#and in this instance i think we the audience will be the ones paying it

[captainvulcant]

Amongst rumours of a Supernatural season 16 I'm just gonna say that would be the funniest most meta shit ever. Even the show itself can't just die, always gotta be resurrecting and coming back like the world's most dysfunctional boomerang.

[megumimania]

A silly ask and I'm kinda surprised no one has done this yet and I like your writing so I'm sending it to you but basically fem reader and toji on an episode on maury :3

WHO’S YOUR DADDY? — toji fushiguro

pairing: toji fushiguro x fem!reader

a/n: the way this has sat in the drafts for well over a year, loved writing this btw, thanks anon!

it’s no secret that toji has his doubts about whether megumi is his.

but you’re officially over going back and forth with him. especially when he still owes you child support that he refuses to pay until you show him valid proof that megumi is his son.

and what better way to give him that confirmation that he desires than on the messiest show on daytime television, in front of a live studio audience.

“for those who have joined us after the break, today we are joined by y/n, who claims that her ex boyfriend toji is pretending to act like he isn’t the father to their two year old son megumi so he doesn’t have to pay child support.”

the camera pans to you and toji sat a few feet away from each other. you can tell that he thinks this whole thing is a joke from the way he’s slouching in the chair and the constant sarcastic replies he gives maury each time he’s asked a simple question.

“maury how do i know she’s not tryna hustle me outta my hard earned money, huh?” he asks, seemingly thinking that he’s caught you in a tight spot. “besides have you seen the kid? his hair is spiky as fuck, nobody in my family has that hair type.”

the laugh that threatens to leave your lips is almost sickening, using hair as reason to not claim his child was absurd.

it was almost as wild as trying to accuse you of being a good-for-nothing money hungry vulture. which was rich coming from him. considering that your job was practically funding his lifestyle, aside from the large dose of cash he received from his 'work trips’ that cropped up once in a while.

the cash did nothing for you as he spent it as fast as he received it. rather than putting it towards megumi’s trust fund or college fund, he squandered it all on drinking and gambling, especially when it came to the races.

it turns out his charming looks and smiles do not work on the biggest gamble of all time: betting on damn race horses.

but in the rare instance he had some had some heart he contributed towards the bills and groceries. yet that still wasn’t enough.

“when was the last time you paid for megumi’s diapers or his formula or anything related to the apartment, hm?”

you retort, revelling at how all the fight and bravado he once held was slowly seeping out of him, as if he had all of his blood sucked out of him. the host looks expectantly at toji, awaiting a response.

the audience sets off in a chorus of ‘boos’ before toji even has a chance to respond to clear his name. he feels ambushed, the humiliation of admitting to be a terrible father on television creeping up on him.

but what did he expect? he always pushed too hard and now he’s paying the price as you unsurprisingly pushed back even harder.

and of course in the sea of 'boos', there’s a few cheers in the crowd from people who are more interested in getting into his pants instead of the main reason to why you were here in the first place.

“oh and maury if you think i’m lying, i’ve got invoices, bank statements and receipts spanning the last three months.” you add “i can tell you for a fact that this man doesn’t spend a dime on anything—he might as well put on a diaper and sleep in our son's crib.”

"and so what?" toji shrugs, ever so nonchalant. to the degree it pisses you off, he could at least try to act like he cares in front of the camera and the audience.

“i still make it up to you though, don’t i?” he replies, a teasing edge to his tone that has implications that you don’t want to unpack on national television, which was ironic since your business was already out there anyway.

the look on your face is almost murderous, and luckily maury manages to pick up on before this turns into a bloodbath. he quickly perks up as he holds up the manilla envelope that was going to make or break your day.

“In here we have the results of the paternity test, come back after the break!” he says clasping his hand together as you head to the commercial break. immediately you head backstage, grabbing megumi from the staff member who seemed smitten with him.

he latched onto you as you doted on him, before he waddled off to play with his firetrucks that you brought with you in your bag. “he’s getting so big.” a familiar voice says and you turn to see him in the doorway.

“megumi look! daddy’s come back with his tail between his legs because he knows he’s about to be publicly embarrassed on tv!” you say in a mocking voice, pointing out to where toji is standing and he toddles over, smacking his arm as he adorably glowers at his dad.

“bad daddy!” he says and you stop him before he gets out of control and starts to barrel toji with his kicking and slapping. you pull megumi onto your lap trying to calm him down whilst biting back a laugh.

“we don’t hit megumi, unless people deserve it like your daddy.” you tell him softly but you doubt he’s retained any of what you said anyway.

megumi is nestled into your lap, his focus back onto the firetruck that he’s playing with. for his age the kid is incredibly perceptive to the point where it spooks you out.

and if toji feels more like an idiot now, he doesn’t say so.

—

“and we’re back! for those who have just joined us, y/n claims that her ex boyfriend is denying that he’s the father of their child to avoid child support payments.”

the clips of the past half hour play back as you sit down, the manilla envelope in your eye level making your heart race slightly. deep down you knew that he was the father so why was the anticipation making you doubt that?

the crowds cheering and whooping comes to a close once maury grabs hold of the manilla envelope, he opens it, dragging out the grand reveal for dramatic purposes as the suspense builds in the room.

“when it comes to two year old megumi fushiguro, toji… you are the father!” he announces setting off the crowd in a series of cheers. you look over at toji and notice the red flush that covers his neck and ears, a sure tell sign of embarrassment and guilt.

“all i gotta say is that i fucking told you so, hell i didn’t even have to say anything you should’ve known!” you said to him, as he did nothing but take the well deserved lecture from you.

toji felt really fucking stupid, like really stupid but he didn’t want to add to your tirade already, he already wanted to melt of pure embarrassment under the hot studio lights. he really underestimated the lengths you’d go to prove him wrong.

“it’s time to start scrimping and saving, old man. food, clothes and diapers aint cheap. I’m sure your poor race horses will understand right?” you said teasingly, biting back a laugh as you clapped his shoulder.

toji let out an annoyed huff as the sound of your laughter ricocheted in his head, the high from your victory lap still present. he couldn’t be more of a fool if he tried. “haha very funny.” he said drily, despite his head burning, now he owed you and shiu money over his stupid antics.

he knew that as long as the internet and tv were still around, he was never going to live this day down, knowing you’d use this moment to embarrass him and deservedly so.

“i’ve been your host, maury! come back tomorrow where we have suguru and satoru. two former best friends and alleged lovers with satoru claiming that suguru’s affair with the kfc worker ruined their relationship!”

[olderthannetfic]

I love that we acknowledge that a lot of women/men who are into yaoi/yuri are *potentially* queer or trans themselves but I think we just need to stop making "well actualllyyyyy" reasons as to why it is okay for diff groups of people to enjoy certain art.

--

The factor people are often most allergic to admitting is that if cishet dudes like f/f content and produce it/pay for it/reward it with attention, there will be lots more f/f. Even if 99% of it sucks (in my opinion as a bi woman), that 1% could easily represent more individual works than would ever have been there without the cishet dude audience.

Ditto many other instances of stuff where people are obsessed with ownvoices even when it's a bodice ripper or a story about a werewolf detective or something and not a realistic coming of age story that's one step away from memoir.

[physalian]

How to Make your Writing Less Stiff 4

Let’s keep this train rollin’! This time less down to line edits and more overall scope of your narrative

Part 3

1. Foreshadowing

Nothing quite like the catharsis of accurately predicting where something’s going to go. It doesn’t have to be a huge plot twist or a character death, it can (and should) be little things that reward your audience for paying attention. Double points if it adds to rewatch/re-readability.

Example: In The Dark Knight, this exchange happens:

Harvey: “You’ve known Rachel all her life.”

Alfred: “Oh, not yet, Sir.”

You won’t think anything of it on your first watch. Alfred is just making a witty joke that throws Harvey off. Watch the movie again, when Rachel dies, and it becomes some incredibly dark foreshadowing. Turns out Alfred has, actually, known Rachel all her life.

2. Chekhov’s Gun

Chekhov’s Gun is a narrative concept where a seemingly inconsequential element introduced at some point in the narrative (a gun) must “fire” by the end of the narrative. Sometimes this element leaves audiences uneasy or anxious, because they know something bad must come of it. Sometimes they think nothing of it until it’s about to fire and you get a one-two punch of the realization that it’s about to hit, and then the impact of the hit. It helps create tension, and tension is incredibly important (if you want a whole post of my take on it, lmk).

It also helps your narrative look more cohesive, where nothing is left on the table. Your set-ups and payoffs leave no threads dangling.

3. Repetition

The Rule of threes can apply on a micro and macro scale. I like doing lists of adjectives in threes, (e.g. My cat is soft, fluffy, and adorable) because the cadence and the flow of three is something we’re familiar with in spoken language. We like three supporting examples for an argument. Any less doesn’t feel strong enough, any more feels like you’re trying too hard. This is not a rule it’s a suggestion.

On a grander scale, you can look at the script of Curse of the Black Pearl for a masterclass in macro rules of three, like three parlays. Doing this helps your narrative look more cohesive and like every detail is thoroughly interwoven and nothing is coincidence. Your audience will get to the third instance and mimic that DiCaprio pointing meme—they will absolutely notice.

4. Motifs

Motifs as well, beyond threes, help. Colors are a huge one. For example every time you mention the color purple, you could attach it to an emotion, or a character, or an important plot beat, like how leitmotifs work for character themes in movies and TV shows.

Obvious examples in film are like lightsaber colors or dressing up the good guys in white and the bad guys in black. I did this whole post about color in fiction.

It’s a lot of other things too. Weather elements and times of day, or specific inconsequential objects popping up over and over again, like birds, or litter, fallen leaves, clothing items. Whenever the narrative mentions them, the author is trying to clue you in on some subtext within that scene.

—

My new novel is here!!! Do you like supernatural fantasy? How about queer vampires? How about acespec characters? Then Eternal Night of the Northern Sky is for you!

[miwiheroes]

The Interruption Trope: Mileven and Byler

A common argument I hear from Milevens in like comment sections and in people's asks sometimes is that Mike and El do get interrupted during different romantic scenes in S3 and S4, which would then apply them to the same interruption trope that Byler has and other ships like Lumax.

Yeah because interruption trope = endgame sure

The huge difference I find between Byler's interrupted moments and Mileven's interrupted moments is the fact that with Byler's - the intimate moment of the conversation has happened. Let's take a look at some particular examples.

So in the scene where Jonathan interrupts them, they don't get interrupted in the middle of Mike and Will flirting, they get 'interrupted' at the end, which causes them to turn around quickly. It more plays off as an interruption of the clear romantic tension between them that would have occurred in an extremely unsubtle way had Jonathan not been there. And we know that the Duffle Bags wanna be subtle or some shit idk

Then again, in the scene where Mike is in Will's room, they have an uninterrupted intimate moment that does get finished. Mike ends up saying what he wants to say, and they have a moment with uninterrupted eye contact where they're clearly so in love with each other it gives Will the confidence to bring his painting along with them. The interruption comes, again, in the middle of their non-so-subtle romantic tension.

SAME THING with the scene on top of the car. They don't get interrupted in the middle of a sentence or in the middle of telling each other something. The audience gets as much out of that scene as possible. The conversation actually has a moment of Mike realising that saying 'I love you' isn't something he actually wants to do and he needs to explain himself to El and hopefully make up with her instead. Then Will alludes to his own feelings. The interruption comes AGAIN when they're staring at each other, not when they're about to say something.

AND ONCE AGAINNNN another 'interruption' which is not really an interruption but still counts. Mike doesn't get interrupted in the middle of putting his hand on Will's shoulder, in fact he keeps his hand there for a moment after getting interrupted. This is perfect because the interruption still leaves us feeling satisfied with the tension whilst not feeling too frustrated there wasn't more. The scene still had a point to it. Because it was Will telling Mike that One's not dead yada yada

A non-byler example would be Lumax, where they get 'interrupted' in S2 during their talk on top of the bus. They have a very good conversation where they open up to each other and the audience gains more information about Max's character and her motivations and things she is self-conscious about. AND we get a super cute moment between Lucas and Max where they smile at each other. The interruption comes during this romantic tension moment just like with Byler, in order to make the audience feel satisfied and wanting more, but not in a negative way.

But with Mileven, nothing actually happens. There are no pay-offs with their interrupted scenes. It just makes them more frustrating as a couple rather than having romantic tension.

There's a reason you feel so much more enlightened by Byler's scenes in Season 4 than Mileven's scenes (they barely have any heart to heart scenes but when they are about to, it gets interrupted) is because they actually have substance and a real purpose.

For instance in this scene, all they do is have some jokes and some laughs, and when Mike is finally about to say something to her (some people suspect he's about to tell her he loves her, but honestly why would he be saying 'I guess' to that.., i think he was about to say sorry) Argyle interrupts and instead they have a funny scene that ends in THIS INSTEAD (below), which then makes the scene between Mileven all about Will's feelings once again. It is much easier to make it all about Will if Mike and El never actually have a heart to heart moment...

Another interruption trope with Mileven happens in season 2, when they're about to kiss, despite Mike literally not even looking down or moving forward like El is, instead standing statue-still looking more afraid. I would love to talk about that aspect of the scene more but really this is about how they get interrupted - obviously there are a lot of interrupted kisses in tv shows where the couple is endgame and ur supposed to root for them. Of course, but I honestly would believe in it much more if Mike had looked more willing to kiss her and they had a short of him looking down or something but they didnt. so

Another clear example of this interruption being used is during season 3. Again, the interruption is not used to increase romantic tension, it is to increase our frustrated feelings towards their relationship. Mike tries to hard to have a heart to heart with El in this scene, even though he really doesn't want to say it. Our frustration goes both ways with this one - with Mike for not saying what he means, with El for not getting what Mike is trying to say at all. And when the interruption comes, it almost feels like we want it in some way. At least, that's how Mike clearly feels from how fast he grabbed that walkie oops-

So instead of feeling like we earned something and we got something out of that scene, it feels a little pointless. But there is really a point to it, it's to make us much more frustrated with their dynamic than make it likeable. That's why so many GA members started to get tired of them after S3 and S4 - when they had more of these interruption moments.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

15 Ways to Improve Your Vocabulary

in response to:

1. Develop a reading habit. Reading is the most effective way to build your vocabulary. Read books, magazines, and newspapers that cover a wide range of topics, and pay attention to unfamiliar words. Look up their meanings and try using them in context. Vocabulary building is easiest when you encounter words in context. Seeing words appear in a novel or a newspaper article can be far more helpful than seeing them appear on vocabulary lists. Not only do you gain exposure to unfamiliar words; you also see how they’re used. In fact, 15 minutes is recognized as the ideal time for students to see positive gains in reading achievement; students who read just over a half-hour to an hour per day improve the most.

2. Utilize word lists. They are incredibly flexible tools that can help you organize your learning in a variety of ways. For instance, vocabulary can be grouped into small, easy chunks that can be revisited for maximum learning benefits. Research shows that a word needs to be seen up to 10 times before we really learn it, and researchers believe that staggered repetition is the best way to learn new vocabulary. Word lists help keep vocabulary terms in manageable chunks that a student can come back to as they gain mastery. I have posted some word lists HERE and will continue to add to this in the future.

3. Use the dictionary and thesaurus. Online dictionaries and thesauruses are helpful resources if used properly. They can jog your memory about synonyms that would actually be better words in the context of what you’re writing. A full dictionary definition can also educate you about antonyms, root words, and related words, which is another way to learn vocabulary.

4. Keep a vocabulary journal. Making a vocabulary journal is a great place to collect and interact with words you hear or see in your reading. Each page should be dedicated to a singular new word, including its definitions, synonyms, and antonyms. Review the journal regularly to reinforce your learning. 

5. Choosing appropriate vocabulary. It’s important to use words and expressions that fit the context so your meaning is clear. For example, different audiences for your writing will require different levels of formality: the vocabulary you use in an academic essay may not be effective for a blogpost targeting a popular audience. Consider the following questions to help you choose the most appropriate words for your audience and purpose:

a. What’s the exact meaning of the word? Words may be broadly similar in meaning but differ in important aspects of that meaning. Consider the difference between ‘the fragrance of flowers’  and ‘the odour of rotten eggs.’ Both words refer to the sense of smell, but fragrance has a positive core meaning while odour has a negative one. If you don’t know what a word exactly means, check it in a dictionary. b. Is the word attached to a feeling? Compare the two sentences: ‘The freeway snakes through the town’ and ‘The freeway meanders through the town’. In this example, snake indicates negative feelings about the freeway while meander doesn’t. c. What level of intensity does the word show? Many words with similar meanings describe different degrees of the same quality or action. For example, ‘comical’, ‘hilarious’ and ‘side-splitting’  show different degrees of funniness. Think about the intensity of what you want to convey when choosing words. d. Is the word formal or informal? Go for formal words and expressions in business communication and academic writing. In the following examples, the second expression in each pair is more formal than the first: (1) come up with / create (2) one after another / at regular intervals (3) huge / considerable (4) enough / sufficient e. Is the word polite? Words which describe negative qualities or sensitive issues too directly can be offensive. Good communicators consider the feelings of their audience. For example, when writing about childhood obesity, it’s more appropriate to use ‘children with weight problems’ or ‘children of an unhealthy weight’ than ‘fat children’. f. Is the word specific or general? Use words with specific meanings whenever possible to make your message clearer to your audience. For example, avoid overusing general verbs such as ‘be’, ‘do’, ‘have’ and ‘get’, especially in academic writing, as they don’t accurately convey specific ideas. It’s better to use a more specific verb or verb phrase to strengthen your message. Compare the impact of the verbs in these sentences: ‘To be successful, learners need to have high-level literacy skills.’ ‘To be successful, learners need to develop and demonstrate high-level literacy skills.’ g. What other words does the word often go with? Some words are frequently used together and therefore sound more natural in combination. This is called collocation. For example, we say ‘fast train’ not ‘quick train’, but ‘quick shower’ not ‘fast shower’. Similarly, it’s more natural to say ‘highly critical’ rather than ‘deeply critical.’

6. Play word games. Classic games like Scrabble and Boggle can function as a fun way to expand your English vocabulary. Crossword puzzles can as well. If you really want to be efficient, follow up rounds of these word games with a little note-taking. Keep a list of the different words you learned while playing the game, and then study that list from time to time.

7. Use flashcards. A quick way to build a large vocabulary is to study a number of words via flashcards. In today’s digital age, a wide array of smartphone apps make flashcards convenient and easy to organize. Aiming for one new word a day is reasonable. You can always go for more, but it may not be reasonable to assimilate dozens of English words every single day.

8. Subscribe to “word of the day” feeds. Some web platforms will provide you with a word a day—either on a website, an app, or via email—to help you expand your vocabulary. You can add these words to running word lists.

9. Use mnemonics. A mnemonic device is a form of word association that helps you remember words’ definitions and proper uses. For instance think of the word obsequious which means “attempting to win favor from influential people by flattery.” Break down that word into components: “obse” is the beginning of “obsessed,” “qui” sounds like the French word for “yes” (oui), and “us” is like the word “us.” So you can think of that big word obsequious as “obsessed with saying yes to us”—which is kind of what it means!

10. Practice using new words in conversation. It’s possible to amass a huge vocabulary without actually knowing how to use words. This means you have to take it upon yourself to put your personal dictionary into use. If you come across an interesting word in your reading, make a point of using it in conversation. By experimenting in low-stakes situations, you can practice the art of word choice and, with a little bit of trial and error, hone in on the right word for a particular context. Furthermore, speaking to native – or non-native – speakers of English (or any language you are learning) will guarantee you the chance to learn new words. Anyone who has ever wondered how to develop their vocabulary will know that the most important thing is putting your vocabulary to use and hearing what people say in return. This is how language works, and before long you’ll be finding ways to work those new words into your everyday use of the language.

11. Watch movies and TV shows. This simple activity can expose you to new words and phrases. When watching TV or a movie, pay attention to the dialogue and note any unfamiliar words. When the TV show or movie is done, look up the meanings of the new words and try to use them in context.

12. Build a story. Learning vocabulary words outside of their context is difficult, so why not create context with some creative storytelling? This can be an individual writing activity or you can do this in a group. A sample group activity: Choose a word list and determine an order in which your students or friends will take their turn. Every person gets to choose one word from the word list. You begin by writing the first sentence of a story; each student then uses their chosen word in a sentence to build on the story. This gets learners comfortable using the words in sentences, and putting those individual vocabulary words into a broader context. This is also an activity you can do via text, chat window, or email, which makes it perfect for remote learning.

13. Draw it. Sometimes the best learning activities are ones that don’t feel like a learning activity. This can be an individual activity but can also be used in group settings. Here’s a way to turn vocabulary acquisition into a game: Ask each student to have a piece of paper and a pen or pencil ready, and tell them you are going to be playing a drawing game. Using the private chat feature of your remote learning software, choose one student and give them a word from your vocabulary list along with its definition, and tell them that they have 20 seconds to draw it. While the student is drawing it, make sure that you make their screen the main screen of the software. You can do a countdown to keep up the momentum, or play music while you wait. At the end of the time, the student shows their drawing to the other students: The first student to guess which vocabulary word has been drawn is the next student to draw. This activity is not only fun, but also benefits students who are visual or tactile learners.

14. Be aware of idioms. Idioms are commonly used word combinations or expressions. These have very specific meanings that are not obvious from the words they contain, e.g. ‘a piece of cake’, ‘get the hang of it’, ‘an Indian summer’, and ‘after a fashion’. Many dictionaries list and define idioms if you look up the component words. For example, try looking up ‘Indian’ or ‘summer’ to find ‘Indian summer’. Idioms are generally more appropriate for speaking and non-academic writing.

15. Practice, practice, practice. In many ways, vocabulary is like a muscle – it will get stronger the more you use it. The key to building a strong vocabulary is to use it regularly. Try using new words in your conversations, writing, and everyday life. The more that you use them, the more they will become a part of your everyday vocabulary.

Sources & other related articles: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ⚜ More: Writing Notes & References

[artigas]

I’m really happy that Black Sails is experiencing a bit of a renaissance, but (predictably) some of the takes I’m seeing online are so busted. It’s wild to me that anyone would complain about the fact that Anne Bonny kisses Jack after she’s developed this life-changing relationship with Max. It’s absolutely wild to see anyone roll their eyes or feel uncomfortable about the fact that Flint has sex with Miranda when he returns to her in season one or that Max is most likely a lesbian but actively has sex with men for pay and knows how to make that pleasurable. It’s crazy to me that some of the very audiences who claim to want queer representation feel so discomforted when they actually see the mess and seeming inconsistencies of queerness that they asked for.

The reality is that there are lesbians who have had (and will have!) meaningful, mutually-gratifying, and deeply sexual relationships with men. There are gay men who’ve enjoyed having sex with women, who are gay as the day is long and nevertheless feel sexually attracted to a woman or two and are nevertheless gay men, full stop. There are gay cis men who are happily married to trans women. There are femme dom tops and butch bottoms and there are mascs afab people who like femme boys. There are non-binary people and trans men who actively identify as lesbians. There are ace and aro people who enjoy thinking about and engaging with sex — sometimes in fiction and sometimes in real life. Queerness, in fiction and in reality, defies neat categorization. That is the beauty, power, and (perceived) unorthodoxy of queerness.

Now, I’ll say this — do I think the straight men behind Black Sails were actively thinking deeply and insightfully about the paradoxes and fuckery of queer identity when they wrote Black Sails? No! By their own admission, Steinberg and Levine have owned up to the fact that some of the writing of the show was really hinged on their own blind spots as people who are not (to my knowledge) members of the queer community. If I want to be generous, I think that the beautiful mess of Black Sails is that, in not feeling like experts enough to designate specific identity labels to any of their characters, the writers stumbled their way into more authentic representation of lived queer experience, which is to say that the notion that James Flint was actively thinking of himself as a gay man was anachronistic. As many lesbian archivists and theories have noted, the notion of a queer identity — as in, queerness is who you are, not what you do — was patently unthinkable for most cultures in the past. In other words, the idea that Anne Bonny operates in the eighteenth century as a lesbian and thus would not willingly engage in relationships with men is not only untrue of the series, but untrue of most recorded lesbian experiences in the real world. The notion that a lesbian would operate her entire life without engaging sexually or romantically with men, for instance, is a very new privilege that some of us are very lucky to enjoy, but it is not true for the vast majority of human history — hell, it’s not even true of our present world.

This is all to say that think that there’s something really funny about how we want queer characters to fit into neatly organized boxes. This isn’t a new problem, either. When the show was still airing, the BS fandom would get itself into tizzies about wether or not Flint is gay or bisexual, wether or not Anne Bonny is a lesbian, wether or not Silver is queer when his only canonical relationship is with Madi, etc etc. We’ve been having these discourses for years and I don’t know. I get that much of it is fueled by how badly some people want to see themselves represented in media, but . . . well. The siloing of queer characters and queer narratives into neat little boxes has never felt very authentic to me and nine times out of ten, it’s also just so damn boring.

[dailyrothko]

Do you mind when other people blog Rothko

Ha, no. The whole point of this blog really is to educate people on his art and spread it around, the problem is that there are some things that go along with that.

One of them is that if I correct somebody online about their fake painting or a painting that's upside down generally they will not pay attention and if they do pay attention generally they will not fix it. Sometimes they block me. Other times, a "lifestyle blog" will put a bunch up and those are much more popular than art blogs so it's difficult to correct this new audience to the possibility that what they're looking at is fake or mutilated,

Sometimes, as many of you know, I will re-blog one as an example of something to avoid. I try not to blame the people that are putting it up because there's no reason they should know any better, but some of them don't want to know any better and it puts me in a weird position because the work is copyrighted and it could be taken down, and I'm not going to encourage that, but I also don't like to encourage people mutilating works of art. I'm not the person who thinks it's cool when you colorize old movies so we can all "relate" and I'm not the person who thinks that presenting color photographs in black-and-white is good if it goes along with your "theme", I just don't think we should meddle with the artist's intentions if possible

I have a close relationship with many people in the Rothko world and I know that, for instance, if a museum person sees a painting at their museum and somebody has photoshopped it or it's a terrible picture? they would love to see a good one in its place. This blog is often able to provide those pictures by keeping up with the newest scans, but people don't want to re-blog because they like to get the credit for posting the pictures in the notes, which, to me, is very immature blogger attitude.

My blog has greatly benefited from submissions and I get a lot of them, many here and many on Instagram, and I always credit the photographers and keep their credit intact, which seems like the normal thing to do, and that way when one of the people that takes museum trips and takes good pictures gets to the next Rothko exhibit, they are sure to offer me some pictures they took because I'm not going to just steal them. It's not that I am a saint, I think it's polite but its also practical, and I think that sometimes if you play the long game rather than alienating everybody, you end up in a better position to do the things that you like to do. (obviously I am speaking of etiquette here or not alienating nazis or punching fascists which I am greatly in support of).

It can also be a little bit frustrating when all the information is stripped from the painting, when a lot of people would like to know the details and they are right here.

I don't mean all of this to sound holier than thou I think of it as a simple fact. I have put this work in for reference. If you don't want to reblog me, or let's say you were at San Francisco MOMA and took a picture of number 14 1960. You could look it up here and get the details if you did not know them, and I would consider that to be a good use of this blog.

So no I am happy for people to spread the word and get the art around to different audiences and different people but I wish they would have cared about it, partially because I'm right here to help and it would not be much effort to ask me or Reblog, but the truth is that most people don't care about that stuff and there's nothing I can do about it unless I want to go to great lengths.

Sometimes frankly I just don't understand it. There are particular blogs who put up bad scans but worse they put up fake paintings year after year after year and it's not like they have not been informed that they are fake. I don't know if they are art bots like the off the easel scammers who had all the "artist Rothko" type blogs, but those people were tech Bros stealing your personal information and mining wiki paintings which is a terrible place to get art, and they were spreading paintings that were sideways year after year. There's a rule on Tumblr against bots but it's not enforced, like everything around here.

So the short answer is no, but the long answer if you made it through it, is  that I wish people had a little bit more interest in precision. This month I must've told 20 different people that they had a problem in their painting post, not a single person changed it. And everybody makes mistakes, but I actually prefer if people correct mine because it embarrasses me!

Apologies for the long reply

[vxxcte]

Extremely long rant on 001 & 457:

3.4k+ words

—

Intro

Yesterday I finished season 2 of Squid Game. I have so much to say about In-ho’s and Gi-hun’s dynamics and writing.

Keep in mind this is my interpretation of these characters and their dynamics, and some of that is speculation. I’m just yapping because I have a lot to say. Maybe this takes on a much more optimistic view than is actually the case, but I fear it makes sense to me.

I have seen two takes about 457 around pretty often:

“They’re in love.” or:

“In-ho feeds off of Gi-hun’s pain because he’s just an evil guy.”

These can both be true in a way, but when no one talks about the little details of the character writing and the relationship between these two guys, it feels like the incredible potential and writing that this duo has is being overlooked.

Note, I will be referring to this Youtube video throughout this post:

Now let’s start with what we know already. It’s pretty evident that In-ho is not totally emotionless like many people are trying to imply or interpret him as.

Here’s why.

—

Hwang In-Ho and The Traitor Archetype

There are two ways in which a character like 001 can be portrayed.

TYPE 1 : The undercover ‘friend’ who is working against the main character can be shown to the audience as the ordinary cast member, and then it will be a plot twist when the protagonist learns with the audience the truth of this character. Usually the demeanor of this undercover ‘ally’ is not shown too obviously because it might take away from the impact of the plot twist later.

TYPE 2 : or You can go down the route that Squid Game did go. We knew Frontman’s face, so it was no use trying to convince us he was a good guy. His personality was not exaggerated like some Type 1 characters can be. Characters like this are not particularly hidden from the audience’s suspicion/accusation because we already know. And in these cases, the writers do not often need to give these characters disguise-personalities. In Squid Game, we as an audience know where to look for the cracks in In-ho’s character, where the ways in which his real identity shows through.

There was that time he killed someone in front of Jung-bae. It would have been out of nowhere for a story where they hadn’t shown his identity before, but we knew exactly what was going on. So let’s look at the instances before it was shown directly to other characters.

Here are the instances where we know for sure that his real self is slipping through.

In-ho more than once asks people questions and engages with them in a manner that might not come across as too strange to them. But to the audience, those who know he is an outsider, and thus know to pay attention to the possible intent behind his every word, it stands out.

In-ho engages with the people who are truly inside the game as specimens to observe. That’s partly why he’s there, after all. For example, take the instance during the Mingle game where he questioned Geum-ja about her son’s character. He doesn’t need to hide his sort of objective, detached curiosity (which extends slightly outside Gi-hun), about these people and how they work, because no one is keeping an eye out for it.

Because of this, I believe he did not need to make any extra efforts to mask his natural personality, beyond the bare necessary minimum.

—

In-ho’s Humor

Another reason I think that him not faking his personality a good amount of the time is his humor. The jokes and the ideas for jokes that one comes up with is very telling of their inner processes and their ability to make connections between things. These also provide an insight as to what they themselves find funny, or what they think others around them will find funny/react to.

First the joke he made about Gi-hun’s last name, and then about Jun-hee’s child as a sixth member in the Mingle game, both display a sort of consistent sense of dad joke type of humor. It is hard to fake humor that you are not well-versed in, and even harder if you put yourself in an unfamiliar environment with little preparation, purely to observe people.

Considering the fact that In-ho is evidently still in the process of observing these people up close as people rather than players, it would have been difficult to first think of a joke that they would enjoy and then deliver it successfully.

He could have gone without. He characterized himself in the others’ eyes well enough to go without making these jokes. It’s not like he was putting on any false performance for us, the audience (as noted above), and he was only omitting certain information from the other characters. There should be nothing ulterior that motivates him to go further and come up with a new/different sense of humor.

This leads me (personally) to read these interactions as genuine. These were jokes he thought of and spoke aloud, not to fool Gi-hun and the others, but because they naturally came to his mind and he decided to share them.

And villain-type character as he is now, he is still a person.

—

In-ho and his Family

There are other moments we saw from him that were genuine.

There was the information we got from his mother and Jun-ho, how he gave his brother his kidney and how his wife died.

Then In-ho lost his composure when Thanos told him to lecture his own kid. This was not an act—It would have been entirely unnecessary if he wanted everyone to believe he was a nice guy capable of little harm. This was genuine from him, he lost control and it was reasonable and it was real.

So when he told Gi-hun about his wife and unborn child that he is supposedly now in the games for, the things we have seen so far also point to that scene being a genuine interaction from him. His expressions did not hide it either.

And if all of that is not enough, he did not kill his brother. He sent Captain Park to find Jun-ho. In-ho put his brother, who knew exactly who Frontman is now, who now has something to work with, over his whole operation—It wouldn’t be too large a reach to say this.

Hwang In-ho is Not Without Emotion

Now we’ve subverted the whole idea of In-ho being some emotionless monster that some people online want to say he is. He may lack morals but he does not lack personality/emotion.

I didn’t even get into the way he cheered in the 5-minigame rounds or the way the first thing he did when he found Gi-hun in the Games was knowingly shit-talk him to his face, but I already have this much. This is all my evidence for In-ho being very and incredibly human, my case for him having a defined personality, fake player aside.

This is almost all sourced from lines in the show, rather than just visual acting which can be interpreted multiple ways. Thus every bit of the things I talked about is likely intentional.

Justice for my queen In-ho he is a great character and I enjoy him and his writing a LOT.

—

457 Introduction

I like to call 457 toxic yaoi as much as the next guy, but it’s so much more than just the visible tension/chemistry between them. It’s more than enmity, it’s more than friendship and it’s more than romance too. Why stick labels on it when it’s so much more complicated?

Although on that note, before I get into the deeper stuff I just want to point out that all this staring at each other’s lips and whatnot was probably not something the actors decided to throw in on their own, considering the ‘I don’t understand it but it’s not unpleasant’ comment about the ship from Lee Byung-hun. So was it scripted for them to be doing allat? Lord knows, we’ll find out in June (fitting).

I am not even getting into how In-ho spoke to Gi-hun without his mask on and let him hear his real voice when Gi-hun won his first set of Games. There is something that has the potential to be very intimate about that.

And then there’s the little storytelling bit of how Gi-hun’s stubbornness reminds In-ho of his dead wife, and then how that exact determination was what wavered in Gi-hun at the end.

—

Pre-Games 2024

Let’s start with the limo dialogues, when In-ho told Gi-hun he wished he would’ve led a happy life.

He has no reason to wish Gi-hun ill, especially after Gi-hun won the games and left. In-ho likely saw himself in Gi-hun even back when Gi-hun won, and genuinely did wish him the happy life that In-ho himself did not end up having.

And how many people like Gi-hun has In-ho seen? Ever?

What kind of person does Gi-hun have to be, how notable in In-ho’s eyes does he have to be, for the person that administrates the Games to show himself to the person who wants to end them?

Gi-hun survived the Games without directly causing anyone’s death. In this place that tries to bring out the worst in anyone, even when Gi-hun fucked up in the marble game, he regretted it and turned back. This already sets him apart from anyone else, and especially sets him apart from In-ho, who took the darker road and climbed up the system.

You could say, ‘But other people have regretted their actions in the Games.’ But how many people get 45.6 billion won over 455 people’s deaths, and then come back, not for money, but to prevent further death? And how many people come back and become the Front Man?

Gi-hun went back with all that money to find his mom dead, presumably in a similar way to how In-ho went back with all the money he won but his wife died anyway.

There is a system that crushes people under it, In-ho realizes somewhere down the line, and then there is a way to remove those people. Gi-hun sees it another way: change the system.

—

Friends

Both of these people came into the Games for the sake of their loved ones. One came out of the process corrupt, and one returned determined to root out the corruption.

This year, aside from In-ho, there are 454 other people in this year’s Games that he does not know or necessarily care about. And then there is Gi-hun.

He knows Gi-hun. In-ho is a previous winner, just like Gi-hun, he is returning to the game for Gi-hun just as Gi-hun returned for In-ho. In-ho sees Gi-hun as more worthy of his time than anyone else. And all of this comes dangerously close to seeing Gi-hun as an equal, someone he has attached his narrative to, more than anyone else around.

And I think this opens up the possibility that In-ho could have come to see Gi-hun as a friend in some moments. There were moments in the games where he was a little too enthusiastic about their own wins for someone who does not need to put on a fully fake persona (and there was the instance with the soju which I get into later).

So surely there could have been moments where In-ho genuinely considered Gi-hun a friend, however short-lived the moments were, however foreign the concept of a friend has become to him.

I don’t mean this in the sense that there are full-fledged periods of time where In-ho is seeing Gi-hun as a friend, or that In-ho was spending any amounts of time being genuinely immersed as his persona. That feels like a stretch.

But you know when you dislike someone that you’re talking to? And in the moment, the awareness of your dislike fades for a bit, and you’re about to laugh at something they said. And then that’s when you realize you’re not actually supposed to be finding anything they say funny? You’re not supposed to actually fw them? This is what I mean by ‘moments In-ho might have seen Gi-hun as a friend.’

The difference between the example scenario (closest I could get) and what I think might be the case with In-ho is that in In-ho’s case, it is not purely borne out of dislike. Rather, it likely just occurs to him who he actually is now, reminds him that it’s not 2015. It reminds him why he’s actually in the Games this round, and that automatically can serve to detach him.

It can be difficult for a genuine person to consistently have an enjoyable person around people they have to fake their personality around, for one. And for another, he is the one who’s killing almost everyone here.

This part is, of course, more speculation and yapping compared to the rest of the post, which I actually tried to support with some form of logic or evidence. But I need to yap about all my speculations (This post is not purely analysis, as I mentioned at the start), and I think this take helps make better sense of the other instances with In-ho’s character that I’ve mentioned.

And this could be what In-ho’s ‘conflicted feelings’ about Gi-hun (from the video linked up top) are all about.

—

How In-ho Sees Gi-Hun

Gi-hun refuses to remain powerless. He acts for change, refuses to give himself over to the system like In-ho has. He doesn’t shut up and take the money he’s given. He keeps fighting to end the Games, for other people who are caught in it.

And this does not make sense to In-ho. We don’t know enough about him. Maybe he tried this exact same thing that Gi-hun is trying. Or maybe he never did, and became who he is without putting up a proper fight.

This is someone who, so far, has remained unbending in his goal for change. This is someone who, in a facility designed to make people prioritize their own survival, gave a man he barely knew for 3 days a magazine, while he himself was getting shot at, while ammo was short.

In-ho lies to Gi-hun about his name, but he tells him about his wife. He bares an old part of his soul to him, the part of it that lingers from back when he was like Gi-hun. He has seen immeasurable death and has caused it, but there was a time he might have wanted to stop it too, and now there is someone like that again.

In-ho bared a part of himself to the person who came here to take him down because he saw his old self in him. And in turn that person did something In-ho never would’ve done at this point in time—Gi-hun extended this seemingly-pointless goodness to him too.

I like to think In-ho was so interested in Gi-hun because he wanted to see how he himself might've become, had he only taken a different view of life.

In-ho might deep down be expecting him to fail, yes, but he roots for him, roots for a version of himself that never made it. He’s curious. Lee Byung-hun has said In-ho is conflicted about his feelings towards Gi-hun, and secretly might even root for him (see the link at the bottom of this post).

In-ho stares at Gi-hun so intently to try and understand him as best he can. He wants to know what’s going on in Gi-hun’s head, the changes someone undergoes in short periods of time in enclosed death game facilities, a new experiment in the head of someone who is returning a second time. How will Gi-hun hold up? He wants to see his future.

—

The Breaking of Gi-hun’s Resolve (or the Changing)

Gi-hun loses the plot.

He couldn’t save everyone at first like he intended, he couldn’t get out fast because they got his tracker, and his resolve weakens, and he deems it necessary to sacrifice some people for the greater good.

When Gi-hun realizes he can’t save everyone, when he trades in an unnumbered amount of people for a shot to end the whole system, and he gives in.

Maybe In-ho sees himself in that weakening of Gi-hun’s resolve. It’s possible he doesn’t like it because he genuinely wanted Gi-hun to remain unwavering, as Lee Byung-hun said In-ho rooted for him. Or maybe In-ho does like it, because he’s satisfied for the confirmation that his view was right, that his path was inevitable all along.

This could be another point of conflict for In-ho’s feelings towards Gi-hun. Maybe that’s why he decided to fake the death of Young-il right then and put a stop to that operation: Of course, it’s partly because he’s Frontman and he can’t let the Games end. But on another hand, the coup was failing anyway, even without his betrayal and return as Frontman.

This then brings to light the possibility that he decided that, because Gi-hun gave in, In-ho decided he’s seen enough from by Gi-hun’s side. It confirmed something for him, confirmed that Gi-hun’s failure was inevitable because of human nature. And that was enough observing from up-close.

But then that confirmation, Gi-hun’s reluctant admission to the need of collateral, is thrown into question again, only a couple of hours later, when In-ho meets up with Gi-hun and Jung-bae. Gi-hun gives In-ho a magazine when ammo is short, and even when In-ho asks him, “Are you sure?” Gi-hun insists.

Sure, Gi-hun traded all those lives for this opportunity, but he is willing to risk lessening his own chance for survival for the sake of his friends, too.

—

“Are you sure?”

Then there is the question: Why did In-ho ask Gi-hun if he was sure about giving him the magazine?

Why would he provide the opportunity to think again on this? It wouldn’t benefit him at all if Gi-hun were to take the magazine back—Not that Gi-hun would. Gi-hun doesn’t say things he doesn’t mean, especially not in situations like this, and this even In-ho should know.

It could be a final test of Gi-hun’s character. Or it could be that this is one of those moments where In-ho genuinely saw Gi-hun as a friend.

Lee Byung-hun has said (from the video) that In-ho’s character was a very nuanced and detailed one that he had to be very careful portraying. That look on In-ho’s face when Gi-hun gave him that magazine was not any error on the actor’s end. It did mean something to In-ho, whatever it may have meant.

—

Jung-bae, Gi-hun, In-ho, and soju

I’m gonna get into the technicalities of exactly what In-ho’s motivations were in taking this specific bit of Gi-hun’s and Jung-bae’s conversation and using it with Gi-hun later.

I don’t entirely disagree when others call it jealousy, but it feels unfitting to arrive at that conclusion with no further thought. So here’s how I see it.

When Gi-hun and Jung-bae were talking about going out for soju, In-ho was eavesdropping. Then later, In-ho tells Gi-hun later to go out for soju together someday.

If In-ho really intended the unfulfilment of the shared plan between Gi-hun and himself to devastate, this was not an ideal or necessary move, and I’m sure he knows that. And I’ve covered earlier, to my interpretation he does not bother to act like someone he is not unnecessarily.

It would’ve been smarter if he had his own conversation about future plans with Gi-hun, instead of leeching off the soju date idea that Gi-hun already planned with Jung-bae.

In-ho probably did plan on killing Jung-bae at that point, be it eventually or through the later Games, because he probably does not really care about anyone besides Gi-hun enough to spare them, or even just as much as he might care about Gi-hun (not necessarily platonically or romantically, maybe, but in terms of overall investment). And maybe he intended to use Jung-bae’s, and Young-il’s, death as another test of Gi-hun’s character.

But In-ho/Young-il’s ‘death,’ objectively and inevitably, means less to Gi-hun than the death of his best friend. This is not to say that Gi-hun subconsciously measures the weights or grief values of these deaths, obviously. It is just to say that he has known In-ho for only a couple days and it is bound to impact him less, just like how Ali’s death did not hit him quite as hard as Sang-woo’s did.

(Admittedly, season 1 did have a lot less focus on character relationships than season 2 does, but it wasn’t so little that a lot would’ve changed in Gi-hun’s reactions either way).

This, combined with the order and intensity of events in the last episode, most likely means that Jung-bae’s death overshadows In-ho’s ‘death’ in Gi-Hun’s mind.

And this would be obvious. So what purpose does ‘You can treat me with a glass of soju when we get out’ even serve? It’s not going to affect Gi-hun in the long run as much as Jung-bae would.

Gi-hun had a much-needed conversation with his good friend and their plan to get soju was borne of reminiscence of their shared past and desire to make it out. But when In-ho brought it up, it was done in an offhand manner in a two-sentence exchange. This is impossible to happen anyway and In-ho knows it.

If he wanted Gi-hun’s full investment in a plan to go out together, maybe for the purpose of hurting/testing him with it, surely he would’ve done something more than this. He knew it wouldn’t stick as well. So then why did he say it? What purpose would this actually serve?

If, even after all this, In-ho he thought that this soju appointment would affect Gi-hun as much as Jung-bae’s might have, then I might say jealousy nurses delusion.

Or maybe it was something genuine. Maybe that moment, when Gi-hun thanked him for saving his life and In-ho said ‘You can get me a glass of soju when we get out,’ maybe that was another one of those short-lived moments in which In-ho did see Gi-hun as something like a friend.

—

Conclusion

Because of the fact that he is more genuine than one might originally guess (according to my interpretation), I would like to say that he did consider Gi-hun a friend sometimes.

And their dynamic is just so fascinating to me. Likely the first I’ve ever seen of this kind.

They’re in love, they hate each other, they’re friends, they’re opposites.

They’re the first person the other looks for upon separation, they’re trying to put a stop to the other’s plans, they’re good friends.

They’re representations of the roads the other didn’t take, they’re mirrors, they lean into each other more than necessary even when cuffed together, In-ho finds the pieces of humanity he lost in Gi-hun, they’re foils, they were friends.

I won’t be recovering for a while.

[schmergo]

My controversial opinions about the current trend of highly minimalist Shakespeare:

I like a minimalist approach to the Bard, but I think it has to be done within certain parameters.

Too many theatres seem to think that either everybody already knows the play and they don’t need to worry about the audience understanding everything OR they assume that nobody cares about Shakespeare and massively cut down everything except the celebrity leading actors’ lines. But if you play your cards right, audiences might actually enjoy other aspects of the play besides the stars!

1. A smaller cast is fine, great even. I’ve heard the estimate that Shakespeare’s plays might have been originally performed by about 15 people. A cast of 11-15 tends to work well in most spaces.

You can do an enjoyable Shakespeare play with 8-10 people (with significant cuts and doubling), but it doesn’t do anything to IMPROVE the theatergoing experience. And under 8 actors? It better be done for comedic effect or highly avant- garde, or it will be incomprehensible to most.

2. If you’re using a lot of doubling/tripling/quadrupling, you need to differentiate characters with costumes. Having everyone wear plain black minimalistic outfits or military uniforms only works if half the actors aren’t playing 5 different people.

As originally staged, Shakespeare’s plays didn’t have much in the way of sets, but costumes did a lot of storytelling. Even if yours are simple and modern, they should tell us something about the characters. The humble Friar Lawrence and the powerful Prince Escalus probably wouldn’t dress the same.

3. Similarly, if you’re doubling, tripling, etc. and significantly abridging the script, do not cut dialogue like “I have disguised myself as a monk!” or “They will never know that I’m secretly Bob!” Otherwise, they might think this is a whole new character they need to keep track of if clothes/accessories are the only signifier for that!

4. Also, try not to cut too many lines that establish a sense of place if you don’t have actual sets. Lines like, “Here we are in the forest” or “We’ve finally reached France!” are Shakespeare’s audience lifelines!

5. If you’re combining small roles to create composite characters, pay attention to those characters’ arcs. For instance, if combining all the minor lords in Macbeth into Ross and Lennox, maybe one starts more naive and the other more jaded, maybe one turns against MacB long before the other.

Don’t assign them lines that don’t make sense for their role, like if Lennox teleports between Scotland and England from scene to scene or if someone reacts with shock to news they already witnessed firsthand in an earlier scene. In general, treat your supporting characters like characters, not just vehicles to move the plot forward for the lead actor’s star turn, even if the lead is played by a celebrity!

6. Relying on voice and facial expressions only to tell the story, absent of sets, costumes, props, ensemble characters, or action scenes only works in a suitably intimate space. I don’t want to sit in the nosebleed seats in a 2,000 seat theatre and see a huge bare stage with only 9 people sitting or standing, emoting to only the first few rows.

Sitting through a play without following the story at all will make lots of people hate Shakespeare who may have otherwise fallen in love with his work after attending your play. “Stripping Shakespeare down to its bare essentials” can be raw and invigorating, just be careful not to remove binding ingredients or the whole recipe falls apart. The text can be tricky enough to comprehend, let alone with next to no visual signifiers to guide them. Work with the text, not against it! So many helpful tools are built into it!

[youwontlikethisblog]

Armando's Affliction

There's a scene in Episode 79 where Marcela is trying to initiate relations with Armando that has him zoned out, thinking about Betty and all that's happened recently, where he has displayed nothing but jealousy, so he ruminates about these moments instead of focusing on his blushing wife to be.

From all of these flashbacks, he thinks of the day that Berta told him about Nicolas Mora being Betty's eternal love and it got me thinking, if Armando is zoned out, feeling jealousy, thinking of these instances, that must mean that when Berta was telling him about Nicolas it wasn't simple speculating that he was jealous but rather a fact of the matter; Armando has been jealous, romantically, of Nicolas from the very beginning.

I'm fully aware that I have written what feels like hundreds of post breaking this down, so it's sort of beating a dead horse, no? Well while I was confident in what I was writing based on how many hours I spent studying certain scenes as if my life depended on it(I honestly miss it lmbo), it was always just writer speculation that was based on what I know about writing and the bit I did know about script writing(tv/movie writing) this just confirmed it in a canon type of way, meaning it's what the writer was intending, purposefully, telling and showing the audience.

Rewatching Betty these past couple of weeks without the intent to study the writing or directing and simply viewing it for fun has had me holding my breath wondering if I got certain things wrong or got them right, and honestly I only got one thing wrong(a huge surprise to those(Are they still here?) who think I hate Morch and justify Armando) and that's something about Marcela's character that I honestly really want to talk about.

But this post isn't about that.

Let us consider one important part of Armando's personality that he himself tells us at the beginning of the story: He doesn't know what love is.

As Betty finds clever ways to not spend time with him, evade his questions, play with his emotions, Nicolas becomes the primary source of Betty's smiles and forgetfulness about him(Armando).

Before this sequence of flashbacks, Armando sat in his car, stalking Betty and Nicolas, who came out of the house, dancing and playing around with his brand new car, imagining a life that could be, Armando stares at him with disdain maybe thinking "What does Betty see in this idiot? How can he be taking my Betty when he's a poor nerdy dork? He's just using her!".

As an audience we're fully aware of all the facts; as we hear Betty narrate what she writers in her diary about how she has no idea how she musters the strength to reject him and not become puddy by the simple sound of his voice or stares, that she knows his affliction is not based on the fact that he misses her or her affections, we see a man that is very much feeling the affliction of Betty's rejection and affection, but rather she thinks that it's about the company, this man walks into his fiancé's bedroom, ready to put on a an act, a woman who aches and is desperate for the man she longs for, tells him how much she desires him, he zones out, thinking of Betty and her rejection, and remembers what Berta told him.

But this is what the characters know:

In the middle of a great tragedy, Betty and Nicolas, would fall in love and as he himself expressed that same day, he knew it was going to happen, that it was a fact, that Nicolas would win Betty's heart, now he(Armando) has become nothing but insignificant to Betty, back to square one. Armando feels like he isn't good enough for Betty that he wasn't able to stop the hand of destiny, and all of this, in the middle of his great tragedy,( but what we know is that Eco Moda is on track with paying off their debt so yes, this is a cause of concern for Armando, the fate of his family and employees rests on his shoulders based on how well they do with the new collection) What is this tragedy? He has been feeling nothing but pain due to Betty's disinterest in him the past couple of days and we get that confirmation in this episode.

Betty says she double booked a date with Nicolas and Armando the previous night because she was forgetful, that it had to be due to love, and Armando takes that as Betty admitting that she has fallen for Nicolas.

Nicolas and his upper hand of fate being on his side, plague him even in his sleep. He dreams a nightmare where he walks into the parking garage of Eco Moda and finds Nicola's brand new Mercedes Benz, empty, but as he nears the front he finds Betty on the driver's side, and Nicolas on the passenger side, making out, he calls out her name, she turns to look at him, her glasses fall, she smiles, readjusted them, and returns to kiss him, he yells at her to admit who she's in love with, him or Nicolas, and as she continues to makeout with Nicolas, the sunroof glass closes and he screams out her name over and over again.

In my previous post I mentioned how Terra Moda and Eco Moda hold a strong symbolic place in Armando's life; Eco Moda was everything Armando knew and loved, until Terra Moda was created, it became a direct representation of his fragile ego, that is directly impacted by Nicolas Mora. This nightmare of his breaks it down perfectly.

The car represents both Terra Moda and Eco Moda, something that he finds confusing and alarming, which directly points to his distrust of Nicolas and how he might be influencing Betty to misuse it and how that can impact his family, Betty being on the driver seats also holds that significance because she is the one approving of all of this because of Nicolas. that she is allowing the love she feels for him(Nicolas) to drive her impulses. Now what truly horrifies him in this nightmare is Betty and Nicolas making out, the window closing on him, as Betty ignores him and basically tells him she chooses Nicolas.

When he wakes up yelling her name, Marcela asks him about it, and unlike the other time he woke up screaming in his sleep, and doesn't tell Marce(she told him if he didn't share the nightmare is because he secretly wanted it to become a reality, in that dream he was chasing Betty and they kissed and he didn't tell her even a made up version of said dream which lets be honest Marcela would have found hilarious) but this time he does, he said he dreamt that they were taking away Eco Moda from him.

Who begins to take presidency and priority in Armando's life? Who is the cause of his afflictions and pain?

None other than Beatriz Pinzon Solano.

This is what he knows.

His biggest fear wasn't just losing Eco Moda, but ultimately, what it's always been: Losing Betty, the person who loved him just as he was, the person who awoke something in him that made him want to be a better person, not only in theory, but in practice as he himself told Betty that he liked being good to her, that he liked behaving for her.

While yes Armando wasn't always in love with her, especially at the beginning, he did care about her. He cared about her as a friend, someone who he admired for all the morals and ethics she had and especially because of her integrity. Armando loved that she came from a hard working and honest family, that she was unlike all the snobs he was constantly surrounded by. Its why I always say that the only thing that prevented Armando from being honest with himself about what he felt for Betty was his own prejudice and society's.

He always explained to Calderon that he felt guilty for what he was doing to Betty, while yes, his own prejudice made him not want to kiss Betty or think of her in a physical way, he always knew that her kisses were special, and that they meant something to him because of that, he always said he could tell that Betty cared deeply for him, why? Because he did too.

At the launch of the previous collection he said he knew that the feelings would be mutual between Betty and her eternal love, which we as an audience know it's Armando not Nicolas, but he didn't. Do you notice how Armando never doubted that someone could fall in love with Betty? Especially when she became the representation of 98 million dollars? With her personality attributions she's already worthy of it(love), but if prejudice imposes one to pursue her, well being rich surely will remove that obstacle.

It was always her, he was just too much of a coward and stupid to admit and see it.

Betty herself says that she had thought that Armando was sincere about his feelings for her because she could feel it in his kisses, and that maybe at the beginning it wasn't like that, but after her birthday night, that they felt even more real.

She has been the object of his desires, afflictions, and love.

Now Mario doesn't need to tell Armando to follow Betty home, no, Armando follows her and Nicolas home, where Betty once more rejects his attempt to be with her by refusing to talk to him on the phone. In Armando's jealous induced mind, the only reason she didn't want to talk to him was because Nicolas was there and she was spending time with him.

The morning of Armando's nightmare, when he's in the office questioning Betty about the car, he said something along the lines of "Why that car? Why didn't you consult me about it?" once again Armando is worried about the company, we can't throw that away, of course he is! It's a source of anxiety for him, but so is this indifference from Betty.

See him and Betty have always been a team. All his victories are thanks to Betty, and (not all)her victories are thanks to Armando(his trust of her and his backing). They discuss everything together, even before the affair, they have always been a good team.

And all of a sudden, she makes a major move with the company that seized his, without consulting him. He feels excluded from Betty's life, no longer her team mate.

Betty keeps everything "professional" in an attempt to have the strength to punish him for his betrayal, she herself says that what bothers him is that she used Terra Moda's capital, that she bought a car as expensive as that one, and that it was being used by the General manager, that just so happens to be Nicolas. Everything is about money, everything that revolves around that plan that she found out about in the letter, she focuses on because it is a reminder that that's why she is treating him that way, a reminder that Armando Mendoza didn't care about her as his partner, his lover, or his friend, but all he cared about was money, she says this with conviction...and when Armando says that that's not it, that he doesn't care about any of that, that he wants to talk to her about them, about how he feels the distance, her indifference, her rejection towards him, betty's walls crumble and you can see her pain, her guilt, her heart.

Armando begs her to go have lunch with him so that they can talk freely about their relationship, outside of the office, Betty regains her anger and tells him that they can't, that he has a very important lunch with a provider. Cue him saying he forgot about it and then Marcela walks in and he yells "What!" she apologizes angerly and Armando, looking at Betty with a pleading look says "Mi amor," turns towards Marcela and says "Mi amor!".

Fast forward Armando sitting down in Mario's office talking about what had just happened and ironically here, the rolls are reversed. How? Armando continues to make an emphasis on Eco Moda and the plan, while Mario goes along with it. Previously, Armando always focused on the ethics and morals of the plan, how messed up it was, how much guilt he felt, how terrible they were for doing whatever it was they were to Betty, Mario was always the one to remind him of the money and importance of Eco Moda. Even before this conversation, that same morning, minutes before the discussion with Betty about the car, Armando told Mario that he stalked Betty last night, and a shocked Mario subtly makes fun of him by saying "Huh, you said you were going to Marcela's apartment last night, who would have thunk?" why? Because Mario has been the one to constantly beg Armando to follow Betty and reconcile with her, no matter what, even if that means he has to sleep with her, but now, by his own accord, Armando lies to him about it, and doesn't consult him for it and eagerly, Mario expects a word by word replay of how the night ended.

Then an irritated Armando says: "What did you want me to do? Did you want me to go to sleep worried about her?" He catches himself, blinks rapidly(sign of stress) and covers his tracks to not let Mario "know" about his true feelings, "an-and-and the company? My company? huh?"

Returning to the argument he was having with Betty in her office about the car, Betty emphasis on the luxury of the car, everything that is materialistic about the plan, rubs it in has face that He's letting her know that she's just "too ugly" to drive a car like that. He refutes saying it's not that, she again counters this by saying "anyway you told me to say Nicolas was my boyfriend as to avoid any suspicion." and Armando glares at her as she sits down in front of her computer to type away, as if internally telling himself "what game is she trying to play here?" all of this, with a satisfying smirk on Betty's face.

All of this reminds me a game of chess and Betty is taking the lead.

In Armando there no longer is a debate of whether he loves Betty or not, there is no confusion about his feelings towards her. He knows he loves her, he knows that she is important to him, even to the degree, that she might just be as important or even more so, than Eco Moda.

At the conclusion of him recapping this argument to Mario he laments that what hurts him most is that she didn't buy that car for herself, that she did it for Nicolas. He reenacts Nicolas little acted out day dream of a life that could be because of the car and finally, when Mario goes on to say "How is this possible? At what point did you become careless about her!?"

Armando tells him, softly, a hand hovering above his eyebrow, covering part of his face, with his eyes closed: "Never, I have never been careless, never have I been careless about her," He looks at him, eyes wide, "In fact the last couple of times we went out I was very special towards her. Those were special nights for us."

In the middle of Mario's stupid commentary he goes off on "How's it possible that a man like you, a man with your qualities, could be losing a woman as ugly as Betty? a woman that's uglier than an ugly salamander, to a guy like him? What did you do?"

Armando sits there, eyes closed, lips drawn in a line, honestly looks like he's internally telling himself to just count to ten and remain calm and tells him that he's worried because Betty is pushing the limits and it's causing people to ask questions.

We can never separate Armando from Eco Moda. Eco Moda is what he aspires to be in his life. He craves his parents approval more than anything, he depends on it for his ego. Eco Moda is the center of Armando's life. It's what he loves most.

How do things start to fall apart for him?

From the very beginning Armando is an arrogant, egocentric, neurotic CEO. We know that Armando doesn't see a challenge he can't conquer, simply a speed bump. He's a determined and confident man. He is goal oriented, charismatic, prideful, and his existence alone demands respect. In the wise words of all the women who have had the unfortunate event of falling for him: What a man, what a man. He's an attractive man, not only physically, but personality wise.

Now, attach millions of dollars to his name. Attach a prestigious family name and power.

Outwardly, Armando is what every woman desires. At least, stereotypically.

Of course, it makes total sense, that because of arrogance, pride, and ego, he won't admit to making a mistake as small as a thumbtack, that could cause an entire economic disaster for his beloved Eco Moda, because what he craved most, was presidency, the legacy of his father. He saw this title as his birth right, his property, that no one but him could have.

So what does he do? With the assistance of his new assistant, he establishes a strict economic budget for a new collection, in hopes, that it would save him from admitting his business plan was flawed, therefore losing his birth right to being the president of Eco Moda. It would be a huge blow for his ego and his image.

But, just to slap him in the face, the collection is a total failure because of the budget, it ruins the prestigious reputation of Eco Moda, and again, instead of admitting to all of this, he asks his assistant to help him lie and embellish a balance of the company for the next executive board meeting.

And before the banks or anyone seizes Eco Moda and takes it away from his parents, Marcela, or him, and he admits defeat to Daniel, he comes up with a clever plan: Create a legitimate company that in case of anything, can protect Eco Moda from being liquidated and consequently lose everything his parents and Marcela's parents worked so hard for, as well as the livelihood of his employees. Armando might have been emotionally stupid, but he wasn't a walking idiot. Contrary to the ONE number that ruined his entire business plan, he was a smart and clever man.

But see this is where emotions take precedence, well at least they start to, because his personal life has been bleeding into his professional life, it first started with Marcela and him fight about their relationship at the office, then Marcela wanting Betty's head.

Betty becomes Armando's number one ally and consultant at the office, and soon, in his personal life. We see this man of stone and unfazed by his Assistant's qualities and emotions to being so deeply impacted by her that the mere idea of firing her, is unthinkable to him, not only is she brilliant in what she does, but she is unconditional and loyal to him to a T, so naturally, she is the perfect candidate to be entrusted with a new company that will seize Eco Moda if it comes down to it.

And working side by side, shoulder to shoulder, hitting brick walls, and bumps along the way, Betty helps fund a new collection, while also seizing Eco Moda in the process, through connections and relations with the banks, to keep the company afloat. We aren't given time stamps on how long this took, but Armando credits Betty for all her hard work being the sole reason the new collection could be launched so soon.

He never doubted her integrity, loyalty, or unconditionality, Betty is of his whole trust. He admires her as a collogue, his team mate, his partner in crime, but not just like any employee of his, because Betty awakes and evokes something inside of him that no one ever has or does: tenderness.

And then all of a sudden, his Betty, has a boyfriend, a man whom she is head over heels in love with, a man that she hired to work for his back up plan company, and while she told them about the existence of Nicolas, his role, and even offered to fire him if it made them uncomfortable or doubt of her integrity, what pains is that his dear ole' pal, didn't disclose that she had a boyfriend, especially one that she had talked about to him.

And while all of this inner turmoil begins to consume him, who else is there to persuade and manipulate? None other than Mario Calderon, who directly benefits from all of Armando's prestigious attributes and reputation, and he lets his paranoia and fear of Betty betraying them both, antagonize and provoke Armando.

The issue was never Betty in Armando's eyes. Logically a woman with some many attractive qualities in a work related environment like Betty, has to be that and more in a romantic relationship, of course, for love, she would give and do anything for the man she loves, and ignore all the red flags because she has no other choice because she's ugly, and a man that allows prejudice to guide him would not let a multi-million dollar opportunity to just walk right past them, because neither would they(Armando and Mario and everyone they're surrounded by.) and this distrust begins to ferment in Armando in regards of Nicolas, because not only will that guy pursuit Betty because of the money and take away his parents patrimony, but his Betty would be used against him, his Betty would betray him for love, and his Betty would no longer be his.

So he agrees to participate in Mario's grotesque plan to seduce Betty therefore secure the fate of Eco Moda. In a perfect world this is what happens; Eco Moda overcomes it's financial crisis, Betty returns the company, doesn't betray him, only shares her quirks and qualities with him, and she stays his assistant forever, he never admits defeat, his ego is untouchable, he marries Marcela for five years, still cheats on her, and then divorces her, and he stays as the president of Eco Moda until he dies.

Take a reading break if you need one.

It then it finally happens; about two or three episodes later Armando tells Mario a play by play about how Mariana's prediction was right and how he has always told Mario about them(that Betty's life would change as well as her eternal love's life); the exact reason he decided to go along with the plan and these are the reasons why:

1: Their purpose(Fate) is becoming a reality.

Why: "Nicolas is opening Beatriz's eyes. She tells him everything, she trusts him completely and he takes advantage of that by manipulating her, telling her she can be a different woman, a rich woman."

How: When Armando first heard of the news Betty had a boyfriend, what hurt him was that she hadn't told him, what made it feel like betrayal was that he wasn't expecting that his girl could have a boyfriend and that while she knew about all of his escapades and affairs(his intimacy) he didn't know anything about her private and personal life. He was jealous of Nicolas, yet he was in denial of it, so when Berta tells him about Mariana's predictions, Armando has a scape goat; he feels what he does because he's worried about the company. He always was, but now, it's amplified. Now whoever Betty loves is interlinked with the company. Meaning that as dedicated and giving as Betty is towards him by simply being her boss, anyone she falls for, she will give more of herself to, could use what she feels, to manipulate and harm him, Por que con el dinero baila el perro.

He makes an emphasis on how regardless of how smart and how many specialties/degrees they had, while valid, that they(Betty and Nicolas) were still broke people. Thus he believes Nicolas is manipulating and influencing her to carelessly spend his money. Therefore this proves that Betty's life is changing and in return she's also changing that "desgraciado's" life.

She becomes owner of a company that is worth a lot, seizing a company that surpasses the value of the other company, becoming owner of a fortune and spends that money showing off by buying an expensive car, a car neither he nor Mario could afford, all to be used and at the disposal of Nicolas. Going out with her friends and buying them an expensive Lunch just to boast about having a rich boyfriend

Thus all of this is only evidence that both their lives are changing. This was a fear of his from the get go. Ergo losing everything that comes along with what Eco Moda represents and benefits him from, as well as Betty.

What is fact?

1: Their fate is becoming a reality, she is changing his life, therefore he is changing her life.

Why: Armando hired Betty for two reasons: He didn't want Marcela to have her spy knowing about his affairs, and she was smart(She also appealed to his ego during her second job interview). Through time she proves to be a valuable member of his team; she understands economy, therefore he doesn't have to work with Daniel's spy(that family sure loves spies, huh?) and her dedication to him makes her trustworthy. Professionally Betty proves her worth and role in Eco Moda, to the point that Armando is willing to endure fights and arguments with his fiancé to keep Betty on his team.

Betty not only proves her loyalty at work for Armando, but her integrity and morals, which moves him to want to be a better boss to her. Especially after his "Diva" night. Does he succeed? No. He still has his neurotic moments, but when he hears about how much he yells at her, the image that her father has of him, of the way he treats her, a person whom he admires for all she does for him at work, that she gets yelled at by, verbally assaulted by, he says he will try to do better by her. This is the beginning of their so called fate becoming a reality.

How: Betty never gave Armando a reason to doubt her. She has been loyal to him, and even when tempted to take money under the table, she didn't because she couldn't bare betraying the man who trusted her so much, who had given her so much responsibilities, because she knew it went against everything her father had instilled in her from a young age. This just confirms to Armando that Betty is human, not the computer everyone mocks her for, but she is someone that is true and real, and all the more worthy of his trust, because despite being tempted to take the money, she didn't. Armando then chooses her to be the one to start up a company that will be there as a plan B if all things go wrong, in order to protect his family's business.

All of a sudden, not only is Betty's role in Eco Moda and as a valuable member of Armando's team all the more important, this just makes Armando admire her even more, because with all of that power she has, not once, even did she consider filling herself with pride and demanding respect or boasting about her importance, instead she continuously reminded him that she understood him and his fears and that his trust was not misplaced, that she would take care of everything he knew and loved(Eco Moda) as if it were her own life and he believes her. How was he not supposed to care for her? For the first time in this idiot's life, he has someone who backs him up, someone who willingly shares the burden with him. Someone who sticks by him through thick and thin, without ever asking for anything in return. Betty doesn't directly change his life on an outside perspective, she changes his life to the very core of who he is and he allows this willingly, until he is confronted with the fact that this woman who has done nothing but reassure him and be his accomplice, might be in love.

Betty's long life dream then becomes a reality, changing her life forever, when Armando, under the pretense that he is doing this for the good of the company and Betty, decides to woe her in order to protect his company and her, Armando ends up falling in love.

So when her rejection comes, he says that she is making his life miserable, that she is making his life bitter. And that in fact his life is changing because of it.

Betty has always been unconditional, but she had her moments where she was tempted to do wrong, duh, she is human. She always had moments of arrogance in her role in Eco Moda, she was witty with her come backs towards Daniel and Patsy Pats, but she was cunning and smart and knew how to defend her job and importance. Sometimes she left out a detail or so when explaining things and ironically, this is something that Armando did admire about her: the ways he knew how to manage people and their tempers.

So when she finds out about Mario's stupid plan and Armando's willingness to participate in it, she feels the anger, the betrayal, and the hurt, to the point that she doesn't want to talk to Armando about it, like Cata had suggested, instead, she convinces herself that history is repeating itself and that unlike before, she won't let it slide and she will make all of Armando's fears come to life. Without this revelation, Betty would have never taken a swim in the dirty festering waters that made Armando. She made the man she swore she loved, suffer, because she thought the source of his pain wasn't her emotional rejection, but rather, the bad management she was having with Terra Moda. She knew exactly where to strike him, and she didn't think twice about it. Armando became the target of her self-hatred and her hate of society. This no doubt impacted her entire life.

The only one that has been manipulating(though I say this lightly as Betty's unconditionality hardly needed more than a gentle tap on the shoulder to do whatever Armando asked her to do) Betty has been Armando and corrupting her morals is him.

Betty agreed to create a fraud of a company for Armando, she agreed to have an illicit and clandestine affair with her boss and the only reason this made her even more special to Armando's eyes was that it was done for him, that she was doing it all for him. This is a cycle that repeats itself over and over again. Betty shows him kindness and Armando does whatever to cling to those feelings, stupid enough to deny his feelings and end up falling in love and ruining their relationship, thereafter, having trusted said woman, with his heart and head, to deliver with a pretty bow to the executive committee at their board meeting, to ravish and shred to pieces, after she psychologically abused him.

Those are the facts.

By no means am I saying that Armando was a poor saint victim. This was the consequence of his choices. He had three different instances where he was able to tell Betty about the plan, that he could fess up and tell her that while yes, the beginning of the plan was to keep her away from Nicolas in the case that he could influences and manipulate her to become prideful and greedy with the money, there was still a silent lament that he could lose Betty, and for whatever reason that was, the idea of it, scared him enough to act stupidly and irrational.

See because from the very beginning, from day one, Armando was smitten with Betty, not romantically, not physically, but he simply admired her, a smart woman like her, to say she knew that beside him she could achieve great things, she appealed to his ego and vanity.

Take a water break if you need one.

I've talked a lot about Armando's journey to admitting feelings for Betty and his attraction to her but I always tried to avoid the fact that it did make me a bit uncomfortable to think "How can you not find the person you like physically attractive from the very beginning?" because while I understand beauty is subjective and that Armando was very much a fan of societal beauty standards and cared a lot about his image, i.e. that the woman he was linked had to also be physically perfect, but life has taught me a lot in the past two years.

I have these two friends who weren't the least bit attracted to each other when they first met, but personality wise, they matched each other's freaks, because of that there were always rumors circulating that they were dating, though they were always adamite that there was nothing of those sorts of feelings or attractions between each other and were simply and only friends, about a year or so of evading dating rumors, they sat down all of their friends to break the news that they finally started dating.

My friend once said that when they first started dating they struggled finding one another PHYSICALLY attractive, but that they knew they liked each other's personalities a lot, and over time, as those feelings grew, that their physical attraction did too, to the point that they find each other the most attractive people for each other. They're getting married soon.

Point is?

Armando didn't commit a crime by not finding Betty physically attractive. It was realistic. I am still in awe of Fernando's ability to write such realistic and well rounded characters. Armando was a man that his entire life was centered around being perfect, having the perfect image, in order to be seen, in order to please. His life is full of vanity, egos, and arrogance. Of course it makes sense that what he sought in women was the exact same thing.

Marcela was the only one though, that had a brain, as he said. I think to a degree, putting aside the physical attraction he had for her, that he did admire her intelligence, and somewhat class, maybe at the beginning he did find things about Marce that he admired and liked, enough that he was okay with marrying her, even if it meant he wasn't in love with her, he did love her, as a human being(though c'mon who are we kidding? He did it to win the Presidency). He was willing to make that sacrifice and he knew that it was something she wanted. He saw it as another task to do a chore list so that he could settle down, be a serious guy, and make his parents proud by proving he was maturing, growing, and not at all what they expect of him(the worst). Marrying her came with a lot of rewards.

But as the weeks go by, the months, he ends up falling in love with Betty, going through the whole denial, acceptance of said feelings and attractions as for what they were rather than what they meant, he then is hit with an unexpected brick wall: His love towards Marcela, even if superficial, never stopped him from cheating, and all of a sudden, even kissing Marcela, makes him feel guilty, not because "omg if she finds out I kissed Betty and then her she would so kill me" but in fact more of a "Omg I can't be kissing anybody that isn't Betty? How can I be betraying my girl like that? Why do I feel like I'm betraying her? She knows I'm engaged to Marcela... Regardless I'm not cheating on my girlfriend Beatriz Pinson Solano." and for a man of his caliber, a man that is a whore(again I use these terms gender neutral) and sleeps with only the best of the best, so long as they're in the same social statues as him, can't seem to...erm, function, with his physical duties in the relationship he's in with Marcela but can in fact willingly participate and day dream of it with Betty, he is left confused and haunted by this. He even tells this to Betty.

And all of this, all of his feelings are forcefully confronted when he sees that he is losing Betty. That she is rejecting him, she is indifferent about him, that she no longer wants to be with him, be in his team, be his ally, his support, his air to his lungs, his shadow, he has to admit, not just accept, that what he feels for Betty isn't based on guilt, or something that will vanish one day, but rather such a profound and intense yearning, longing, and desire for her, that he understands what love is.

[DISCLAIMER!}

Before anyone thinks I am glossing over Armando's behavior during these period of Betty's rejection; I'm not, he acted poorly, distastefully, and horrific.

It makes sense(Don't confuse this by thinking I'm saying it was okay, it was not morally correct!), however, that he acted the way he did. It goes with his character at this point of his character development, and he mirror's Marcela to a perfect T.

Hope you like this long post!

'Til Next Time :)

[cheeseandbretboy]

JOKER (2019) AND JOKER: FOLIE A DEUX (2024) SPOILERS !!!

still trying to sift through my thoughts but i liked joker 2. i dont get how the ratings are so bad?? were people expecting a romance???? a fun movie? i mean even i was surprised by the depressing end but im really glad it happened because thats what joker 2019 was about too. arthur was never the actual 'joker' we see in dc films, and we knew that. his whole story is tragic but a lot of people missed that in the first movie. the second speaks on that to humanise arthur (even though thats what they literally tried to do in the first one?? didnt work i guess) and shame those who use him as a symbol for misogyny and incel stuff. i think what most people are mad about is how hes not as 'villainy' as the other jokers BUT AGAIN he was never the true joker and im confused as to how people missed that !! personally i loved how it shows that even after he's secured himself the identity of joker he's still repeatedly exploited as he was before that, and he has to come to terms with it. harleys character was really surprising for me because usually she's the one being manipulated by joker- in this case it was the other way around. especially interesting was how joker was the one who sung 'bewitched' about harley (the original song is sung about a man, so they had to change he/him to she/her) and the scene of joker and harley's show where she continues singing 'to love somebody' without looking at him, instead basking in the attention the audience gives her. people were expecting a twisted sexy romance between them but instead we were given something really uncomfortable and unnerving- like that sex scene. her character also gives insight into parasocial relationships and how weird and dangerous they can get. she never really knew arthur- she knew joker. the film starts with us finally happy that he 'for once in his life, has someone who needs him' and ends with us absolutely distraught. in the first movie, he says stuff like 'you dont listen' and 'i never knew i existed' and STILL after becoming an infamous killer, getting a show about him, EVERYONE talking about him, he's still not seen. there are just so many things the film points out about its fanbase (incels, parasocial relationships, identity, the glamourisation/sexualisation of violence, columbiners, exploitation etc etc) and i guess people don't like that. they want capitalism=bad, 'men have it so bad', and mm gore! which is fair- i loved it too- but it doesnt hurt to delve into the identity of 'joker' (whatever that is) and how that influences its viewers. its quite meta i like it a lot. they didnt care that the ratings would be awful because they had to speak on what the first movie did to people

oh also the intertextuality is just amazing. the songs are great, like i mentioned before with changing the female and male roles with 'bewitched', and even though i absolutely hate musicals this really worked fo rme. i think it's because musicals often have songs smack bam in the middle of realistic scenes and the singing just ruins it for me- but in joker 2 they're more often a part of arthur's fantasies so it was actually better. i wasnt sure about the musical element at first but after rewatching joker for like the 1000th time i realised how much its intertwined in the first movie- we just never really paid attention to it. the end of 'gonna build a mountain' was amazing (you have to pay attention to the lyrics), 'the joker' was great, and the few instances of violence we see from arthur while hes singing is really entertaining i love it sm. i keep mentioning 'betwitched' but i love it. 'she is cold, i agree, she can laugh, and i love it' ahh. i loved the intertextuality with nolan's the dark knight. a lot of people hate it, but i think people should be more flexible with inspiration and interweaving similar but different stories into films. just because it follows a similar story doesnt mean that it should either perfectly fit the mould of nolan's batman, but neither does it mean they should abandon it altogether either. harvey dent really surprised me, and even though he was a pretty minor character i loved the few references to nolan's batman they give (like his gory face after the explosion at court being a possible villain origin story). most obvious is the end though, where arthur is gutted by that inmate who admires him. the use of the joke was amazing and i was really surprised by how he got stabbed. you can see in this moment that arthur has been relieved of his identity of 'joker' and can finally rest as himself, just a mentally ill guy with a history of tragic abuse. when lee and his fans betray him (the real life ones too hilariously) we realise no one truly saw or loved him, and he couldn't deal with that. so, the identity of joker was passed on to that inmate- "ah, what a fine young son to take my place"- while he cuts a glasgow smile into his face. in felt this was sort of missing from joker 2019, so im really glad they used ledger's joker as inspiration for this inmate.

there's a lot more to talk about, ESPECIALLY gary's reappearance which im so so glad about, it really fleshed out his character. when he walked up to the stand, you can see people whispering and laughing at him- arthur never made fun of him. it really helps to make people question what constitutes a bad person. sure, these people didn't kill 6 people, but how easy would it be for them just not to laugh? it showed arthur's empathy, and how uncomfortable he was with admitting to it when trying to paint himself as the joker. "you were the only one who was nice to me" was said by arthur in the first movie when he kills randal and gary says something similar to him during court.

anyways wow that was great people are mad the 2nd movie is as depressing as the first (if not more). at the end ofthe first, arthur has a whole revolution loving him, and we did the same. at the end of the second we realise we never truly knew him, but exploited his character.

[hallucinateonpaperspines]

Imagine a world thats like a butterfly.

It's pretty, and unique, something that you hold your breath and watch from a distance as those bright colors and patterns dance in front of your eyes. Some parts of it aren’t so pretty, the tongue is a little creepy, that segmented body disturbing if you examine it too closely, and lord hope you don’t learn about how the insect tastes with the very feet that are touching you.

Then again, some might find that cool.

The world is pretty, it's a little weird, it’s not something you’ve seen before, but most of all, it's fragile.

You could crush it without thinking. A sadistic child could rip it apart. A disconnected scientist could pin its husk to a wall. Even if it's not one of you that kills it, the beautiful thing has such a delicate balance, old generations passing within weeks and replaced by new in an endless cycle dependent on the environment around them. Not too hot, not too cold, not too soon, not too late. Life is dependent on factors out of control.

And what is this little butterfly’s defense? A facade of strength? The ability to hide in tiny places? A poison that will inconvenience a predator at the cost of their own end?

How soft. How delicate. How pathetically sad.

That's Earth to Cybertron.

But that’s Cybertron’s view. In quite a few ways it is correct, but there is a single factor that is missing; Humanity is terrifying.

That basically is the sum of my Once Upon a Time series.

We’re paradoxical, intricate, willful little buggers that don’t know how to quit. The transformers' continuities I’ve always seen tend to push humanity to the side, make us the damsels in distress, or a temporary side arc to examine as the big picture paints itself around us. 

I get, I mean, it's transformers, We’re here for transforming robots, not fleshy faces that you can see in any other version of media. Give the audience what they pay for. In those instances, I’d prefer if Earth/humans were written out entirely. Focus on the bots if there the only thing that narratively matters, please.

So imagine a little butterfly, so pretty and delicate, is crushed under a steal-toed boot. Butterfly dead. You walk away, unwilling to see the squished and paper-thin remains. There are more important things to do, so why waste anything other than disappointment on something so small?

The issue is that the planet was never a butterfly to begin with. 

The bug picks itself up and keeps crawling. Keeps living. We’ll find another dark corner, creep along outside, and slink our way into your home. We’ll repurpose, infest, and grow. We’ll survive and infuriate, disgust, and horrify those who learn what we really are. We aren’t butterflies, not entirely.

We’re space cockroaches.

[jailforwriter]

A closer look at...

Okay, so chances are you remember studying negative spaces in middle school art class. As a refresher: "negative spaces" are the blank spaces around and between the subjects of a composition (i.e. the "positive spaces"). It's also likely that you drew a chair one time using this technique and didn't think about it again, but what if I told you that you can apply it to writing, too? (Yeah, I AM still chasing the glorious high of getting an A+ in middle school art class, and no, I haven't come up with a way to make fingerpainting relevant to writing yet. But I will, TRUST.)

Literally how?

By making what isn't said and shown have meaning! Cool, right? See, in the same way that the empty areas around the chair are what make it look like a chair, the empty areas around that conversation/description/explanation are what will make the subtext visible. Or, you know, detectable, since there's no visibility involved in subtext. Or text, for that matter. Huh. ANYWAY—

But I love talking. Doesn't saying stuff say more stuff? Don't I get more stuff per stuff?

You'd think so, but nope! Remember that "less is more" thing your mom used to say so you'd shut up about dinosaur nostril circumferences on the car ride to school? Yeah, it's that. Basically. What we mean by it in the context of writing is that you're adding too much static (extra noise) to your signal, so now we can't hear the song at all. The "song" here is what you're trying to get across, the "signal" is the way you've chosen to do it, and the "static" is that stupid scene they tack on at the end of every movie ever where they overexplain the plot for your uncle who fell asleep half an hour ago. But we are not catering to your uncle. It's good practice to assume that your audience has both the ability to pay attention and the desire not to be babysat. It's polite, even. So let's remember our manners and resist the urge to make characters say some clunky "I'm really angry" line when going like this >:( would suffice. Let the reader interpret stuff sometimes, PLEASE. Make 'em work for conclusions. Participation is what makes things memorable, I promise!

OKAY, fine. I won't try to fill up every space. But when can I use this technique?

Like, all the time, dude. The next time you want someone to give you more details about something, just keep quiet after they answer and they'll feel pressured to— oh, wait. You mean in writing, right? Haha. Gotcha. Alright, let's have a look at the three main places where you can implement this:

Dialogue (what's left unsaid):

Nothing takes the wind out of a conversation's sails like overstating stuff. Seriously, don't underestimate the impact meaningful pauses, omissions, and interruptions can have on an otherwise bloated exchange. For instance:

"Are you okay?" John asked. "No. I'm angry with you. Also, this crossword puzzle represents a breakdown in our communication. Like, subtextually."

There are a few occasions where stating things plainly like that can work, such as when one character is tired of trying and failing to get the other to acknowledge their feelings, but for the most part, there are better ways to go about this. Consider:

"Are you okay?" John asked. Mary pushed her glasses back up her nose with her middle finger, and realizing she'd miscounted the spaces, crossed out her four-letter word for moron.

Yeah, that communicated a whole lot more and avoided the stilted expository language no one would actually use. Yay.

Another way to say things without really saying them is by having two characters talk about one thing when really, they're talking about something else entirely. It's the classic Hallmark movie moment where a father and son talk about baseball while actually talking about their strained relationship. It usually goes something like this:

Father: "The Mets aren't doing too hot this season. No discipline, no teamwork. At this rate they won't make it to the World Series." Son: "Yeah." Father: "Back in my day, the coach would've torn us apart for playing like that. No mercy. Certainly no room for egos." Son: "Maybe that's why no one wants to play for him anymore." Father: "Or maybe players these days don't take responsibility."*

*Assume awkward and combative eye-contact throughout.

So on and so forth. You've heard it a million times before. But the object lessons here are: the lack of anyone expressing how they actually feel, the beating around the bush via metaphor, and the maximizing tension by minimizing words. Negative spaces! Literally! There's a massive chasm between them and everything is negative as hell!

2. Description (what's left unshown):

Look, I'll be the first to advocate for describing what's present in scenes, because quite frankly, I'd have no damn clue what's going on otherwise. It's hard enough having to conjure up mental images from the black-and-white word soup in front of us. Having said that, indulging in a teeny bit of not showing things can be very effective. For instance:

Drawing attention to the scuff marks on the floor and making me infer that there used to be a second chair there is much more immersive than showing me the chair and having someone mention that no one sits there anymore.

Brains don't like empty spaces. They feel compelled to fill them. So let them! Readers will feel more engaged that way, and will be pretty much guaranteed to ask themselves more questions and get themselves more invested in the situation than if you'd simply filled in the blanks with clutter.

3. Action (what is left undone):

Much like how what you didn't say to your best friend that one time she wore a neon leotard to school says a lot about you, what you didn't do to keep her from slipping in the mud and ruining it forever communicates entire essays about your values, qualities, upbringing, and all those backstory details that make online personality quizzes so fun. To illustrate this:

The phone is ringing. It's someone your character hates. They could opt for action and take the call, perhaps cuss the other person out for good measure, but crucially, they could also opt out of the action. They don't have to take the call. In fact, not doing so might express an even deeper dislike than picking up and yelling would. It's all about using the "negative space" around the untaken action to define the subject at the core of the conflict, which in this case is anger.

Now imagine all the other subtle ways in which you could implement this! A king who doesn't rise when someone enters the throne room. A person lingering at the door and choosing not to knock. Someone getting a letter and deciding not to open it. The possibilities are endless, and there are plenty of empty spaces around them to play with. Yay.

4. Plot (what is left unexplained):

This one is a bit of a bonus observation, since it's not as immediately appreciable as the rest, but please don't be afraid to leave some gaps between plot points! Those empty ("negative") spaces are where the readers will trace their lines to connect the dots! Let them piece together the scraps of backstory and build your character up themselves; I promise you seeded everything well enough for them to arrive at the right conclusion unaided. Give them (and yourself!) some credit, dude.

In summary: emptiness can be cool and useful, and you should consider not saying/doing/showing the thing sometimes.

Happy writing!

[tobi-rx]

I have more thoughts, that build off of this post of mine: https://www.tumblr.com/tobi-rx/774229680597467136/tbh-the-more-i-watch-the-scene-of-the-fall-the

SO, was anyone else confused about this speech?

“Sentinel, the betrayer is dead… but his death has given rise to a new enemy. A stronger enemy. A personal enemy. We will not be blinded by his deception. We are the ones who are… DECEPTICONS! Rise up!”

Everything is pretty straightforward about this, except for the part where Megatron calls Orion/Optimus a deceiver.

I originally thought he was saying that Optimus was like Sentinel, and I didn’t understand how. It’s undeniable that Optimus is a Prime, unlike Sentinel, who was a false prime. The Matrix is there for everyone to see. Primus clearly chose him.

Then I did some thinking and realized that the deception Megatron is referring to isn’t regarding the validity of Optimus being a Prime. It’s about Optimus’ strength, and the validity of his status as leader. The doubts Megatron and the High Guard have about this is also the basis for which Optimus and Megatron’s conflict rests.

Let me explain.

The High Guard and Megatron (even as D-16) idolize strength. They believe strength should determine who is the leader (demonstrated by how Megatron took command from Starscream). They believe Orion is weak, because Orion didn’t have the guts to kill Sentinel, because in order to get the High Guard to listen to him, Orion had to depend on Elita-One to punch Shockwave in the eye (her strength, not Orion’s).

To them, Orion doesn’t have the strength or fortitude necessary to be a leader. He’s made weak by this moral code, and has less capability to command than D-16/Megatron does. Orion wouldn’t be a leader who can stand on his own, and thus isn’t worth following.

To the High Guard, Megatron has proven himself worthy of the physical strength that comes with Megatronus Prime’s t-cog, Megatron has proven himself a leader worth following because yes, he had the physical power, but he also had force of will, determination, and a vision that they could get behind. This was proven when he defied Starscream, and then beat Starscream’s ass.

That is how D-16 was able to rally them to finally make Sentinel pay. Megatron had the strength to do what was necessary, even if the cost was his best friend, Orion Pax.

However, for some reason, antithetical to how they believe the world works, Primus decided to give Orion the Matrix. With the power of the Matrix, Optimus Prime defeated Megatron and the High Guard in battle, proving his strength to the city of Iacon. To the High Guard, that is why the bots of Iacon follow him, but to the High Guard and Megatron, that strength is not truly Orion’s.

Their defeat was the result of the raw power granted to Orion by the matrix, just as Sentinel’s strength was not truly his, because it was granted by Megatronus’ t-cog.

Moreover, Primus isn’t an all powerful or all knowing god. He is fallible, and to the Decepticons, in this instance, Primus was wrong because he chose the weaker bot.

That is how in their eyes, Optimus Prime is a deceiver.

Therefore, calling themselves decepticons makes sense. To themselves, they are standing against deception. Deception that the citizens of Iacon fell for.

Optimus is stronger than Sentinel, because Megatron couldn’t kill him, at least this time. He’s an enemy, because when the High Guard and Megatron tried to deliver justice by tearing down Sentinel and his kingdom built upon lies, Orion stood in the way.

Orion wanted to establish a precedent, a foundation upon which a better world could be built. However, in dropping him and saying “I’m done saving you,” D-16 made the choice to become Megatron. To choose vengeance and destruction over Orion. This was D-16’s betrayal of his promise to Orion.

When Orion got revived as Optimus, he came back to Megatron and the High Guard raining destruction and death down on Iacon, heedless of who they may harm while they’re at it, and with little care for the aftermath. What choice did Optimus have but to banish them? They didn’t deserve death, unlike Sentinel. However he couldn’t let them remain and cause harm to the citizens of Iacon.

Optimus wanted to end the conflict. However, in doing this, Megatron sees this as Optimus making the choice to stand in Megatron’s way of attaining “rightful” leadership of Iacon, and cybertron. This is why Megatron says, “This isn’t over… PRIME” upon being banished.

To Megatron, this was Orion’s betrayal of their promise, even if Megatron betrayed Orion first. This is further proof of weakness to Megatron, because Optimus had shown mercy, and this would have consequences. Optimus had mercy for both Sentinel and to Megatron because of his idealism. To Megatron and the High Guard, this idealism is weakness.

As Orion makes that choice to banish him, in Megatron’s view, his friend is gone, and only the Prime remains.

You know what this whole mentality really reminds me of? Toxic masculinity. I said it. The High Guard and Decepticons are a hotbed of the ideals behind toxic masculinity.

Hope that made sense. Lmk if clarification is needed.

[invinciblerodent]

Hi Dissonant Verses here! 12, 22, and 23 for the salt asks

Aah, thank you for asking! ❤️ I'll try to get as thoughtful about it as I can be without feeling embarrassed over my rambling, lol.

Question list here!

12. Is there an unpopular arc that you like that the fandom doesn’t? Why?

This is kind of a difficult one to answer, because in my little fandom-bubble, I don't really tend to keep a lot of room for people disliking the things I like lol, but I suppose when we consider popularity, the first one that comes to mind is probably Blackwall.

I think Blackwall's story is far more compelling than the number of fanworks I've seen of him suggests. I think his arc is among the ones I think about most frequently, his romance to me is utterly heartbreaking, and his take on identity, redemption, and regret, is just... really, really interesting.

This idea of atonement. The question of how long is long enough in a mortal life. How much suffering pays for suffering caused, how much selfless good that is done pays for blood that was spilled in greed. This overarching grief and self-flagellation in the casting aside of one's identity in favor of adopting one that still feels like it's constricting around you like a snake trying to swallow you whole, but less so than the original.

Lies. Betrayal. A want of love and acceptance that only your mask can receive because you know your own face that's beneath only as unworthy.

The little moments of humor and levity and romance that break through, where the borders between person and persona blur.

Genuinely, I think Blackwall and his arc are such a compelling counterpoint to not just Solas', but the Inquisitor's, and many others in this same theme, that I find it really odd that there aren't more people absolutely chomping at the bit over him like I am, lol.

The rest under a cut because boy howdy did I get wordy.

22. Popular character you hate?

Oh, I hope you have a couple hours, lol.

It's not hate, that would be a pretty big exaggeration lol, there's not really a character I would say that I hate, but when I twist this to be about who my least favorite character is... it's Fenris who really doesn't work for me as a companion.

And it's not because of any... I guess ideological reason, not because of the point of view that he represents, or even his storyline, not because of what they were trying to do with him (I can see what's being done and how it's supposed to work), but I still dislike him because I just... don't believe his writing works for me as a companion, within the DA2 setting specifically.

The way I would play Hawke naturally, it's difficult for me to picture a character to roleplay who could make him work for me.

I think I may have mentioned this in passing before, but I think Fenris is a really great example as to why I think it's important to match the style of the writer and the tone of the character. Because David Gaider wrote both my favorite, and my least favorite character in the franchise- and he did so while staying completely within his own style.

See, in my experience of his work, Gaider can be very good at what he does, but he is also a very unsubtle writer. This shows maybe even more clearly in his prose than it does in his character-work (we don't need to look further than The Stolen Throne or The Calling), but he seems to have this tendency to want to write feelings that are very LOUD and PASSIONATE and laid out CLEAR for the audience to see.

Which can be awesome. This style can work incredibly well with many characters. Like just as a comparison, Dorian for instance, who is my favorite character and is supposed to be unsubtle, works really well: his loud feelings and his yearning to be known and loved are built on top of a kind of humor and charisma that's able to withstand the sheer volume of his personality: he's written in a way that implies he wants people to want to spend time with him (if only because he's funny, or attractive, or smart, or whathaveyou), to want to get to know him, and to ultimately love him.

Fenris on the other hand is a character who also was written with similarly intense feelings, but they are far more... thorny, I guess, is a word for it? His personality is similarly loud, in that Gaider way... except it's not the charisma masking the yearning, but the pain at the center of him that is screaming the loudest, and his behavior is written to reflect that quite clearly.

Fenris' feelings are passionate, but they're also jagged, and painful, and I find that he doesn't really try to draw the player in, but rather he seems to want to push them away. His personal narrative doesn't have him wanting to step into the player's bubble and get to know them and be known by them, but rather it has him taking several steps back for any step forward, it has him recoiling from attempts to know him, often pushing the player away deliberately, clashing and snagging against the personalities of the other companions and even the player character themselves, and for the most part (on a friendship path at least) relying on the player to continue pushing after he's already given them an implicit "no".

I personally don't... enjoy, doing that. I don't enjoy feeling like I'm roleplaying forcing my company onto someone who doesn't want it, for seemingly no big narrative reason besides the fact that I'm supposed to.

It clearly works for many people (I suppose because they find him intriguing from the start?), but because his is an arc that relies on the player having a kind of interest in him that would have them keep pushing until they get through his (reasonable) defenses, it doesn't work for me, and, in my opinion, it kind of doesn't work that well in the setting of DA2, which inherently assumes that the association between the characters is voluntary.

By that I mean, the cast in DA2 are not really coworkers who are working towards a common cause (and, over time, just so happen to forge friendships), they're kinda more supposed to be a group who stick together willingly through the years, and I just... find that premise to not really jive with continuing to seek out the guy who clearly doesn't act like he wants to be our friend, you know? Not unless Hawke was charmed by him from the start (which for me they tend not to be, given the pro-mage non-mage way I usually play), or if I also enjoyed the rivalry system (which I kinda don't- I think it's a great idea, but would work better in a setting where there's something forcing the characters to work together)(like Inquisition or Veilguard, tbh), or if I personally were to find him somehow deeply intriguing, which I... also kinda don't?

.... and, I feel like I have to mention that he also set himself up to be on my bad side on my very first playthrough, by starting out his entire questline with calling Bethany a snake right after we helped him, lol.

Like, I knew nothing of the story then, nothing except that my Hawke loved- and would do anything for her sister, and him immediately insulting her was the kind of first impression that didn't have me reaching for him often that run... even beyond him being kinda redundant to me on the party-level, because my Hawkes also tend to be 2H warriors.

I've since then gone through the whole game multiple times, and unraveled the character for myself as well as I could, but it felt a little bit like a chore, and I think I'm forever kinda stuck with an opinion that's just "yeah, I understand why you are the way that you are. I get you, and all that's happened to you is really awful, but... your whole vibe still kinda bums me out, so. glhf in the next nine years, see you at the endgame?", lol.

In my opinion, for him to have worked for me, he would have either needed to be written by someone more subtle, or needed to be in any game other than the one in which he actually was.

....................... I'm also not really into Lucanis, tbh? I know this is probably even more controversial lol, but I'm like pretty much completely neutral about him, maybe slightly annoyed but I chalk that up to the sheer inescapability of his face, the large VOLUME of attention he commands in contrast with the low level of insight some of the takes I've seen have, and the slight puss-in-bootsness of his vocal performance that just draws a barrier around him for me as someone who does speak Spanish, but I think I'll probably come around to him eventually lol. As of right now, I'm not as intrigued by him as I am by the other companions, I don't really think he tickles my brain right, but I'm only on playthrough 2/3, so there's still a lot of meat on these bones for me to gnaw on, lol.

23. Unpopular character you love?

A part of me wants to launch into a lengthy tirade about my love for Sera, and Vivienne, and Davrin, and about fandom misogyny and racism, but...

I feel like I just have to bring up Oghren again.

And to clarify in advance, I don't love him in the "I want to keep him around and listen to everything he has to say because I find him funny for some reason" way, but... I kind of can't help but love him as a tragedy.

Oghren as a character is very interesting to me because he is very much representing an everyday kind of struggle, actually rather beautifully imo. He is a (by all means pretty repulsive) man who was left behind by his family, swept under the rug by his people when he ceased to be useful, lost to his religion, and became an embarrassing failure of the dwarven caste system through becoming a poster child for its regressiveness and pride. I totally get that.

As a person, he's often sexist, sometimes homophobic, and frequently just foul, and I don't particularly want to spend time with him in the party (similar I guess to the way I don't much want to keep Fenris around), but... with Oghren, I just... I still can't bring myself to dislike him.

I think feel too sorry for him.

And I know it's a bit odd for me to find him more sympathetic than Fenris, but... I guess that's because for every moment that's shallow, and gross, and insensitive, for every line that was meant to be funny but either never was or aged really poorly, I can't help but recall that one particular, tiny moment when he first clicked for me as a character.

I think that that moment when I left Orzammar with my Aeducan after having played Paragon Of Her Kind for the first time is just forever stuck in my head- that moment when the kinda gross guy I was stuck with for the last leg of the quest paused for a moment, looked up at the sky for the very first time in his middle age, realized that he's about to leave behind caste, kin, past and people, everything he's ever known, took a moment to shake himself and mumble something gruff... and took that first-last step anyway, without ever really speaking of it again.

I think I love Oghren in the way I would love an uncle struggling with all the same things he is: with untreated mental health issues, with severe alcoholism, loneliness after the loss of a spouse, an inability to connect with people, regressive attitudes forged by having been raised for 50-some years in an environment with all sorts of bigotry woven into its very fabric, but... also with moments of courage, and sincerity, and honor, and a deep sadness that peeks through, but is quickly swept under the rug with a fart joke every time it would become apparent.

I feel bad for him, and love him as a story who would have greatly benefited from having been maybe taken more seriously in- and by his time, but... realistically, as a person, most of the contact I would want to have with him in everyday life would be limited to a yearly "happy birthday" text.