they accomplish as a narrative device. Often times, Norman analysis can end up falling flat to me because there’s a prioritization of the perceived humanity of a character over what they’re accomplishing for the narrative. At the end of the day, whatever interpretation of him makes the rest of the narrative the most compelling and the strongest is the most important. I say that Norman is a narrative device because at the end of the day, the influence I read from this line that might not be logical as his thought process or as a non cartoonishly evil intention are more important to me than trying to figure out a way where that thought process makes any damn sense. This is Doylist vs Watsonian, when it comes to this line I personally think it’s going to be easier if Watsonian interpretation that contributes to my hesitance because of how hard it would be to make the following make any damn sense as Norman’s conscious intentions plays second fiddle to the personally far more interesting ideas of what this accomplishes from a Doylist perspective. Overly long explanation accomplished, let’s move on.

Norman as a narrative device is primarily a foil for Peter. Give a man a mask and you see who he really is. Peter chooses to do good with little reward while Norman is effectively using anonymity as a tool to get what he wants, which is primarily control. Every scene with the Goblin is preceded by a scene where Norman experiences something, usually negative, that gives him a reason to want to do something drastic. He is using anonymity and his physical power with the Goblin to effectively try and eliminate anything that threatens the power he already has as an influential and wealthy person. It’s easy to interpret it’s about control for him from that; he is doing whatever he can to control every factor to prevent anything from threatening that he has what he wants and wants to continue to have it, regardless of what extremes he needs to go to or who his need for control harms in the process, because at the end of the day his need for control is entirely selfish. This contrasts well with Peter, who makes the conscious choice to help others regardless of the cost to himself because he believes it’s the right thing to do and those people deserve that protection and the ability to live safely. Norman/the Goblin quite literally states that he views the masses as a tool to elevate himself, a mentality that Peter’s actions do everything they can do prove that he doesn’t buy into as a character beat for him. Peter is choosing to take on a massive, selfless burden to himself and use the power he has, power he could use to exert control over people like Norman does, to instead help others and elevate them, rather than using them to elevate himself. This is the primary point of the movie, hence why it’s reiterated and expanded upon so much: the most important part of the movie is showing that Peter is a benevolent person who is learning that his power is best used to protect and elevate others, instead of using them to elevate himself. Norman being his foil, what aspects of his character strengthen that arc are more important.

Therefore, it’s easy to read that in Norman’s purpose as a character, that’s about control. It’s also an easy plot device just from that—he is exerting control over how his son sees him, a fun and cool plot device that will allow Harry to experience the horrors later on. He only demands Peter don’t tell Harry, but he effectively eliminates anyone else from knowing in the same move. If Harry can’t know, Peter can’t create any way for the public to know. That preserves Norman’s name in regards to many of the things he’s shown to care about. It’s also a sort of double bind for Peter if he ever even wanted to tell someone: he’d have to explain that he’s Spider-Man and the reasoning behind why preserving the last wish of a terrorist is more important than letting that be public and letting Harry make his own decisions. He’s never stated to tell MJ, because MJ would probably question these things and I think Peter knows that! At a certain point, Peter probably felt he was in too deep and that being his last words became more of an easy excuse for Peter to not have to do the main thing he struggles with: have difficult conversations. From every angle, letting Harry continue to suffer without all the details is a bad move… but after not telling Harry for months, is it too late to explain himself or for letting him hurt to be inexcusable? After a year? After the two years that we are shown in the time between the first two movies? It’s no longer if it’s more important to help the very alive Harry than respect the very dead Norman, it’s now that Peter is in an impossible situation where both options feel wrong. Anyone would be angry he hid that for that long, but the more time that goes by, the reaction becomes even more likely to be explosive, especially as Harry sinks into quite literal clinical delusion. And that’s not even really digging into the fact Peter just avoids those sort of difficult interactions in any way he can.

The idea this line is more of a narrative device is more clear when it comes to Harry. At the end of the day, this line exists to rationalize and make more believable Peter’s refusal to talk about it as Harry slowly experiences a pretty harsh psychological decline. I half resent this because I wish Peter’s avoidance was allowed to exist as its own flaw, but I also understand the line preserves suspension of disbelief. Harry is near constantly lied to by the people in his life, something that creates the distrust that makes him so much more dependent on his largely selfishly or maliciously acting father, even in death. Harry’s an odd specimen as a fictional character who’s a child of abuse, considering he’s shown to idolize his abuser instead of hate him—and yes, I am going to insist on the idea Norman was emotionally abusive at best. It’s in the text.—so having this sort of control via this line and his hallucinations is another narrative element to contribute to the idea that Harry stepping away from his father, existing independently from his attachment to Norman and Norman’s influence on him and towards the people who love him for himself and the creation of his own identity is the best thing for him. I understand liking Norman, especially in a post-NWH world, but there’s a reason he is the quite literal face of all of Harry’s worst traits, worst decisions, and the things that allow him to continue causing himself pain.

My primary opinion on this line is that it allows Norman, even after death, to keep exerting a deep control over almost every major character in this trilogy. That is its purpose, because that control makes the rest of the narrative more solid and more interesting. You can’t just remove this element without consequences. His intentions are very secondary for me, because I just don’t think they’re that important, though I doubt it was good intentioned on any more than a conscious level because it doesn’t align with the tone of every single other interaction with Harry and the idea that a line that has this sort of influence was meant to be helpful just has incredibly strange implications on so many levels.

[whaliiwatching]

How DO you think universe signatures work? I don't think I've seen many theories or discussions on it but I also haven't been looking for them either

HOHOOO UNIVERSE SIGNATURES. ok. as i was rewatching scenes so i could write this, my theories fucking blinked out of existence :) there is as much consistency to universe signatures as there is to the atsv timeline.

alright lets see how incoherent this gets

btw i’m not using the word ‘dimension.’ incorrect scientific terminology in an animated spider man comic movie franchise about the multiverse? couldn’t be me. i already let them keep their holograms*

itsv came out in 2018 and is reported to have taken four years to make. in 2014, we couldn’t have made atsv; the technology hadn’t been developed, because there wasn’t yet a movie to demand it. (usually when the question comes up during production, the team has to invent an answer. like animating violet’s hair in the incredibles in 2004, or water in finding nemo in 2003, or fur for sully in the monsters inc movies, or the entire animation process of 2019’s klaus, or reflections on the cars in cars—) this, combined with itsv being set entirely in miles’s own universe, means that the b team’s (noir, peni, ham) universe signatures changing between universes can be attributed to 1. less worldbuilding than atsv and 2. lack of technological ability in 2014-2018 (no diss to the og animators obviously, itsv is fucking gorgeous)

but that’s a boring doylist analysis. i wonder if we can get watsonian. atsv, which was likely produced from 2017 or so to 2023, explores four more universes, rather than sticking to miles’s. surely it’ll have more answers!

i went through the entire movie to see what changes. not gonna bore y’all with a scene to scene analysis, so i’ll summarize: the only person who substantially differs between dimensions is gwen (abstract in E-65, solid but still pastel in E-1610, slightly more painted in E-50101, abstract again in E-928 during emotional scenes). hobie’s collage changes to match the tone or color palette of the universe around him, but doesn’t take on its signature. other than that, the only effect any universe has on every character is with its light, and the only effect to overpower a universe signature is a portal.

let’s pretend that in an infinite multiverse, such a thing as a standard can be set, and that standard is Comic Style. comparing it to itsv, where peni and ham gained depth from previously 2d-esque universes, it seems as though some things don’t change—general color palette and extreme stylistic divergences from the aforementioned standard, eg when atsv peni is styled in 2d—and some change universally—like universe-specific volumetric light, eg in itsv when E-1610’s halftone-style light gives peni depth and in atsv when E-928’s holographic-style light does the same in a different way.

then portals. they distort the space around them in their style of origin: organic portals always have miles’s universe’s signature because that’s where they were born; any portal opened with an E-928 watch has miguel’s orange holographic hexagon, no matter who uses them or where they open to; portals opened with hobie’s homemade watch are always collage, though they take on the color palette of the universe they’re opened in. that means portals have to be watch-specific, prolly based on the materials’ universe of origin, but in that case, hobie’s would look a lot like miguel’s since he harvested most if not all of the parts from E-928. so it has to be specific to either the person who made it or the universe it was made in.

but neither of those make sense! the degree of separation from universe/person that apparently applies to the watches doesn’t apply to items left in other universes. E-1610’s rubik’s cube retains its color and volume in noir’s universe, but the sweater gwen leaves on miles’s bed isn’t abstract, and the shoes she nicked from E-138 aren’t scrappy. even hobie’s watch is rendered in strangely crisp 3d, brightly colored and noticeably not collage.

and of course, both universe-specific light theory and portals-overpower-all theory aren’t totally consistent. hobie’s only properly illuminated when he’s in his base colors. but maybe that’s a quirk of atsv? he doesn’t glitch like paper in the radius of a portal—renaissance vulture didn’t glitch like paper either, maybe that’s just how glitching works! maybe it’s always that tv-signal-bright blocky mess! maybe there is one concrete rule in all this!!!!!

noir’s universe (during his intro scene, at least) comprises of three solid colors: black, light gray, and white, and volume/shadow is communicated through the intensity of halftone used. in itsv and in atsv he’s always in black and white, no matter the color of the light around him. he’s also the ONLY CHARACTER who glitches differently. noir breaks down in black and white!! when the team is lit up by gwen’s portal in atsv’s final scene he’s the only one not distorting in color!!!!! what the fuck man!!!!!!!!!

there isn’t one cohesive multiversal rule for how universe signatures act and interact with different universes, much as i’d love to have one. it raises too many questions and doesn’t give quite enough evidence to study. the closest i can theorize is color/style generally sticks and lighting/spatial physics generally doesn’t, and since that’s relatively simple, i’ll use it. gwen gets her photo-booth-app watercolors and peni/pav/ham/noir get just a little more rendered.

theories i have seen floating around that i also enjoy

gwen’s universe requires people to be in tune with it, to reflect their emotions—implying that the floaty abstract art during her scene with her father is diagetic. so when she’s not in her universe, she’s not like her universe.

hobie’s universe signature necessitates that he doesn’t conform to any other style

on that note, so would ham’s, because cartoon logic defeats reality logic

hope you enjoyed!! or at least were amused by my suffering <3

*do not get me started on holograms

[zichqec]

Simplicity Template v1.0.0

Hi. It’s me again, emerging from the depths of ukagaka hell to bring you new and strange things.

So here’s the thing about ghosts, I helped make this one called Needle for ghost jam 2022, and it’s kinda sorta maybe the best thing I’ve ever participated in. And it maybe kinda triggered a big shift in how I think about ghosts. And I think maybe, the process doesn’t need to be nearly as complicated as it is. 

Right now, the existing ghost templates are very, very big. Everything everywhere will tell you that making a ghost is a long project that requires a lot of dedication. And that can be true! There are some wonderful and detailed ghosts out there that take a long time to produce. But as we’ve seen in ghost jams, that’s not necessarily true! Ghosts don’t HAVE to be big! Ghosts don’t HAVE to be complicated! And even ghosts with a lot of content don’t have to be a huge project that eats up months of your life! Just about everything in the existing templates is optional, but I always feel like I’m cheating or doing a bad job if I skip things.

The more I think about it, and with a lot of the work I’ve done lately, I think it is easy to get burned out by the amount of tedious work you have to do filling in side functions that many users won’t ever see. New devs may find those functions uninteresting, or confusing, or just simply overwhelming from the sheer amount of them. And I think a lot of folks may not realize they can be omitted entirely without causing any harm to the ghost! SSP has default dialogues for the stuff that there need to be dialogues for!

Additionally, I’ve started to see more possibilities for ghosts lately, and the existing templates are making me feel very boxed in. Many ghosts right now have the same premise of “X character but on your computer”, and I don’t have anything against that, but there’s lots of other interesting ideas out there that we haven’t explored hardly at all! What if it’s not that a character has appeared on your desktop, what if you’ve appeared in their world! What if you’re not actually human? What if they know you already! There are so many things I would love to see happen, and some ideas that I’m hoping to start exploring myself.

Anyways! That was a whole lot of words for me to introduce my new template. I’ve made a new template called the Simplicity Template, and these are the things I hope it accomplishes:

Makes ghost making less intimidating for new developers by having less to fill in

Helps more ghosts reach completion by getting straight to content first, with very few side features to fill in

Gives developers more freedom to experiment and try new ideas, and to break away from the current formula

If any of that sounds interesting to you, give it a try! You can always add in more features later and build upon the simple base that is here!

[hetalia-club]

CK3 GOT Hetalia Mod- House Targaryen

House Targaryen is my 'smaller' house. As in I really didn't have to do much to set it up, most of it was already just done for me. Like making a bunch of dragons and what not I only had to make 4. That being said teh Dragons & Their Personalities are more 'set' in this house because I already had them thought up before I started this, they exist as characters in my AU so I know what they look like, their names and personalities. So I did modify them to reflect it. So get ready for some longer in-depth Dragon descriptions riddled with Lore and personality.

In House Targaryen to start as King Jaehaerys, with your player heir set to Prussia. I set this house up last and REALLY liked the idea of keeping in normal families so I'm Going to do that as well and just set heirs since I taught myself how to do that without changing laws. I like that they get a bunch of premade historical siblings with their own lore and shit.

No need to have a meeting to declare your heir between 'Rhaneys & Visaryes' Prussia is your named heir and so long as he does not die tragically somehow then when Jaehareys dies you'll play as him. House Targaryen's goal? Re-form The Seven Kingdoms and don't lose it in the process.

First Up: Prince Gilbert Targaryen heir to the Iron Throne & Prince & High Lord Of Dragon Stone

Prince Gilbert is: Arrogant, Brave and Sadistic and Vengeful. He is August, Skilled Tactician, Holy Warrior, Skilled Warrior, Journaller, Dragon Rider and he is plagued with Dragon Dreams which eat away at his mental health making him paranoid and giving him visions of the past and future. I was going to make him a Zealot but Zealots are really not fun to play as at all. He is High Valyrian and follows the Faith of the Seven. He's married to his older sister Aelroa, whom he hates. and she hates him. In all three of my start ups he's killed her getting himself the 'kin slayer' trait. He's on of my favorite characters I've made in my AU just because there is a lot of magic and mystery surrounding him. As you can see he currently lives on Dragon stone as an Independent ruler. Spends a lot of time in the Dragon pits I imagine him in there sinning the Dragon Lullaby like every single day like he is their personal MP3 player.

Sliverclaw is Gilberts Dragon and Best Friend. When he has Dragon Dreams he IS Silverclaw flying around and terrorizing the country sides. Silverclaw is a younger and smaller dragon sharing an age & birthday with Gilbert. But makes up for it by being Swift, Magnificent and a Destined Dragon. Silverclaw is: Aggressive, Accepting, Impulsive and Trained. If Gilbert is Killed SIlverclaw will adopt the 'widowed dragon' trait and will refuse to ever take another rider and go wild, even if caught it will not accept a new rider (I tried to program him to fly to Essos but it seems entirely random where they go). Silverclaw was hatched from an Egg that was thought to be turned into stone until the night Gilbert was born. It's said that the moment he let out his first cry the brilliant silver egg on display in the throne room let out loud crack that could be heard through the entirety of the Red Keep, Some of the small folk even swear up and down the sound woke them as well. And from the Egg out crawled Silverclaw, a Silver dragon whos scales shone like diamonds with icy blue eyes. After informing the King she was taken to Gilbert so they could cradle together. As they grew up together people would say they were not sure where the boy ended and the Dragon began. Gilbert took Silverclaw everywhere with him perched on his shoulder until he was arguably far too big for it. Even when she was getting too large to sleep in his bed he would sneak to the Dragon Pits to sleep with her there, which he still does alot of nights. (Silverclaw is a Female Dragon and has laid eggs in my play throughs)

Next is: Prince Ivan Targaryen Heir to the Lordship of Dragonstone.

Prince Ivan is: Shy, Just, and Ambitious. He is Avaricious, Quick, Hale, a Trained Fighter, a Squire and a Dragon Rider. He is High Valyrian and follows the Faith of The Seven. He is Betrothed to his sister Natalya who he does not like. And has a Crush on his cousin Amelia Stark.

He rides Maegor: A very large and vicious dragon. His scales are a deep blue with black wings and black eyes. Maegor is: Skittish, Cooperative, Accepting, Aggressive and Well Socialized and a Titanic Leviathan. Maegor is a picky dragon and has only ever had two riders. The most recent being Ivan who he took to instantly. Ivan was attempting to bond with Dreamfyre. But As he was attempting it and Dreamfyre was refusing the match politely, Maegor came from the depths of the pits to claim him instead. Everyone thought at first he was just grouchy and was coming to kill everyone for being too loud and waking him up. Since he basically snuck up on them just poking his large head up. The Trainers ran away urging the young Price to do the same who was frozen with fear. Maegor took the place of Dreamfyre who had moved away from Ivan and he lowered his head without even being told. Urging him to climb on. The Trainers urged the Prince not to. Thinking it were a trick to get him closer. Since Maegor was know as a highly aggressive and dangerous dragon. Ivan didn't listen and approached and climbed on after Maegor lowered his wing for teh small child to use as a boost. No one knows what caused Maegor to do that. It could be he was just bored and wanting a new rider or maybe he had his eye on Ivan since he was born since Gilbert used to bring him to the pits (Against everyone's wishes). Whatever the reason Maegor has helped Ivan come out of his shell. Having such a fearsome and aggressive dragon march himself over to you when he had never taken another rider made him feel 'chosen'. And in a way he was chosen. No one understands the bond Targaryens and Dragons have or what makes a Dragon choose a rider. Much less teh Targaryens themselves. If it's force, fate, a mind link? Dragons are smart maybe he just wanted to be ridden by a future king? Maybe he was stir crazy and wanted to go back to war? Perhaps he just liked teh cut of Ivan's jib? We'll never know. What we do Know is this is NOT a dragon you want to be on the bad side of. Maegor enjoys burning people far too much. He seems the happiest when he's causing absolute mayhem, which is strange he would pick such a passive rider. Maybe he knows something about Ivan the rest of us dong? A madness within? (This is a Male dragon)

Next: Princess Natalya Targaryen

Natalia is: Cynical & Vengeful. She is Fire Obsessed, and cute. Not much to say about her yet. She's kind of a brat, but she is a Princess so what would you expect? She is High Valyian and follows the Faith of The Seven.

Alyrya is Natalya's Dragon. It quite literally just hatched. It has no traits. It is Bright white with white wings and blood red eyes. It currently lives in the Red Keep and spends time with Natalya. Who knows what kind of personality it will develop.

Next: Prince Felikx Targaryen

Prince Felikx is: Gregarious and Arrogant. He is a Conniving Puppet Master, Schemer, Spider, Fashionable, Cute and a Dragon Rider. He's High Valyrian and follows the Faith of the Seven. He is married to Addison Lannister (Alfred's Aunt & Ludwig's Sister).

His Dragon his named Neerhem: Calculating, Reserved, Accepting, Friendly and Well trained. He is a dark purple with dark purple eyes. Neerhem has the name "The Dreaded" From the small folk. But the Targaryens will tell a different Story. Though he is large and can melt stone with his fire Neerhem would much rather take a long nap in the warm summer sun than do anything at all. He enjoys the company of people and other dragons alike. He has had many riders, his latest is of course Felikx. He has never hurt a Targaryen or a Keeper, no matter his size and reputation. He goes to war but he does not enjoy it. The tamers think it stresses him out to hear people scream. So he's really just a gentle giant. Even if you have a failed bonding or run into him in the dragon pit. Your chances of getting killed by him are extremely low seeing how he's never done it before without being told. He will even let teh Tamers give him pats on the snout. When his previous rider had him burn someone alive Neerhem retreated to Dragon Stone. The Dragon Tamers say he was being disobedient while the Targaryen's say he was feeling guiltily. He did come back to Kings Landing on his own after a few weeks of sulking. But his bond with his rider was never the same after that. He enjoys being ridden by Felikx, Felikx has little care about fighting in battel or burning people alive. His strengths lie in the shadows stealing secrets. So Neerhem is quiet happy just going on the occasional leisurely fly. Neerhem is also one of the few dragons who will let people he's unbonded with fly on his back, so long as his rider is present. He has no issue when Felikx brings his wife or young children onto his back. (Neerhem is a male dragon)

Next: Emil Targaryen

Emil is: Calm, trusting, Content and Pensive. He is Handsome, Has Dragon Dreams and is a Dragon Rider. Called the "Wandering Dragon" Emil hardly stays put for any amount of time Since he claimed his Dragon it is difficult to keep him in one place. He keeps a book documenting his travels from The wall to the Shadow lands. His dream is to go everywhere, even lands uncharted.

Jaedor is Emil's Dragon. A Bright Orange and yellow dragon with fiery orange eyes. Jaedor is: Imperious, Skittish, Defiant and Trained. Much like his rider Jaedor enjoys exploring. She refuses to stay in the pits and before he was bonded to Emil he was considered "wild" Missing in action. She had refused a rider his entire life until escaping the pits when he was 20 and has lived on his own since. Some thought she may have flown back to Valyria or perhaps been devoured by Cannibal. Though every now and aging reports of a wild orange and yellow dragon would surface by sailors near the storm lands. But one day when the young Emil at the age of nine put on a hood and ventured out of the city through the tunnels and exploring the country side he returned on dragon back with Jaedor who he said he found in a cave by the beach, which is where he remains. Emil said he shouted to her by name knowing him to be the 'rouge' dragon his father had told him about. Jaedor flew away and he stayed at the cave waiting for him to come back. The dragon did come back and seemed annoyed but not angry to have a visitor, perhaps she had been lonely with no other dragons or Targaryens to keep him company? After sitting with the dragon a few hours Jaedor allowed Emil to touch her and when she roared and hissed at him Emil did not back down and told her to "be calm" in Valyrian Which Jaedor did and allowed Emil to climb onto her back. He seems to always know when Emil wants to ride her and will hang around the dragon pits on those days. Both are impossible to keep tied down. Emil Does not use a saddle while riding Jaedor instead he grips onto her spikes. Jaedor seems to be an exceptionally bright dragon seeming to understand every word that Emil speaks to her. Emil swears she does understand and they can have entire conversations in Valyrian and Jaedor will respond to him inside of his mind. Perhaps it's true maybe they do share a psychic link? Or maybe the Targaryen madness is setting in? They say when a Targaryen spends too much time with dragons they lose their sense of humanity and their dragon side begins to take over. And Emil spends months and months with no one but Jaedor as a companion. Which begs the question what do dragons like to talk about? (Jaedor is a female dragon)

Lastly: Lady Elise Targaryen

Lady Elise is: Calm, Honest and Shy and a Dragon Rider. At the Start of the game. Elise is only five and her personality is not very shaped out.

Elise is in possession of a golden dragon egg. But if we use code to force it to hatch we can see who's inside! It's a bronze and white dragon! It looks like it's a little unhealthy being born with the Spindly trait. (Don't know the gender)

Claimable/Owned Dragons in the Pits of Kings Landing: (Familiar faces!) Balerion 'The Black Dread'- Calculating, Cooperative, Blood Thirsty, Imperious and a Titanic Leviathan. (male) Vagar- Lone Wolf, Accepting, Impulsive. (Female) Caraxes- Aggressive, Blood Thirsty, Calculating, Spindly & Fearsome Wyrm. (Male) Silverwing- Accepting, Cooperative, Friendly, Perfectly trained and fertile. (Female) Meleys 'The Red Queen'- Imperious, Accepting, Reserved, and Swift Dreamfyre- Calculating, Imperious, Defiant, and Fertile. (Female) Vermithor 'The Bronze Furry'- Imperious, Aggressive, Cooperative, Great Drake (Male)

[sirdust]

THOUGHTS ON THE FINALE?? bc it was a lot for suuree

| any thoughts on the last 2 episodes??? i sure do have mine i was like wth throughout the whole thing😭 |

apologies for the radio silence 🫡 i've been busy and also not very enthusiastic about discussing this show, lol. been in the process of packing up my autism and moving it over to transformers.

anyways sure i'll give my thoughts.

as my friend who i was watching the eps with said during ep7, "this version of hazbin hotel where women exist is a lot more interesting"

ep7 was probably the most tolerable character-wise even though it suffered from the same general pacing problems that we saw throughout the rest of the season. charlie felt like an actual character who experienced inner turmoil, and while i didn't like "out for love" very much as a song, the sequence itself was solid. carmilla badly needed more presence in the story for how much they treated her as an important character, though.

i'll also say that i think rosie is the most likable character in the show period. she has a cute design and a charismatic personality, and i wish she had shown up earlier. it was weird that she and alastor acted as if they had just reunited when they saw each other in ep3, though.

the final battle was disappointing all around for both obvious and non-obvious reasons. vaggie badly needed a big heroic moment, but she was fighting lute (who simply does not feel like a real threat) for so much of it that her actions during that part of the episode had very little impact. especially since she was the one to figure out how angels can be killed in ep7 (which was admittedly a plot point that did not need to exist, aside from it facilitating charlie and alastor's deal, but i digress).

i also am pretty miffed that charlie only got one or two good hits in on adam before needing to be saved by lucifer. it was like they couldn't decide whether they wanted to do a team-up or to give lucifer a moment showing off how powerful he is to be able to fight adam one-on-one.

i don't know if there's anything for me to say about what they did to pent that hasn't already been said. i doubt he's going to be relevant in s2, but even if he is, i really don't care. it's baffling incompetent to treat a character death as a comedy beat one moment and then dramatic the next. it winds up not making me feel anything at all. (and on a pettier note, i hate his redesign.)

i've never been huge on adam. his character had potential but was continually wasted in favor of being another shallow commentary on toxic masculinity (which is much too prevalent in spindlehorse shows, i'd argue. the issue isn't with the thematic choice but how vapid the execution is). i'm also hung up on the fact that he's clearly meant to look like alex brightman, but the writers have lucifer make a fat joke about his appearance. fatphobia in these shows has always been an elephant in the room but i feel that this crosses some sort of line.

i don't think i have much else to say? i could go more in-depth of course but i'd have to refresh my memory and i don't have the time or desire to rewatch any part of the season right now. i've gotten pretty much all of my gripes with the show as it stands out of my system.

this blog will likely continue to get some use in the future, but i'll probably be increasingly inactive on here. the silver lining of all this is that hazbin's success may, if nothing else, help pave the way for execs greenlighting more queer animation, but we'll have to wait and see. here's to better shows being made in the future though 🥂

ETA: oh and i've been calling twist villain lilith since 2019 but i have nothing else to say about that.

[animehouse-moe]

The Art of Jojo's Bizarre Adventure, and The Life of Hirohiko Araki

A while back I promised to give a walk through of the Jojo art books I own, and I found myself with quite a bit of free time today, so that's what I'm doing. These art book are... something else. Everybody knows how much Araki's style is influenced by high fashion and pop culture (specifically music), to the point that stands are named after bands, and a lot of illustrations in these books borrow poses and themes from actual photo shoots. But it's far greater than that when you experience it in full. The depth and sheer scale of Jojo's exists on a different level through these references, the locations, the styles, even Araki's comments. It well and truly is the world that Hirohiko Araki inhabits, and I hope I can do it at least the slightest bit of justice in this (not so) little post.

Jojo A-Go!Go!

So, Jojo A-Go!Go! (as well as Jojoveller) are actually collections of books for Jojo. The main/big volumes containing all the major illustrations, while the smaller ones are dedicated to more knowledge than art. With A-Go!Go! we get separate books for the various stands of Parts 3-5, and a volume that explores Araki's past through countless interviews and snippets that I'd love to see officially translated some day.

Regardless, one cool aspect of the A-Go!Go! set is this little wheel featured on the box that contains the volumes. As you can tell, there's a layer behind the circle on the top of the box that you can spin around to align properly, or like I show here, create some funny mix ups.

Anyways, the art. Man, the art. Incredible, just incredible. The book opens with a lot of double spreads that feature groups of characters based on parts or roles within their respective parts, and they all look so good.

Of course, it's not just good art, it's an impressive creative process that captures the best parts of Araki's creativity, with pages like this. I just think it's so cool how they use a cutout page to provide a unique style and experience through the art book. Especially with the bottom image, as you can see stands in the darkness of the pages.

But yeah, an absolutely stunning art book for parts 1-5. Very impactful and strong poses and styles, as expected from Araki.

I really wish that the stands and Hirohiko Araki volumes were translated for this art book. There's so much information and a world of interesting pieces from Araki himself within them. I can read a little bit, but it does take a while, so sadly I can't really translate or explain much either. One day though, I hope Viz or someone else will provide an English version of these art books for English-speaking audiences.

Jojoveller

A rather similar story to A-Go!Go!, Jojoveller is the art book for Jojo parts 6-8, plus a few extras. In addition, it also has a full collection of Jojo stands that's up to date with the release of the art book back in 2013, plus a history book of Jojos. Once again, a huge amount of information, but a lot stuck in Japanese which presents a challenge for NA audiences.

Anyways, the art. There's not much to say besides what I've already said. It's incredible. It's powerful, creative, stylized, unique, so on and so forth. But showing it makes more sense than telling you.

Once more, I love how these art books use translucent or partial pages to create an experience for readers. So very cool.

And here's an example of the extras. Incredibly cool to get the Gucci x Araki artworks at this scale (also cool cause it's Rohan).

These pieces are just so incredible. I'd to try and go through one day and find the real life counterparts for the illustrations that borrow from photoshoots. Just on that topic though, it's incredible that Jojo's has created a feedback loop with it. Borrowing concepts and poses from high fashion and photoshoots to use in its world and story, which people in turn mimic and use themselves.

Jojo 6521

Want the previous two art books but don't want to spend the money, or want to be able to read what's in them in English? Jojo 6521 is the almost answer. It's a condensed version of the two art book collections, condensing the art and information of them into a single book which includes a really interesting breakdown of information by part.

It's not near the same scale of information as the other books, but it's also only one volume at a fraction the page count of the others combined, and it's the only one in English. Sort of a beggars can't be choosers thing, but still quite a bit of cool stuff in it. I think my only gripe would be how plainly the illustrations are put together in this art book, as the vast majority of them are just placed together on a plain white page with each other. But, I think that's counteracted by the new/original material discussed and shown in this volume, with loose character designs and other pieces placed thoughtfully throughout.

And there it is, the Jojo art books I own. I could spend hours looking through all the different illustration and designs that appear in these books. Hell, I could spend a significant chunk of time just looking at the packages/formats that these art books come in (specifically the JP ones). The entire experience of these art books is so incredibly well designed that even though they're very expensive, I'd say for anyone that can afford them and is a Jojo fan, you absolutely need to own these art books.

[ancelineonline]

I’ve been thinking about this more because of course I have. I was talking with my mum about a similar balance but in regard to everyday life things. I’m in the middle of a frustrating and difficult life situation and I personally tend towards the “burn it to the ground” method of conflict resolution. Consequently, I talk with a variety of people in my life to temper that initial impulse and make sure that burning things down is really the best course of action. (Usually it isn’t, but also I’m usually angry for a reason and it’s good to figure that out.)

Anyway to get back to the point of how this relates to On The Rocks. My mum said that she and dad live by the thought of facing a difficult and frustrating situation and saying “I will never regret being generous.”

And they’re right. That’s the side that cares. Suds and Foq and Atelut don’t regret stopping to help the people that need help. And that’s right and good and important.

But here’s the thing that I said to my mum when she was giving me this advice. She’s right. I won’t regret being kind and generous. But can I afford it? Can I make the kind and generous choice freely and without resentment, and without it costing more than I can bear in time or money or energy or whatever?

That’s where team burn it down matters. Because while it’s important to be generous, it’s also important to be aware of if you can afford it. And it’s so easy to overextend yourself when you’re trying to be kind. Suds might not regret staying to save people but he would regret being caught by the Albions if he stayed too long.

I sort of see it like there’s going to be burning either way, and while being generous and pulling someone out of the fire is so good and important, it does not server to world well if we bring ourselves in the process. At the end we want both people whole and alive and able to continue being kind. The nation of Visteria and also the real world need the people who will be kind and care and build things back up, but it also needs the people that make sure the kindness is not wasted and lost.

(This post is going longer than I meant as more thoughts come to me but hey, you’re along for the ride already, might as well keep it up. Or not, it’s up to you.)

I think we can look at Foq and Atelut particularly as sort of… ends of a spectrum. Because both of them are on some level, very kind. They want the people around them not to be upset and to be having a reasonably good time. But they’re at opposite ends of the “how much does this cost me?” part of the spectrum.

At the start of Off the Rails Atelut is a person who looks at a difficult situation, tries to be generous and thinks “can I afford this?” Then immediately always answers yes, even if they shouldn’t. Even if the better answer would be no. That’s how she ended up in the position of being the person the Albions were going to throw under the train. You see this start to change in the arc, but at the end of Off the Rails, Atelut is still with Albion. And you see it start to change even more in On The Rocks, but at the end of that, Atelut is still willing to leave themself under a pile of rubble to make sure her friends get away. Her friends say “No, that is Too Costly, we refuse.” And they’re right.

In contrast, Foq also wants the people around him to be having a good time, he doesn’t want people to get hurt, he’s more or less a gentle soul. You see this in bothOff the Rails and On The Rocks. He vortex warps the dragon away rather than letting the party kill it. He does the same with Iryn Albion. However at the beginning of Off the Rails of Foq if were faced with the a situtarion where being kind cost him anything at all he would absolutely choose himself. One of my utter joys in both Off the Rails and On The Rocks was watching a silly, self centred character show that, actually, there is quite a bit more depth there than you thought. Foq cares about his friends so much, and you see him start to reckon with the existence of consequences (for other people anyway, Foq doesn’t experience consequences, he inflicts them) and make choices differently.

This story is so wonderful and it brings me so much joy to think about. I love how the importance of balancing out the importance of caring with the importance of the ruthlessness needed to protect. It’s there in the party as a whole but also you can see the consequences of that balance in individual characters as well and I love that.

Anyway, thanks Haley and Gus and Dillin and Dylan and Aram and John for making such an amazing story. I will treasures it for a long time.

Friends I was thinking about the finale of On The Rocks again today and the corresponding Verbal Component and I was struck by the thought that while one of the main themes of both Off the Rails and On The Rocks is “Capitalism, Bad” another connected theme is “caring matters.” I think it shows up more in On The Rocks a bit.

Spoilers below the cut.

I think the part that really got me was the intersection of those two things. And something that Gus and Haley mentioned on the last live Verbal Component really drove it home for me. Gus was talking about how Suds was coping with the difficult reality of a blowing up a building that was full of people, and not very many of them got out. And Haley rightfully pointed out that a big part of the theme of capitalism being bad is the the people who bear the brunt of the bad are the ones who least deserve it.

But I love love love how that intersected with Suds and also Atelut both still caring about people. Both stopping to try and save whoever they could, even though in many ways it could be seen as a waste of time or a failed effort.

It reminded me deeply of that fabulous tumblr post about the RMS Carpathia rescuing the survivors of the Titanic. (Take a minute to read it if you like, but be warned, you will almost certainly cry.) Because here’s the thing, just like the Carpathia, Suds failed. But just like the Carpathia, it matter so so much that he tried!

I think it’s interesting that at the start of the mini arc we have Rian, Chet, and Piper working together to do a terrorism revolution all on their own (sort of) but at the end it’s them AND Suds and Atelut and Foq. It’s a balance, and it’s a really important one.

Team Terrorism Revolution is important to making the revolution happen. They’re the ones that understand that Bad Things have to happen and are willing to do them, even though there’s going to be some collateral damage, even if they feel badly about the collateral. In one of the live Verbal Components the question came up of “what would happen if everyone died except your character?” And for Rian the answer was so clearly “take down as much as he can before they kill him” that it didn’t even matter that Dylan wasn’t there to say so. And Haley said the answer was more or less the same for Piper.

But this is the key bit, they need something to balance that. You spend so much of the mini arc watching how Rian is so focused on their goal that he is balanced on the edge of a cliff and if he falls it’s full on villain mode. His singleminded dedication to the goal can become all consuming in a really bad way really easily. And that’s why he needs the others. That’s why all three of them need the balance of the people that care. They need people like Foq who is on the surface a bit of a fool, but when you get down to it cares deeply about not seeing people hurt or killed when they don’t have to be. They need people like Suds and Atelut who will stop in the middle of a disaster to pull a few people out of the mess because even a few lives matter.

I just love how it ended with those two forces so well balanced. I think it’s a beautiful ending to the mini arc, but I also think it’s a beautiful promise for what happens after. Because as much as you need the people who can make the ruthless choices required to tear things, you also need the people who care about every life to be there to build things back up after.

[mimzy-writing-online]

Writing Toph Beifong, Advice from a Blind Writer

I’m Mimzy, an actual visually impaired writer and blogger who talks a lot about writing blind characters accurately and sensitively. A while back someone sent me an anon asking how to write Toph more accurately and sensitively.

Anonymous asked: Hi there! Your blog has been super-helpful already - I thought I knew a bit about writing with blind characters, but it turns out there was a lot to learn - but this is more specific. I'm writing a The Last Airbender fanfiction, and one of the characters is Toph. I think the fandom has done a fairly good job of respecting her blindness, but what are some things you'd like to see when people write her? I want to represent the character as best as possible; thanks in advance!

It’s taken a while for me to answer because I have a lot of thoughts about it as both a blind writer and someone who has read a lot of atla fanfiction. So here we go:

Before we get started, I want to mention some things: 

One: I have an entire series for writing blind characters that continues to grow with time and the most up-to-date version can be found pinned as the top post on my blog. There will be a time-stamp for when the post was last edited and a long series of links to all relevant posts on the subject.

Here’s a quick link to that post, but again, all you have to do is click my blog url and you’ll find it immediately.

Two: I’ve noticed something amazing about the atla fandom and I would like to thank you for it. I’ve noticed a lot of bloggers have taken to writing image descriptions for both the fanart and memes you post in the fandom, whether it’s OP including the description or another blogger adding it themselves. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a fandom so consistently doing this and that’s incredible. Realizing how many different blogs were picking up this habit has warmed my heart.

I’d like to see writers use her other senses. There’s soooo so much more to her O&M (Orientation and Mobility) than earth sense. 

Beyond sight and earth bending, there’s hearing, touch, smell, taste, sense of direction, hot vs cold, sense of pain, sense of where your body parts are in relation to the rest of you, sense of internal well-being, etc. Before Toph had mastery of her earth bending, she had to have mastery of those too.

Toph also must have very strong opinions about certain smells, sounds, tastes, and textures. Toph is opinionated about everything, and when so much of your understanding of the world depends on senses that most people are ignoring in favor of some other sense you don’t have, it gets frustrating. I’m sure that tree looks pretty but the smell is terrible. Who cares if this fabric looks pretty, it’s scratchy, do. not. like. at. all.

But also in positive ways too. Oh, that flower arrangement looks bland and monochromatic? Who cares, it smells sweet and honey-like. Weird dark cavern with high ceiling and no light? The harmonics are awesome.

Every character probably has a certain sight or image they’re particularly fond of: Katara watching snow fall, or Aang enjoying how small the world looks from up on Appa, or Zuko enjoying the sunrise every morning during meditation. In that line, Toph must have some things personal to her that she enjoys.

I imagine she likes the taste of foods familiar to her childhood, the smell of whatever flowers grew around her home, and the texture of certain kinds of dirt Example: loose dirt probably isn’t the best for seeing, but I think she would enjoy how it feels to run her fingers through it or maybe enjoy the way it softens her perception of the world the same way sighted people like to see colorful, bright lights reflecting off puddles in the middle of rain.

If you struggle with this, that’s okay. I recommend taking some time to think about it for yourself, to find what tastes and smells and textures and sounds you enjoy the most, what makes you feel safe and at home, what brings you comfort, and relate that back to Toph.

In a Modern AU, I want to see Toph have a cane. Even in a Modern AU with bending included in the world building, I think Toph would benefit from having a cane.

The cane has a lot more function than bumping into things. A big part is that it signals to others that you are very obviously blind. Which is a big deal because sighted people are really, really bad at spotting the blind person.

(psst, please stop saying ‘the blank look in her eyes’ because I swear to god it’s been killing me inside for years.)

Also, even in an AU with bending, I think Toph would like the advantage of tapping her cane to create a stronger, more distinct vibration than a small shifting of her weight on her feet. It would have more control.

You could give Toph a guide animal, buuuuuuut, um, Toph is not a guide dog person. Like, there are some people who definitely prefer a guide dog, and some people who definitely prefer a cane, and some who definitely prefer no mobility device at all. Toph does not have the vibes of someone who wants to be both responsible and reliant on an animal when she’s so insistent that she can take care of herself on her own. Toph likes animals, but not that much.

Although, yeah, only 10% of the blind community use mobility devices, so cane and guide dog users are the minority of the blind community, but I stand by the vibe that Toph would love the independence of a cane. Also, it’s almost never ever done. Modern AUs never seem to touch much on Toph’s O&M skills with canes or guide dogs.

I wrote a whole post on everything you need to know about canes, what orientation and mobility is, how you learn O&M, what kind of canes exist, how to use them, how to describe the sensory input a cane gives you, and everything I know about guide dogs from past research.

Honestly, you could give Toph (or any blind character) a cane in any AU, because I fully stand by the theory that canes are a piece of technology that has been invented, lost, and reinvented again and again.

I wrote “I found a piece of lost blindness history” a few months ago after a visit to see my grandparents. My grandmother told me how her blind aunt found a way to write letters by hand to send to my grandmother when she was a child. I speculated on how the long cane has probably been invented and then lost and then reinvented over and over again in history, as well as giving a little history on the growing popularity of guide dogs in the 20th century following World War 1.

About the “blank look in her eyes,” I have a theory to the exact cause and nature of Toph’s blindness.

I know it’s common to think that the milky green color of her eyes is why she’s blind, though I’m not sure how many realize that milky green color is caused by severe cataracts. At least, cataracts is what I assume to be the reason for the color of her eyes. However, people with cataracts still have some remaining sense of light and shadow perception.

Only 9% of the blind community is completely blind, seeing absolutely nothing. The rest have some remaining vision, even if that’s only light and shadow perception or the perception of vague movement.

The percentage of people born completely blind is even smaller.

Toph says that she’s never been able to see, which would lead me to guess that the initial cause of her blindness was a defect with the visual processing part of her brain. I also theorize that the cataracts developed slowly over her very formative years and that she likely wasn’t born with them. For that reason, I think it would have taken a few weeks or months for her parents to realize there was something wrong with her eyes.

Here is a post about the developmental years of blind children and how their life would differ from both sighted children and from someone who went blind as an adult.

What is it like to see nothing?

It’s a concept that sighted people struggle with and I completely understand. I myself didn’t understand the concept of “nothing” until someone explained it as this:

“Imagine trying to see out the back of your head.”

Which, genuinely, imagine that. Try that. Because here’s what I found. There’s no part of my body that can help perceive that. I don’t have eyes there, nor do I have a part of my brain that can process that. Because of this, there is no sense of light or dark, no shape or shadow or movement or depth that I can perceive. There is nothing.

And honestly, it gives me a headache trying to think too much about it.

Toph doesn’t see black, doesn’t have a mental image of it. When people talk about light and dark, Toph has nothing to base the concept on. The closest relation she has to that is silence versus sound, or her earth sense when she’s in the air on Appa versus when she’s on solid ground. But it’s not the same.

I would like to examine the way the show tried to describe Toph’s earth sense, that black void with ripples of white stretching from her feet and outwards. Television is a visual medium so of course their explanation of Toph’s earth sense would be visual, but that’s not what it’s actually like in her head. More accurately, it’s like touching the back of your head to something and feeling what’s solid behind it and what has more give. A wall versus a pillow for example. Slamming your hand on a flimsy table and feeling it rattle under your palm. And for someone so adept at using that sense, she feels not just the table surface under her palm, but the individual rattles down the four legs, how uneven those rattles are because the legs are carved decoratively instead of solid planks, and how the foot of each leg bumps against the ground, and how the floor vibrates in response to the impact, which she feels in both her feet and hand. 

About Toph’s Relationship with Her Parents

It’s not something I see touched on much. There’s been a lot of focus on Zuko and Azula’s relationship with their parents and the abuse, as well as exploration of Sokka and Katara’s trauma with losing their mother, and Sokka looking up to his warrior father while Katara struggles with her abandonment issues.

Please don’t take this as a critique, because there are a few valid reasons for this and I would like to give you some insight on how to explore Toph’s relationship with her parents.

For starters, the show had a lot more reason to focus on Zuko and Azula’s parents, with Fire Lord Ozai being the primary villain and Zuko’s greatest abuser, and Azula’s dependent worship of her father in response to Ursa’s neglect and favoritism of Zuko, which was likely Ursa’s response to Ozai’s favoritism of Azula. Their parents are huge driving motivators for why Zuko and Azula make the decisions and mistakes they do, why they are at one point in the show the villains themselves. (And why I think Azula should get a redemption arc and some healing.)

Katara’s trauma of losing her mother and blaming herself is a huge factor in both her response to the war, her relationship with her bending, and her motherly nature with her friends. The show has to explore that. Just as it has to explore Sokka’s problems with toxic masculinity in response to being the man of his village, and his desire to be a great warrior and leader like the father he idolizes. 

The show needs to explore that to make the plot move forward, and it benefits from these being two sibling sets with different responses to their upbringing and different sibling dynamics, setting them up as foils for each other.

The show also wouldn’t benefit by giving Lao and Poppy Beifong more screen time. Their established character were two nobles who kept as far out of the war as possible and prospered monetarily for it. Poppy was polite and demure and Lao liked to lead the conversation. Unless the gAang decided to return to Toph’s home, those characters had no reason to pop up anywhere in the show. And if they did, they would be a hinder to Toph and her part in the plot as both Aang’s earth bending teacher and as the greatest earth bender in the world, tossing Fire Nation soldiers eight ways to Sunday. 

So truly, I understand that there’s not a whole lot of canon material (comparatively) to go off of when developing this, but I will offer some insight on what is there in canon.

Toph’s relationship with her parents is explored in that it maps out why Toph doesn’t want to be mothered by Katara, why she wants to prove how independent she is, but there’s very little on screen interaction between Toph and her parents.

Toph deeply loves her parents. I think that plays into why she doesn’t want Katara mothering her, because she has a wonderful mother at home who she loves and wants to better understand her, but she had no friends growing up and no older sister, which are the roles she needs and wants Katara to fill. If Toph wanted a mother figure, she would have latched onto Katara. Look at how Zuko never sought out another mother figure but did find a father figure in Iroh as he began to heal from his childhood trauma and separate his self image from his father’s acceptance.

Toph is in a complicated situation, she loves her parents but the way they’re raising her is hurting her in the long run. But Toph can see that their actions are because of their immense love for her. She can see how they would do anything for her. While she never had any examples of how other noble children were treated by their parents, who might have been distant or disinterested or always away for their social and work lives, she was remarkably loved by her parents. Her father put careful thought into her tutors and checked in on her progress. Her mother feared for Toph’s emotional state when she was kidnapped (even if she was incorrect about how Toph would respond), showing genuine empathy for her daughter.

I think their over protective nature became the love language Toph best understood them by, and part of her reasoning for not revealing how capable she was, was because she wanted to keep experiencing that love and care for as long as she could. But it’s not a love language she would put up with from anyone else.

I would like to point out Toph’s genuine excitement to see her mom again in the season finale of Book Two, how badly Toph wants her mom to understand and accept her for who she is.

My thoughts on what Toph can’t do: read, swim, see in the sand, fight things mid-air.

For how incredibly powerful the show makes Toph with her earth bending and the O&M she taught herself through it, they do touch on some of her weaknesses when they come up and find a useful way to showcase them.

The Serpent’s Pass was an excellent example of Toph’s vulnerability in water. From her fear of not being able to see on Katara’s ice bridge to not being able to swim and needing Suki to save her, Toph’s weaknesses putting her in danger added to the excitement and “sitting on the edge of your seat” feeling while watching the episode without turning her into someone who was helpless. She was just in a position where her normal defenses were useless.

Just like the earth benders in the metal prison in the ocean, or Katara having little water in the middle of a desert where her friends needed that water to survive more than she needed it to fight, making her vulnerable later in the show when the insect-wasp things attacked. Just like fire benders being weaker at night, or powerless during a solar eclipse, or a sighted person being lost in the dark. Those were just situations in which the tools you were accustomed to relying on could no longer help you or were taken away.

The show was clever in that it didn’t make her inability to read a direct threat to her safety, but rather as a clever plot device for her to be alone when the sand banders attacked and have to choose between fighting them to save Appa, or holding back an entire fricking building by the tiniest spire on its very top from falling into a void leading to the spirit world. It also showed her weakness to not being able to see or fight as well in sand. Which the show later made an effort to show how she’d improved on that problem in Book Three when she was surrounded by nothing but sand at Ember Island.

Like improving her ability to see in the sand, I would like to see a character teach Toph to swim, or at least float, so that she never feels helpless again. If she took the initiative to improve her sand bending so much, I’m sure she would have learn to swim eventually.

And on the note of reading, I’ve seen some speculation on how Toph could learn to read, whether it’s through using ink that has some percentage of earth mixed in, or developing the sensitivity to feel out the different weight, consistency, and texture of ink on paper. 

I would like to bring your attention to Louis Braille, the blind Frenchman who invented Braille while studying at  the Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles, the world’s very first school for the blind in Paris France (established 1785). Previously Louis was learning to read through a method in which each letter was pressed into the paper to leave an imprint that someone could feel out with just their fingers.

Louis Braille concluded that raised lettering was impractical because-

1.       It is difficult to read, the letters had to be printed in huge font to be fully felt out and printed on thick paper.

2.       Thick paper means higher quality, more expensive. Larger font means more paper is needed for a single text.

3.       This made it inaccessible due to expense and the sheer volume of a text.

4.       If today’s Braille books are hard to access and giant compared to traditional books, I can’t imagine how inaccessible those raised letter books really were.

The subject of Braille, the start and controversial near downfall to  Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles were discussed in a post about writing a blind character during the Victorian Era.

I’ve heard others complain in the past about fantasy universes in which a sighted person invents a solution to allow the blind to read, when the most effective and longest lived method was invented by a blindman over two hundred years ago and is the standard taught in schools today.

And while I couldn’t easily explain it or how it works because I can neither read Braille nor speak Chinese, I can tell you that Chinese Braille exists and works only slightly differently from the Braille western languages use. So, again, modern AUs especially would benefit from enabling Toph to read Braille and use a computer and phone with screen reader.

But just as easily you could choose not to have her learn to read but rather have sighted people read things aloud to her. Whether it’s in a professional setting as an adult having an assistant who reads and writes for her, or as a cute, fluffy little moment between Toph and another character. Both are just as genuine to the blindness experience.

Blind Jokes

If you ever get around to reading my post about blind jokes, I’d like you to remember that it’s primarily written for people writing original characters and that Toph canonically makes blind jokes, so to take away from that would not be true to her character.

Does Toph’s Earth Sense Negate her Blindness?

It’s a question I’ve seen raised before and discussed by both abled, disabled, and blind people. There are multiple perspectives on it, but my own take on it is that Toph’s earth bending does not negate her blindness, but rather functions very much like the process of learning to use a cane.

She had a tool, a teacher, and she learned to use that tool. Instead of a cane, it was seismic perception and her teacher were blind badger-moles. She spent years learning to earth bend as they do and then continued to take it to new heights as she explored fighting with it on her terms against sighted fighters.

Come to think about it, I would love to see Toph teach another visually impaired or blind earth bender who to see and bend as she does.

Is Toph Good Blindness Representation?

This question was posed to me in the comments of my master post, and my answer was something like this: “Toph is good representation, but she can't be the only type of representation we get. She's the best we had 15 years ago, but there are a million ways to nuance the blindness experiences. Toph's experience being born blind, having very over protective parents, being a small girl in a patriarical and wealth influenced society, having no friends growing up. Those are all great aspects of blindness to show, but there is so much more to explore. As for her blindness and whether or not that's negated, that's also nuanced. She has limits, she's not all-powerful, but she is the best earth bender hands down. More or less, I love Toph, she's a great character, give me like a million more blind characters who are completely different from her.”

I want to see accurate and well-written blind characters become much more common in modern media, and that’s why I started this blog. So if you decide you want to write your own blind character from scratch, feel free to come back and look at some of my other stuff.

End Notes:

I want to thank the anon who sent the original question because it never occurred to me how much the atla fandom would benefit from a post like this. 

You should follow my blog. Along with advice about writing blind characters, I write general writing advice and answer questions about writing, college, plot development, character analysis, and living with blindness. I curate writing advice from fellow writeblrs, write my own image descriptions for writing memes, post about mental health and working/living with ADHD, disabilities outside of blindness, and LGBTQA+ topics. 

[spaghett-onaplate]

I'm so sick of booktok books. Tropes sticky-taped together to make a semi-comprehensible and mildly enjoyable at best story. 2D characters that have no real defining personalities beyond banter and witty one-liners, that have no clear motivations or goals, that are inconsistent in their actions and thoughts. A lack of description that has you rereading passages over and over in a lackluster attempt to understand wtf is going on.

I'm reviewing this book for a bookstore magazine, and that fucking thing is the inspiration behind this. I mean, it has "TikTok" on the front cover, so I was a little sceptical at first, but now I'm just pissed off. Apart from what I've already mentioned, there are severe plot holes - the entire plot of the book is centred around a journey to recover a magical item of legends. Both of the main characters are sceptical of its existence, but they decide to try and find it anyway. Personally, I think it could have been executed much better if one of the characters believed in it fully and wholeheartedly, and was dead set on his goal to get it. Then, that would have allowed leeway for some scepticism in other characters while still moving the plot ahead, and added more depth to the otherwise bland characters. It also would have tied in very well with the backstory and just made so much more sense plot-wise.

I don't know, it's just really pissing me off. I probably wouldn't be able to finish this book if it weren't for the fact I'm writing a review, but it pains me to think of the fact I'll have to write a mostly positive review - so I'll do what I'm best at, and compliment the (few) enjoyable aspects while backhandedly complimenting the rest. I'll keep it honest, but if I didn't have a word limit/positive theme I would write a scathing review of 5k words, at bare minimum. There are so many points where I have to flip a few pages back and ask myself if I missed something - not that there's much to miss.

The two main characters are both cardboard cutouts with inconsistent goals and thoughts. One of the central conflicts between them makes next to no sense. The other two side characters are yawn-inducing and essentially useless, and I often forget they're even there. The lore of the world is bleak and two-dimensional. The writing style reminds me of The Hunger Games with its short and direct sentences, but is executed so poorly that I hesitate to compare it to, you know, The Hunger Games. It works in that series with Katniss' thought process and character, but here it just makes me cringe. It gives off the effect of trying to put emphasis on sentences that really don't deserve it. I think some books can pull that writing style off really well, when paired with other sentence structures, but in this book it just comes across as lazy and, well, badly written.

Writing a book is still an impressive feat, and the author could have done much worse. So I'll still write a kind review, but I'll keep it honest and I won't be happy about it.

Anyway, just needed to get that out of my system so that I can write a mostly positive review. But I'm just sick of what is essentially the Marvel-ification of a lot of recent YA books. I've seen other posts discussing this so I'm glad I'm not alone. And either way, bad books have always existed - it's not a recent phenomenon. Good books exist, bad books exist, and unfortunately it's a lot easier to find the latter.

[lokiondisneyplus]

'Loki' takes over: Tom Hiddleston on his new TV series and a decade in the MCU

Ten years after Hiddleston first chose chaos in Thor, Marvel’s fan favorite God of Mischief is going even bigger with his time-bending Disney+ show.

Tom Hiddleston is Loki, and he is burdened with glorious purpose: After playing Thor's puckish brother for over a decade in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, no one understands the mercurial Asgardian God of Mischief as well as the actor. He can teach an entire seminar on Loki if given the opportunity — which he actually did during pre-production on his forthcoming Disney+ show. In conversation, Hiddleston quotes lines from his MCU debut, 2011's Thor, almost verbatim, and will playfully correct you if you mistakenly refer to Asgard's Rainbow Bridge as the Bifrost, which is the portal that connects Loki and Thor's homeworld to the Nine Realms, including Midgard, a.k.a. Earth. "Well, the Bifrost technically is the energy that runs through the bridge," he says with a smile. "But nine points to Gryffindor!" And when he shows up to the photo shoot for this very digital cover, he hops on a call with our photo editor to pitch ways the concept could be even more Loki, like incorporating the flourish the trickster does whenever magically conjuring something. The lasting impression is that playing Loki isn't just a paycheck.

"Rather than ownership, it's a sense of responsibility I feel to give my best every time and do the best I can because I feel so grateful to be a part of what Marvel Studios has created," the 40-year-old Brit tells EW over Zoom a few days after the shoot and a week out from Thor's 10th anniversary. "I just want to make sure I've honored that responsibility with the best that I can give and the most care and thought and energy."

After appearing in three Thor movies and three Avengers, Hiddleston is bringing that passion to his first solo Marvel project, Loki, the House of Ideas' third Disney+ series following the sitcom pastiche WandaVision and the topical The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Led by head writer Michael Waldron (Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, Heels), the six-episode drama sees Hiddleston's shapeshifting agent of chaos step out from behind his brother's shadow and into the spotlight for a timey-wimey, sci-fi adventure that aims to get to the bottom of who Loki really is. "I wanted to explore slightly more complex character questions," says Waldron. "It's not just good versus bad. Is anybody all good? Is anybody all bad? What makes a hero, a hero? A villain, a villain?"  

Even though Loki — who loves sowing mayhem with his illusion magic and shapeshifting, all with a major chip on his shoulder — has never been one for introspection, the idea of building an entire show around him was a no-brainer for Marvel. When asked why Loki was one of the studio's first Disney+ shows, Marvel president Kevin Feige replies matter-of-factly, "More Hiddleston, more Loki." First introduced as Thor's (Chris Hemsworth) envious brother in Kenneth Branagh's Thor, Loki went full Big Bad in 2012's The Avengers. That film cemented the impish rogue as one of the shared universe's fan favorites, thanks to Hiddleston's ability to make him deliciously villainous yet charismatic and, most importantly, empathetic. The character's popularity is one of the reasons he's managed to avoid death many times.

"He's been around for thousands of years. He had all sorts of adventures," says Feige. "Wanting to fill in the blanks and see much more of Loki's story [was] the initial desire [for the series]."

The Loki we meet on the show is not the one who fought the Avengers in 2012 and evolved into an antihero in Thor: The Dark World and Thor: Ragnarok before meeting his demise at the hands of the mad titan Thanos (Josh Brolin) in 2018's Avengers: Infinity War. Instead, we'll be following a Loki from a branched timeline (a variant, if you will) after he stole the Tesseract following his thwarted New York invasion and escaped S.H.I.E.L.D. custody during the time heist featured in Avengers: Endgame. In other words, this Loki hasn't gone through any sort of redemption arc. He's still the charming yet petulant god who firmly believes he's destined to rule and has never gotten his due.

Premiering June 9, Loki begins with the Time Variance Authority — a bureaucratic organization tasked with safeguarding the proper flow of time — arresting the Loki Variant seen in Endgame because they want his help fixing all of the timeline problems he caused while on the run with the Tesseract. So there will be time travel, and a lot more of it than in Endgame. As Loki makes his way through his own procedural, he'll match wits with new characters including Owen Wilson's Agent Mobius, a brilliant TVA analyst, and Gugu Mbatha-Raw's Judge Renslayer. The question in early episodes is whether Loki will help them or take over.

"One of the things Kevin Feige led on was, 'I think we should find a way of exploring the parts of Loki that are independent of his relationship with Thor,' or see him in a duality or in relationship with others, which I thought was very exciting," says Hiddleston, who also serves as an executive producer on the show. "So the Odinson saga, that trilogy of films, still has its integrity, and we don't have to reopen it and retell it."

Yet, in order to understand where Loki is going, it's important to see where he came from.

Hiddleston can't believe how long he and Loki have been connected. "I've been playing this character for 11 years," he says. "Which is the first time I have said that sentence, I realize, and it [blows] my mind. I don't know what percentage that is exactly of my 40 years of being alive, but it's substantial."

His time as Loki actually goes a bit further back, to 2009 — a year after Robert Downey Jr. big banged the MCU into existence with Iron Man — when he auditioned for Thor. It's no secret that Hiddleston initially went in for the role of the titular God of Thunder, but Feige and director Kenneth Branagh thought his natural charm and flexibility as an actor made him better suited for the movie's damaged antagonist. "Tom gave you an impression that he could be ready for anything, performance-wise," says Branagh, who had previously worked with him on a West End revival of Checkov's Ivanov and the BBC series Wallander. "Tom has a wild imagination, so does Loki. He's got a mischievous sense of humor and he was ready to play. It felt like he had a star personality, but he was a team player."

Hiddleston fully immersed himself in the character. Outside of studying Loki's history in the Marvel Comics, he also researched how Loki and the Trickster God archetype appeared across mythology and different cultures. "He understood that he was already in something special [and] it was a special character in a special part of that early moment in the life of the Marvel universe where [he] also needed to step up in other ways," says Branagh, who was impressed by the emotional depth Hiddleston brought to the part, especially when it came to how isolated Loki felt in the Asgardian royal family.  

There was a lot riding on that first Thor feature. For one, no one knew if audiences would immediately latch onto a Shakespearean superhero movie partially set on an alien planet populated by the Norse Gods of legend. Second, it was integral to Feige's plans for the shared universe. Loki was supposed to be the main villain in The Avengers, which would not only mirror how Earth's mightiest heroes joined forces in 1963's Avengers #1 but also give Thor a believable reason for teaming up with Iron Man, Captain America (Chris Evans), and the rest of the capes. Feige first clued Hiddleston into those larger plans when the actor was in L.A. before Thor started shooting.

"I was like, 'Excuse me?' Because he was already three, four steps ahead," says Hiddleston. "That took me a few minutes to process, because I didn't quite realize how it just suddenly had a scope. And being cast as Loki, I realized, was a very significant moment for me in my life, and was going to remain. The creative journey was going to be so exciting."

Hiddleston relished the opportunity to go full villain in Avengers, like in the scene where Loki ordered a crowd to kneel before him outside a German opera house: "It's the unspoken truth of humanity, that you crave subjugation," says the Machiavellian god. "The bright lure of freedom diminishes your life's joy in a mad scramble for power, for identity. You were made to be ruled. In the end, you will always kneel."

"I just knew that in the structure of that film, I had to lean into his role as a pure antagonist," Hiddleston recalls. "What I always found curious and complex about the way Loki is written in Avengers, is that his status as an antagonist comes from the same well of not belonging and being marginalized and isolated in the first Thor film. Loki now knows he has no place in Asgard."

Loki did find a place within the audience's hearts, though. Feige was "all in" on Hiddleston as his Loki from the beginning, but even he couldn't predict how much fans would love him. Feige recalls the reaction at the 2013 San Diego Comic-Con: "Did we know that after he was the villain in two movies, he would be bringing thousands of people to their feet in Hall H, in costume, chanting his name? No, that was above and beyond the plan that we were hoping for and dreaming of." It was a dream Feige first got an inkling of a year earlier during the Avengers press tour when a Russian fan slipped past security, snuck into Mark Ruffalo's car, and asked the Hulk actor to give Hiddleston a piece of fan art she created. "That was one of the early signs there was much more happening with this quote-unquote villain."  

Despite that popularity, the plan was to kill Loki off in 2013's Thor: The Dark World, but the studio reversed course after test audiences refused to believe he actually died fighting the Dark Elves. Alas, he couldn't out-illusion death forever. After returning in Taika Waititi's colorful and idiosyncratic Thor: Ragnarok, Hiddleston's character perished for real in the opening moments of Infinity War. In typical Loki fashion, before Thanos crushed his windpipe, he delivered a defiant speech that indicated he'd finally made peace with the anger he felt toward his family.  

"It felt very, very final, and I thought, 'Okay, that's it. This is Loki's final bow and a conclusive end to the Odinson saga,'" says Hiddleston, who shot that well-earned death scene in 2017.  

But, though he didn't know it yet, the actor's MCU story was far from over.

Credit: Charlie Gray for EW

When Hiddleston returned to film two scenes in Avengers: Endgame in 2017, he had no idea where Loki portaled off to after snatching the Tesseract. "Where'd he go? When does he go? How does he get there? These are all questions I remember asking on the day, and then not being given any answers," Hiddleston recalls. To be fair, it's likely the Powers That Be didn't necessarily have answers then. While Feige can't exactly recall when the writers' room for Endgame first devised Loki's escape sequence, he does know that setting up a future show wasn't the primary goal — because a Loki series wasn't on the horizon just yet.

"[That scene] was really more of a wrinkle so that one of the missions that the Avengers went on in Endgame could get screwed up and not go well, which is what required Cap and Tony to go further back in time to the '70s," says Feige. Soon after that, though, former Disney CEO Bob Iger approached Feige about producing content for the studio's forthcoming streaming service. "I think the notion that we had left this hanging loose end with Loki gave us the in for what a Loki series could be. So by the time [Endgame] came out, we did know where it was going."

As for Hiddleston, he didn't find out about the plans for a Loki show until spring 2018, a few weeks before Infinity War hit theaters. "I probably should not have been surprised, but I was," says the actor. "But only because Infinity War had felt so final."

Nevertheless, Hiddleston was excited about returning for his show. He was eager to explore Loki's powers, especially the shapeshifting, and what it meant that this disruptive figure still managed to find a seat beside the gods in mythology. "I love this idea [of] Loki's chaotic energy somehow being something we need. Even though, for all sorts of reasons, you don't know whether you can trust him. You don't know whether he's going to betray you. You don't why he's doing what he's doing," says Hiddleston. "If he's shapeshifting so often, does he even know who he is? And is he even interested in understanding who he is? Underneath all those masks, underneath the charm and the wit, which is kind of a defense anyway, does Loki have an authentic self? Is he introspective enough or brave enough to find out? I think all of those ideas are all in the series — ideas about identity, ideas about self-knowledge, self-acceptance, and the difficulty of it."

“The series will explore Loki's powers in a way they have not yet been explored, which is very, very exciting.”

The thing that truly sold Hiddleston on the show was Marvel's decision to include the Time Variance Authority, a move he describes as "the best idea that anybody had pertaining to the series." Feige and Loki executive producer Stephen Broussard had hoped to find a place for the TVA — an organization that debuted in 1986's Thor #372 and has appeared in She-Hulk and Fantastic Four stories — in the MCU for years, but the right opportunity never presented itself until Loki came along. "Putting Loki into his own procedural series became the eureka moment for the show," says Feige.  

The TVA's perspective on time and reality also tied into the themes that Waldron, Loki's head writer, was hoping to explore. "Loki is a character that's always reckoning with his own identity, and the TVA, by virtue of what they do, is uniquely suited to hold up a mirror to Loki and make him really confront who he is and who he was supposed to be," says Waldron. Hiddleston adds: "[That] was very exciting because in the other films, there was always something about Loki that was very controlled. He seemed to know exactly what the cards in his hand were and how he was going to play them…. And Loki versus the TVA is Loki out of control immediately, and in an environment in which he's completely behind the pace, out of his comfort zone, destabilized, and acting out."

To truly dig into who Loki is, the creative team had to learn from the man who knows him best: Hiddleston. "I got him to do a thing called Loki School when we first started," says director Kate Herron. "I asked him to basically talk through his 10 years of the MCU — from costumes to stunts, to emotionally how he felt in each movie. It was fantastic."

Hiddleston got something out of the Loki school, too. Owen Wilson both attended the class and interviewed Hiddleston afterward so that he could better understand Loki, as his character Mobius is supposed to be an expert on him. During their conversation, Wilson pointedly asked Hiddleston what he loved about playing the character.

"And I said, 'I think it's because he has so much range,'" says Hiddleston. "I remember saying this to him: 'On the 88 keys on the piano, he can play the twinkly light keys at the top. He can keep it witty and light, and he's the God of Mischief, but he can also go down to the other side and play the heavy keys. And he can play some really profound chords down there, which are about grief and betrayal and loss and heartbreak and jealousy and pride.'" Hiddleston recalls Wilson being moved by the description: "He said, 'I think I might say that in the show.' And it was such a brilliant insight for me into how open Owen is as an artist and a performer.'"

Owen Wilson as Mobius and Tom Hiddleston as Loki in 'Loki.'| Credit: Chuck Zlotnick/Marvel Studios

Everyone involved is particularly excited for audiences to see Hiddleston and Wilson's on-screen chemistry. "Mobius is not unlike Owen Wilson in that he's sort of nonplussed by the MCU," says Feige. "[Loki] is used to getting a reaction out of people, whether it's his brother or his father, or the other Avengers. He likes to be very flamboyant and theatrical. Mobius doesn't give him the reaction he's looking for. That leads to a very unique relationship that Loki's not used to."

As for the rest of the series, we know that Loki will be jumping around time and reality, but the creative team isn't keen on revealing when and where. "Every episode, we tried to take inspiration from different things," says Waldron, citing Blade Runner's noir aesthetic as one example.

"Part of the fun of the multiverse and playing with time is seeing other versions of characters, and other versions of the titular character in particular," says Feige, who also declined to confirm if Loki ties into Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness and/or other upcoming projects.

Making Loki was especially meaningful to Hiddleston because they shot most of it during the pandemic, in late 2020. "It will remain one of the absolute most intense, most rewarding experiences of my life," he says. "It's a series about time, and the value of time, and what time is worth, and I suppose what the experience of being alive is worth. And I don't quite know yet, and maybe I don't have perspective on it, if all the thinking and the reflecting that we did during the lockdown ended up in the series. But in some way, it must have because everything we make is a snapshot of where we were in our lives at that time."

While it remains to be seen what the future holds for Loki beyond this initial season, Hiddleston isn't preparing to put the character to bed yet. "I'm open to everything," he says. "I have said goodbye to the character. I've said hello to the character. I said goodbye to the character [again]. I've learned not to make assumptions, I suppose. I'm just grateful that I'm still here, and there are still new roads to explore."

[beepboop358]

Anti-Byler Argument Refuttals

Although I discussed all of this in my Byler Proof master slides post, I wanted to do a separate post specifically just refutting the most common anti-byler arguments.

1. "Mike and El's relationship is too developed" and "They have been through too much together to break up now!"

This is probably the thing I hear the most when people argue that Byler will never happen. The weirdest part of this argument is that people assume that they will never drift apart, and that they will never ever break up, as if we didn't just see them drift apart, break up, and not officially get back together in S3? Yes, they have both been through a significant amount of trauma, but their relationship is not as developed as people think it is, they barely even know each other really. They spent a week together in S1, then El was gone for a year. Mike and El don't reunite until the very end of S2, probably a few days after halloween. If we work out the timeline between Halloween of 1984 and July 4th of 1985 in S3, that's 246 days, so it's actually less than a full year they have spent together, getting to know each other.

The “development” people argue that Mike and El have just doesn't stand up. Mike and El do not have intimate conversations, their conversations are incredibly awkward, and they just kiss frequently in the beginning of S3 before they break up. That's not development. Hopper even refers to their constant kissing as "not normal and not healthy." Mike couldn't tell El he loves her to her face, which is a parallel to the failed relationship of Stancy where Nancy couldn't tell Steve she loved him, and we later find out it's because she doesn't, which all happens during the blank makes you crazy scene that is extremely similar to Robin's coming out scene. And yes, Mike and El have endured a lot of trauma together, but so has the rest of the group and people don't seem to use this argument the same way with the other couples, or between the friendships. History doesn't determine the future if there's no feelings involved, things can always change. This is idea of staying in a relationship where there is no real love but there is history/benefits is hinted at in S3 when Mike dresses almost identically to both of his parents.

2. "Look at how much Mike cares for El! They're in love!"

No, they're not, and how they treat each other proves that they're not. I firmly believe neither Mike nor El is seriously, romantically in love with each other.

If Mike was really deeply, romantically in love with El, why did he treat her like he did in S3? If he really cares about her that much, why did he wait for Lucas to guide him at all times in matters regarding his relationship with El, instead of just taking initiative, but he does take initiative with Will? Why can't her apologize to her? Why wasn't Mike more upset about El dumping him? Why couldn't he tell El he loves her to her face? Why did he consistently lie to her throughout the whole show? Why did he stop calling her in S2? Why did he give up and say she was dead, but never gave up on Will? Why did he scream in her face in S1? And no - it isn't because he's just shy or awkward. Mike doesn't act like he is truly in love with El because he isn't. He is projecting his feelings for Will onto El, and he is deeply in denial about his sexuality due to his internalized homophobia and hasn't fully processed how he feels about Will throughout the series (up until the ending of S3). And why does Mike have such an odd reaction to El saying she loves him if he does love her? If he loves her that should be exactly what he wants to hear, so why does he look so confused and scared? And why doesn't he just say it back right then?

El isn't seriously, romantically in love with Mike. They meet in S1, and he immediately takes her in, saving her life. He looks out for her, and actually cares if she is okay, and no one has ever done that for her before. El was abused her whole childhood until Mike lets her live in his basement. He was the first person to treat her like a human being, and show her compassion, which she has never experienced before. It makes total sense that she would cling to their relationship like a security blanket. Mike is an emotional attachment for El. He makes her feel safe, because of how he saved her life previously. El has very limited knowledge of love, life, friendship, relationships, and social behaviors since she was locked in a lab for over a decade of her life, she was never truly exposed to these concepts like the other kids in the party were. Everything El thinks she knows about love she learns from watching soap opera's alone in Hopper's cabin. Of course her perception of what romantic love is, is warped. If El was seriously romantically in love with Mike, why was their break-up no big deal to her? Why was she smiling, laughing and looking at pictures of boys with Max right after she supposedly dumped the love of her life? Why did she not seem even the slightest bit upset about it the entire season?

If they're both seriously in love, then why are their interactions so awkward to watch and why does it feel so unnatural and forced? Why don’t Mileven’s interactions feel romantic? The official released scripts on 8flix describe several Mileven scenes as "awkward". It's no coincidence that detail was included in the script.

3. "But they already have Robin"

I mean this comment basically means that sense the show already has one confirmed lgbtq+ character, there can't possibly be any others. What?! There isn't a "one gay character limit per TV show". This comment really bothers me because it reeks of homophobia. If you don't ship Byler that's fine, but refusing to even explore the possibility there could be more than one lgtbq+ character in a TV show just because one already exists? Yeah no. Queer people existed in the 80's, definitely more than just one, so capping out the amount of queer characters in the show is just icky.

Also, Robin was not originally written to be a gay character. It was decided during the filming process that Robin should be a lesbian, because Maya Hawke and Joe Keery were not getting romantic vibes between their characters. Just because the show introduced a new gay character in S3, it does not mean the queercoding of Will and Mike is erased to make room for Robin, and keep Mileven together. Making Robin a lesbian, does not cancel out Mike and Will being gay/liking each other, and the show's future plans for byler.

4. "Mike's not gay."

Does this seem straight to you?

Giving your girlfriend a drawing of your male best friend, that was drawn by him, but telling her it's your drawing so she'll hang it up on the wall you coincidentally face while you make out with her, to remind you of him.

Taking your girlfriends hands off of you while you're making out with her, and keeping your hands folded in your lap away from her.

Only being able to apologize to said male best friend and being more emotionally invested in that relationship than your relationship with your girlfriend.

Mike is the only other person besides Will pictured in close up shots with rainbow and fruit imagery.

Even the die-hard Mileven fans have to admit that's more than a little coincidental, and if we know anything about the Duffer brothers, it's that they love incorporating intricate details in their show to reveal things about the characters/plot.

If you want more examples, some images, or just a more in-depth analysis of byler throughout the series, I suggest you check out my Byler Proof master slides :)