#as it's central to my interpretation of this scene

[sysig]

Stick figure VUX are surprisingly fun (Patreon)

[supersoakerfullofblood]

Point of View: the Biggest Thing You're Missing!

Point of view is one of the most important elements of narrative fiction, especially in our modern writing climate, but you rarely hear it seriously discussed unless you go to school for writing; rarely do help blogs or channels hit on it, and when they do, it's never as in-depth as it should be. This is my intro to POV: what you're probably missing out on right now and why it matters. There are three essential parts of POV that we'll discuss.

Person: This is the easiest part to understand and the part you probably know already. You can write in first person (I/me), second (You), and third person (He/she/they). You might hear people talk about how first person brings the reader closer to the central character, and third person keeps them further away, but this isn't true (and will be talked about in the third part of this post!) You can keep the reader at an intimate or alien distance to a character regardless of which person you write in. The only difference--and this is arguable--is that first person necessitates this intimacy where third person doesn't, but you still can create this intimacy in third person just as easily. In general, third person was the dominant (and really the only) tense until the late 19th century, and first person grew in popularity with the advent of modernism, and nowadays, many children's/YA/NA books are written in first person (though this of course doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't write those genres in the third person). Second person is the bastard child. Don't touch it, even if you think you're clever, for anything the length of a novel. Shorter experimental pieces can use it well, but for anything long, its sounds more like a gimmick than a genuine stylistic choice.

Viewpoint Character: This is a simple idea that's difficult in practice. Ask yourself who is telling your story. This is typically the main character, but it needn't be. Books like The Book Thief, The Great Gatsby, Rebecca, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and the Sherlock series are told from the perspective of a side character who isn't of chief importance to the narrative. Your viewpoint character is this side character, the character the reader is seeing the world through, so the main character has to be described through them. This isn't a super popular narrative choice because authors usually like to write from the perspective of their most interesting character, but if you think this choice could fit your story, go for it! You can also swap viewpoint characters throughout a story! A word of warning on that: only change your viewpoint character during a scene/chapter break. Switching mid-scene without alerting the reader (and even when you do alert the reader) will cause confusion. I guarantee it.

Means of Perception; or, the Camera: This part ties the first two together. If you've ever heard people talk about an omniscient, limited, etc. narrator, this is what they mean. This part also includes the level of intimacy the reader has with the viewpoint character: are we in their heads, reading their thoughts, or are we so far away that we can only see their actions? If your story is in a limited means of perception, you only have access to your character's head, eyes, and interpretations, where an omniscient narrator sees through all characters' heads at once. (This doesn't eliminate the viewpoint character--most of your writing will still be in that character's head, but you're allowed to reach into other characters' thoughts when needed. You could also be Virginia Woolf, who does fluidly move through everyone's perspectives without a solid viewpoint character, but I would advise against this unless you really are a master of the craft.) Older novels skew towards third person omniscient narration, where contemporary novels skew towards first person limited. You also have a spectrum of "distant" and "close." If omniscient and limited are a spectrum of where the camera can swivel to, distant and close is a spectrum of how much the camera can zoom in and out. Distant only has access to the physical realities of the world and can come off as cold, and close accesses your character's (or characters', if omniscient) thoughts. Notice how I said narration. Your means of perception dramatically effects how your story can be told! Here's a scene from one of my stories rewritten in third-person distant omniscient. The scene is a high school football game:

“Sometimes,” he said. “Not much anymore.” “It’s not better, then?” She shivered; the wind blew in. “A little.” His tone lifted. “I don’t know if it’ll ever be better, though.” She placed a hand on his arm, stuttered there, and slipped her arm around his waist. “Did it help to be on your own?” He raised an eyebrow. “You were there.” “Yes and no.” “And the guys, the leaders.” “Come on,” she heckled. “Okay, okay.” Carmen sighed. “Yeah, it helped. I don’t think—I don’t know—I’d be me if they’d fixed it all.” She grinned. “And who might you be?” “Oh, you know. Scared, lonely.” He fired them haphazardly, and a bout of laughter possessed him which Piper mirrored. “Impatient.” “And that’s a good thing?” “No.” He sat straight. “Gosh, no. But I don’t want to be like him, either.” He pointed to the field; Devon recovered a fumbled ball. “He’s never been hurt in his life.” She met his eyes, which he pulled away. “You don’t mean that," Piper said. “Maybe not. He’s too confident, though.” The cloth of Carmen's uniform caved and expanded under Piper's fingers.

With distant-omniscient, we only get the bare actions of the scene: the wind blows in, Piper shivers, the cloth rises and falls, Carmen points, etc. But you can tell there's some emotional and romantic tension in the scene, so let's highlight that with a first person limited close POV:

“Sometimes,” he said. “Not much anymore.” “It’s not better, then?” Frost spread up from her legs and filled her as if she were perforated rock, froze and expanded against herself so that any motion would disturb a world far greater than her, would drop needles through the mind’s fabric. A misplaced word would shatter her, shatter him. “A little.” His tone lifted. “I don’t know if it’ll ever be better, though.” She placed a hand on his arm, thought better, and slipped her arm around his waist. “Did it help to be on your own?” He raised an eyebrow. “You were there.” “Yes and no.” “And the guys, the leaders.” “Come on,” she heckled. “Okay, okay.” Carmen sighed. “Yeah, it helped. I don’t think—I don’t know—I’d be me if they’d fixed it all.” She grinned. “And who might you be?” “Oh, you know. Scared, lonely.” He fired them haphazardly, and a bout of laughter possessed him which Piper mirrored. “Impatient.” “And that’s a good thing?” “No.” He sat straight. “Gosh, no. But I don’t want to be like him, either.” He pointed to the field; Devon recovered a fumbled ball. “He’s never been hurt in his life.” “You don’t mean that.” She spoke like a jaded mother, spoke with some level of implied authority, and reminded herself again to stop. “Maybe not. He’s too confident, though.” Piper felt the cloth of his waist cave and expand under her fingers and thought: is this not confidence?

Here, we get into Piper's thoughts and physical sensations: how the frost rises up her, and how this sensation of cold is really her body expressing her nervous fears; how she "thought better" and put her arm around his waist; her thought "is this not confidence?"; and how she reminds herself not to talk like a mother. Since I was writing from the close, limited perspective of a nervous high schooler, I wrote like one. If I was writing from the same perspective but with a child or an older person, I would write like them. If you're writing from those perspectives in distant narration, however, you don't need to write with those tones but with the authorial tone of "the narrator."

This is a lot of info, so let's synthesize this into easy bullet points to remember.

Limited vs. Omniscient. Are you stuck to one character's perspective per scene or many?

Close vs. Distant. Can you read your characters' thoughts or only their external worlds? Remember: if you can read your character's thoughts, you also need to write like you are that character experiencing the story. If child, write like child; if teen, write like teen; etc.

Here's another way to look at it!

This is a confusing and complex topics, so if you have any questions, hit up my ask box, and I'll answer as best I can. The long and short of it is to understand which POV you're writing from and to ruthlessly stick to it. If you're writing in limited close, under no circumstances should you describe how a character other than your viewpoint character is feeling. Maintaining a solid POV is necessary to keeping the dream in the reader's head. Don't make them stumble by tripping up on POV!

[veganpropaganda]

"A telling example of the impulse to project human stereotypes of disability onto other animals can be found in the story of Mozu, a snow monkey (a Japanese macaque) who was born in Japan’s central highlands. Mozu was born with abnormalities of her hands and feet thought to have resulted from pesticide pollution. Snow monkeys spend much of their time moving through trees, which allows them to avoid wading through the thick snow that covers the ground in the winter months. Mozu’s disabilities meant she was mostly unable to move through the branches; instead she traveled the nearly two miles that her troop covered every day in search of food by alternately walking on her abnormal limbs and crawling and sliding on the forest floor. When Mozu was born, researchers who had been watching this troop feared she would not make it past infancy. To their surprise, Mozu lived for nearly three decades, rearing five children of her own and becoming a prominent troop member.

In an episode of the program Nature featuring Mozu’s story, she is again and again referred to as “inspiring,” “suffering,” and a “very special monkey.” The dramatic music and voice-overs that describe Mozu’s struggle in vivid detail make it nearly impossible to watch her move across the snowy forest floor, a baby clinging to her belly and other monkeys flying by above her, without thinking, “Poor Mozu!”

At the same time, I am aware that the piece was edited to elicit this reaction. There are few shots in which Mozu is not struggling, and I question the effect the videographers had on her and the troop. In one scene her desperation seems to stem from being chased by the cameraperson. The music and voice-overs of course also add a sense of struggle to Mozu’s story.

Yet I have no doubt that life was hard for Mozu, and I find myself desperate to know what she thought of her situation. Was her instinct to reach for the trees unquenchable? Was she always in pain, exhausted, or fearful as she moved slowly across the forest floor? Did she wonder why she was different from her companions? I cannot help but wonder, although I realize how similar these thoughts are to the tiresome questions I have been asked again and again about my own life, my own disability. My desire for Mozu’s life not to be seen as one of suffering and struggle is also a projection, one that wishes disability empowerment onto my fellow primate. Our human perspective shapes how we interpret Mozu’s experience.

Many of our ideas about animals are formed by our assumption that only the “fittest” animals survive, which negates the value and even the naturalness of such experiences as vulnerability, weakness, and interdependence. When disabilities occur, we assume that “nature will run her course,” that the natural process for a disabled animal is to die, rendering living disabled animals not only aberrant but unnatural."

-- Sunaura Taylor, "Animal crips" in Disability and Animality: Crip perspectives in Critical Animal Studies.

[verypersonalscreencaps]

"PREGNANT, IF I WANT, WHEN I WANT, HOW I WANT" FRANCE BECOMES FIRST COUNTRY TO EXPLICITLY ENSHRINE ABORTION RIGHTS IN CONSTITUTION The Washington Post | Published March 4, 2024 PARIS — With the endorsement of a specially convened session of lawmakers at Versailles, France on Monday became the first country in the world to explicitly enshrine abortion rights in its constitution — an effort galvanized by the rollback of protections in the United States. The amendment referring to abortion as a “guaranteed freedom” needed the approval of three-fifths of lawmakers — or 512 votes. The vote result on Monday evening was 780 in favor and 72 against. “We’re sending a message to all women: your body belongs to you and no one can decide for you,” Prime Minister Gabriel Attal told lawmakers assembled in Versailles. Thousands of Parisians gathered to watch the proceedings live on a giant television screen at Le Parvis des Droits de l’Homme — or “Human Rights Square” — in central Paris, with the Eiffel Tower looming dramatically over the scene. Before the political debate began, the television screen showed a montage of women’s rights campaigners around the world holding signs declaring, “My body is mine” and “My body, my choice.” The sound system blared Aretha Franklin’s “Respect.” Parisians driving by honked their horns. France decriminalized abortion in 1975; abortion is legal for any reason through the 14th week of pregnancy. This amendment won’t change any of that. But while other countries have inferred abortion rights protections from their constitutions, as the U.S. Supreme Court did in Roe v. Wade, France is the first to explicitly codify in its constitution that abortion rights are protected. France is not interpreting its constitution; it is changing its constitution. The outcome was “also a promise for all women who fight all over the world for the right to have autonomy over their bodies — in Argentina, in the United States, in Andorra, in Italy, in Hungary, in Poland,” said lawmaker Mathilde Panot, who had introduced the bill in the National Assembly. “This vote today tells them: your struggle is ours, this victory is yours.” People gather near the Eiffel Tower during the broadcast of the special session of Parliament, in Paris on Monday.

[deadnametrading]

I've been reading people's interpretations of this scene, and while I agree with the substance of the take that "Laios is quite isolated and his party often don't understand him", it's not the reading I get from this scene in either the manga or the anime.

So let's review the board, spoilers for episode 18 of the anime, obviously

Senshi's Laios: very cute, a reflection of his standards of masculinity. Possibly influenced by him being older, by Dwarven ageing, and the fact Laios is clean shaven. He projects similar notions on Chilchuck, and other biases onto Marcille. I feel this can mostly be chalked up to how brief his time with the party currently has been (1-2 weeks).

Chilchuck's Laios: Dangerous, unreasonable, unhinged, and coloured by his long time experience of Laios.

At this point in the story Chil's perception of Laios has changed rapidly due to both the reveal of his monster obsession (back in episode 1, previously suppressed) and the confrontation with Shuro, among other things. As seen in episode 13, he think's Laios is going to suicidally chase Falin to his death. He also thinks his monster obsession is a sign of a disturbed mind (not a suprise given his own experiences of the dungeon).

Marcille's Laios: Quite the opposite of Senshi, Laios' masculinity is exaggerated, which does reflect her Elf beauty standards (male and female Elves are often similarly feminine ).

Specifically for Marcille, she was told Laios looked a lot like Falin, and before meeting him, her opinion of him was really low (see the Falin makeup extras and her retelling the story of being alone after Laios left home, to Marcille).

Now, I've hated people in my lifetime, there's an inclination to be more critical of them than you would other people. Marcille didn't like the comparisons between the two siblings, and so fixated on their differences.

For review, here is there first meeting:

Marcille came for a fight, clearly her letters didn't tell Falin the whole story. She HATED Laios in this scene. Everything in the three years after was clawing back from this mess.

Look at Laios, not a button a stubble, and neither person got any short or taller in the intervening years. When she gets irate over people saying Falin and Laios look similar, it's because of that mental image broadcasted by the Shapeshifter. That's how she sees him in her mind, the man who took Falin away from her, who made Falin unhappy, and who others have the gall to compare to her dearest friend Falin.

Conclusion: Laios and Falin, their emotional and social alienation, and how they each influence others like Marcille and Kabru; these things are central to the story, and to Laios as a protagonist. The last thing I want it people thinking I'm dismissing that.

But at this point in the story, focusing on that narrative, it's proverbially putting the cart in front of the horse. Structurally, this encounter is a review of party stability moving forward. The previous battle with Chimera Falin put everyone on edge, made them uncertain of their future, and distrustful of Laios.

Laios came out of his fight with Shuro (Toshiro) appearing unobservant to people's appearances and feelings. Marcille and Chilchuck recognise Kabru and Laios didn't. They're suspicious of his abilities. Laios, in turn, knows he has the chance to win them back, knows he fucked up with Shuro (Toshiro) and ruined their friendship.

This encounter is about Laios' shortcomings, reflective of his neurodivergence, the doubts of his party, and how Laios uses his strengths to compensate, and even solve problems his party members can't. Ultimately, this chapter is saying, Laios is different, but he is not lesser, and in a battle against monsters he excels.

The others can point out differences in clothing and speech easily, but those were the tools the shape shifter easily used against them. Laios succeeds precisely because he's focusing on the things others don't pick up on.

[immortalthunderstorm]

Criston Cole and Fandom Perception

There seems to be this idea that Criston's character and motivation solely revolves around Rhaenyra, which seems to be a fandom-wide belief. I won't deny that she plays a part on his development, but even that is more about who he is than what she means to him.

I'll provide my personal interpretation.

The overarching theme for Criston, something that was deeply explored by Jaime as well (who in the books refers to Criston as a man of duality), is that the idea of knightly valour in theory is rarely applicable in practice. A knight in theory is meant to be honour-bound, fearless, principled and chivalrous, obey each of their vows. Their name and the Ser they have earned is a badge of prowess and honour.

Especially the Kingsguard, having sworn off all "earthly" pleasures in order to serve their monarch for life, have a deep sense of focus on this as their duty is a singular one, while also having sworn their knightly vows before their Kingsguard ones. The Kingsguard is seen as this incorruptible, elite force of the very best of knights, a high office to have and the dream of even many of the highborn knights. The societal regard for this office is also very high.

Criston is not highborn. He's the son of a steward, Dornish, and unlike many highborn sons who are trained and fostered to rise the ranks and bring glory to their already established name at tourneys, he had to get there the hard way. The show makes this explicitly clear in the scene where Otto suggests choosing a knight with a good name to the Kingsguard, and Rhaenyra chooses Criston for his real experience (points can be made that she's also attracted to him, or impressed by his tourney feats, but she is not in the wrong here. Most knights at this time have never seen real battle, as Rhaenys says to Corlys)

His vows represent everything he has accomplished for himself "all that [he] has to [his] name" - his entire self worth.

Criston's speech on the boat is not about him being in love with Rhaenyra. He explicitly says he thinks it's the only way to wash the stain off his honour and name. He's desperate and of course it's a bad plan, but it's the only way out he sees with the prospect of death and torture now looming over his head in ever waking hour (see Ser Lucamore the Lusty). That's why he's so jumpy the whole episode and the next. He's paranoid about being exposed, and that's why he's so angry that Rhaenyra simply wants him to be her "whore". She's not in love with him either, it's all just about sex for her while it's a life or death situation for him. That's why he breaks down to Alicent so quickly and almost unprovoked, and confesses and asks for a swift death.

"I took an oath. As a knight of your Kingsguard. An oath of chastity. I've broken it. I've soiled my white cloak. And it's the only thing I have to my fսcking name! I thought if we were married, I might be able to restore it."

His devotion for Alicent also isn't primarily motivated by his dislike for Rhaenyra. To him, she's his second chance to live up to his ideals. She's his "Lady of Honour", the person he sees as the perfect example of a dutiful woman (as fostered by the society they live in) . Her he can chain his own sense of honour to, safely devote himself to without conflicting feelings, and be his idealistic version of what a white knight should be.

I'm not saying his behaviour is logical, knightly hypocrisy is one of the central themes across GRRM's work, but it's a lot more complex than what a lot of people make it out to be (everything is about Rhaenyra)

I'm also tired of this situation being simplified to "he's just an angry Incel" by this fandom. It's much deeper than that and I don't get the absolute demonisation of Criston who's a very complex character.

People just love to look for some ulterior reasons to justify their hatred for a him. It's absolutely fine to dislike Criston if they want, but applying these pseudo-psychological frameworks to him is getting old very quickly.

He is not an incel, he pretty much tells Rhaenyra he's been with at least a couple women before joining the Kingsguard, and it's not like he's angry at her because she doesn't want to sleep with him, on the contrary she pretty much offers him to be his 'paramour' and he gets upset because he doesn't want to be used for sex at the risk of his life. The whole point is his extreme sense of honour and paranoia of breaking his vows.

Similarly the Madonna-Whore complex doesn't check out because this only applies to his dislike for Rhaenyra, not sexually active women in general. Criston hates one (1) woman and that's more for personal reasons than religious extremism - he's very respectful and polite to the prostitute in ep 9, does not treat her as someone lesser or sullied or sinful despite being religious. He pretty much says to Aemond that all women should be treated with respect.

This man insults one woman (who he has personal beef with) once, and immediately apologises for it, yet the fandom seems hellbent on him being some raging misogynistic incel.

(If we want to start throwing stones, Daemon calls people bitches, whores and cunts in almost every episode lol.)

[mayabruhbruh]

What do you think of the possibility of Will and Chance happening? I feel like it would be really poor writing tbh but I feel like they will give Will a different love interest because they’ll try to make all of the audience „happy“ But that would just truly not align with the writing so far I feel like.

Love your analyses btw<3

THANK YOUU! That's so kind :) And great ask! This is definitely a topic that the ST fandom needs to discuss.

The default question when people have little to no hope in Byler is, well, who the hell is Will going to end up with? Because it’s become increasingly evident that they’re trying to set him up for a romance. The “im not gonna fall in love”, the “it’s not my fault you don’t like girls”, even the gif shown above. It all can be interpreted to mean that Will is going to find his person soon.

So... to be completely honest, I had no idea who Chance was until this ask popped up and I had to look him up💀. It’s been a while since I’ve been on here, so I’m a little rusty on the deep lore lmao. So, in the off chance that others might also be confused, here’s a (rare) gif of him I found.

I think that’s him with the Hawkins cap on the right. Correct me if I’m wrong.

I’m not sure where the rumors that this guy was going to become a bigger part of the show came from, but that seems highly unlikely to me. I feel like they would have either hinted at it in the fourth season (like how they’re giving Patrick here quite a sizeable role so that he’ll be memorable to us later when he gets vecnafied) or they would have announced him as a more prominent character already like how they did for s5 with Holly, that one new kid character, and also how they did Amybeth for s4. Idk, maybe it’s unreasonable to think they would have to do that, but it feels quite too out-of-the-blue. Especially for a character that would take on the role of becoming our central character’s love interest, which is a BIG DEAL. Especially if it’s queer lol.

Secondly, I firmly believe that it would be a disservice to Will’s own desires to meet someone new.

Will said this explicitly in the van scene, and as of now, we’re still under the impression that Mike is his person. Forget about Mike’s issues and feelings for a second, and think about what Will is saying here. He feels like a mistake for being different, but Mike makes him feel like he’s not a mistake at all, that he’s better for being different. Mike gives him courage to fight on. Fuck. Tbh, it makes me wonder how long he’d felt this way. As a byler, you might be inclined to think his feelings have been on for forever, but narratively, he could have easily just realized his own feelings very recently, most likely sometime between season 3 and 4. It doesn’t mean the feelings weren’t there before, but realistically neither Will nor the general audience were aware of it before now.

Moving on.

Has anyone heard of the rule of Chekhov’s gun? It’s an incredibly clever and widely-used tool in screenwriting and storytelling in general that helps to clue the watchers in for what’s to come next.

Think of Lucas’ wrist rocket in season 1. When they introduced it as a flimsy-looking, no-good weapon that he’d put too much pride in at first, it gives us a good laugh and we move on. But really, it very meticulously set us up to subconsciously anticipate to see it again later. That’s what Chekhov’s gun is all about. Set-ups, foreshadowing, hidden treasures.

Another great example would be the painting reveal of s4. Obviously, after finding out that Will was painting something, bylers immediately figured it was for Mike and BEGGED and HOPED and PLEADED that we’d be able to finally see it, but to the general audience it was just another something that they’d have to pick apart and realize was actually of importance as the season progressed. (It’s also a good way of showing that the writers are fully capable of engrossing the entire fan base and general audience in his and Mike’s story. Just knowing Will had painted something and that it was for Mike created this sense of PLEASE TELL ME WHAT IT IS AND WJATS GOING ON and whatnot that watchers are simply so susceptible to it’s insane.)

Okay, back to the van scene. Will’s confession.

Now, I’m not saying that the writers intentionally used this foreshadowing tool for us to find and understand immediately. There are plenty, plenty of instances where writers use Chekhov’s gun principle and it flies over peoples heads purposefully. What I’m trying to say is that, thematically and narratively, they would never have introduced Wills feelings for Mike if not for it to have importance to the story, or for nothing to happen with it at all. It’s a set up. And a maddeningly good one, at that. Because queer stories already do tend to fly over people’s heads, and also because there’s the added drama between Mike and Eleven that makes it seem quite impossible for any of these feelings to be addressed in the midst of such emotional chaos. But whatever. I think I’m rambling.

Basically, whether they end up together or not, whether Mike reciprocates these feelings, Will is forever established to be in love with Mike. The confession was simply too grand and emotional and earnest for him to just switch up abruptly next season when he meets someone new that he might have a better chance with. Even if there were to be a whole new arc for him where he learns to let go of Mike or something crappy like that, it would be terrible writing on their end and poor use of a well-set-up Chekhov’s gun reference. It would be like introducing the gun in the display case in scene one, then two scenes later just tucking it away into a storage closet for the remainder of the story. Like… what?

And plus, it’s HIGHLY unlikely that Will would end up with that sort of storyline next season when he’s literally WITH Mike for presumably a majority of the time (based on the set pics so far).

So that’s my debunking of the Chance rumors :) and I didn’t even get to mention how incompatible they’d be just naturally as characters. Chance, a Jason-following jock that hates Dungeons and Dragons, fantasy and nerdy things, and willingly assisted in beating up the Hellfire Club when they were trying to find Eddie. What about that at all screams Will’s type? And if you’re thinking “unconventional couple enemies to lovers”, just don’t. This isn’t a rom-com, especially for a queer plot line lol. I think it’s safe to say there’s no “chance”😉 that they will ever happen. And either way, it’d be a bummer if they did. Cus it would just be Will defeatedly settling for someone that isn’t Mike.

UGH! It makes me sad that the one thing that is firmly being teased by the writers (Will’s love playing a major role in the plot to come) is constantly being questioned and framed as different questions. “Will Mike reciprocate?” “Does this mean Mike and Eleven break up?” “Who will end up with who?” SHHH Frankly, to me this is already a win. It’s become obvious that Will having feelings for him will come up again soon, and the rest of the evidence that accounts for Mike’s end already speaks for itself, so I prefer to just sit back and watch it all unfold.

Again, thanks so much for the ask!! This was so fun to dissect and feel free to keep sending questions into my inbox. It might take me a second to post my response but I’m determined to get through all of them. Love you guys!! <3

[jonsaslove]

This will be my one and only discoursing post about house of the dragon’s finale.

So many people are saying that Alicent’s character is being ruined (and to a lesser extent Rhaenyra’s) both with the earlier sept scene and now the finale scene.

I can agree that the writing is a bit clunky or even that the premise of these meetups is unrealistic, sure. However, most people are mad that Alicent is not raging with fury over the death of Jaehaerys, that Rhaenyra isn’t holding Lucerys’ death over her head, that Alicent is willing to give up Aegon and Aemond in exchange for her own life and Helaena’s. And in principle I get it, I really do.

But! I do not think that these choices equate to unequivocal bad writing. They are simply different from the choices that many people wanted the writers to make, they wanted Alicent and Rhaenyra to be allowed to be angry and righteous and vengeful instead of sorrowful and mournful and full of regret. There is a whole conversation to be had about this in terms of how women and men are written differently and how it may feel like Rhaenyra and Alicent’s motivations and feelings are being feminized as to be more palatable. Again, sure, I see that and I understand that critique, and agree with it. But do I think it isn’t realistic that Rhaenyra and Alicent’s shared past gives them some form of lingering endearment to one another, that they may hesitate to want the other dead even as these atrocities occur? No, I think that it’s pretty reasonable. Alicent did not strike down Lucerys on dragonback, Rhaenyra did not swing the steel to take Jaehaerys’ head. Which even if Alicent believes Rhaenyra ordered it, was retaliation for Luke’s death not expected, even dreaded? They are at war and still they are allowed to feel multiple feelings at once. They are allowed to be feel agony and then when face to face with the other feel hesitation on what violence and war actually mean, the consequences of those righteous feelings.

What it boils down to is that people are not realizing that the story the writers are telling is different than the one they envisioned in their heads, there is more of an internal look at these characters as humans with complexity as opposed to the caricatures we get in Fire & Blood (an in universe historical text that glosses over many intricacies of the Dance with countless potential for bias…but I digress). You can dislike the decisions being made, you can critique them, you can think some of the writing is bad too (there are parts I haven’t been thrilled about either), but blaming everything on “bad writing” feels like a cop out at this point so that you can refuse to engage with the text where it’s at and not what you thought it would be.

Rhaenyra and Alicent’s connection is a core tenet of the show, however you interpret that, and if you think that is going to be ‘fixed’ next season because there won’t be a writer’s strike or whatever other reason you cling to, you are deluding yourself. I enjoy a multitude of aspects of the show, many of the ships and their dynamics and I think by refusing to acknowledge that their relationship is at the very least central to the story (and accept the way the writer’s are choosing to write that relationship!) you will set yourself up for disappointment.

[anodymalion]

ok I am in fact using this as an excuse to make a long post about this thank you thank you asjksdjfaljdf

---

Interpreting Yuri as asexual is my very very favorite type of headcanon, which is one that 1. is compellingly coded in the source material (even if that wasn't the creator's intent), 2. is thematically relevant to what the piece of media is Trying To Do as a whole, and 3. just means a lot to me, personally, because I said so.

Coded in the source material

Yuri’s short program is “eros”, aka desire (you can interpret what “eros” means in various ways, but YOI itself explicitly refers to sexual love, at least in the English translations). Yuri struggles with this. Hard. He can’t come up with an answer when asked what eros means to him. His big revelatory moment about desire is that it’s how he feels about wanting to eat his favorite food (omg… boy). Even as the season goes on and the way he views the Eros program changes, the program doesn’t ever really embody the idea of eros as sexuality or romance (which was how the other characters expect him to interpret it) but rather as a desire to keep Victor in his life.

Like look. I’m obviously not going to say that the creator intended any kind of ace subtext to be there. I kind of doubt it was her intent. But goddamn is the subtext there.

2. Thematic relevance

The central theme throughout YOI is “love”, and especially loving people in a way that inspires you both to be your best selves: Yuri learning that the people in his life truly love and support him; Victor finding someone who makes him feel joy about skating again.

Like, Yuri’s whole skating theme for the Grand Prix is literally about him exploring what love looks like to him, even when it takes a form that other people don’t totally understand. Viewing all this through a lens of him being ace is really compelling. It adds depth to the idea of learning how to express the way you feel love even when it looks different than what other people expect. I think it’s a really delicious layer that adds even more nuance to what the show is getting at.

Besides, it’s an interesting way of viewing the criticism of the show that occurred for it not being 100% explicit about them being a couple (aka people getting mad because the kiss in ep 7 is blocked by Victor’s arm lmaooo). Like, ok, did you see the ending scene of ep 9? Did you see ep 10??? They definitely, definitely love each other, in whatever way that means for them. Their relationship takes a form that’s pretty different than the other way people in the show are going about romantic relationships, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t real for them. That is very much in line with the main themes of the show.

3. Means a lot to me

In the final scene of the penultimate episode, Yuri tells Victor that they should end their coaching relationship after the Grand Prix ends. This is because he thinks he’s holding Victor back, that Victor would be happier being free to go back to skating on his own instead of being Yuri’s coach. When I watched this (and, I’ll be honest, this is completely me projecting here) I REALLY interpreted this as an ace thing. I think it’s pretty easy to internalize the idea when you’re asexual that you just won’t be… enough, for other people. In my case I ended up a strong impulse to self-sabotage relationships because I would rather be the one to end things than to let someone else tell me that who I am as a person is fundamentally lacking. Yuri destroying a connection he desperately wants because he thinks there’s something about him that is holding Victor back from a life he’d be truly happy with? Oh yeah. I can fucking relate to that.

Also: YOI came out in 2016, which was the absolute peak of hostility to ace people I was seeing on this site. It was bad here. At the same time Tumblr was going wild over this show. Everyone was watching it. Seeing a whole site of people absolutely adore a character I very deeply in my heart believed to be ace? Extremely vindicating.

---

In conclusion Yuri is asexual because it is fun and interesting that way, and also because of this:

[danceofthephilos]

"Repent and Make Efforts"

Kaoru's calligraphy display in episode 5 is very obviously targeted, but between natural difficulties in translating idioms, changes made in the English dub, and misunderstandings of the general meaning of "repentance", exactly what he's communicating often gets lost in translation - which is a shame, because it's not only a very telling moment about Kaoru's own feelings about Adam, but one that ends up being very important to the themes of the entire show and many of the central character arcs.

To give some quick establishing information, what Kaoru is writing in this scene is a called a yojijukugo (四字熟語), or four-character idiom - set idiomatic phrases that are very similar to (and originate from) Chinese chengyu (成语), which you may be familiar with if you've read any linguistic analysis of danmei. Four-character idioms are very common subjects for calligraphers like Kaoru, and the ways they can be used in speech make them very difficult to translate concisely. The particular idiom Kaoru has written here, read from right to left, is 悔悟奮發, a real four-character idiom (though usually written 悔悟憤発 in modern Japanese - Kaoru is using the Chinese hanzi.)

Read kaigo funpatsu, both the Crunchyroll subs and the dub translate this as "repent and make efforts", which is... fine enough given the complexity of translating yojijukugo. It's quite a literal translation, looking at the phrase broken down into its components - 悔悟 can indeed be translated to "repentance", and 奮發 means "to exert oneself." As an idiom, it means "to regret one's mistakes, and work hard to recover." It generally refers to remorse, but can also mean coming back from a loss. In this exchange from a Japanese website explaining the use of the idiom, it's used to describe recovering after a loss in a competition:

Tomoko: You must be in high spirits, to be practicing on your day off. Kenta: Everyone was shocked when I was eliminated in the first round of that tournament the other day. Next time I'll get my revenge. Tomoko: Oh, so you're trying to make a comeback*, good luck!

(*in a perfect example of how difficult yojijukugo can be to translate when used in regular speech, a translation as literal as "repent and make efforts" would sound very silly in English here.)

And this idiomatic meaning is how Kaoru explains it - and where I believe some misunderstandings are originating from, both due to the overall interpretation of the word "repent", as well as changes in nuance in the explanation given in the dub. To begin with, let's look at Kaoru's dialog in Japanese. (Due to him immediately explaining the meaning, I chose to leave kaigo funpatsu untranslated, unlike the official subs.)

And the same dialog in the dub:

It should be apparent just from this that Kaoru in the original and Kaoru in the dub are saying completely different things. Originally, Kaoru makes no mention of making peace with people that have been hurt, because that isn't what kaigo funpatsu is referring to. Kaigo is personal, internal regret - kaigo funpatsu is about self-reflection, recognizing one's mistakes and striving to do better, considering your past in order to take your next steps in the future. That could involve making amends with wronged parties, but it's not part of it inherently - Kaoru's original dialog doesn't even allude to people being hurt at all, because it's not relevant to the idiom.

It's here that I believe the word "repent" is causing some trip-ups: it's being taken in the Christian sense of atonement or penance, an action done to achieve forgiveness from others or redeem oneself for sinning, but Kaoru is simply talking about realizing you've done something wrong and feeling remorse for it. (Or, specifically, about Adam realizing he's done something wrong and feeling remorse for it.)

And while his last line in the dub is at least a bit more in the spirit of kaigo funpatsu, it's still missing what is at the heart of Kaoru's feelings about this idiom, and about the man it's clearly targeted at - the idea of coming back from one's mistakes, something that does not come up in the dub at all. The first word Kaoru uses, bankai (挽回), does mean "to recover", but also "to regain what was lost" or "to return to the original state." Torimodosu (取り戻す), as well, specifically means to regain something that was lost - in fact, it's the very same word Tadashi uses when speaking of Adam "regaining his love."

Kaoru is not asking Adam to personally make things up to him, or to anyone - Kaoru, at heart, believes in Adam, and believes that he can, and should, still come back from everything. Even in the finale - after the Full Swing Kiss, after his naive hopes of simply returning to how things were in high school are shattered - his first concern is still for Langa to make Adam understand that.

Like with Kenta in the example exchange above, kaigo funpatsu isn't about Adam atoning for his sins - it's a call for him to recognize he screwed up and move forward without making the same mistakes.

And he does, or at least he's beginning to take those steps. He recognizes the mistake that matters most to the themes of the story, and that led to everything that happened in his life since - that he lost sight of the innocent love for skating he had as a child.

He finally admits what Tadashi meant to him;

he directly defies his abusive family's wishes by working against Takano rather than throwing Tadashi under the bus;

and he finally shows up as Adam in daylight, on someone else's "turf", to celebrate his own defeat - reaching out to his former friends and gracefully accepting loss, things he refused to do even an episode prior.

He may not be begging for forgiveness, and with this coming at the very end of the series there's a long road still ahead of him, but he's recognizing that he did things wrong and he's making an effort to move forward in a better way - and in doing that he's regained the most important thing he lost, his love of skating.

And Adam isn't the only one whose character arc kaigo funpatsu describes, either. Reki regrets his mistakes...

...and comes back from them.

Langa recognizes his mistakes and comes back from them - and is even able to help Adam do the same.

Tadashi, more clearly spelled out than anyone, recognizes his mistakes...

...and he's able to come back from them, too.

None of these resolutions involve big direct apologies, or any kind of penance to earn forgiveness. (Personal forgiveness isn't something SK8 takes much interest in dwelling on or making characters earn in the first place, and its approach to forgiveness could easily be a whole other meta in and of itself.) They don't have to, because in the end, Kaoru's idiom is not only a message to Adam - one that he ultimately does receive, if a bit later than Kaoru hoped - but a moment that spells out a big part of the show's thesis.

Everyone is going to do things wrong in their life, one way or another - but anyone who regrets their mistakes and makes an effort to do better should be able to recover from them and regain what they lost.

Only season 2 can show us what moving forward is going to look like, but when it comes to what counts to the core narrative, everyone's taken the first steps.

[glorious-sunset]

LBFAD Opening Artwork – Hidden Meanings

The created artworks used for the opening scenes of LBFAD (Love Between Fairy and Devil) are unique and have many hidden layers of meaning! Sheer genius on the part of the artists and designers :D Here are my interpretations of these stunning works of art.

Image 1: Bone Orchid (image above)

Although I’ve posted stills, each image actually moves. Here, flowers bloom on the Bone Orchid and leaves grow on previously bare branches around the sides. This is the original form of the Bone Orchid prior to DongFang QingCang (DFQC) transforming it into a bracelet for Xiao Lanhua (XLH) in ep. 9.

The two parts of the Bone Orchid, the crescent-moon-shaped bone and the vine of the orchid plant wrapped around it, each represent DFQC (the Moon Supreme) and XLH (who was disguised as an Orchid), and their close bond. This is a new magical artefact that DFQC created from his blood in ep. 9 (similar to Lady Yan creating the Heart-hiding hairpin). That he chose to give it a form symbolising a bond between himself and XLH is deeply significant! Consciously, he may have meant their connection through the one-heart curse, but subconsciously he already had deep affection for her by this time.

Orchid flowers blooming on the previously bare vines of the Bone Orchid represent the blooming of their love for each other. (As their love blooms, XLH bonds with the Bone Orchid to the extent that removing it would end her life by ep. 29). It also refers to the many times that XLH makes flowers bloom when DFQC does something to make her happy :D The leaves growing on the bare branches around the sides of the image symbolise XLH’s resurrection of DFQC’s Tree of Emotions and his healing process. The Bone Orchid represents the love between our Fairy and Devil which is the central theme of LBFAD, so no wonder it is the first image we see!

Image 2: Xiao Lanhua

Here XLH first transforms from an orchid flower tethered to its stem, into human form as a young and innocent girl. The white swirls around her represent her usual spiritual powers (not her green Goddess powers). When she uses her powers to repair destiny leaves, etc., her energy appears as white light (important note - we see a different type of energy later in the opening artwork!) The pink tinge to some swirls represent her femininity and affection. XLH appears weak and vulnerable but her love and tenderness are the most transformative force in the series. Her reflection in the water below shows an orchid plant only, not a girl – this symbolises the illusion of her orchid form in hiding her true identity.

Image 3: Haishi Rescue

In this scene from ep. 3, initial obstacles to their love are presented including their power differential (symbolised by her small size within his giant hands), his view of her as an object and his underlying lack of emotions. The city of Haishi is below, the giant Sun made of DFQC’s formidable Hellfire is to the left, and the floating debris represents the destruction DFQC has wrought and is trained to continue to wreak. His mission is to destroy Shuiyuntian and conquer the three realms.

XLH looks vulnerable, her cloak resembles an orchid petal, and white/pink swirls of feminine energy again surround her. However, DFQC has just saved her life and continues to shield her within a protective bubble – an important ongoing dynamic of their relationship.

Images 4-7: Flashback

Images 4-7 are artistically presented as a series of opening doors, like opening the pages of a history book. They are a flashback to events 30,000 years ago and set the scene for current events and obstacles to the love between the OTP.

Image 4: The Two Tribes

The two different tribes that our OTP belong to are presented. Shuiyuntian is light and airy, and floats above the clouds with dozens of golden birds flying in the sky. They are the emblem of Shuiyuntian (as the crescent moon is for the Moon tribe) as shown by the golden bird brooches worn by celestials. Similar to Shangque transforming into a black dragon, the true form of some celestials may also be of golden birds and they can transform into this form. The position of Cangyan Sea below Shuiyuntian, the darkness in which their people live and their comparative lack of manpower (there is only one black dragon in the image) suggests that they are oppressed by Shuiyuntian.

Image 5: Battle of Two Tribes

Prior to Lady Chidi’s sacrifice, the people of Shuiyuntian and Cangyan Sea fight each other, their forces coordinated by Lord Dong and DFQC. This is the culmination of a hundred millenia of warfare between their tribes. Again there is only one dragon, and Lady Chidi in the forefront leaps into Cangyan Sea territory to confront it. Her red cape traces her active path through the battlefield. White and red swirls of energy (+/- blood) emanate from her.

Image 6: Lady Chidi’s Sacrifice

After invading Xuanxu realm of Cangyan Sea, this is the pivotal moment where Lady Chidi explodes her spirit to seal the 100,000 soldiers of the Moon tribe. Red blood sprays from her body and her earth magic envelops the Moon Tribe soldiers, sealing them within the earth. Her sacrifice foreshadows XLH’s own sacrifice in ep. 31.

Image 7: The Capture of DFQC

After the sealing of his soldiers, a weakened DFQC with white hair is suspended within the circular Haotian tower, his arms and legs magically bound. Magical glyphs surround him to seal him in place, representing the magical seal of the Haotian matrix.

Image 8: Xiao Lanhua of Arbiter Hall

Back to the present - the series opens by introducing us to XLH of Siming Dian (Arbiter Hall). The archways in this image are similar to the archways in the lower level of Arbiter Hall. Vines grow around the pillars, symbolising that XLH’s primordial spirit is connected to the plants at Arbiter Hall. The trees behind her may represent the nearby Shuyu Forest that she frequently visits. As XLH moves to the right, new white trees start to grow in front of the black trees, demonstrating her ability to create new life and make plants grow. White swirls of her spiritual energy again surround her.

In line with her selfless and giving nature, XLH offers up her spirit! She does this four times in the series: 1) In ep. 1, she offers up her life and spirit to protect Changheng, whose destiny leaf had changed and was destined to have his body and spirit destroyed (more detail here). 2) Also in ep. 1, she fuses part of her spirit to DFQC’s, restoring his spirit and body and giving him a part of her spirit (which he later extracts in ep. 33 to resurrect her). 3) In ep. 31, she sacrifices her life and spirit to protect DFQC’s life, to resurrect everyone that died on the battlefield and free the 100,000 sealed soldiers of the Moon Tribe. 4) She promises the Great Turtle in ep. 33 that she will sacrifice her spirit to defeat Taisui and bless the Three Realms. XLH’s fate to sacrifice herself is another obstacle to her and DFQC’s love for each other :(

Image 9: DFQC’s Tree of Emotions

Thanks to XLH’s resurrection of his Tree of Emotions in ep. 1, DFQC begins to grow beautiful glowing golden leaves on its previously bare branches, symbolising his breathtaking transformation.

Image 10: The Great Turtle

I believe this is another flashback. At the end of XLH’s first life in Xishan, her parents disguised her as an orchid plant with no human form. At this time between her first and second lives, she meets the Great Turtle. The orchid flower sprouting from her hand is the new form she transforms into, and orchid petals float around her during her transformation. The Great Turtle calls XLH an old friend in ep. 9 as they have met before – in this scene.

To the left of the image is a crescent moon with a dead tree growing on it. This symbolises DFQC (the Moon Supreme) and his Tree of Emotions which was dead at that time 30,000 years ago. There is a wisp of haze around the tree indicating that it has the potential to regrow. Despite XLH’s destiny to sacrifice herself for the Three Realms (which she might have discussed with the Great Turtle here), DFQC is waiting in the wings to change her destiny!

Image 11: Our Fairy and Devil

XLH gazes upward in hope, while DFQC’s eyes are closed and his head bowed, portraying both his reserved nature and that initially he was emotionally closed off, aloof and distant. The asymmetric gold crown that DFQC wears indicates that this scene is from after their return from the mortal realm back to Cangyan Sea – XLH also wears Moon Tribe attire.

On the Bone Orchid between them are flowers in full bloom, representing their love, which is now in full bloom :D Also between them is DFQC’s Tree of Emotions, now fully regrown with gorgeous white blossoms similar to the scene where he sits beneath his tree in ep. 24.

Despite the beautiful development of their love and of their characters, war between their two tribes is imminent. The image of Shuiyuntian between them sports a red flag, indicating their impending invasion of Cangyan Sea. Cangyan Sea is outnumbered, represented by one dragon vs. dozens of golden birds, and they face annihilation at the hands of Shuiyuntian D: Another reason for DFQC to bow his head, as he faces both the destruction of his realm and the loss of his love at this time.

Image 12: Peace Reigns

Just look at the swirls of energy emanating from XLH and DFQC as they float in a boat along the Oblivion River! There are again white swirls for XLH, but DFQC has red and gold swirls for Glazed Fire!! This scene occurs after DFQC’s return at the end of the series! :D The red belt around XLH’s waist is reminiscent of blood pooling from her wound in ep. 31 when she stabs herself with the Zhengying sword. This image (and the opening theme song Jue Ai, “Farewell Love”) pays homage to both her sacrifice, and DFQC’s sacrifice in ep. 36 which produced his Glazed Fire. Only through both of their sacrifices, were they able to bring about first a ceasefire to war, then lasting peace between Shuiyuntian and Cangyan Sea, breaking through a hundred millenia of unending conflict!

Only by creating peace are they finally able to be together happily. The boat is deeply significant for our OTP - there are three situations where they are alone together in a boat during the series. XLH reminisces fondly about this in ep. 24, and Siming sends a boat for DFQC (and fireflies for Changheng!) as a sign that she knows their most significant connections to XLH. To the bottom right are the peaceful waters of Cangyan Sea with the watchful eye of a black dragon at rest. To the top left is a peaceful Shuiyuntian with Yunzhong’s watchful “Eye of Heaven” (seen in ep. 14) accompanied by a flower in bloom, symbolising peace and prosperity. The positions of each are in poetic parallel to image 4 which showed conflict – the defensive black dragon in image 4 is now restful, and the golden birds also seem to be resting :)

Here is a link to my article: How Immortals age in cdramas – clues from LBFAD

All of my LBFAD articles can be viewed with the tag #lbfad reflections (hyperlinked) and the table of contents to these is here.

[i-heart-hxh]

Hello! I hope AX is fun!

I have a question along the lines of some that you probably have already gotten before. If so, sorry. Mine is basically: do you think people who say there's queer/gay subtext in Gon and Killua's relationship are reading too much into it, or are otherwise biased to an extent that it's effecting objectivity?

The reason I ask is: usually people who say these sorts of things are the borderline homophobic sort that insist kids their age can't be gay or make fun of people who like to engage with anime fandoms, but I have come across someone (in private, friend of a friend, lol) with a couple of arguments which I think leave out all that, and I thought it would be valuable to ask, both just to have a discussion and because I don't quite trust my own skills.

One point was that the famous shinjuu line isn't as romantically charged as the English speaking fandom makes it out to be, and that the word contemporarily refers to multi-death tragedy or dedication resulting in death generally, especially in the context with which Killua said it (being that he was about to follow Gon into a fight with Pitou which he knew they'd lose without any prior mutual agreement). The argument was that a romantic reading of the line comes from bias and unfamiliarity, and as a result isn't as paid attention to in Japanese HxH communities as it is in English ones.

The other was that a lot of the moments showcasing the intensity of Gon and Killua's feelings (such as the dodgeball or "you are light" scenes) are very typical/standard of shounen anime, which often have central themes of friendship that are frequently "overestimated" by fandom to be intentional romantic undertones, and that these two characters are not unique in that respect. They said determining romance-establishing purposes to scenes like the ones Killua shares with Palm is projection that interferes with analysis for all the reasons mentioned above. Part of the argument was that a romantic interpretation ignores a subversion of 'the power of friendship' shounen trope, as Gon and Killua have a comparatively tragic "end" (in quotations because obviously the story isn't done), where Gon pushed Killua away, Killua could not stand up for himself, and Gon ended up defeating a powerful enemy without him; adding romance to it obscures and misses the point of this subversion. They also said it was very unlikely for Togashi, should he want to explore queer themes like this, to be so subtle about it, and to not ascribe intent to the author.

The way I see it is that reading romance between Killua and Gon is just one of many interpretations someone may get from a culmination of moments from the text, and that a lot of meta analysis will inevitably be biased by someone's own experiences. For example, a lot of people can relate to the experience of having a baby gay crush, and so see themselves in Killua and read the character with that background in mind. I think the arguments I see here (on tumblr, but also your blog) are well-substantiated and well-explained, which I think are all that's needed for a "valid" interpretation.

Anyway. I apologize for the long ask. Thank you for reading all that!

Hi! AX was fun, thank you!! I caught a cold so I've been slow to recover this week, but I'm starting to feel better.

So, I've answered similar questions with a lot of different reasons why I think the subtext is intentional, and I think it's worth reading that first because it helps when thinking about Togashi's mindset and interests in his works. While of course I can't put words in Togashi's mouth, there is validity in examining things he has actually said and included in prior works and deducing some of his tendencies and patterns based off of that. I do not think it's a stretch or leap at all to read queer themes into the work of someone who has stated an interest in creating queer works, expressed that he enjoys and is influenced by queer works, is married to someone who created a work known for its queer themes, and has previously included queer themes in his works as well. And I mean, KilluGon isn't even the only queer inclusion in HxH by far either.

The thing is, I can understand where this person is coming from...up to a point. If you take any one or even a small handful of these points in isolation, sure, it's not difficult to say that perhaps the romantic reading of those moments is incidental and not intended to be taken that seriously.

I think the real problem with this attitude is that when you start adding up the number of times something with a romantic implication is included between Gon and Killua and look at the picture as a whole, it does reach a point where it gets increasingly ridiculous to claim it isn't intentional or has no real weight. Why would someone like Togashi, who has such an eye for detail in his stories, bother including these implications over and over and over again if he didn't want it to be read this way? Especially when he is someone who has expressed interest in writing queer stories? I struggle to look at the full picture and accept that there isn't a strong degree of intention to the decisions he makes.

I've seen tons of other anime, including lots of shounen, and while I understand that person's perspective with the fever-pitch friendships that the fandom then takes and interprets as more (something I believe Jump intentionally fosters as a marketing tool), personally I do see HxH as being several notches above other shounen series with regards to both how much subtext exists and also how seriously the bond between the characters is portrayed. To me, it does feel distinct from even many other series where male characters are commonly shipped for these reasons, and I'm actually rather skeptical with regards to the majority of these ships being considered canon or even close to it even when there is some basis the fandom is going off of. But I do think HxH leans into this aspect even more than most other shounen do, both in the series itself and in related offshots like the musicals and marketing and even how both versions of the anime were approached.

Also, I will say that I follow the Japanese side of the fandom pretty closely and read tweets frequently, and I do see people bring up the shinjuu line with regards to Killua's feelings and especially what it says about the gravity of how he feels towards Gon. I would actually agree there is less emphasis on it in the Japanese side of the fandom because the word (including the subtext) is already familiar to Japanese audiences and so they just see it upfront and then either take it that way or not, while it has to be explained to a non-Japanese audience due to the lack of cultural familiarity and also the inadequacy of the English translations to capture the meaning.

Regardless of the fact that it technically can be taken either way, I do strongly feel like the word was used by Togashi with intention and knowledge of how it's normally used in a literary sense. I believe Togashi made a choice to use that word on purpose and let his audience take it as they will. It's also worth noting that Gon and Killua directly parallel another lovers' suicide--that of Meruem and Komugi, who do use romantic language towards one another. Komugi says "I may not be much, but please, let me accompany you," which is an old fashioned way for Japanese women to accept a marriage proposal. This echos Killua's "Gon, you are light. Sometimes you shine so brightly, I must look away. But even so, is it still okay if I stay at your side?”

I also think Gon and Killua's friendship can be and is still a subversion of shounen friendship tropes while at the same time being romantically coded. In fact, that it is so close to romantic is a bit of a subversion itself. I don't think the coding gets in the way of the shounen friendship subversion or takes away from it--both can exist at the same time. I still say that the way the Palm subplot is constructed doesn't fully make sense if you remove the intention of the exact nature of Killua's feelings being explored. Otherwise why bother to have so much emphasis on romance as a theme? Why not construct things differently? Why not have Gon make a platonic friend for Killua to get jealous over instead? Why essentially give Killua a romantic "rival"? Why have Killua "stalk" them on their date and point out that's what he's doing? Why have him freaking out at the thought of Gon going on dates and then saying he wants to be with Gon forever literally the next panel? Why make his jealousy come off as romantic in nature because of the way the whole situation is set up? These decisions matter! Togashi could have approached this entire subplot from any angle, and yet he chose to keep repeatedly referencing romantic love when the focus is on Killua's feelings for Gon.

Obviously as someone who ships Gon and Killua, I do have a certain degree of bias, though I like to think I am able to step away from that and look at the series more objectively as well. I do have moments where I go, "I am I being a little delusional here? Do I need to re-assess?" and think over all of what we've been provided again and...honestly I just come to the same conclusion every time no matter what angle I try to look at it from. I do believe that Togashi writes the KilluGon dynamic in such a way that people who would rather ignore the romantic subtext can do so. It's a perfectly beautiful and complex friendship regardless of whether you acknowledge the romantic subtext or not. I think Togashi enjoys playing with the ambiguity of it. But just because it's ambiguous doesn't mean the romantic subtext doesn't exist or have meaning/intent behind it, and to me, adding up all the different choices made in the series, it does reach a tipping point wherein I seriously believe Togashi includes it with full intention and knowledge of what he's doing. And for what it's worth, I don't think it's actually that subtle. A lot of people notice it and wonder about it and connect with it, even including some people who don't actually want to see it (think about all the dudebros who post online going, "Is it just me or does Killua seem kinda gay???").

I hope this response is helpful to you! I wish I could provide more concrete examples in this post, but I feel like it's getting awfully long as it is. I do sincerely believe that the romantic interpretation is a valid and meaningful one that has legitimate merit when looking at the series. If others would rather ignore that aspect, they're allowed to feel that way, and of course no one is obligated to ship Gon and Killua in a romantic way no matter how much subtext exists. But I don't think that perspective erases the existence of the romantic implications, which are fairly heavy in my opinion when you add them all together.

[adozentothedawn]

Life and Death of a Saint Pt. 1 -Dispersion Relation, unknown artist c. 2809. Forgotten Sanctum, Central Stacks.

Commentary under the cut.

This thing is an interpretation of the first memory scene of Waidwen in Bridge Ablaze. I'm intending to do all of them eventually but it'll take a bit.

Alright, I am kinda torn. On the one hand yes it is cool and I did a thing! This is my first embroidery project of the sort! It took me more than a month to get done but I did get it done. On the other hand, it doesn't quite live up my expectations. The borders aren't quite as neat as I would like, and of course making good pictures of my work has always been an impossible task. For the next one I'll also try to plan out the colour scheme a bit better. The placement in the frame is uznfortunately a bit off because i cut the fabric too small since I didn't know I would have a frame yet. Still, I did a thing! And it looks kinda good!

Special thanks to @stylishanachronism who really helped me put it together!

[streussal]

i 100% agree with u about the fight, my question is why do you think they even included that scene? i don't feel like it tells us anything we don't already know & it gives ppl who dont remember the original scene opportunity to believe louis was the aggressor.. don't know how to feel about it to be frank

I got this ask after I made this post. Responding almost 4 days later so I don't know if the anon will see this, but I have some thoughts.

First of all, no matter how strongly a piece of media demonstrates who is the bad guy in a situation, there's always going to be people who side with the abuser, ESPECIALLY if the abuser is a white male and the victim is anyone other than a white male. Louis straight up said in the scene (LESTAT'S VERSION) "like you wrapped your hands around our daughter's neck" so it's pretty clear he's responding to Lestat attacking Claudia. On stage, Lestat goes off script and insists that it was wrong of him to drop Louis from the sky, and that afterwards Louis was "a broken thing. I know, I saw, because I am the one that broke him". He then follows this with the admission that he did it because Louis hurt his feelings, not because of any threats or violence from Louis: “I couldn’t persuade him to return my affections. I could force him to love me. And so, I broke him.” If people don't get that Lestat was in the wrong here, I don't think there's anything else the writers can do.

As for why I think the show gave us that scene:

Playing around with different points of view is neat, and showing different recollections of the same event is a recurring thing in this show. (I'm torn on whether this is Lestat's actual recollection or just something the coven added to make Louis look bad - see my interpretation that Lestat is being coerced into participating in the trial - but either way it plays into one of the themes of the series.) Yes showing the POV of an abuser could backfire if it falls into victim blaming but I think the show handled it very well (and there is a portion of the audience that is always going to see Lestat as the victim even when he straight up says he was the bad guy in a situation).

It shows Louis physically protecting Claudia AND prioritizing her over Lestat. One of the major criticisms of Louis is his failure to do either of these things, so I actually think it made a lot of people like him better. Most of the twitter reactions I saw, from people who accepted the scene as 100% fact, was people talking about how great it was that Louis was ready to kill the guy who hurt his daughter.

It allows Jacob Anderson to do something different! One of the reasons I'm suspicious of this version of events with Louis cackling is that I have not seen Louis act quite like that before. But Jacob definitely sold it! Makes me wonder if maybe this is yet another side of Louis! I don't know! It adds rewatch value.

The acknowledgement that Lestat dropping Louis from the sky really did do long term damage to Louis. Not just physically. He became "a broken thing" - there was serious psychological damage. After he got back together with Lestat, we never really saw him push back against Lestat again. A lot of his time in Paris is a reaction against being in an abusive relationship. (And then he gets in another one, which happens a lot in real life.)

But I think it's also significant that right after this scene, we saw Lestat's remorse. And a much more real apology than anything we saw in s1. Now obviously this does not fix anything. (Claudia highlights this - "Can I cry and say sorry too?" - She and Louis tried to kill Lestat and are on trial, Lestat nearly kills Louis and just gives an apology.) But it gives the possibility that perhaps Lestat has changed or realized that he needs to change. And given that the showrunner has repeatedly referred to Loustat as the central love story of the series (link)... we need to see that Lestat is not going to do the same thing again. We want him to be better for Louis. Not that it would ever be an entirely healthy relationship (they are vampires), but not "drop him the sky requiring months of recovery" level awful. (@awildwickedslip wrote an interesting post relating to this here)

[lieutenant-teach]

Being a pro-Jedi fan is super hard.

Stumbled upon a scientific paper ‘The Psychgeist of Pop Culture’ (2024) about ‘The Mandalorian’ and ‘The Book of Boba Fett’ series. It’s divided into many smaller research by various PhDs. The Boba chapters are actually very good.

And then there’s ‘Fatherhood and male emotions’ chapter. About Jedi. About attachment. The authors Keely Diebold and Meghan Sander, PhDs, are claimed as Jedi fans.

Good start. / s Bad enough Din Djarin is called ‘Djarin’ as a name throughout the whole paper (my own pet peeve about the dick move of Favreau and Filoni in the end of Season 3 which is a decision to criticize in itself). Of course, Obi-Wan wasn’t a ‘good father figure’ as claimed by Lucas himself. Neither was Bail Organa. /s

Yeah. Hypocrisy. Hey, ‘Jedi fans authors’, have you actually watched the movies? Sigh. Seriously, ‘the intergalactic therapists’ who were trying to help Anakin to cope with his emotions so much, working with ‘cognitive therapy’ – they suppressed emotions. I just… don’t have any coherent thoughts about that bullshit on the screencap. And – now we defend Palpatine. Just great.

By the way, rewatching Indiana Jones movies, I paid special attention to the moments when someone of the team is left behind and the main characters continue chasing the enemies (just like in the mentioned scene in AOTC). And it’s never presented as ‘left behind and forgotten, heroes don’t care about them’.

What is evident to me is that this all is a piece of banthashit. Mandos with the suppression of emotions – I agree. Jedi? When one of their main proverbs ‘feel, don’t think’?

‘His own interpretation’? It’s not! Why did the authors decide that’s what happened? The point is that Anakin is taught ‘compassion, which … [is] unconditional love, is central to a Jedi’s life. … we are encouraged to love’ by the Jedi, but acts in the way he wants regardless. Screams in the plush Grogu How do people manage to watch obvious in messaging children films with their ass holes?

Frankly, I suspect that these ‘Jedi-fans’ authors just don’t understand and didn’t even try to explore the meaning of ‘attachment’ in Star Wars – it’s not ‘a deep and enduring emotional bond that connects one person to another’, it’s ‘selfishness’. They never tried to google Lucas’s interviews, but only used books about child rearing. This is why we have all this crap in a ‘scientific paper’. I firmly believe that @david-talks-sw, @writerbuddha, @kanansdume, @antianakin, @smhalltheurlsaretaken and other fans could write a whole paper about Jedi and attachments – and this would be real in-depth analysis of the Jedi and Star Wars.

And a rotten cherry on the top of this shitcake I noticed just before publishing – using ScreenRant as a reference not the smartest move, really.

Now how can a reader trust your judgment if you use fucking ScreenRant as a proof? Ah, no, they cannot (see this whole post).

[xtraordinaryfangrl]

S3 Allison Hargreeves is NOT Canon!

—

I finally bit the bullet and watched Episode 5 of TUA S3 - the episode where Allison borderline SA’s Luther and I have no idea what the writers were thinking when they wrote that into the script.

Actually, no, that’s the problem! They weren’t thinking!

Up until that point, I was genuinely enjoying this season. The Sparrows were annoying but intriguing characters. The Diego and Stanley dynamic was everything and seeing him as a legit father in the final season will break my heart. I loved Viktor (or V, as I affectionately call them) and his transition as well as everybody’s reaction. Especially Allison’s, and her comradery with him in those first few episodes made me feel things. BITTERSWEET THINGS. Their relationship has always been so interesting to watch and I’ve grown fond of them as a duo despite the tension and angst they’ve displayed throughout the show.

I felt the desperation Allison had to get her daughter back, the way it boiled and bubbled up to rage. I understood her motive and empathized with her pain, even agreed with her and the rest of the Hargreeves pack on the Harlan situation. I could see her delving deeper into her “Wandavison Era” and I was ready to side with her on everything, then THAT scene happened.

Her relationship with Luther always creeped me out because of their romantic history. They were raised together before they got together and called the same man father - which is just another weird layer to the incest trope. She forces him to kiss her when she could have just… threatened to rumor him? Or at the very least show she could still control one thing at that moment by making him stand still?? That would have driven her point across just fine, WITHOUT Jedi mind-tricking a non-consensual sexcapade???

What’s worse about Allison’s character assassination is that she most likely doesn’t see anything wrong with what she did, and neither does Luther because like the doe-eyed himbo he is - he immediately skips off to see Sloan as if he’s the male lead in some early 2000s rom-com! They didn’t see an issue with what happened because the writers didn’t see an issue, and that’s MY issue with this.

Nowadays, no matter how a story is told, everything is up to the audience’s interpretation. But sexual manipulation, depression, and other important topics that real people experience should not be treated as an ambiguous “oh it can be taken multiple ways” plot point.

If St*ve Bl*ckman or whoever mapped out Allison’s S3 journey was a competent screenwriter, they would have refocused her contempt on The Sparrows. And if they REALLY wanted to make her past with Luther a central point, they could have put her “you’re blowing me off for some knockoff you’ve known for five minutes?” line to good use by making Sloan her target instead of Harlan.

—

I don’t know. This was a whole rant and maybe none of it makes sense. But aside from the few good things to come from S3 (such as V coming out as trans and Diego/Lila pre-parenthood shenanigans), nothing else happens. Any “canon storyline” after S2 is an acid-laced fever dream as far I’m concerned.