#anne talks: with anons

[arkhammaid]

Liam Lawson 🤝 Oscar Piastri 🤝 an awkward entry to F1 following the mistreatment of Daniel Ricciardo

[pinkpastels113]

also tell me your 69th track and lyrics this instant 🔫

from this ask meme

why are yall obsessed with this number ADSGFDAKJ *insert ana's scared hamster and go to horny jail gif**

69. promiscuous- nelly furtado, timberland

OKAY THIS WHOLE SONG IS A BANGER BUT

I'm a big girl I can handle myself But if I get lonely I might need your help (whoa) Pay attention to me, I don't talk for my health I want you on my team So does everybody else

[mertylmylove]

[What if question]

— So imagine Nasiens and Ann confesses their feelings to Percival. But ended up getting rejected by him. How do you think will go?

Oh...👁👁👁

Note: Feel free to put your own thoughts just don't be dick.

--

I'm splitting this in to two parts one on Nasiens side and the other on Ann side.

--Nasiens: I think he be absolutely crushed because this is someone he deeply fall in love with like never before. This someone that healed his broken heart. So being rejected by his love will hurt deeply like stab to the heart. I think Nasiens will have bit of hard time+

progressing this new reality of his love rejecting him. But than if Nasiens really really loves Percy i think he stand by and support him no matter what. Even if they couldn't be lovers as he was hoping for. Nasiens will still be greatful he gets to have such a amazing friend.By his side even through it didn't turk out romanticly as wished for. That's how i think Nasiens will handle it.💖

Ann: I think once Ann is rejected by Percy. At first of course it will hurt like hell. But I think Ann is girl that will get back on her feet after while and realized that it doesn't mean Percy cares less for her just because he didn't share the same romatic feelings.She will just like Nasiens stick by Percy side no matter what,And love and support depise them not ending up as lovers. Because she still very much loves him.💖

Note: I detaled my other post because I answered to the wrong submission.😭😭 ,SRRYY

Thank you for your question anon:3

[becauseheartsgetbroken-hs]

watching anne playing with her first grandkid is so heart warming 🥹

[queer-crusader]

👍🏻🕊🥂 - vampatty (main is different so anon sign off it is)

Validddd and thank you!! I love chatting with you, I think if we're not Tumblr friends yet then it's definitely in the cards!!

[anghraine]

Was nice to see the throwback to your early pnp fanfic!

I went back and read catalyst. I never quite understood it, but it makes sense now after reading your description of the story. Anyway, there's one line that has stayed with me since I first read it: "Perhaps because I am a woman, and less inclined to put other women on pedestals".

I think of it everytime I'm vaguely uncomfortable when people put women or any other minorities on pedestals. And it's often a reminder for me not to put any group of people on pedestals.

PS: it's fingernails on chalkboard that trope of Darcy confessing to Colonel Studmuffin (or Bingley with a suddenly new backbone), who then advises him to grovel. I like how you inverted it here.

Thank you!

I'm glad "Catalyst" makes sense now. It was definitely a direct response to the exact trope you're talking about. I don't really know why it became so popular in fandom to water down Darcy's willingness to listen to Elizabeth and separate her valid criticisms from her misjudgments and respond to them with zero expectation of meeting her again. Like, Austen fandom absolutely 100% made up the concept that Darcy couldn't figure it out on his own unless a man explained it to him.

I hated the idea even then (2006!), so while I thought (and still think) it improbable that he'd confide in anyone at all about the first proposal, I thought it'd be interesting to turn it around and have the confidante also be a woman. And I just cannot buy the idea of perfectly enlightened forward-thinking Fitzwilliams who were never going to share Darcy's reservations. So it seemed natural to go, "okay, he does have a family confidante who plays a role in all this, but by agreeing with him so hard that he can really hear himself."

And thanks about the line about putting women on pedestals. I didn't expect it to linger that way, but I appreciate that it did. I do feel pretty strongly on that point. There are lots of ways I'd write "Catalyst" differently if I were writing it now, but I'd keep that!

[causticsunshine]

anne sharing her stance as neutral on the genocide through multiple of her instagram stories certainly doesn't help my opinion about this whole staying quiet thing. very disappointed but not surprised.

i literally saw this one this morning (screengrab via @/spacecowboysue on twitter):

(edit: i’m about to get properly irate here but my anger isn’t just aimed at her, it’s at everyone taking similar pages out of her book by claiming neutrality and calling for ‘peace’ and essentially playing I Pretend I Do Not See in this situation; there is no reason or excuse for anyone who claims to want ‘peace’ here to be playing the so-called neutral card anymore.)

like okay, what the fuck is a STATUE going to do? and reconcile what—nearly a century of systematic occupation and genocide pushed and backed by numerous western countries, including her own? yeah, i’m sure a fucking statue is going to just, y’know, poof all the palestinians’ past and active trauma away, rebuild all the rubbled homes and cultural centers and other buildings, regrow the natural flora and heal the traumatized and dying animals and bring back the desecrated olive orchards, rain down clean water and fresh food from the sky… oh and bring back all their martyred dead!

and on top of the fucking insult that it is to still be standing for ‘neutrality’ and just wanting ‘peace’ between an oppressive nation state committing apartheid and the peoples of an actual country continually being terrorized for existing in their own homeland, calling it the ‘palestine israel conflict’? no one has ANY valid excuse anymore to belittle a continual siege as a ��conflict’, like it’s a fucking playground spat.

and perhaps besides the point a bit, but on top of all that—anne will let the public call her son a slag (since he was a CHILD), a cheater, a womanizer, a queerbaiter AND a zionist, but the second anyone’s come for his bald head? oh, now that’s just too much now!

so today alone, she can make a post and a story calling out people making fun of or talking about her nearly 30 year old child shaving his head, but the best she can do in terms of addressing ongoing genocide that over 290 british MPs voted no on a ceasefire towards, is making a story post implicating her further neutrality and whittling the situation down to being ‘fixed’ with that ugly ass fucking statue?

and for anyone who wants to jump down my throat or go after anyone else talking about this with claims of ‘well you don’t know what she’s doing or saying in private’ or getting mad we upset harry’s mummy—i think sharing this shit publicly tells you whereabouts she’s at on things! she posted 3 separate stories about some fucking boots she recently purchased or was given through sponsorship (tbh i wasn’t arsed to check the detail, all i saw was the same pic like 3 times on her available IG story) and a few others about some ted talk she attended and meeting the speaker there, then one about harry’s hair, and then made an actual POST about his hair and tagged it with TPWK….

she HAS a platform. she has over 2.8 million instagram followers alone. and this is what she chooses to prioritize, to push. there really is no excuse anymore, especially when you’re from one of the countries continually backing israel and voting no on intervening with their despicable terror! there are resources EVERYWHERE including constant updates on gaza, debunkings on the lies western and israeli propaganda are spreading, insights into the entirety of the apartheid, information on palestinian culture and values, on the true history of israel, holy books… what excuse is there to really be had at this point besides blatantly prioritizing your own comfort over the lives of thousands of occupied and terrorized and murdered people?

[desertfangs]

The Armand/Daniel throwaway is insane because while I don’t see it as canon, (and I don’t think it’s meant to be taken as such), I do believe it makes their lore a lot richer and more poignant. Anne hit gold with them man, she really did. And in a way we’re pretty lucky. We got the best chapter OF ALL TIME written about them, followed by the weirdest, messiest breakup plans that never came to fruition, followed by a few one liners about them getting back together. Who knows what would’ve happened if she had decided to flesh out their story further and I’m scared to consider the possibilities. We know what we need to know and now the world is ours 😌

Yeah, it's not meant to be canon. Canon is anything published in the text itself. Anything else (notes, drafts) are things Anne chose not to include for whatever reason and while it can help us all inform the text if we so choose, she as a writer decided against using these in the final versions. It sure is fun though!!

AND YES IT IS INSANE!! Because even though I agree some of the dialogue does not sound like Daniel or anything he would say, their dynamic is there!! That is THEM. It's weird and it's messed up but you totally get shades of them in those notes and maybe a finished, polished version would have really done them justice. We will never know!

But you're right! We are so lucky. She really hit lightning in a bottle with Armand/Daniel. It's such a great story, they are such fascinating characters, and Devil's Minion is such a wild chapter. Their parts in QotD really tell us so much about them and how they interact and what they love about each other, even though it's so few pages.

It will always break my heart a little that Daniel was tossed aside in the final trilogy. I get that he wasn't really part of the story she was trying to tell, and that's why he gets a line here or there about being with Armand, but is otherwise not mentioned after Prince Lestat, but wow, I would have loved to see Daniel there to comfort Armand after Marius calls him a child or he bears his soul to Lestat, or any of that stuff. And of course I would have loved an actual reunion chapter beyond just "they're out hunting together." (Of course I think we got the same thing with Marius and Armand in the QotD... 😒😒)

But--and I've said this before--part of why I was scared to read the final books was a deep-seated fear that she was going to kill Daniel off. It felt like she had no use for him and I was terrified for his safety. So even though we only get a few lines about him being back with Armand, we know they've reconnected, and honestly, that's more than I had hoped for.

And the playground is ours now, absolutely! I've loved seeing how other people flesh out this stuff in fics and headcanons and art, and I love doing it myself. So while I regret the lack of Daniel in the rest of the series, there's so much potential for stories to tell, and this fandom has really stepped up to the plate on that score. 💖

[apollos-boyfriend]

captanne sparklez really popping off in that wig

captann sparklez.........

[ladamedemartel]

what do you mean you and aurora discuss things?

I mean that I am Daniel and she is Lestat.

[nightcolorz]

If you could change one thing in TVC book canon, what would it be?

This is a really good question! It’s difficult bcus there’s just so many things I’d change lol, so settling on one is the hard part. I suppose I’d probably eradicate David Talbot. For one, out of all the things that I dislike about canon or wish weren’t a part of it, he’s the most prevalent, since in some books he’s a genuine main character. I really dislike David Talbot, and unlike other characters whom I dislike, there’s literally nothing interesting about him or his role in the story that justifies him as a character . Like, for example, Marius. Hate the guy, but I don’t wish he didn’t exist bcus he’s a valuable and significant part of the chronicles and a genuinely interesting character. Can’t say the same about David Talbot. Every time he’s around I can’t help but feel like I’m reading about someone’s awkwardly inserted oc in a bad fanfic. You know how they’re always just there, not doing much bcus the author didn’t know how to organically fit them canon? Then the author tries to convince us that the oc and the canon characters have bonds and relationships, but their attempts at writing those just come off as unnatural and unconvincing, bcus the oc sticks out so plainly among all these pre-existing characters with established relationships. That’s how David Talbot comes off to me, lol. If not eradicating David Talbot I’d choose to eradicate the VC and Mayfair Witch crossover books, for obvious reasons ha. Otherwise, I considered it, but I don’t think I’d choose to get rid of or change the “problematic” aspects of canon bcus I don’t believe that’s a helpful or progressive sentiment. Choosing to purge the chronicles of their uncomfortable, weird, and offensive aspects, though I understand the appeal, I think wouldn’t result in the reform we assume it would. I think instead we’d just have a more sanitized and less nuanced book series and fandom. When it comes to being a fan of these books, taking the good with the bad and making sense and meaning of it all is an important part of the experience, and it’s not really an experience that many other fandoms require. I guess what I’m trying to say is that all the problematic, weird, bat shit stuff in TVC creates a culture in this fandom that encourages us to think critically and complexly about the media we are engaging with. And I think that culture is very special, and not very common in many other fandoms, so I don’t think I’d choose to eradicate the problematic bcus it would take away from that. Does that make sense? Thank you anon sm for sending the ask ❤️ it really got me thinking. I’m sorry for going on a bit of a side tangent, lol.

[arkhammaid]

Oscar in Monza: "Fuck your championship" Ricciardo in Singapore: "Fuck your Grand Slam"

aussie mentality

[fideidefenswhore]

do you think jane seymour might actually have hit anne, in defence or attacking, knowing henry would protect her? wow. that is such a contrast to her reputation

I mean, I don't think the story as a whole has much merit, so not that element either, considering it's a 'source' so many decades after the fact, the source not being alive during these alleged altercations. Like, at least George Wyatt's account (questionable for similar reasons) notes the source for some of his retellings as a former lady of Anne's, this one doesn't really even give you the chain, beyond Jane Dormer, so it's guesswork to judge the credibility. Were these stories from Stanhope, Mary's 'good gossip'? Was the chain something else, one of Anne's ladies that later transferred to Jane's household? It might have been, but sources that won't even name theirs are more suspect because you cannot consider the motivations of both if one remains anonymous, you cannot even judge the credibility of the account based on whether or not it was second, third, fourth, fifth-hand... because it could be any of the above.

Imho, the story has become such a mainstay in pop-history because it sort of 'fills gaps' of Chapuys' account?

I learn from several persons of this Court that for more than three months this King has not spoken ten times to the Concubine, and that when she miscarried he scarcely said anything to her, except that he saw clearly that God did not wish to give him male children; and in leaving her he told her, as if for spite, that he would speak to her after she was "releuize." The said Concubine attributed the misfortune to two causes: first, the King's fall; and, secondly, that the love she bore him was far greater than that of the late Queen, so that her heart broke when she saw that he loved others. At which remark the King was much grieved, and has shown his feeling by the fact that during these festive days he is here [London], and has left the other at Greenwich, when formerly he could not leave her for an hour.

+

The king seeming to affect Jane Seymour, and having her on his knee, as Queen Anne espied, who then was thought to be with child, she for anger and disdain miscarried, as she said, betwitting the king with it, who willed her to pardon him, and he would not displease her in that kind there-after.

The problem inherent in assuming it 'fills the gaps' is that it assumes that the Dormer account was from the same time as the one by Chapuys, but it wasn't. Even Chapuys' account here is questionable (I have read so many different interpretations by historians of who 'the other' refers to, was it AB or JS, but Anne is the only one among the two who Chapuys previously referred to Henry being unable to leave for 'even an hour', so...maybe the phrasing or translation here just reads awkward?); we've imbued it with credibility because we know what will happen in the next five months. Chapuys interpreted the separation of Anne and Henry in 1533 as sign of an extreme rift, but the timing of their separation was Anne entering confinement. The separation of 1534 he interpreted as the same, except Anne had just miscarried and had yet to be churched. Here, it is the same (and, if 'the other' was Jane, Anne's ladies could not be at court without her, so they would all be absent). Was he finally right, or was this more an example of the broken clock right twice a day?

Picking and choosing elements of the story that serve your narrative needs makes sense in fictional adaptations, it might 'make sense' in pop-history, too, but it's less defensible there. Absenting and absolving Jane of any agency evident in the tale and attributing it solely to Anne because it seems like she was 'more of a scratcher' (Alison...the Way That You Are), as well as insisting the story is credible, except the part that contradicts her preconceived notions about these women, is yet another mealy-mouthed, pathetic attempt of self-aggrandizement from the same.

[mertylmylove]

I seen lots of people complain about how Ann may get in the way of "Persiens" but I don't fair to mad at Ann shouldn't all the Persiens stans be mad at Nakaba instead?😂

Please don't hate on our queen~

I saw a few around complaining but don't think she in the way at all. She isn't to blame even if that was the case. Blame nakaba pls🙄 i understand you are annoyed but please don't hate on our precious queen. Thank you~

But another thing if Percival begans to show some interest in Ann and the ship actually starts moving and recving special moments like Persiens. Than i guess it is what is🤷 ,Percianne also needs to some love. Besides Percival is the center of this he choose who he wants as he his love interest. I'm mostly waiting to see what way this goes:) ,But for now we wait.

NO INSULT TO PERSIENS

[navree]

https://at.tumblr.com/alicoles/which-one-of-henry-viiis-wives-is-alicent/k8sabcwh80z0 👀I trust now to you and your history expertise

Ah, the Tudors, literally my first ever foray into getting weirdly obsessed with periods of history, this is a merger of two very intense interests lol.

Also I personally voted for Jane Seymour, even tho an argument could be made for Katherine Parr if I wanted to, because there definitely are similarities in story and in temperament (as fas as we can guess, considering we don't know that much about Jane which is why stannes who get so weird about her fucking INFURIATE me), and also because there's a recap blog that's been watching The Tudors that described Annabelle Wallis's Jane as essentially a woman married to an abusive man who is working really hard to toe the line and make sure that she never got on his bad side or said the wrong thing and just always kept her cool and her head, and that kind of description is giving me big Alicent energy.

[marythequeen]

For real just read a so-called Mary fan saying "the Boleyns aren't power hungry and wouldn't have problem with Mary as queen of England, oh and here read my story about Mary in which she hates her newborn child and refuses to take care of her for being a girl, cause I claim to hate what the Spanish princess did to Mary's relationship with her mother, but I still liked it and will do the same in my supposedly Mary-centric story "

Cannot believe the gall of Boleyn stans, now they're out there pretending to be mary stans, all the while writing blatantly bashing fanfics about her. Like just leave my girl alone. Mary would not hate her own child. She would be a great mother. She wanted it more than anything. Died not getting it. And they think it's deep character exploration to have Mary hate her own daughter for her gender. Some "Mary fan" they are.

I'm sorry for venting in your inbox. But I'm just so pissed.

hey dear anon!! thank you for sending this to me because.. i've also happened to read that story and i was terrified. that was really disgusting and i hated every word of it.

i was like this the whole time;;;

i agree with all of your words you are 100% right and i support you!! the portrayal of mary was even worse than 'elizabeth 1998' and the way the writer tried to blame everything on queen katharine, disgusted me. while i think koa could have done more, she was NEVER the guilty one. never.

the entire story also felt xenophobic. 'anne boleyn was innocent and kind, katharine of aragon was the guilty one, princess mary hated girls and accepted anne as queen' these are shit. i'm sorry for my language, but this story is shit. i've tried to give a chance since you know there's few stories for our precious girl. but it was disappointing. there were no words from a mary fan in that story. no person who truly loves her would write such things. it was pure anne boleyn stan intelligence. ps, they are not very smart.

and plus, yes, especially nowadays many anne boleyn stans claim to love mary and it is annoying. i see them on tiktok and instagram all the time and it's funny because in reality, we all know that they don't care about her. they just say 'stan all women <3 henry was the only guilty one 😔 but yeah koa was old and boring and she deserved to be thrown away because she was a spaniard who was religious. and yes i love slaver elizabeth even tho it is known that she burnt cats and women and tortured both irish and catholic but she was a woman in a man's world. however i hate mary tudor because she burnt some protestant after they rebelled and said they wished to kill and r#pe her 🥰🥰'

they are not sincere and they know we know they aren't. i just wish them to stay away from her but they will not take down their stupid masks.