#as opposed to a comically large one

[soppingwetrat]

most sane O.A.I.R. employee

[ariadne-mouse]

For UNEND, I'm very excited both for more general Un lore (places! people! creatures!) and to see if perhaps there will be echoes, decades on, of what happened to the Trust after it collapsed. Will there be the occasional person who still wears valor beads, a little chipped and worn with age? Do they wear them with nostalgia? Longing? Bitterness? Stubbornness? Has the valor and caenum tree on Midst developed any particular cultural significance? What has become of the Highest Light? Did the people there adapt and reform a new society with different rules? Is there an offshoot cult that tried to keep going and got even weirder? Do people keep their or their family's old abacuses in a box like heirloom jewelry that is no longer fashionable? I am gnashing my teeth in a calm and collected manner.

[thedevotionaltour]

in terms of art alone im sorry. im a jrjr defender to my last breath you be fucking nice to him. i dont wanna hear shit❗️❗️❗️

[softgrungeprophet]

ironically if sony movie don't got me apparently sony video game does (re kraven the hunter)

(i just want him to be Large)

[abbyshands]

THE LAST OF US, and the israeli themes surrounding it

i'm very glad that people were able to see one of the previous things i published, where i complied a series of links that you can use to learn more of what's going on in gaza, how you can help, places you need to boycott, etc. however, at the end of the post, there is a large part of it that is DIRECTLY meant for people who play or watch the last of us, or play the last of us 2.

the last of us 2 in specific is not at all elusive in displaying the chilling themes we are seeing before us today. what boggles my mind, is that a select few individuals are choosing to keep publishing fics, reblogging them, uploading content that has NOTHING to do with what's going on, etc. also, you can't reblog one thing about palestine and claim that you care, then flood your account or people's home pages in fanfiction, especially during a media blackout. it just doesn't work like that.

i took the time to make a post discussing all of the israeli/palestinian themes that the games as a whole, but mainly the second one, display. if you are my mutual, a friend, a fan of my work, or a fan of the game or show, then i 100% demand you read this. if you can read fics for hours, you can spend time to read a post discussing the universe those very fics came from.

a lot of us are now aware of the last of us's nature in regards to the ongoing genocide, but not many people know the specifics of it. after seeing this post last night (the person who made this, you are an angel), i decided to take the time to dive into the specifics of the last of us 2's israeli nature, on a logical level, but also a moral level, using a list of sources to help me along, which will be linked at the end of this post. i will link the sources along the way so you know which sources i got my information from.

regardless of if this changes anyone's mind about ignoring the media blackout, or not giving a fuck about what's going on period, know this: regardless of how you feel, regardless of what you believe, from the river to the see, palestine will be free. at this fucking point, the people who are on the right side will keep speaking out and spreading awareness, regardless if you are here to do it with us. that's it. now, let's get into this.

UPCOMING DISCUSSIONS: neil druckmann, the last of us 1, the last of us 2, the last of us show and zionism in the show's cast, boycotting the game and show, and conclusion

NEIL DRUCKMANN

45-year-old neil druckmann, who was the co-director and co-writer for the last of us 2, was born in tel aviv, israel in 1978. according to the above source, druckmann was raised in a settlement in the west bank, where he was surrounded by violence on a daily basis. comics, movies, and most of all, video games, became an escape for him as a child, before he and his family moved to miami, floridawhen he was 10 years old.

to water down the full story that you can, again, read here, druckmann went to college to major in criminology. however, when he was in college, druckmann took a compsci course, that later lead to his major becoming coding as opposed to criminology. soon after, he knew he wanted a career that related to one thing: video games.

in the summer of 2013, the last of us part 1 was released, and it was renowned as one of best video games to have ever been made. in 2020, druckmann and nd released the last of us part 2, followed by the 2022 release of HBO's show based on the first video game. druckmann played a huge part on set, being not only the co-creator and co-writer of the show, but also having directed an episode himself. druckmann will remain involved in the second season of the show.

bringing up neil druckmann’s background is a crucial aspect of what’s upcoming in this post, hence why i wanted to discuss it at all. druckmann growing up in israel is one of the sole reasons the last of us was ever made at all, and not only that: it is the reason why the second game is the way it is, because neil druckmann planted his israeli ideologies right into it.

so, let’s speak on it.

THE LAST OF US 1

on the official the last of us podcast, neil druckmann himself discussed the last of us' link to the israeli-palestinian conflict, and now, genocide. the general consensus was that people will go ridiculously far for the people that they love. this idea of druckmann's was revealed when he discussed the first time the main character of the first game, joel miller, kills somebody to keep his daughter, sarah, safe from harm. this is one of the first scenes in the game prior to the time jump, where the pair's neighbor becomes infected, and attacks them. joel uses a gun to kill him so that the neighbor doesn't harm sarah.

the following is a quote i would like to copy from this link word for word: "Druckmann said he follows "a lot of Israeli politics" and compared the incident to Israel's release of hundreds of Palestinians prisoners in exchange for the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit in 2011."

the plot of the first game, as neil druckmann explained, is based around a moral dilemma. he discusses how if joel had to kill a man to save a random kid, would he have done it? druckmann himself says, "but when it was his tribe, his daughter, there was no question about what he was going to do."

while the first game, in my opinion, isn't as heavily centered around israeli themes as the second game is, regardless, it is heavily crucial to note that the basis of the first game derived from a real-life incident involving israel and palestine, where hundreds of palestinian people (edit: i believe it is more than 1,000) were released from imprisonment, all in exchange for one israeli soldier. in the second game, the israeli-palestinian themes, if you look closely enough, scream out at you.

let's talk about it.

THE LAST OF US 2

"There is a common saying that if you seek revenge, you should dig two graves. Playing The Last of Us Part II is like being made to dig those graves with your teeth (Zacny)."

nd's 2022 the last of us part II is described down to the last letter in the above quote, albeit the game's utterly obvious israeli nature. in this post, the creator, rob zacny, goes on to discuss the game's theme of a "cycle of violence," and how the game reminds you in each grotesque encounter of the cruel ideology behind that. due to what occurs in the last of us 1, joel, basically, reaps what he sows when he is murdered for killing a surgeon who, along with the group said surgeon was a member of, the fireflies, was planning to perform surgery on ellie, who joel had since grown close to, in search of a cure for the infection that has plagued their world for decades. four years later, the second playable character in the game, who is introduced in the first half hour or so, abby anderson, kills joel to avenge the surgeon who was murdered, who happened to be her father. from then on, the game follows what, again, can only be described as a "cycle of violence." joel kills abby's dad, abby kills joel, ellie kills all of abby's friends, aims to kill abby in the final battle of the game, but spares abby when ellie's conscious morally attacks her for her decisions.

throughout the 24 odd hour gameplay, the player is allowed to play as ellie and abby, abby's parts of the game being arguably longer than ellie's. the idea this, i believe, is meant to introduce, is one of perspective: the player is meant to be loyal to joel miller once the first game has been finished, so when he is killed, they are inclined to make abby pay for it. however, abby's perspective, both in the past and as the present course of the game goes on, is meant to make the player understand why she did what she did. thus, the moral: there are no good guys in this game. every person is as equally bad as the following, and no one is innocent. however, when we consider the israeli-palestinian nature of this ideology and how it is presented in the last of us part 2, it simply doesn't work like this.

“I suspect that some players, if they consciously clock the parallels at all, will think The Last of Us Part II is taking a balanced and fair perspective on that conflict, humanizing and exposing flaws in both sides of its in-game analogues. But as someone who grew up in Israel, I recognized a familiar, firmly Israeli way of seeing and explaining the conflict which tries to appear evenhanded and even enlightened, but in practice marginalizes Palestinian experience in a manner that perpetuates a horrific status quo (Maiberg).”

when discussing the last of us part 2’s plot, one could 100% argue that there really aren’t good guys on the dual sides of the game. if you compare ellie and abby, you know that ellie went on a murder frenzy to get revenge on abby for killing joel. on abby’s side of it all, you know that abby wasn’t all that great before coming across lev and yara, and even then, she killed people to do what everyone in said world aims to do: survive. prior to finding lev and yara, abby had killed numerous people before, and did, as the player sees, handle joel very cruelly before she ended up killing him. here’s one more example, one that’s more random (but it’s simply to compare abby vs. ellie’s people, if you will): joel and manny. joel went on a cross country murder spree to keep ellie safe, and killed a building full of people at the end of the game to save her life. in regards to manny, if you recall a discussion that manny and mel had in the beginning of abby’s parts of the game, the pair are discussing a happening where a group aside from the wlf, the seraphites (which we will discuss later) attacked them because the wlf killed children who were a part of their (the seraphite’s) group. manny voiced how he would prefer to keep their people (the wlf) safe, and challenges mel, implying that those “kids” weren’t really kids, because they were the ones who attacked their guys (the wlf) in the first place. as a general consensus, manny kills several people throughout the course of the game, which can be inferred or seen by the player, making him, for the sake of what i’m getting at, a bad guy.

we see in the game how ellie and abby’s people are unanimously bad. the last of us is set in a world where laws and morals are thrown out the window for the sake of survival, so this is no surprise. however, this dual perspective, “no bad guy,” ideology simply doesn’t apply in the world today. you may compare ellie vs. abby, or joel vs. manny, or bring in more characters in the game, such as tommy, nora, etc, claiming that all parties are bad. that makes perfect sense. but think about it like this: if this is meant to represent the israeli-palestinian perspective, and i give you the scenario of a five-year-old child versus a full-grown IDF soldier, what would you say? isn’t there an obvious answer as to who is in the wrong and who’s not? maiberg is 100% right in claiming that the game marginalizes the real-life palestinian experience. abby, ellie, joel, manny, etc, are not real people. but the thousands of innocent children who have been killed for the ridiculousness and inhumane israeli regime are. you can’t say each side is equal in awfulness, not when one side is full of innocent men, women, and children, some of which could never make it into a year of their lives. not when if one side pauses their battle, there would be a ceasefire, but if the converse pauses their battle, they would all be dead.

“And then they cheered afterward,” Druckmann, who grew up in Israel, recalls. “It was the cheering that was really chilling to me. … In my mind, I thought, ‘Oh, man, if I could just push a button and kill all these people that committed this horrible act, I would make them feel the same pain that they inflicted on these people.’"

remember how i said discussing neil druckmann's background was crucial? it is. druckmann, who, again, was born in israel, told the Washington Post that the game's cynical themes of revenge and suffering is linked to the 2000 killing of two israeli soldiers (tw, lynching), who were killed by a mob (maiberg). allegedly, some of the incident was remembered in film, that druckmann watched, and in his interview, he explained his angry nature that came about in response to the video, and how he desired vengeance.

the last of us part 2 is mainly set in seattle, washington, where secondary main character, abby anderson, resides in with a militia group named the wlf (which we will also delve into later, alongside the seraphites). maiberg brings out how seattle, on a visual and mechanical level, is based around "a series of checkpoints, security walls, and barriers (Maiberg)." he notes: "[seattle] looks almost exactly like the tall, precast concrete barriers and watch towers Israel started building through the West Bank in 2000." here are side by side images for comparison:

now that we’ve discussed this, let us discuss one of most prevalent aspects of abby’s part of the story: the wlf, and the seraphites. the seraphites are a religious group, nicknamed “the scars” due to the scars the members of said group carve into their faces to display their membership, who the wlf, a makeshift militia group, runs into conflict with following the fall of FEDRA, the country’s former military. in a note in the game, a fedra commander explains that the city of seattle has been lost to the wolves (the wlf), who he names as terrorists. maiberg brings out the following: “Here, there are parallels to early Zionist organisations that fought British rule in the region. These organizations were also described as terrorists, and leaders of those organizations later became leaders in Israel, much like how Isaac, the leader of the Wolves, came to control Seattle. Other in-game notes, scenes of urban ambushes, and the bodies of executed FEDRA officers laboriously walk the player through the cliche "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter (Maiberg).”

maiberg also discusses a series of manners in which the fictional seraphites resemble real-life palestinians. here are the three ways he specifically discusses in his original post, but there are much more:

“The same note from the Seattle FEDRA commander that bitterly says the Wolves are in charge explains that it's now their responsibility to not only feed and shelter the people of Seattle, but deal with the "religious fanatics," referring to the Scars.

Later in the game, Ellie finds a location called "Martyr Gate," where the Scars' spiritual leader apparently died, indicating a religious significance of a specific and disputed location, and emphasizing the notion of martyrdom as central to their culture.

The Scars are able to get around Wolf patrols and various barriers around the city via an elaborate, secret system of bridges between skyscrapers. These function as a kind of flipped version of the underground tunnels Palestinians use to bypass Israeli blockades and other means of limiting free movement in order to get supplies and carry out attacks on Israel.”

one more post i would like to link is this one, the very reason i decided to make this in the first place. it captures the zionism in the last of us 2, along with the wlf vs. seraphite conflict, perfectly. i very much recommend you read it, as it explains it much better than i can.

the general consensus is this: the idea that the seraphites are equally as bad as the wlf, which implies that palestinians are equally as bad as israelis, simply doesn’t apply in 2024. as i said before: what is so vile and cruel about a newborn baby? a pregnant woman? an innocent man? NOTHING. part of the reason the last of us captures this so poorly is due to the apocalyptic nature of the world the game is set in. obviously, people would go rogue if their lives were put in peril by not only animalistic infected beings, but also humans. however, we live in a real world where laws and morals do, in fact, apply. this isn’t a video game where those are simply discarded. what the wlf and the seraphites did to each other in the last of us 2 could be any other day for them: but what israel is doing to palestine right now is a war crime, a genocide, and plainly vile.

THE LAST OF US SHOW, and zionism in the show’s cast

i don’t think i need to spend a lot of time here, because if you have made it this far, you are well aware of the real nature of the last of us and the last of us 2 already, so you must understand that the show is HBO’s take on the game’s story (which, need i remind you show-wise and game-wise, neil druckmann played a huge part in). i simply bring it up so that people are aware of the fact that the 2022 show is ALSO linked to the ongoing genocide, and the cast is a major part of that (however, if anyone would like me to delve deeper into the show, let me know, and i 100% will).

for the following season which is a sequel to the last, theorized to center around the happenings of the last of us 2, members who are set to play a few crucial characters in the game have been announced. this includes isabela merced, who will play dina woodward, ellie’s romantic partner for most of the game, alongside kaitlyn dever, who will play abby anderson.

many people freaked out when they realized kaitlyn dever will be playing abby, but not for the reason they should have been. if you are a last of us fan, you are well aware that abby’s muscles are a central aspect of her persona. yet, kaitlyn dever is on the skinnier side, and according to some, does not resemble abby.

but this is not the issue that is most crucial to discuss.

kaitlyn dever is a zionist, and so is isabela merced (i am under the impression that both of these claims are true, but i had trouble finding a source i deemed reliable enough to link here. if i do, however, i will). now, while i’m not here to riddle you with conspiracy theories, people believe this (zionism) is the reason kaitlyn dever in specific got the role of abby anderson (there is a separate actress, shannon berry, who more closely resembles abby, but made a post in solidarity with palestine. this is theorized to be the reason why she didn’t get the part, and why kaitlyn dever was announced shortly after this particular actress made said post). let us not also forget that ellie’s actor, bella ramsey, is also in support of israel, which can be seen here.

(edit: i was informed since making this that bella has a story on one of their social medias, showing their alleged support of palestine and calling for a ceasefire. i’m going to link this post where i spoke on it, so you aware of what i think on that front).

all of the previously provided information brings me to my final part of this post: boycotting the games, and boycotting the show.

BOYCOTTING THE GAME AND SHOW

i could go on and on about why this is so crucial, but we would be here forever. however, i’m going to paste in what i wrote in this post surrounding the topic of boycotting, as i personally believe i got it down quite well in regards to the last of us (the show and game). it reads:

"DO NOT BUY TLOU, TLOU REMASTERED, TLOU2, TLOU2 REMASTERED, OR ANY GAME FROM ND! neil druckmann has donated money to the IDF in the past. & where do you think he’s getting his money from? yeah, you got that. watch gameplays, pirate these games, or buy them secondhand. several shops sell used games. & for those of you who went and purchased the game anyway, knowing about all of this? fuck you.

if you think your $10 doesn’t matter, then think about this: okay, one person spends $10 on the game. whatever. but when 100,000 people do it? that’s a million dollars, going into the hands of a zionist, who is using YOUR money to help kill innocent men, women, and children. put that in your pipe and smoke it.

it is not just the games you need to boycott. HBO’S show also needs to be. follow this link to learn of more movies and shows you need to boycott, & the reasons why, including the last of us. let’s also not forget that dina & abby’s actresses are in support of israel, and BELLA RAMSEY, ellie’s actress, has also shown support.

boycott. the fucking. show. there are a million websites where you can pirate it, so you are not giving any of your support to it. resist."

what it comes down to is this: purchasing the game or watching the show directly from nd or HBO is not a must. spreading awareness and speaking out about palestine is. you are more than capable of not purchasing the game, or watching playthroughs, or buying the game secondhand, etc. you are more than capable of pirating the hbo show so that money is not made off of your engagement. it's not that difficult. i have said it once, and i will say it again: boycotting is a form of resistance, and that is the least we can do for those suffering in gaza as you read this. resist. people openly admitting that they went and purchased the game anyway simply make me sick. i hope you know what an awful thing to brag about that is, and how despicable of a human it makes you.

CONCLUSION

there's so much to discuss when it comes down to this topic, and it's possible that in the future, i will make a second part to this. however, for now, i really hope this does suffice. i believe knowing of the game's israeli nature is a step. but knowing the specifics is a leap, one that i need everyone engaged in this fandom to take, hence why i wanted to make this post at all.

i'm not saying anyone needs to quit liking the games or the show or whatever. i'm not saying you need to delete or throw away a game you spent $60 on. i've seen so many people who are way too dense to understand that. what i'm saying is that it's crucial you are at least AWARE of the content you are consuming. aware of why it even came about at all.

in my opinion, you can't separate the game from the roots. but you can remain aware of the inner workings of this world you've grown to love. you can keep spreading awareness about it, and you can do right by the people in gaza by discussing the ongoing genocide, and using your voice as much as you can.

i'm so lucky to have been able to gain a following on here in such a short amount of time, even if that following has gone up and down because i've chosen to post more about palestine as opposed to my previous content (granted, that fact won't deter me at all). i will keep using said following to keep speaking out for the people in gaza, and i encourage you to do the same. keep reblogging. keep speaking up. keep using your voices. the people in gaza need us. be there for them.

FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA, PALESTINE WILL BE FREE 🇵🇸🍉.

LINKS AND RESOURCES:

neil druckmann | the official the last of us podcast | the not so hidden israeli politics of the last of us 2, by emanuel maiberg (i highly recommend you read the full post. it discusses several crucial details i didn't discuss in this post) | galid shalit prisoner exchange | Neil Druckmann Speaking on the Washington Post | 2000 killing of two israeli soldiers (TW: LYNCHING) | 'The Last of Us Part II' Is a Grim and Bloody Spectacle, but a Poor Sequel | Veiling Colonial Violence: The Last of Us Part II, Israel and the Erasure of Power (full disclosure, i did not read the full post. i merely needed the quote in the very beginning of it) | zionism in tlou2 | isabela merced | kaitlyn dever | bella ramsey's support of israel

PALESTINE LINKS

—

[carlsangel]

a deeper understanding (g.i.t.w, ch. 2)

carl grimes x fem!reader

warning: none.

masterlist here!

other chapters here!

Carl spends the next couple of days trying to figure you out. The first true day at Alexandria, he was forced to get to know everyone else first. He doesn’t even know you but you are automatically more important than everyone here. He’s just so intrigued, it’s like you’re overwhelming his mind. He couldn’t help but ask the teenagers of Alexandria as well.

“Wait…you go out the walls?” He’d been spending time with the teenagers of Alexandria. Ron, Mikey, and Enid. This question was directed to Enid who is sat on the bed opposed to the boys on the floor. She was focused on a comic which is apparently more important than the conversation that’s occurring. “Yeah it’s not hard.” She replies shortly. He can’t help but want to know more. “W-well how I mean the walls are…so…high.” His voice gets quieter when he realizes how dumb he sounds, stating the obvious.

Enid rolls her eyes at the fact that he’s still talking and she slaps the comic down in her lap to look at him. “I use large bolts to get up, there’s massive crates against the back wall which are shorter so the fall down isn’t that far.” She explains. Hm…large bolts. “Do you think I could borrow them? The bolts?” He inquires. Ron chimes in. “What’re you leaving the walls for? Tired of us already?” He chuckles. In all honesty, yes he is. He just wants to see you. “No…it’s just I’ve been seeing this girl out there. The…ghost in the woods?” He feels sort of silly calling you that.

“Oh yeah, Enid’s met her.” Ron adds. “Like barely. She doesn’t speak. Ran off quite quick, you’re not gonna find her.” She says. Carl thinks about that, knowing that he’s somehow going to prove her wrong. He just knows it. He ends up receiving the bolts from Enid anyway and the next day, his mission to find you.

He makes his way to the south of Alexandria to search for you there first. It takes him a while but he was able to find some sort of tracks. He’s learnt a little from Daryl along the past two years and he is educated enough to know that the tracks aren’t a walkers. He looks around the forest a bit, back and forth between trees.

Then, he sees you. Finally.

He starts to speak before you start to run away which initially catches him off guard but he needs to talk to you. So he chases quick after. After a bit of chasing, he soon realizes there’s no point, there’s no sight of you and on the floor is a small trail of tracks almost in a circle. It looked like you walked around between a couple trees and just vanished since the only trail leaving the circle was the one you came from. He spots a bag with an American flag patch as well as a rifle laid on it. He looks at that for a moment before looking around aimlessly.

You were in a tree just watching from above.

He doesn’t even think to look up even though his first sighting of you was in a tree. He starts to look closer at your belongings. You felt like an idiot for leaving the rifle down there, you’re realizing he could definitely take it but since it’s been getting jammed so much it’s no use. He does actually take it in his hands which sets you off. “Don’t touch that.” He looks up at you once hearing your voice, he sees you sat up on a thick tree branch, hugging the trunk before you began to climb down.

He was touching your stuff, you knew he wouldn’t do anything but still. He set it back down and waits for you to get down and once you do, he realizes you look way different than the first day he saw you. “You’re the ghost in the woods?” He asks gently, backing away from your belongings as he looks you up and down, taking note of how clean you are. “That’s what they call me in Alexandria yes.” You walk over to your bag and pick it up as well as your rifle. “What’s your actual name?” He questions, you sort of smile at him though. “I don’t do all that.” You tell him, which is ultimately confusing.

“Do what?” You two sort of start to circle each other without even realizing it. “I don’t really like to learn names. Or give mine out for that matter.” You explain. He nods, knowing he really doesn’t care. He wants to know you; he wants a deeper understanding on who you are. “I’m Carl.” He states, catching you off guard. Now you “know” him. “Didn’t you hear me?” You stop circling and sort of just look at him annoyed. He shrugs. “What’s the harm in knowing my name?” He questions. You hate to talk to him more because you can already tell this might become a situation.

“Attachment. I hate it. It’s easier to lose someone you don’t know.” He listens to your reasoning and understands. He just wants to understand why you’re still talking to him. “Why bother sticking around then? I heard you like to run away a lot.” He teases. “I do. But you touched my stuff. Usually people walk away. Sometimes your people leave me things. Well, one guy really. They never know I’m here because for some reason no one checks trees.” You tell him. He listens but only catches onto a couple details.

“One guy? Who?” You rack your brain of the features of the man. “Umm…he’s white, brown curly hair, looks nice.” You describe someone Carl knows as Aaron. “Oh Aaron.” He spits out. You mentally scold him for spilling another name. “Yeah I guess.” He didn’t realize until after. “Well why’s your stuff so important, what do you have in there?” He points over to your bag. “Normal shit I guess. A walkman, the batteries are kinda faulty. Um…books I’ve read seven times…other things.” He smiles a little after hearing what you have. “Well I can bring you some. I can fix your gun too.”

What? “How’d you know my guns jammed?” He points at your gun but feels it’s easier to show you. He walks over and you step back but he puts his hands out to show that he won’t do anything. Once you ease up, he shows you. “The slider to pull the chamber open. It won’t pull back all the way because there’s a bullet stuck inside.” He explains, pointing at the chamber of the gun and you act like you understand what he’s saying. “I could take it back to Alexandria…maybe get it fixed.” You contemplate it for a moment. It would be nice to get some new batteries too. “I have comics I could bring you too. I’m sure you’re out of entertainment.”

Why is he making all of this sound fantastic? You’re not supposed to be getting attached. That’s the last thing you’ve wanted but you could already sort of feel it happening. With how close he was to you and how kind he was being. It felt oddly comforting which was a bad sign. All of it was. But you just need it. “Yeah okay.” You reluctantly hand him the rifle and he takes it in his hands carefully. “Great. I’ll see you back here sometime soon?” He smiles, knowing he completely broke you. He was able to break the ghost in the woods. Maybe not exactly the friendly spirit, instead a sassier one. More closed off than you’d think. “Come back in two days.”

Once he was gone, you regretted letting him take the rifle.

─── ⋆⋅ ꒰ა 𐚁 ໒꒱ ⋅⋆ ───

He came back two days later with a bag and no rifle. You plop down from the tree and have on a different outfit and you still look clean which reminds him to ask you why. “How are you so clean?” He asks, letting the bag fall off his shoulder and onto the floor. “Rivers exist. Do you have my rifle?” You retort, he disregards your comment. “Needed my dad’s help to fix it, it’s harder to fix than I thought. We’ve got some…stuff going on at Alexandria.” He tells you, digging through the bag. You’re quite annoyed to say the least, but he continues to ramble. “Comics or batteries first?” He looks up at you and then back down, his hat tumbling off his head and landing at your feet.

“You said you’d fix my rifle.” You repeat, looking down at his hat before picking it up for him. “I’ll have it for you soon, okay?” He watches you dust his hat off. “Can I have that back?” You furrow your eyebrows and hand it to him. He pulls about three comics out of his bag and puts them in your direction. “These are my favorite…X-Men, Invincible and Spider-man. I can bring you more tomorrow.” He also hands you a pack of batteries before zipping up his bag. You shove them in your pocket and walk to a tree to sit at the bottom of. He joins you.

“You’re also bringing my rifle tomorrow.” He nods with a small yet guilty smile. It’s weird you found yourself sitting there with him. You just talk about anything and everything. He explained how his mom died, how he was the one to kill her. He told you about a farm, a man named Shane, and a prison. You liked listening to him talk, he was very kind but sort of cold. He was warming up a bit to the idea of being normal, however.

When he had to leave you almost felt sad, but you tried your best to push those feelings down. He came back the next day, then the day after that. Then the day after that. All you would do is sit with each other and talk, except you never quite mentioned what happened to your family. You’d talk about how good a of a cook your older sister was and how much your dad adored movies, but never where they went or what happened to them. It always made him think about it, even though he thinks he already knows. One thing about you is no attachments, which is a rule for you that he broke. He doesn’t know how, he likes to think maybe he was able to smooth talk his way into catching your eye but…he wanted more.

He wanted you to join Alexandria.

On the fifth day he’d come to visit you, he brought you snacks. Something you mentioned to him was how marshmallows were important to you. Something about a memory you had mentioned but you never went into detail. He brought you water and marshmallows and while sitting with you at the tree you guys were snacking and chatting. “I didn’t realize Alexandria had such luxurious snack selections.” You say jokingly, popping one into your mouth and chewing your way through the puffy food. He looks at you and smiles. “I’m telling you, you should join.” He tells you seriously, you just hate to hear him out. “And be normal like you? No thanks.”

He smiles a bit more but really wants to get through to you. “I’m serious y’know.” You look over at him, your smile fading slightly. “I am too. I’m not trying to do attachments, I told you that.” You explain. He thinks about your attachment rule, he finds it stupid. “What’re we doing then?” His voice is quiet and he just stares at you while you look ahead. “I think you should join. It’d be good for you, a lot safer.” He’s doing his hardest to convince you but he’s just pushing you to be more irritated. A no is a no.

“You know what? We’re not doing anything here, actually. Thanks for the— marshmallows and the water. The comics and the past few days but you’re right. I don’t know what I’m doing.” You stand up and dust off your shorts. “Bring my rifle here tomorrow. Please.” He looks at you silently and nods, regretting everything he’d said before. He just wants you to be safe.

The next day he doesn’t meet you at the tree. Although you understood why since that same day, you witnessed his dad and another man you knew was an asshole brawl it out in the middle of the street. He didn’t come the day after that, but the community was having more issues with one of the leaders dying as well as that same asshole from before. You try to hunt the next day, but you only have a knife and it wasn’t as effective. Not to mention, there was a blaring noise coming from Alexandria, but there were too many walkers for you to make it back and check it out. You hid in yet again another tree.

You wish you never gave him your rifle.

Your dad’s rifle.

tag list: @zomb-1-egutzz @lunarnightt @hiro--aoki @h00d-tr4sh @callsignwidow @lilyglasergrimes @smollbean42905 @deadgirlwalkingx @txrasbae @lalaloopsie12309 @crusadecherryblossom @violetashfall @amanita-raine @prettylittlevampire12 @shadowybasementmiracle @junkyard-juno27 @th3-3d3n-g4rd3n

[david-talks-sw]

When a Star Wars writer engages with the material but not the narrative.

I'm writing a long post about the Jedi and the clone troopers and there's a whole section that I had to remove because it was too long:

Karen Traviss' take on the Jedi and the clones.

I already wrote about why Karen Traviss' take on the Jedi and Yoda doesn't track with what George Lucas had established in his narrative of the Prequels. Since then, I've been able to do more research.

It's no secret that one of the reasons Traviss listed for criticizing the Jedi in the Expanded Universe books she wrote is their treatment of the clones (or at least what she understood it to be).

In 2008, she wrote a now-deleted blog post about it (it was really long, so I'm only including the part relevant to my point, if you want the full context you can look it up, this is old stuff).

So if you ask me, in the above quote, Traviss is essentially doing the equivalent of saying:

"Batman is a psycho elitist who beats up the mentally ill and indoctrinates kids, turning them into child soldiers for his unending crazy vigilante war on crime, and if you can't recognize that then you scare the living crap out of me."

Like... you can argue that, and a couple of comics have argued that.

But by and large, the general consensus is that Batman is a superhero, the Robins are his sons and daughter, and the "mentally ill" are in fact the Joker and Two-Face aka mass murderers.

So if you make that argument, that's you applying your real-life values and conclusions to a narrative that deliberately doesn't acknowledge those points, in-universe, in order to tell the story it wants to tell.

It's counting on your suspension of disbelief, defined as "the avoidance—often described as willing—of critical thinking and logic in understanding something that is unreal or impossible in reality, such as something in a work of speculative fiction, in order to believe it for the sake of enjoying its narrative."

The Jedi accepting the clones and the clones being slaves isn't a "delicate point". It's barely a point at all!

It's never addressed in the film (because of course it isn't, the Prequels are about Anakin and the Republic, not the clones).

It's only addressed once by Slick, an unreliable narrator, in The Clone Wars.

That's it. Hell, in 2008, when The Clone Wars writer Henry Gilroy was asked to comment on the relationship between clones and Jedi, he explicitly said he'd "rather not get into" that particular point.

I recently got Mythmaking: Behind the Scenes of 'Attack of the Clones' and nowhere is that detail touched on by Lucas at any point.

Nobody wants to touch on that point with a 10ft pole, because it's not relevant to the story.

So while Traviss acknowledges the Jedi are fictional characters, she doesn't follow that thread through to the end by acknowledging that fictional characters don't have free will, they must abide by the story and the whim of the writer.

She's engaging with the material, but refusing to engage with the narrative. She's having her cake and eating it too.

My reason for saying all this is that in the book Star Wars on Trial, she elaborates on her thought process upon discovering this detail.

Shortly before to this, she acknowledges twice that she knew nothing about Star Wars, beside seeing the original films in her youth.

Another writer who saw the new films and saw Mace Windu argue against there being a war...

... the worry on his face at the prospect of the Jedi being thrown at the Separatists...

... and the sheer melancholy on Yoda's face upon announcing the Clone War had begun...

... might have instead wondered how the Jedi, so opposed to war, could've ended up being generals.

Because while we don't see the Jedi openly protest the use of the clones in the film... they're not exactly giddy about it, either. All they can do is watch powerlessly as it gets voted by the Senate.

"The Jedi are there. But the Jedi aren't really allowed to be involved in the political process. They're there, but they can't suddenly step up and say, "No, no. You can't do that." They have to let the political process go." - George Lucas, Attack of the Clones, Commentary #2, 2002

We also don't see them take on the role of generals, either.

We only see them begrudgingly lead troops on Geonosis, specifically.

But they're not referred to as "generals" yet.

Another writer might have imagined a scene where after Geonosis, Mace Windu talks to Palpatine thinking the Jedi will go back to their roles as diplomats, and that what we saw in Attack of the Clones was a one-time thing to save Obi-Wan, but Palpatine politely goes:

"Ha! No. Didn't you hear? The Senate was so impressed by your performance on Geonosis that they voted to make you all generals in the GAR. Now, get back to the front."

Another writer might've elected to write them having that "big moral debate" she mentions.

Instead, Traviss immediately jumps on the "Jedi are elitists" train.

Because her personal experience with the military makes her sympathize with the clones and her personal belief is that - while the story may frame the Jedi as "the good guys" - nobody is that good a guy, real life people aren't that pure and selfless. There's gotta be something off about them and aHA! That's what it is!

That's her choosing to take that line of thought instead of one more in-line with the story, because she perceives it as unrealistic. But like... Star Wars isn't real life, it's a fairy tale.

That's like saying:

"The hunter in Little Red Riding Hood commits animal cruelty by cutting the Wolf open. He should've let nature take its course, the wolf earned that meal fair and square. If you think the hunter should've saved Red Riding Hood and her Grandma, then clearly you're the kind of monster who thinks one life is worth more than others."

... no?

The story's narrative clearly portrays the wolf as the villain of the tale and frames the Hunter saving Red Riding Hood as a good thing.

Disagreeing with that narrative is absolutely fine, but anybody who acknowledges the wolf is the bad guy in the story isn't automatically an animal hater and/or a bad person. Just because you say "the wolf is the villain" doesn't mean that you think that, in real life, killing wolves for shits and giggles is good.

Conversely, the narrative of the Prequels asks you to suspend your disbelief and not consider the implications that having a clone army entails. Because the use of clones doesn't have a direct impact on either Anakin or the Senate's stories.

Edit: I finished the post this one here originally spun out of!

You can find it here:

[faeriekit]

sorry I need to lose my mind for a couple paragraphs:

THIS old man is WHITEPASSING.

So, if you're wondering how the hell this dude is Whitepassing, please note that this is restricted to a single comics run rather than All Alfreds in the Known Multiverse™. Anyway, I was reading the Dark Knights of Steel vol 2 of my own accord (and against the better judgement of friends) because I apparently enjoy suffering when I got the to the "Alfred has secretly been J'onn J'onezz the whole time" schtick and my brain turned clean off.

Because. Implications.

To start, when they draw J'onn as himself as opposed to his "Alfred" disguise:

J'onn is still drawn with what look like typically "Black" features, albeit with a few Martian overtones: high cheekbones, a broad face, a flat, wide nose. His "Alfred" form is distinctly differently structured with a narrow face, sharp nose, etc etc. Couple that with a backstory explicitly referencing escaping from a war and attempted enslavement, this is a pretty strong attempt at an allegorical Black alien, even if, uh, you know. It's also Alfred. (And yes this is all ignoring that J'onn is usually portrayed as Black; I just wanted to see if his allegorical Blackness still held up in this particular comic run.)

And there's a lot to be said here about the long and storied history of having black caregivers raise privileged white children and the racism embedded therein but that's not what's happening!! As far as I've gotten (and this is as far as reading vol 2 of the dark knights of steel compendium, and only vol 2), Alfred did stay beside Bruce ever since Bruce's parents kicked the bucket, but.

No one else knew "Alfred" was a nonhuman.

Not Bruce. Not his friends (if he has any). Not his fellows in the army, nor anyone else in the entire world— because due to the inherent prejudice of the setting, everyone he knew would quite possibly turn their back on him or turn him in if his true history was revealed. The world at large was prejudiced against him and non-humans like him, and the solution was to hide or otherwise obscure both history and origin so that he could move freely without repercussions. Even Bruce in this run, the only guy "Alfred" is with at all times, is shown to be prejudiced against non-humans and explicitly hostile. Hiding is shown to be not just necessary, but the only surefire way to survive the Plot™.

So, uh. Just to make sure everyone is on the same page, do y'all know what Whitepassing is...? Ever since White people started bringing slavery to the shores of the new world in the 1600s, people were pretty quick to discover that as long as you were born light enough, people would no longer harass you for doing dangerous and scary things like wanting to own property or to stop being held captive and forced to do hard labor or wanting to keep your own kids. It was easy to do! Provided, of course, that you could 1) escape your circumstances in some manner, 2) give up every person you ever knew, including all friends, family, and references to thereof, and 3) pretend you're someone else for the rest of your life without ever breaking your own cover.

You may be thinking, wow, this sounds horrible and traumatizing! Sure does, and that's because it is! But it's a pretty well-known part of the Black community even today, because if you could pass, you had an infinitely better chance at making enough money to live. You could feed your kids. You could save up to own your own home. You could get a career that didn't physically break you down or disable you.

Passing is giving yourself as good a chance to live as anyone else could ever get, and all it costs is everyone and everything you've ever known. Of course people chose to pass. Of course people choose to pass even here and now.

And you know what? As soon as J'onn reveals his nature, someone close to the throne takes advantage of the knowledge to immediately kill him. Fucked up. It's notable that, in some way or form, J'onn J'onzz, Martian man from outer space, is always human-passing, but the sheer implications of being explicitly depicted as Whitepassing, even if only accidentally, blew my brain clean open.

Imagine passing in a world completely foreign to you. You don't know their customs. You don't know their language at first. You have to learn to adapt. You can't say your true name or show your true face, or everyone will know who you are— what you are. Eventually, you learn to let people close to the mask you've made, but you can never relax with them; you can say your wife is dead, but they cannot hear her name, or they will Know. You can tell them your child died in your arm, but you can't tell them where, or when, or why.

You raise a child to adulthood. They do not know your true form, and you pray they never will.

You tell them the name appropriate for their society, and that is what they call you.

Anyway. This old man is Whitepassing. I feel so bad for him.

(It's important to note that while this part of the storyline doesn't seem to go anywhere that wasn't plot relevant, that somehow didn't stop it from manifesting in the middle of this medieval aliens comic. Which. Wow. What a move.)

[pikahlua]

"A deuteragonist has a very different role in the MHA and that is a whole other post ."Can you please write this article? I am tired of Bakugo being constantly downplayed. There are very few people who understand his character and role in the story as well as you do.

Haha I mean hehe it's just hoho I never said fufu that Katsuki is the deuteragonist guffaw shucks haha I mean come on snort why are you putting words in my-

Katsuki Bakugou is the deuteragonist.

Katsuki Bakugou is the deuteragonist

Katsuki Bakugou is the deuteragonist

"Of course you would say that. You're a Katsuki Bakugou stan! You are invested in inflating his importance in the story because you love him." - some people, probably

No. If that were true, I would be arguing Katsuki Bakugou is the protagonist. But I'm not.

Because Katsuki Bakugou is the deuteragonist.

It's not that I love him and therefore assert that he's the deuteragonist. I love him because he's the deuteragonist (plus many other reasons). He is an archetypal familiar shounen hero made interesting in part by the fact that he is NOT the protagonist and deliberately written in the deuteragonist role/function, and I will go into visceral detail about this momentarily.

I promise you I don't go around in other fandoms arguing my favorite non-main character is the deuteragonist. I fully embrace whatever role it is they play in the story. YOU WILL SEE THE EVIDENCE OF THIS VERY SOON, FOR EVERY CHARACTER IN MHA.

What is a deuteragonist?

A deuteragonist is a story archetype. They are the second-most important character in a story (which is a vague as hell definition). They are often known as the "secondary main character."

That's it. Everything else one might say about a deuteragonist is just a sub-archetype.

A deuteragonist can be a sidekick, a love interest, a rival, an antagonist, or even a neutral party. They are often, not always, written as foil characters to the protagonist. They often, not always, provide a different and yet similar outlook to the protagonist's. Their utility in a story can be quite varied. Sometimes they support the protagonist, and sometimes they oppose the protagonist. Often, they are used to help the protagonist complete their character arc.

Sometimes, there can be more than one deuteragonist.

What the hell is a deuteragonist?

The problem is, the function of a deuteragonist can change just depending on the type of story we're talking about. A deuteragonist in an ancient Greek tragedy (theatre), where the term originally came from, won't necessarily function the same way as a deuteragonist in a 2-hour contemporary movie. Things get even more complicated when we're talking about a TV series, a book series, or a comic book series in which the cast becomes so large we're likely to see MULTIPLE deuteragonists.

My Hero Academia, like many long-running shounen manga, has an ensemble cast. Would you be surprised if I told you My Hero Academia not only has multiple deuteragonists, not only has multiple antagonists, but also has multiple protagonists? Because it does!

Sometimes people wanna divide MHA into three or four acts and make the claim that the deuteragonist changes from act to act. I say they aren't going far enough. MHA is divided into arcs, and each arc has its own protagonist and antagonist and sometimes even deuteragonist. This is a STAPLE of ensemble cast shounen manga, where often there will be so many characters they get grouped off into trios (or more) and one among them will be the group's designated protagonist.

Sure, in most MHA arcs, Izuku is the protagonist. But he's not always. Who is the protagonist of the Pro Hero (Endeavor vs Hood) arc? Who is the deuteragonist? It's not Izuku and Katsuki; it's Endeavor and Hawks! What about the protagonist in the My Villain Academia arc? Tomura. The Hero License Supplementary Course arc? Katsuki and Shouto (who can't seem to decide if they're co-protagonists or protagonist and deuteragonist and who is which). The Overhaul arc? Izuku is the protagonist and Mirio is the deuteragonist. Some arcs really play with these roles or make it unclear who is playing which role or if the role even exists.

What is a deuteragonist in My Hero Academia?

So if we have a bunch of protagonists, does that mean the most important one is the series' overarching protagonist and the one second in importance is the deuteragonist? It COULD be, but it's not necessarily true.

There aren't that many arcs where Izuku is not the protagonist. If we look at the number of arcs where someone else is the protagonist, following the above logic, we could end up with All Might or Endeavor as the deuteragonist. Maybe some people would earnestly make the argument Endeavor is the deuteragonist--I don't know, I haven't met those people I guess. The problem with this approach in my eyes is that it entirely discounts the deuteragonists of each arc. Would it not follow that the overarching deuteragonist is the character who has played the deuteragonist in the largest number of arcs? What if that character is different from the character who has played protagonist the second-most number of times? And this is to say nothing about if the protagonist or deuteragonist are the same as the antagonist in a given arc! It's difficult to weight any one character in this fashion particularly when you have an ensemble cast.

This is getting into the question of focus and screentime. How much should we weight this metric? Admittedly this one can also be complicated, especially when it comes to long stories with ensemble casts. The question is how much does screentime actually convey how much a character is the focus of a story, and does that necessarily translate to protagonist and deuteragonist? Because for many the question is: could the deuteragonist be an antagonist in MHA?

It just gets a little harder to argue someone besides Katuski Bakugou is the main deuteragonist the more Katsuki's screentime allocation looks something like this:

Okay, perhaps that exact size of gap is hyperbole. But there is a clear, measurable gap between Katsuki Bakugou and everyone else and I don't think anyone has ever disputed that. Please check out this post by @dekusheroacademia that has compiled some of these statistics (they also make some excellent points about evaluating the elements of a deuteragonist and how various characters fit or don't fit those characteristics).

Still, this is merely supporting evidence, not conclusive. I am well aware of the concept of a false protagonist, where someone appears to be the protagonist until later someone else is revealed to be the story's true protagonist. And while I've never seen a false deuteragonist where someone SEEMS to be the deuteragonist and is later revealed in a twist not to be (as opposed to the deuteragonist just merely changing NOT as a deliberate twist where expectations were set to be otherwise), that doesn't mean it can't happen.

Tangentially related, we could also potentially look at marketing as another piece of supporting evidence. It's not conclusive that just because Katsuki Bakugou is one of the most merchandised characters in the franchise that he is more important to the story than those who aren't, but it's still notable supporting evidence. After all, based on Horikoshi's marketing of his own story i.e. who he draws in which orientations on chapter and tankoban covers, or how he lists characters on character intro pages, we could easily come to the conclusion as casual readers that Izuku is the protagonist. There are many cases where one could conclude Katsuki is the deuteragonist based on such presentations alone. But again, I concede this is not conclusive.

So, if we set aside individual story arc roles, screentime, and marketing, what does that leave us with?

What is THE deuteragonist in My Hero Academia?

Even if we can determine Izuku Midoriya is THE protagonist of MHA based on things like the number of times he's protagonist in story arcs, his screentime, and marketing, I'll set those aside for the deuteragonist and see if there's something else that can help us here.

What element are we missing? The overall story.

Sure, we can break down the story into arcs and assign deuteragonists that way, but that's not getting us to THE deuteragonist. So let's start with the protagonist. How do we know Izuku Midoriya is the protagonist of MHA without considering the previous metrics? The way the story focuses on him. It is easy enough for anyone to recognize the characteristics of a protagonist in him from a functional perspective. He is a POV character. We hear his thoughts. He narrates the story. We see the story over the timeline of his character growth. His character arc coincides with the overall story themes.

I've talked many times about how My Hero Academia at its core is a story that explores the question: what is a hero? MANY characters explore this question, but the character who compiles these answers together and rounds them all out and grows and has his perspective change and exemplifies the moral is: Izuku Midoriya.

So let's go back to the functional elements of a deuteragonist. Remember those sub-archetypes? Well, in a shorter story with no ensemble cast, what do a sidekick, a love interest, a rival, an antagonist, and even a neutral party all have in common? They are defined by their relationship to the protagonist.

You see, in a story where all the characters interact with each other and converge on the major theme of the story, ALL characters are defined by their relationship to the protagonist. But in particular, the function of a deuteragonist is to supplement the story with what the protagonist needs FUNCTIONALLY. When is a sidekick the deuteragonist of a story? When the story focuses on the adventures of the protagonist and their sidekick. When is a love interest the deuteragonist of the story? When the story focuses on the developing relationship between the protagonist and the love interest (i.e. the romance genre). CAN a story with a love interest deuteragonist focus on their adventures and individual character development too? Yes, but sometimes the result is that the love interest is ALSO the sidekick...or the rival. When is the rival the deuteragonist? When the story focuses on the clash and growth between the rivals. When is the antagonist the deuteragonist? When the story focuses on the battle between them. NOTE that when I write this, I don't mean it focuses on the protagonist's adventure that culminates in them meeting the antagonist at the end for a battle. I am talking about when the BATTLE ITSELF is the main focus of the story. See stories like Silence of the Lambs or Death Note for a clearer example of what I mean, where the focus of each is on the psychological games the protagonist and antagonist play with each other. The point is, the story on a structural level, on a meta level, has to focus on these sorts of interactions to determine its deuteragonist.

Obviously this gets more complicated with a large story and an ensemble cast because you could have bits of the story where the structure changes and seems to focus on new things. That's why I pointed out that the more immediate protagonist and deuteragonist and antagonist often change in MHA depending on the story arc.

When I try to determine who is THE deuteragonist of the entire story, I have to look at the entire story. I have to ask myself what the story is about. So what is the story about? What is MHA about?

If you said MHA is about Izuku falling in love with Ochako, I'm sorry but you're wrong.

If you said MHA is about Izuku taking on All Might's mantle, I'm sorry but you're wrong.

If you said MHA is about Izuku defeating/saving Tomura, I'm sorry but you're wrong.

If you said MHA is about Izuku rekindling his friendship with Katsuki, I'm sorry but you're wrong.

MHA is about Izuku Midoriya (and most everyone else) learning what it means to be a hero.

It's in the fucking title. MY HERO ACADEMIA. The story is about Izuku's education (as it takes many forms) to learn what it means to be a hero.

So who is the deuteragonist in the story about Izuku Midoriya learning what it means to be a hero? The character who is second-most important in how Izuku Midoriya learns what it means to be a hero.

A lot of characters do teach Izuku Midoriya what it means to be a hero or at least some piece. But who is MOST IMPORTANT?

See, My Hero Academia is LONG. If we just focus on the parts of the story in which Izuku tries to learn from All Might or take on his mantle, we lose ARCS of the story. The same is true if we focus on his love life, or his rivalry with Katsuki, OR EVEN HIS BATTLE WITH TOMURA AND ALL FOR ONE. In the case of the latter, we're basically excluding HALF the story: the school arcs!

MHA is structured such that it alternates between what we colloquially refer to as "school arcs" and "villain arcs." And while exploring the question of "what is a villain?" is an important subset of the main theme, it is not the entire story. You can't just label all the school arcs as "filler" (because they're not) and chuck them out. Each story arc contributes to the lessons Izuku learns and the theme of the main story.

I can think of something every character teaches Izuku with respect to this theme. I can think of a lesson Izuku has taken away from every encounter and every story arc. But who ELSE is present in nearly every story arc? Who represents the foil to Izuku who allows us, the audience, to learn alongside them what it means to be a hero? Who learns the bits Izuku does not need to learn because he already exemplifies those answers in spades? Who represents the other half of the hero equation that Izuku is missing? Who has his own blanks filled in by Izuku himself? Who has played all the sub-archetypes of a deuteragonist for Izuku Midoriya, including antagonist, rival, sidekick, and even arguably love interest (replace with platonic interest for the rekindling friendship angle if you want so we don't have to go into that whole thing here please, I'm talking about the generic structural elements within a story more than anything)?

Izuku Midoriya cannot possibly have learned the fundamental lessons of what it means to be a hero without Katsuki Bakugou's character arc to supplement him. Katsuki Bakugou is an irremovable, integral player in demonstrating the theme of collectivism that informs the main story, not just for Izuku to learn it but for THE AUDIENCE to see it too. He is one half of "win to save, save to win." He is the standard shounen manga archetype who has to learn the value of teamwork/collectivism so that he can teach it to Izuku Midoriya and save him from himself. The story is structured in such a way that it resembles LESSONS for the characters to learn, and Katsuki's "education" in this respect is VITAL to the story, second in importance only to Izuku Midoriya's.

P.S. Is it actually taking away from Katsuki to call someone else THE deuteragonist?

Yes. I know some people don't want to have to say it that way, but it is. Based on a number of metrics, Katsuki Bakugou is most widely recognized as the deuteragonist. If there's a default answer to the question of who is the deuteragonist but you think the deuteragonist is someone else, then in order to be persuasive you must not only argue why you think your chosen character is the deuteragonist but why Katsuki Bakugou is NOT the deuteragonist. If you want to argue someone else is the deuteragonist, you are taking on that onus, that burden of proof. You have to disprove Katsuki Bakugou is the deuteragonist.

Are there other characters who fit the deuteragonist function at times? Yes! There are multiple deuteragonists! But if in spite of the multiple protagonists we're still able to call Izuku Midoriya THE protagonist of My Hero Academia, then we are absolutely able to call Katsuki Bakugou THE deuteragonist as well.

tl;dr MHA is about learning what it means to be a hero and Katsuki Bakugou's story is second-most important to that theme, which makes him the deuteragonist

[likeabxrdinflight]

I want to talk more about the way the characters have been adapted for the live action adaptation, because character writing is the thing I care about the most and as a psychologist it's probably the aspect of any story that I'm most invested in. I can get around pretty much any plot contrivance or weird maguffin or even shitty pacing if the characters of a story are engaging enough. This is my bread and butter, so to speak.

And I want to start with Iroh, because I think he is by far the best adapted character from the original. But I suspect I think this for different reasons than other people might, because the beloved Saint Iroh from the animated show this man is not.

See the thing with animated Iroh is that he's just...a bit too perfect. We know he's been complicit in the war in the past. We know he laid siege to Ba Sing Se, we know he had a complicated past. But we never really see it, we only barely hear about it, and more often than not there are other aspects of Iroh's past that serve to further deify him. He was a general in the war, but then he goes on to protect the last dragons and learn the true meaning of firebending. He led a 600-day siege and lost his son but he came out of that experience Enlightened, having journeyed to and from the spirit world. He joins up with the White Lotus (at some point) and becomes the wise old sage we know and love.

Except most of that is revealed in later seasons and is inconsistent with his actions alongside Zuko in season one. Season one animated Iroh is kind of a passive character, largely existing for comic relief and as a support to Zuko. But there's very little to suggest he's disloyal to the Fire Nation or their cause. He says it himself- "I'm no traitor, Zhao!" Now you can certainly interpret that line in several different ways, but I suppose that's the point- there's a lot left up to interpretation with animated Iroh. We get a sense of who he is in relation to Zuko, but his own development largely happens off-screen. And because to Zuko he's a wise, caring uncle and mentor, that's largely how we, the audience, see Iroh. We love him because Zuko loves him. And that's fine for what it is, and clearly it was effective- Uncle Iroh is almost universally beloved. But it does leave a lot of questions about him up in the air.

Live action Iroh is a very different character. This Iroh is a deeply broken man who was been profoundly impacted by the war and what he has lost because of it. I do not get the sense that the loss of Lu Ten has led to any spiritual enlightenment for this Iroh- there's no indication that he can see spirits, for example, or that he has ever traveled to the spirit world himself (he does still oppose the killing the moon thing, though.)

Right out the gate, we get the sense that this Iroh has lost faith in what the Fire Nation is trying to achieve with the war. He explains to Aang fairly early on what the Fire Nation's goal and perspective is, and can rattle off this dogma quite easily. But when questioned by Aang if these beliefs are also his beliefs, he dodges them rather un-deftly. So you know immediately that this Iroh doesn't really support the war. Later you see him somewhat bluntly telling Zuko that the throne may not be all it's cracked up to be, and he's fairly openly critical of Ozai in other moments. So you know from the jump that Iroh's not really on Team Fire Nation.

And yet this is also not a truly repentant man. When he is captured in Omashu, Iroh gets another brief scene with Aang while they are both imprisoned there (this is before Aang meets with Bumi). And in this scene, Aang tries to convince Iroh to help Zuko stop being The Bad Guy. And Iroh defends Zuko to Aang and stresses the point that it is not Zuko who owes him any great debt, but he who owes Zuko. Later, when he is confronted (and hit several times) by an Earth Kingdom soldier who lost his brother during the siege, Iroh does not apologize. He does not flinch at the man's accusations, nor does he deny them. He defends himself, albeit weakly, by stating he was a soldier, and it was a war. He has the audacity to accuse this soldier (somewhat obliquely) of having been made dishonorable by the effects of war. It's kinda messed up, honestly.

But then this man accuses Iroh of knowing nothing of loss. He leaves the shot, and we saw Iroh's face just crumble, and the scene cuts directly to Lu Ten's funeral, where Zuko chooses to sit with his uncle and support him through what must have been the darkest moment of his life. Back in the present, it is only later, after Zuko has come to rescue Iroh, that he speaks more honestly to the Earth Kingdom soldier- he shows mercy and states that they've all "seen enough death."

So what we have here is an Iroh who is deeply disenchanted by the war and does not support it or the goals of the Fire Nation, but who has continued to stand alongside Zuko and support him in his goals. We have a man who doesn't necessarily regret his actions as a soldier in the war but who very much does regret what those actions have cost. We see a man who is profoundly impacted by loss and grief and has become emotionally reliant on his nephew as a source of support. Not that he's parentifying Zuko or anything, he's very much not, but he is rather obviously channeling all the love he once felt for his son into Zuko instead. Zuko is his lifeline, he needs Zuko and you get the sense that without him, Iroh would truly fall apart. I mean the man is on the verge of tears more often than not when Zuko is in even the slightest bit of danger in a way that animated Iroh was not.

This is what I think is different here. Animated Iroh seemed to turn against the war because it was morally wrong, it had thrown the world out of balance, and imperialism is bad. Live action Iroh seems against the war because it wasn't worth it. It wasn't worth the cost, or the death, or the grief. He couldn't see that until he lost Lu Ten, but now he sees it everywhere. I get the sense that this Iroh just wants it all to stop, and I'm not sure he cares how that happens.

The White Lotus is definitely hinted at, but I suspect that was his motivation for joining it. It's not about restoring balance to the world for this Iroh. It's about restoring peace, so that he won't have to lose Zuko like he lost Lu Ten. So that the death and destruction stops. So he can just live a quiet life and put the past behind him.

It's a different take. And it's not that he doesn't still have a lot of wisdom to him, that he's not still a gentle, caring person. But he's a much sadder person, and he's lost that sense of "enlightenment" that his animated counterpart had. There's a selfishness you can read into to this version of his character that's much more apparent than the animated version.

I think a lot of people are gonna hate this, because it's a darker take on a much loved character. But I love it. This Iroh is human, this Iroh is flawed, and this Iroh has a lot more growing left to do. And that's awesome. If we get to actually see more of a character arc for him too, if we get to see him also growing and changing alongside Zuko? Please. It's not like he needs a total redemption arc, per se, but if in his journey with Zuko throughout the Earth Kingdom we can see Iroh gain some of his fortitude back, we can see when he decides he needs to push Zuko down a certain path, to take a side in the war, to see that it's not just the death and destruction that makes it wrong? God there's so much potential with that.

Now, maybe this isn't what will happen with seasons two and three. Maybe they'll back track and try to make him more similar to the animated version. I don't know. But for now? Live action Iroh is fantastic, and Paul Sun-Hyung Lee is giving a hell of a performance. He's warm and tender when he needs to be, fierce when he has to, and just profoundly sad throughout it all. And I love him so much more for that.

I'll be controversial here and say it. So far, live action Iroh is a better character than animated Iroh.

[writingwithcolor]

Running Commentary: What is “ok to do” in Mixed-Culture Supernatural Fiction?

Dear readers: 

Today we are trying something new. To give you some insight into our process in the Japanese moderator section, we are presenting our response in the form of running commentary to show you how we dissect and answer long asks. We hope this makes clear what points are useful and not useful when sending us a query. As always, this is for learning purposes, not callouts. Be prepared: this is a long one. 

To summarize: the asker is looking to create a comic drawn in Japanese manga style, and has provided a long summary of the story and worldbuilding which involves a mix of “reimagined” Japanese yokai mythos and cultural symbols from many other sources. They have questions with respect to cultural appropriation, coding etiquette, and “what is and isn’t ok.” 

Opening Comments

I know a common advice when it comes to the thing I am about to ask is to talk to people involved in __, but I struggle with opening up to strangers for reasons I'm uncomfortable explaining. 

Marika (M): This is already a red flag. If you want to engage with another culture without talking to people from that culture, then research is going to be very challenging. You won’t have members of that culture to guide you towards sources and perspectives they feel most accurately represents public opinion. If I were in your shoes, I might start with tackling my discomfort when engaging with other people, if only to improve my work. If you aren’t ready to engage with a culture and its people directly, then I think you should wait until you are. 

I should note, reaching out to the Japanese mod team at WWC does count as engagement, but WWC should not and cannot be the only point of contact because there is no single, legitimate cultural perspective. 

Rina (R): Also, you don’t need to “open up” to strangers or talk to them in person to get perspectives. Asking specific research questions anonymously to a forum or on social media requires very little vulnerability. You managed to do it here on WWC. So give it a try! 

Anyway, my question basically amounts to the what is and isn't ok [sic] in terms of depicting fantasy creatures and concepts outside of their respective culture.

R: So, the reason why we turn away rubber stamp questions by that ask “is XYZ okay?” is because “okay” & “not okay” 1) is vague and 2) creates a dichotomy where there isn’t one. 

When we say something is “not okay,” do we mean:

It’s offensive to the general majority of XYZ group? 

It’s contentious among people who ID in the group? 

It has a potential to be interpreted in a certain negative way, but may not be a red flag to everyone?

Insetad try asking:

What are the reasons this subject is offensive? 

What makes cultural appropriation bad? 

When might it be “okay” to intentionally discuss a difficult or controversial topic?

What is your reason for including something that may be interpreted as offensive and can it be sufficiently justified? 

What stereotypes or tropes might it be consistently identified as or associated with, and why? 

When might it be justified to bring up these tropes?

With That In Mind...

Let’s get into the rest of the ask below. 

…a story I've been working on in recent times is largely inspired off the Japanese yokai, and the setting is basically Earth in the far future, as far as when the next supercontinent may form. These yokai, although portrayed differently here, do retain their main characteristics [...] Included in this world are two goddesses of my own creation, primarily representing the sun and the moon. [...] There will be thirteen nations, named and based after the Chinese Zodiac, and the life force found in the living things in this world, called qi, comes in two forms that are always opposing each other but can never fully overpower the other, this being based off yin and yang. They're even directly named this; yin qi and yang qi.

M: This reads more like using Japanese and Chinese culture for the “aesthetics”, not the cultures themselves, which I personally feel falls under cultural appropriation. From a world-building/ coding standpoint, the actual use of concepts is workable, and, dare I say, typical, given how Chinese cosmology influences Japanese culture. However, naming a concept “yin qi” or “yang qi” is the equivalent of naming something “- charge” or “+ charge”, respectively. That you don’t seem aware of this tells me you are pretty early in your research phase. In that vein, we’ve covered translating terms and names from foreign languages in fantasy before. See the following article linked here for our recommendation against using RL terms outright but instead encouraging people to create their own conlangs. 

R: Worldbuilding-wise, I think you would have to figure out the chicken-or-egg of the zodiac nations. Did the nations come first, and the zodiac later as an origin folk story (which you would have to rewrite to serve the nation-building narrative)? Did the zodiac come first, and the nations named (most likely re-named) by a political entity? What is the justification? Otherwise, again, it’s a shoehorning of aesthetics. 

There is also a third, lesser known god based off of fox spirits and trickery and I imagined he's the patron deity of a family that honors and worships him, but his influence on them has transformed them into Kitsune-tsuki, which I depict as fox-like anthros. 

M: Not related to this ask directly, but I have jokingly ranted about how often non-Japanese people prefer using imagery related to kitsune-tsuki in Japanese coded world-building (link). This makes me feel the same level of petty irritation. See my troll answer below for a similar experience.

R: Same. It’s boring tbh. 

M: Troll Answer: I get that kitsune-tsuki are very sexy furries, but Japanese folklore has other sexy furries too! These underrepresented demographics also deserve recognition and appreciation!!

The plot of the story is this; modernization has left the goddesses neglected of their worship and forgotten, something that is necessary in this world to stop them from fighting each other. The Moon Goddess awakens first, punishing the humans by unleashing the yokai. Then the Sun Goddess wakes up to fight in humanity's defense…

M: This could feel rather like Shinto-like coding (Ex. the myth of Amaterasu and the Cave, or Tsukuyomi slaying Ukemochi), but something about this scenario feels a bit too binary in terms of themes of good v. evil, light v. dark to be Shinto. The plot also feels more Gaelic/ Nordic in influence for me as a person raised in a Japanese Buddhist and Hindu household. I imagine this dissonance could have been fixed with better guided research. 

…but their fighting has caused a perma-eclipse and this world is in danger of ending. The yokai have run rampant; some are loyal to the Moon Goddess, and some aren't, and it lies to the main characters to bring balance back to Midgard. Yeah... the name of this future Earth is Midgard. I debate changing it since it and some other things I will mention sorta feel out of place.

R: Marika, looks like you were right on the Gaelic/Nordic influence /j 

Also, worldbuilding question: if the Earth is in the far geologic future, how long has it been since modernization (19th-20th century)? Centuries? Millennia? How long has this fighting gone on for? What triggered the perma-eclipse, and why now? Why is this time depth necessary? 

One of the main characters in question is a humanoid woman with wolf features named Ling, and she is a descendant of the dynasty that had first ruled the one of the nations, particularly the one based off the dragon zodiac. She accidentally summons the other main character to this world as she's praying at a shrine, a humanoid with dragon features--I call them drakon--named Angelynn.

[on the names of characters] is it appropriating by not having the world entirely based on [Chinese, Japanese, and Indian] influence? it's a little weird to me how worldwide the creatures are referred to as yokai, implying a strong Japanese influence not unlike how it is today with Western culture being so dominant, yet there are still names like Keith and Kiara.

M: I will give you credit for recognizing you have unconsciously veered towards white-washing/ race-bending: either presenting European cultural influences (drakons, Angelynn, Keith, Kiara, Midgard) as default or utilizing general E. Asian cultural influences and aesthetics for a Western-style story (Ling, qi, Chinese zodiac, yokai). I agree with you that this creates a sense of cultural dissonance. At this point, I’d say you have a clear choice: write a Western-style high fantasy using a background with which you have more familiarity, or get some better guidance on research with East Asian cultures so you can code the story more effectively. 

The focus of this story is centered around meeting all these yokai and showing that there's more nuance to them than Ling believes, all while saving the world. But I worry if I'm appropriating these concepts and creatures by 1, drawing from more than one culture--I initially imagined that there would be a mix of Chinese, Japanese and Indian influence because according to a website I am getting the info on yokai from, the yokai in question already draw inspiration from or have been based on something in Chinese mythology or Hinduism [...]

R: Sure, some yokai have Chinese or Hindu parallels as that tends to happen with folk tales. But not all–some are unique to Japan, and some are more modern. Sometimes it’s very political–some people consider the Ainu Korpokkur as being a “Yokai of Japan” despite it belonging to the indigenous culture. It’s up to you to research, untangle, and understand these influences. 

The fact that you bring up that the Asian continent has seen a lot of cultural exchange is not a sufficient reason to randomly combine influences for the sake of visual appeal or “coolness.” That is appropriation. These influences must be understood in their historical context so that you know how/why certain things combined or morphed into another, and what makes sense to combine/morph. 

M: This also indicates that the character views the yokai as evil/inherently bad, which I would argue is not a typical stance for much Japanese folklore. Again, this shows a deficit in research. 

2, reimagining these yokai in a new context even though I have done the research on them, because one thing I kept seeing in regards to cultural appropriation is that it's bad to do that […]

R: Refer above to my note on “okay” and “not okay.” The thing with folklore and fairy tales is that every–and I mean every–folk tale is reinterpreted with every new iteration of it. Reimagining in a new context is what people do every time they pass on a story or tell a story with the same plot or characters. Do not think of folklore as an “original” that is altered and rebooted, but rather a living document that gets added to. Reimagining is not the inherent issue. HOW you reimagine something matters. 

So I suppose my question is...if someone were to do research upon the creature they want to use, given they are allowed to use it, and gained an understanding of what the creature or concept stood for, are they allowed to pick it apart and reimagine it? Alternatively, is it ok if it's explicitly pointed out that it is derivative of the original?

It has actually become my biggest fear that I may have internalized something that could both continue to do harm long after the fact and attract the wrong people to me work. I don't wanna let people down!

M: As Rina has noted several times, I think the problem is in trying to ID a set of specific variables and circumstances that make a thing “okay” or “not okay.” I want to recommend that you read my joking response about writing in secret rooms while wearing a disguise (Linked here). Who can you hurt if no one knows what you are doing? There’s a difference between creating for oneself and creating to share. 

You have internalized a message incorrectly, but not the one you cite. The goal of many recommendations against cultural appropriation is to avoid causing direct harm to people who have seen their cultures demeaned, discredited and devalued, especially in shared spaces. Assessing cultural engagement, whether we are talking about appropriation, appreciation or exchange is not a measure of personal virtue or a collection of commandment style do’s and don’t’s. Rather, I believe engaging with other cultures is the state of mind of acknowledging that when using these cultures’ in one’s own work, there is value in consulting members of that culture and giving credit where credit is due. This will be challenging if you are only comfortable engaging with all of these cultures in a distanced, minimal capacity. 

FWIW, I’ve written stories that probably will offend people from other cultures and backgrounds, but I don’t show them off. I don’t think writing these makes me a bad person, but I also don’t see the need to give unnecessary offense, so those stories are just for me, to be written and read in my own secret room. However, I’m not ashamed of having written them, and I’m also comfortable to “let people down” provided that my own shared work reflects my personal principles of what I consider to be sufficient research and engagement with other cultures,  As a creator, my work wouldn’t be mine if I didn’t first please myself. I think the trick to the creator role is deciding what to keep private, what to share and what constitutes sufficient engagement. 

P.S. 

We’ve referenced the need for research multiple times in this ask, and in some of the other asks that have gone up this week, so we thought this would be a good place to plug a beginner’s guide to academic research created by the mod team.. Look for it soon under WWC’s pinned posts!

[flowerbloom-arts]

AU where the Shifting Mound doesn't snatch the Damsel so soon and you have to deal with the repercussions of existing past "Happily Ever After" with a voluntarily undeveloped Sweet Love Interest™.

(also, yippee finally found a way to put my 2 interests together!!)

(absolutely incomprehensible ramble under the cut.)

Okay so I'm going to make this as understandable as possible for the uninitiated, whether it be for the Moomin comic strip or the franchise at large.

The plushie the Damsel is holding is that of the Snork Maiden (or just Snorkmaiden), the girlfriend/love interest for the main character, Moomintroll. Now, Snorkmaiden is an interesting and largely misunderstood character, especially when it comes to her comic version where she's a bit of a "promiscuous" character who oftentimes ditches Moomintroll for another man when she sees fit, this is where the misunderstanding lies.

Snorkmaiden haters will dismiss this (if they were to read the comics, because in all honesty they aren't that widely considered or even read in the fandom) as an addition to her general unlikeability as an "obstacle" to the fandom's main gay ship between Moomintroll and his best friend, Snorkmaiden sympathizers will leap to justify this with the good ol' It Was Heteronormativity All Along, which is a very... Honestly lazy reading/justification of her character which doesn't hold up under scrutiny. I, however, have an obviously superior reading of her character (/not serious)

Snorkmaiden simply has a very different definition of romance or at least wants to gain something different out of the concept of romance as opposed to the general public perception built up around it, one which even Moomintroll can't even begin to grasp.

What she gets out of romance, and where it begins and ends for her, is the adventurous fall and honeymoon of it, and each new man she gets into a relationship with is thematically appropriate to the adventure/problem of the week that she and her boyfriend's family are currently facing. When she goes to the French Riviera she starts dating a rich actor because it is a tourist shoreline city where all the celebrities go, when she finds herself in the wintery unknown (she and the Moomins usually hibernate through it, they're creatures like that) she catches a crush on a professional winter sportsman, when she decides to live a hedonist life because some self-proclaimed prophet came in and told everyone to she decides to start it by running away with someone new, when she gets a job as a secretary she falls in love with a coworker who is really interested in accounting, so on and so forth. Even with Moomintroll, they fell in love upon her introduction and Moomintroll signifies a new life in the valley in which they currently live in.

And in the end all of these new romances fall apart either due to unfortunate circumstances, Moomintroll's jealous intervention or her simply becoming disinterested eventually, and in the end of all of them she returns to Moomintroll, as per formulaic comic strip storytelling. (I must mention that Moomintroll also falls in love with other women based on their looks, and he also fell in love with Snorkmaiden because he thought she was pretty, so, he's not that much better really)

This is a repeating cycle, one that Snorkmaiden is simply incapable of breaking out of due to the conventions of her narrative. No matter what she tries, where she goes, who she gets with, she'll always end up back in Moomintroll's arms whether he "earns it back through chivalry" or she runs back to him much to her previous chagrin. It's a self-fulfilling cycle too, in one comic it's shown that she's so used to Moomintroll's behavior that it sours her current relationship with an already bad partner even further. If she was capable of Truly Leaving then she stopped being capable at that point. Snorkmaiden is stuck with a long-term boyfriend when she normally strives in a short-term relationship.

She's also deeply entrenched in romance tropes and loves to roleplay them with Moomintroll, and especially loves them when she thinks they're real, these tropes she fancies usually tend toward kidnapping (and not alot of rescuing) or romantic sacrifice such as dueling or... Romeo and Juliet. These things are extensions of her ideas on what romance is, more about the short-term thrill than the long-term contentment.

Of course, with most Moomin media having a child demographic as opposed to the adult newspaper readers of the comics, Snorkmaiden's character in adaptations of these stories get presented without the depth or the means for that depth, as she gets presented as either a somewhat boring playdate to Moomintroll with grand, childish ideas of romance or a naggy girlfriend whom the writers try to make feminist but ultimately fails to deliver on anything subversive or substantial.

How this ties into the Princess is the cyclical nature of it all, the choices with no branching ends, the new experiences with seemingly no development, the change and then the sudden stop. And with the Damsel in particular it is the reduction of such an interesting and intriguing person full of potential to a cutout of a simple Love Interest. All that anguish is suddenly washed away into something more palatable, a parody of a fairytale princess, a goodness so pure that it is sickening, no motivation behind the eyes except for one simple goal.

Now. Don't get me wrong, the Damsel is my favorite princess, between the Adversaries and the Towers and the Witches and Wilds, the Damsel is the one which captivated my singular interest, becaus I'm not immune to her trappings of adorable beauty and saccharine sweetness with no other motivation than to make her hero happy, I believe that it's a combination of the player's desire for her to be a normal princess they can have a happy ending with but also her willfully stripping herself out of guilt of what she's done to the player.

She stripped herself of any real personhood just to make us happy, and that is the purest motivation anyone can have, really, a terribly misguided one but the sentiment is immeasurable. I pity her and I love her and I want her to be so genuinely happy because of what she's gone through but I know very well that she's incapable of that because the decisions the player chose made her that way, she is made incapable of genuine happiness without total dependence on the player's feelings and that really breaks my heart.

It breaks my heart when she's reduced to a crappy middle school anime drawing when she's put through the pressure of getting interrogated or being told strange things about what would make the player happy.

It breaks my heart when she's finally free but then immediately met with the coldness of the Shifting Mound and thought that coldness was happiness.

It breaks my heart when she accepts her second death with tears in her eyes and a smile because she thinks that's what made the player happy, and yet somehow she couldn't accept it as a real decision the player made on their own because in the first time she was warned that they were possessed, so the only conclusion she could come up with was that the cabin was causing this pain and so as the Grey she decides to burn the whole place to the ground and stare at you lovingly until her face melts away.

It breaks my heart that the Grey is in a wedding dress, on top of that.

She's so desperate to cling onto the first person to show her kindness that she seems to have become broken over it. She's so terribly tragic that I can't help but keep thinking about her and the million heartbreaks knowing that she's so lovely and selfless but she wasn't Real anymore.

I want her to have a massive fairytale wedding like at the end of Disney's old Cinderella movie and live forever with some physical manifestation of Voice of the Smitten. I want her to come back to personhood and cry and not be snapped like a twig over it. I want the Damsel to be happy in any way she seems fit to be but I know that can never happy, both by the nature of the game but also in the very programming of her character.

She is trapped, whether it's in the cabin, her own circular mentality or as part of the Shifting Mound, she's incapable of of being really free as her own person unless you count the ending of us leaving with the no-blade blade starter princess.

... And that's why I think she should hold a massive Snorkmaiden fair prize won by her darling new butch knight girlfriend.

[ikiprian]

Wanna share ur epic cool WIPS?

-Winion✌🏽

OH BOY, DO I!!! MISMENTOR AU BE UPON THEE

“Hey, Mr. Fenton,” Tim says. He makes some snap judgments based on Fenton’s personality and previous interactions he’s seen him have with students, then holds out the blanket, expression aiming for appropriately sheepish as opposed to dead guilty, which will be more fitting a role when he gets to English late. “Sorry I passed out back there. I promise it won’t happen again, I was just up late and then I couldn’t fall asleep and, y’know, my brother’s dog--”

“Oh absolutely, you’re not in trouble or anything. Don’t worry about it,” Fenton says. He opens the largest drawer in his massive desk to tuck the blanket away-- Tim spots at least two hoodies, a massive first aid kit, a box of granola, stress balls, fidget toys-- and shuts it. “But I do wanna ask if everything’s okay. This is, if I’m counting right, the third time in three weeks you’ve fallen asleep.”

Tim freezes. Yikes.

“I didn’t wanna say anything the other times,” Fenton continues, “but it is a pattern, now, and I wanna make sure you’re getting everything you need.”

“I am,” Tim’s quick to say. I am, I’m just also moonlighting as a vigilante and have three cases to juggle ATM. I am, I’m just also trying to organize my teen superhero team into a potential reunification party. I am, I’m just also filling my time chasing some new meta kid around Gotham to make sure he’s not a villain. He takes a breath.

A dozen pre-planned, civilian-friendly excuses shuffle in his head, and he picks the one that makes the most sense. “I just-- y’know. I’m having trouble adjusting to academic life again, I think. I took that break studying abroad, and then I worked full time, and I had all that freedom, and now…”

Fenton nods. “Oh, yeah. I remember being a teenager.” God, Tim loves it when people reinforce his excuses for him. “Well, if you ever need anything, let me know, okay? And try to prioritize sleep in your schedule. Here, let me show you a trick…”

Fenton opens his phone, his comically large fingers tapping away at the tiny screen, and pulls up a little website. In some ways, his brick-shithouse build is intimidating. Tim’s surprised he’s found a career in the classroom, and not as a bouncer at a nightclub.

[felassan]

Hello friend :) I was wondering if there is a definitive list of known spies of Fen'harel? In Trespasser we meet one ("The elven guard that led you to the Qunari body, who intercepted the servant with the gaatlock barrel? Mine.") but can't remember if there are any other such cases we can look back on. Thanks!!!

hello! ◕‿◕ oh, good question! I don’t know that there is a definitive list.

there is the elven lady - the guard from Trespasser - as you say

Solas mentions in Trespasser, but doesn’t name of course, the existence of multiple spies of his that were within the Inquisition (the ones that “tripped over” the Qunari spies within the Inquisition)

a Trespasser epilogue slide reads “After the events at the Winter Palace, elves left the Inquisition under mysterious circumstances, as did elven servants across Thedas. None could say where they went, but those who believed the Inquisitor's story about Fen'Harel wondered just how large the Dread Wolf's forces were... and what the ancient elven rebel had planned.” – it’s likely that at least some of these were working as his agents/spies at the time of the events of DA:I, and those that weren't, well, they’ve left their lives in Thedas to go join him and are his agents now. tying to this, in Tevinter Nights, the rumors going around Thedas that “dozens” of elves have gone to join him are mentioned

In Half Up Front in TN, there is the elf who hired Irian and Vadis to try and steal Dumat’s Folly, who then poisoned herself rather than be caught

In the same short story, Gatt mentions a male agent of Fen’Harel who was within the ranks of the Ben-Hassrath, explaining that he tricked them also into trying to steal Dumat’s Folly

In Dread Wolf Take You in TN, the Carta Assassin relates his tale and it has three elven agents in it: the one with the regular Fereldan accent (as opposed to Dalish) who is presumably a former Fereldan City Elf, the one whose accent does sound Dalish only more formal and poetic (who from this is implied to be an ancient elf**), and the Dalish elf who they accidentally killed, who was the one to originally make contact with the Carta assassin’s boys and who told them that he learned of the idol being in the statue of Meredith from a dream.

Felassan, of course

Gaius, from the comic Dragon Age: Deception

** not a wild idea, Felassan was another example, there are also groups around like Abelas and the sentinels in the Temple of Mythal, Solas alludes to other groups of them too in DA:I with his dialogue line to Abelas "There are other places, friend. Other duties. Your [ancient elvhen] people yet linger." were these other duties.. being agents of Fen'Harel and helping out Solas with his plans?

Honorable mentions:

at one point the Qunari thought Solas himself was an agent of Fen’Harel (Charred Note reads "These walls of blue flame were cast by the agent of Fen'Harel as he ran through this place bringing chaos and destruction. [...] Fen'Harel's mage-servant made them to hamper us, and they bring only death.")

at one point the Qunari thought the Inquisitor was an agent of Fen’Harel

his agents once tried to recruit Irian Cestes, but she turned them down.

(lmk if there’s any I missed.) :>

[worrygutz]

One of the things i find really interesting about Nubbins’ character is peoples perception of him depends a large amount on what their character interpretation of Bubba is.

I’ve noticed that fans who interpret leatherface as being a victim of his family, or not much of a person outside of his disabilities, tend to have a more negative view of Nubbins, often lumping him in with the abusive family member label (even though the opposing canon shows him being the one abused). This being further carried by the Jason x Leatherface comics, solidifying this interpretation of the character to some viewers.

Despite being in the same home circumstances as Bubba Sawyer and despite also being mentally disabled (Both Gunnar Hansen (leatherface) and Ed Neal (Hitchiker) referenced real life mentally disabled people for their performances) his character is treated as more capable and held to higher scrutiny not only by fans but by Drayton Sawyer himself in canon.

My own character interpretation of Bubba Sawyer affects my opinion on Nubbins also, which is probably why I like him so much. I see Bubba as someone who is more capable than people give him credit for. Especially within the family dynamic. He’s not just the physical strength of the family but he has the skills of all family members combined whilst also filling in for the roles of family members which are missing (aka grandma).

Maybe it’s his violence being more on the unpredicatable side or a specific scene or interaction that people are put off by him. I would love to know other people’s thoughts on it bcs I could be slightly biased.

[avoidcrowdraws]

Might be too long of a comic so a list of your headcanons is fine too but you mentioned in the ds au that Chilchuck was a bit hesitant to take on Laios cause he doesn't really work with other races often, so maybe a peek as to what that first meeting/contract negotiation was like???

It is a little too long to draw all of it, but here's some doodles, and a ton of thoughts below the cut!

Warning again for kink and sexuality discussion

Dandan is the one to introduce them, they meet at a cafe, and from the start Chilchuck is exasperated because Dandan didn't tell him Laios is a tall-man. They have a brief row about it to the side while Laios waits (see Chilchuck's rant in the bottom image here)

Chilchuck isn't completely opposed to other races, but as in the Dungeon Meshi canon half-foots are looked down upon. I imagine he has to fight an uphill battle for respect among non-half-foots, and that's before even introducing himself as a Dom

Fortunately Laios doesn't question Chilchuck's Dom capabilities, which Chilchuck had been expecting, which puts Chilchuck more at ease with the situation. Laios does immediately overstep and start calling him 'sir' before they've agreed to anything, Chilchuck has mixed feelings about that, but he sees it as a trainable offense

Laios becomes more more confident when he starts talking about what he wants, kink is one of his special interests in this AU so he's pretty knowledgeable even if he's less experienced personally. Chilchuck becomes legitimately interested when Laios lists a bunch of their overlapping kink preferences, because Chilchuck's current sub roster is a little more softcore

This might make some people unhappy, but my headcanon is that Chilchuck doesn't participate sexually with his subs himself. He'll get them off if they want, but he doesn't enjoy sex in a D/s context. He separates his sexuality from his kink entirely, and also in fact he considers himself largely straight

But I just want to mark this last paragraph with huge 'FOR NOW' signage

Chilchuck has brought a trial contract along, that outlines a short but non-personalised agreement, one with strict limitations, and that expires quickly. If they like what they're doing (which they do) Chilchuck will help them write a longer one together, with more specifics