#balance vs antithesis

[neo-zone]

Yin and Yang

[ballinandcantgetup452]

Something that I love about the DCAU is just how flawed that version of Superman is.

I'm not saying DCAU Superman is evil. I'm just saying that he's not perfect. While Superman is my favorite superhero of all time, sometimes when he's not in a starring role he can be written as perfect. Which is fine if you do it right. Superman should always do the right thing. But JLU is one of the rare pieces of media that sees Clark struggle to do the right thing.

If I had to critique All Star Superman, it would be that Morrison's Superman comes first. In JLU, Superman is Clark Kent first and foremost. Clark Kent is a human being. JLU somehow finds the balance of the John Byrne "I'm a human" without going so far as to make it so that Clark is erasing his own heritage.

DCAU Superman has the deeply simple human trait of being happy to be here. He likes the people around him. He invites J'onn over for Christmas, it's implied that he, Bruce, and Diana go out to eat every once and a while. DCAU Superman loves humanity, and he loves being human.

On the other side of the coin, he also feels the deeply simple human trait of anger. When he finds out that he's an alien, he punches the barn and runs off, he chokes Professor Hamilton upon finding out what he did to Kara, Clark openly admits that he wants to storm Cadmus after what happens to The Question.

Honestly, there's a part of me that believes that his "world of cardboard" speech had a little bit of resentment to it. Almost like he wishes that he could go all out. That it would be easier. I'd argue that it's the antithesis to Superman Vs. The Elite's "dude just get creative" speech.

DCAU Clark Kent is a flawed human being. He still has the appropriate heart that you're supposed to give the character, but it's a human heart. I think it's why it's one of my favorite interpretations of the character

[novafire-is-thinking]

Per aspera ad astra: “through adversity, to the stars”

The Vision

“You see a future in the stars?" Alpha Trion asked him quietly.

. . .

“The stars look endless to me,” he [Orion] said eventually. “Out there, you could just go and go, and there’d be enough space for everyone, and things to do and see that go on forever.” (CoP)

In an earlier post (Orion the Dreamer), I shared the full scene where Orion reveals his hopes and dreams to Alpha Trion.

And I mentioned in the previous post (Desire vs. Destiny) that it was Optimus’ deepest desire to peer behind the veil of life and study its secrets by collecting stories and seeking knowledge wherever he could find it.

Putting together both of these, one can see that Orion/Optimus’ personal vision for his life was to be a lifelong learner—one who learned through exploration, discovery of new life, the seeking of stories, and deep reflection.

Change of Plans

I will recover the AllSpark, thought Optimus Prime. Then I will retrace my steps across the galaxy and sow peace on my return wherever our initial exodus has inadvertently fomented division and war. (Exiles)

Life rarely goes as planned, as Optimus found out as the war dragged on.

Where a young Orion dreamt of setting out on his journey with curiosity and hope, a war-torn Optimus came to expect nothing more than a future quest of reparation and what he determined to be a moral duty.

A Fresh Glimpse of Hope

After so long, it was strange indeed to reach this planet again. Although I had heard it was full of life, I did not expect what we found—civilizations, technologies. For the last months, as we have been on final approach, we have learned to know them by their broadcasts, and though the others say nothing about it, what amazes me is how alike we are. Our bodies are different, our lifespans and our needs unalike, but what drives us and moves us is very much the same: humans talk about the heart, and Cybertronians the Spark; they love and fear, think and fight one another, as we do.

I looked for signs as we came within the light of their sun, and I find them everywhere—the many readings of Cybertronian technology on their world, the intensity of their struggles, the strange richness of their stories—against all odds, Unicron the Destroyer of Worlds has borne eons of life. I feel everything hangs in the balance. The Nemesis still pursues. We still track the AllSpark. So long this journey has been, and in spite of all its battles, so unchanging. (CoP)

Upon meeting and observing humans for himself, Optimus saw a glimpse of future potential—a future in which two very different, yet oddly similar species could learn and grow together, just as he’d wanted before the war. After all, Earth was also home to Unicron—the antithesis of Primus. There had to be a connection somewhere, and if not, Optimus intended to create one.

Of course, the war prevented him from getting his hopes too high, but judging from the fact that he trusted a human with the Key to Vector Sigma, it seems he allowed himself to hold onto a sliver of hope that humanity would not only survive the Cybertronian war, but would be part of Cybertron’s future in some way.

Endings and Epiphanies

I saw my death in the descent of the Dark Saber in Megatron's hand. I was surprised a little, disappointed. And then suddenly Megatron was no more. The reprieve was beyond belief. It shook me to my Spark and I felt suddenly with incredible force the fool I had been. I was not alone. I had never been alone, Prime or not. We, the Autobots, were one. (CoP)

After eons of hardship and carrying what he thought was primarily his burden to carry, Optimus was reminded that he was part of a greater whole.

The bigger goal was to see Autobots and Decepticons become one again, but this monumental shift in awareness was a necessary first step on Optimus’ journey to heal and open himself up to possibilities involving Cybertronians of either faction and humans.

A Shared Destiny

Thus ends the story of the Age of the Primes and of the origins of the Cybertronians, though not the whole story of course, for that is still being written in time and space on Earth, and all over the galaxy where the seeds and the sparks of life are growing.

I, Alpha Trion, one of the last Primes, now give this book into your hands, human friend, so that you shall know who your allies are, and your enemies also, how they are made, and where they have come from. Be sure that wherever and whenever you need our aid, the Autobots will respond to your call.

This is the Covenant of Primus, as given to all Cybertronians by right, and to humans by the last wish of Optimus, the Thirteenth Prime, so let it be.

TILL ALL ARE ONE.

Alpha Trion’s wording tells me humanity is probably the only other species that was given the Covenant of Primus.

This is incredible, to say the least. Of all the races Optimus encountered, he asked that humans be given one of the most sacred texts of the Cybertronian race.

But why humanity?

Well, Optimus firmly believed humans and Cybertronians shared a common destiny.

Alpha Trion, the relics, Unicron, the end of the war.

To Optimus, all of it pointed to Earth and humanity being an excellent starting point to launch into his original dream. He saw in humanity the future he’d endured so much hardship for: a future of learning and growing—not just alongside fellow Cybertronians, but alongside other races as well.

And depending on what each fan chooses to believe is the end of Optimus’ story, he either never got to see the fulfillment of his dream, or he did in some imagined way outside of canon.

Dreamers suffer more, but they also live more.

✧ ✧ ✧

Today, this post and the entire series are dedicated to Peter Cullen on his 82nd birthday, and to one of several beloved Optimi he’s poured so much of his heart and soul into. ❤️

[animehouse-moe]

Jujutsu Kaisen Season 2 Episode 21: I Am You

I think it's pretty funny that I haven't been active at all this week due to life, but my first post since the question about my activity regarding JJK, is a post about JJK. Just a bit of irony.

Anyways, this was originally just going to be a short complaint about narrative flops in this episode (that I thought I might not even write about), but I have a feeling it's going to end up a pretty long winded complaint about the handling of key characters at the end of this season. So here we go.

I'll just get right into it with the egregious ending of Itadori vs Mahito here.

I think that if for a minute you've understood who Itadori is, what he is, that this scene will immediately rub you the wrong way.

Why, on god's green earth, would you pull Sukuna into this conversation? Why would you make a reference to Sukuna with the words coming from Yuji's mouth in this context.

Better yet, why would you paint Yuji as a looming shadow above Mahito in this moment?

It's just an egregious and wasteful depiction of Yuji that takes his character in the complete opposite direction.

Our boy Yuji here isn't some grand hero, he is not some otherworldly threat to Mahito. He is, quite literally, the antithesis to Mahito. These are words that Yuji himself states, within this very episode.

Yuji is a cog in the machine of the Jujutsu world, he is a single piece of the puzzle that creates a bigger picture. He is the wolf hunting the rabbit on sheer instinct. There is no greater goal, there is no lofty ideal. It is clear cut and simple, that this is Itadori accepting his fate, accepting his life. Using the hole in his mouth to show him carrying the carnage of Sukuna on his back? Great idea. Using that imagery at the completely wrong time though? I can't imagine why they would choose to do that.

His entire character arc through Shibuya is to own his life at this stage, to say that everything he's done is his own actions, and that he'll keep pushing until he has nothing left. Not that he'll get stronger, not that he'll save his friends or the world, but that he'll keep. killing. curses.

It just sort of blows my mind to see how they would handle something so expertly clear cut from the manga. Gege's vision was so incredibly well defined and expressed in these finals moments of the pair. It was pure art, and absolutely earned its status and popularity within the fandom.

I won't lie, it hurts. Not physically, but it hurts. And then there's just a bunch of odd animation work with the sequence, like Mahito's mouth and eyes shaking at a million miles per hour. There's obviously some really great animation and work throughout the episode, and it's not so much that it's poorly animated, but just incorrectly animated. These characters can feel insanely different just from cut to cut alone, and when the smallest details can make the biggest differences, those variances can really add turbulence to their character arcs.

Anyways, onto the next topic of discussion: Todo. I love this man. Hands down, my favorite side character through all his time on the page and screen. Incredible character to put beside Yuji for balance.

But.

The production ran away with him a little too much. I get it, it's hard to not go crazy when you have the potential to, and in a vacuum I adore the two big sequences he's gotten in the last two episodes. However, I think you have to be pretty crazy to think that Todo's Takada Tandem (patent pending) is a good fit for the episode.

Todo and Takada are an... interesting pair. Todo doesn't "use" Takada too much, so it makes it hard to really define a proper line with it, so let me put it another way.

Before Yuji was in the picture, Takada was Todo's #1 by a mile. With Yuji in the picture though? Sorry Takada, a brother's more important than an idol.

So, you could imagine my surprise when Todo tries to steal Yuji's thunder with a Takada powered delusion. I mean, he's fighting side by side with his brother, the person closest to him in the world.

Todo went to Takada to ask a question in his season 1 dilemma with Hanami because Yuji was out of the equation. Yuji was not at risk, it was not "Yuji's fight". Where Todo was leading Yuji with Hanami, it is absolutely the other way around with Mahito. And I mean, the most obvious thing to explain that with is the fact that Mahito basically shoves Todo to the side to start.

Regardless, the idea is that Yuji's in the pilot's seat, he's the one that knows the most about Mahito, he knows how to fight him. Todo is there to support his brother. Bringing out Takada, stealing Yuji's thunder, and weakening the balance and chemistry between our brothers just confuses me to no end.

Like, just simple things like Todo's hand. Dude has 3-5 business days to chop it off in the anime, and realizes on his own to do so. Kudos to Todo and his insane IQ, but the entire idea presented in the manga is that Yuji is faster at warning Todo than Todo is at grasping what's going on. It's just things like these that undermine the significance and value of this fight, and consistently appear in the episode.

Completely baffles me why it happens, but it's just a further extension of the narrative trend of stirring the pot where no stirring is needed. And it really hurts. Powerscaling is nonexistent, fights have ended up vastly different in tone and execution, and core narrative elements have just all sorts of these little inexplicable changes that undermine that masterful work of Gege through this arc. We're almost across the finish line, and all I'm hoping for is for it to be over at this point, which is flat out depressing.

[overworkedblorbobattle]

Hi dear poll runner! I just closed nominations on a competition im gonna run and was wondering if you had any advice on making good balanced brackets?

(also it's the @ultimatecubetournament if anyone wants to go vote once it starts)

Honestly, I just kind of winged it but I'll do my best to explain what I've noticed. I'm assuming your talking about creating matchups and seeding the bracket, so that's what I'll talk about. (if you're not I'm sorry and you can send me another ask if you want). I’m also not very good at explaining things, so I hope this makes sense.

The explanation is under a read-more because it wound up being much longer than I originally thought it would be.

The thing with these tournaments, is that no matter how you seed your bracket someone will complain about it. Therefore, seed your bracket the way you want to and let the people who enjoy your tournament enjoy it, there’s no pleasing everyone.

With that being said, there are three main methods I’ve seen for seeding brackets, they’re all balanced in different ways and I’ve given them all names because I wanted to.

1: Classic seeding-

This is where you assemble a bracket in such a way that the strongest (most popular) competitors don’t compete until later on in the tournament, leading to the later polls being more competitive and exciting. Using this method, you’ll pit less popular characters against more popular characters in round 1 with the assumption that the more well known character will win, and face off against the other well known characters in later rounds. This is the most common type in competitive sports and the like.

Pros:

Ensures that the competition and interest in the polls will scale upwards as the polls progress, leading to the final being the most exciting and engaging of all.

Fans of popular characters will enjoy seeing their faves win a lot of polls

Cons:

Fans of niche characters aren’t going to like having their favourite character be beaten out by someone much more popular in the first round

The tournament may inadvertently end up less exciting as the earlier matches may wind up feeling boring and one sided

Seeding this way requires decent knowledge of each characters popularity, relative to each other

Takes a lot of time and energy to seed effectively

2: “Fair” Seeding-

This is essentially the antithesis to classic seeding. You assemble the bracket in such a way that niche characters are pitted against niche characters and popular characters are pitted against popular characters for as long as possible.

Pros:

The first rounds are likely to be immediately engaging, with matches between characters of similar notoriety

Fans of niche characters will enjoy seeing their faves have a fighting chance

Cons:

The later rounds of the poll may end wind up less engaging, with the popular characters likely to beat out the nicher ones, the finale itself may end up frustrating and one sided if it’s a popular character vs a nicher character

Fans of popular characters won’t like seeing their favourite characters lose earlier

Seeding this way requires decent knowledge of each characters popularity, relative to each other

Takes a lot of time and energy to seed effectively

3: Random Seeding-

The most simple to explain. Each of the matchups are generated randomly.

Pros:

Doesn’t require any knowledge of the characters or their relative popularity

Fast and easy, the matchups can be decided in less than a day with very little effort on your own part

Takes the blame off of you when a poll is unfair or frustrating

Cons:

Can feel frustrating and inconsistent, with some polls being much more balanced than others, appeasing neither fans of niche or popular characters

Since the matchups are random, has the potential to fall into the cons of either or even both of the previous methods

In conclusion,

No method is free from cons, but no method is free from pros either. The way you chose to seed your bracket should depend on what you want to prioritise in your tournament, and how much energy you want to spend doing it.

No method is better or worse than another, just different. You can even combine methods. I personally used random seeding, but readjusted any matchups that I found were too unfair.

Basically, it’s impossible to please everyone or create a tournament that’s completely balanced. Someone will always be unhappy. So, do what you want to do.

[icecreambeach]

I like the ocean analogy, but I think this idea of binaries gets a bad rap. (Alternate title: I'm taking this opportunity to have Thoughts about the Force.) (Also, the user's use of the ocean metaphor STILL implies a binary: shallow vs. deep.)

A lot of people hear the word 'binary' and automatically think it's describing something over-simplified or just downright false. But the Force is only thought of as a binary because human minds can only conceptualize reality via binaries: nothing and something. Something couldn't exist without nothing. It's the nothing that makes the something, something! We can only establish the existence of a thing when we notice it, and we only notice it if it's somehow different from the other things around it. (But also, things exist together! Is the wind pushing the leaves, or are the leaves pulling the wind? OooOoOoo—)

And it's this friction—or to use another word, this conflict ("it's star WARS not star PEACE")—that creates everything we know. It's considered wisdom in many cultures to be able to hold two opposing thoughts at the same time. It's one way to best approximate Truth.

The dark side is evil, and it can never die. The light can also never stop fighting it. The balance doesn't exist in stasis; the scales are constantly shifting. Neither can ever fully win, and the seed of one resides in the heart of the other. Yin and Yang.

The Force is all of that. The Force only appears to have a will in instances where the individual goes extremely far into one polarity, like in the above examples. It's not a mass that swallows. It's everything. It's not even really just a force/energy. It's All That Is. It CERTAINLY does not have an individual will. It's just individuals (or sometimes groups) projecting their own will upon its faceless face. (Even the concept of Good vs. Evil is a Single-Perspective-Haver's idea that means little to the cosmic/All-Perspective of the Force. When you are infinite, it all comes out in the wash. But that's going down a road that would lead to a whole other essay.)

This is why the idea of midi-chlorians is so bad. lol. It takes away the inherently unknowable aspect of the force that mimics its real-life equivalent as explored in the Tao. It turns being force-sensitive into a scientifically measurable trait, which, if you read about the Tao, is sort of the antithesis of the whole concept. Its invisibility and inability to be defined is MAYBE its only true definition. (If you think this is confusing, congrats, you get it. Oh you think you get it? Then you don't get it.)

"Chi," the Chinese concept of a life force present in all living things, is what inspired Lucas (though I'd take it even further to include the inorganic.) Nothing exists independently of anything else because everything is connected. Granted, Lucas's iteration is extremely Westernized, and he himself said he pulled from "all major religions" in a Hero-with-a-Thousand-Faces mono-myth fashion (which, idk if I agree with the concept of the mono-myth,) but the Taoist origins are, to me, the basic building blocks and should be adhered to above the rest of the Christian window dressing.

Because while I get that Lucas only wrote in midi-chlorians so he could have Qui-gon point to scientific (Western) evidence (because God forbid Western audiences have to accept a more 'woo-woo' test, like the Council all just feeling for Anakin's latent powers and all agree 'oo yeah this kid has Got It,') this is why Star Wars is Appropriation Central. You can't just slap bits of many different religious beliefs together and call it a day. Either the Force is What Is, the underlying FORCE of the entire universe AS WELL AS the Void implied by the dichotomy of Something vs. Nothing, or it's Daddy God and Baby Jesus. Or a secret third thing. It's like rummaging in a stranger's medicine cabinet and taking a prescription not meant for you. (This is also why most Americans, including me, suck at meditation btw.)

This is also why the Cosmic Force/Living Force thing is bad. It's basically "God created Life, but God is separate from Life." This Christian idea of divinity as separate from "earthliness" sucks. It's all the Force, baby! You ARE the universe experiencing itself!

This is ALSO also why I hate the fanon of "Grey Jedi." The whole point is that the Force is Light vs. Dark. Sure, a Jedi who is generally dedicated to the Light (compassion, peace, a belief in the inherent value of life) can make some decisions that seem Dark, but again, it's all about the Balance. Tip too far into one direction and the momentum can drag you down with it. Anakin wanted to stay in the Light, but due to many factors, he was unable to resist the Dark. Both have, I think, magnetic pulls, but the Dark is more seductive because it's easier, it often FEELS better, and pain can make us short-sighted. People who want characters to be Grey Jedi just want them to be Light Jedi who don't behave quite as monk-like as, say, Obi-wan or Yoda. Ahsoka is still a Light Jedi. So, Kreia saying, "I hate the Force. I hate that it seems to have a will, that it would control us to achieve some measure of balance, when countless lives are lost," welp... that's Sith-talk, whether she believes it or not. The Force has no will, she's just sad about, /waves hand. All the atrocities. Which, legit. Just gotta work on that attachment babe. (And she did wind up a Sith anyway, so.)

I DO love different cultures with their own unique understandings of the Force. The Council sure as shit didn't have it perfectly figured out. As an inherently unknowable Thing/Concept, cultural/individual interpretations of it are EVERYTHING. The mind creates reality.

I like to imagine a remote planet where their Force-sensitives do nothing but help build homes for their community. To them, it IS all about just moving rocks!

You know, with all the language throughout Star Wars about “giving in” to the Dark Side, how the Dark Side makes you more powerful, how the Dark Side makes you age strangely and destroys you, it sure doesn’t sound like an “opposite side of the coin” so much as the “deeper end of the pool,” like it’s actually the true form of the force and being a Jedi is about keeping it tamed so it doesn’t eat you the way it actually wants.

[void-tiger]

Writer Nonnie and *reads Thor Saves Everyone post* are you telling me we could have had an Everyone Lives? That in a VLD/MCU crossover Thor and Shiro would another thing to bond over in addition to being Older Twins Who Have Chaotic Younger Twins? Because I'm pretty sure that "we were 8" line in Ragnarok implies they Thor and Loki were raised as twins AND I WILL NOT LET THAT GO. *adds to WIP pile* "Only one way" my ass Doctor Strange.

Always be suspicious of “only one way”. It is almost always not only false, but a way for the writers or a Writer’s Standin Character to handwave things away.

You literally cannot look at every single infinite possibility. That’s...why it’s called infinity.

It is possible to see “most likely way” or “probably more likely ways” but this usually doesn’t mean it’s “the best way”, just “an easier way”. (Best is also arbitrary. Most favorable outcome? Most likely outcome? Easiest outcome? Best HOW.)

So...at best (hah) Doctor Strange only looked as a sliver of possibilities, which were still extremely overwhelming and only found “one way” before needing to call it quits (both because Overload Much as well as...Thanos could literally pop up at any time and take the gem by force.)

TL;DR:

I don’t blame Strange as a character. However, he was used as a grimdark plot device. And further insult to injury—besides Thor losing the most and treated as a joke because of it—Thor actually begged to use the Infinity Gauntlet...but was shot down in favor of Professor Hulk. Also let’s be honest. They wanted to kill off both Gamora and Natasha to make us sad, completely sidelined Captain Marvel and Scarlet Witch, repeatedly tortured Nebula, where tf is Sif, and...thought they could appease us with a All (most) Of The Marvel Women In A Single Shot Montage that just...resulted in a “keep away”? Yeah...uh...no.

[writingdotcoffee]

#167: Social Media for Writers

Writing requires focus. A lot of it — if you want to get anywhere that is. Social media is the antithesis of focus with algorithms designed to exploit the weaknesses of the human brain and claim as much of your attention as possible. At the same time, more and more communication happens over social media. 4.3 billion people have access to the Internet. Out of that, 3.2 billion have either a Facebook or Instagram account.

Most well-known writers are active on social media with prominent accounts managed by themselves or their team. It’s too good an opportunity to pass up.

How can you make social media work as a writer without it affecting your productivity?

The secret

To be successful on one of those platforms, you need to post regularly. Most people recommend posting once per day minimum with some people advocating up to 5 or even 10 high-quality posts per day.

Whenever I tried this, it completely shattered my writing productivity. Instead of getting things done, I was constantly looking for something clever to post on Twitter. It was stressing me out.

When I was stressed and on social media, the algorithm caught me unprepared, and I ended up doomscrolling for extended periods.

So what’s the secret? It’s surprisingly simple: batch-write your posts.

Every week, set an hour aside to write as many posts as you can. As a writer, you’re used to spending hours at your keyboard writing your stories. Do the same with your social media posts. This way, you’ll be leveraging your strengths while creating content at the same time.

Write as many posts as you can. Whatever comes to mind. After that, pick the best ones and schedule them over the coming week so that you have one post for every day.

Over time, you'll get better at this. You’ll have a better idea of what posts resonate with your audience better. You can either spend less time doing this or write more posts during the hour so that you can post multiple times a day.

Inform and entertain

But what should you post? The best way to do this is to think about what content you enjoy seeing. See what other writers are doing. Can you figure out their "social media strategy?"

Often, this boils down to information and entertainment — your posts should either have useful information in them or be entertaining (broadly speaking).

Your opinion on a TV show = entertainment. A balanced review of a book you read = information. Original stories = entertainment. Writing advice = information. You get the idea.

Document vs create

When you’re not feeling inspired to come up with ideas, try documenting what you’re doing. Write about something that you’ve been struggling with while writing. Tell people how you do what you do. Share snippets of your work in progress. Post about the books that you’re reading.

Interact with others

As your posts begin to attract attention over time, you should set aside time to interact with others. Respond to comments and appreciate the posts of other users.

Do this during your downtime — whenever you feel too tired to write. Disable your social media notifications so that you aren't tempted to do it as the comments come in.

Social media can be a disaster for your writing life. But when you approach them with intention and are strict about managing your time, social media are a massive opportunity for writers. It’s how you build an audience of like-minded people that care about the things that you care about.

Want More?

My email subscribers receive a notification when I publish these posts along with a few things I found interesting or helpful on the literary internet every week. Click the link below to join the club.

SUBSCRIBE

(I won’t spam you or pass your email to a third party. You can unsubscribe at any time.)

Past Editions

#166: The Right Time to Write, October 2020

#165: The Tip of the Iceberg, October 2020

#164: Moving on to the Next Thing, October 2020

#163: Making Space for Writing, October 2020

#162: Knowing the Right Thing to Do and Doing the Right Thing, September 2020

[wanderingaldecaldo]

14, 18 and 28 for the fic thing!

Thanks for the ask! 🥰

Fanfic end of year asks

14 - a fic you didn’t expect to write

I answered this before but I'll give a different one. Once I started writing No One's Gonna Love You, there was no stopping me. I did a lot of the April prompt event at Lizzie's, but I got detoured for several weeks in late April/early May by Blaze of Glory.

I was in-game researching the panzer (double-checking that they could actually sit on it and smoke a cigarette after...well...you know) and I scanned Mitch. The results shocked me -- NCPD showed him as wanted for sexual assault. It shook me to the core. I certainly believe that people are capable of change, but to me that was the antithesis of everything Mitch stands for. I struggled with it for a long time. It actually put me off of writing NOGLY while I reckoned with it.

Turns out CDPR is just terrible and randomly generate charges for NPCs. I've gotten different charges with each different scan since then, but the fact that it showed up and I had to *see it*?

But I love the piece that I wrote as a result. It was the first time I really wrote from Mitch's POV, and I feel like I struck a good balance with it without descending into apologist territory.

18 - current number of wips

OH GOD I guess that depends on what counts. Let's say, anything that has actual writing done for it vs planning.

No One's Gonna Love You is still technically a WIP -- and I'm procrastinating by doing this instead 😬

Goro/Corpo V based on Pride and Prejudice (this is actually what got me back into writing this year and I have seven hand written pages for it already. one day I'll go back to it)

three for friends' ships

three Mitch/Val oneshots

Mitch/Claire slow burn

Parts two and three to Triangles, a Mitch/Scorp/Corpo V plot-what-plot

Judy/Carol rebound-to-love (Carol needs love too, dammit!)

Rogue/Johnny pegging

Total: Lucky 13

28 - longest fic you read this year

Chase the Morning by ThornWild. Does it matter that I was his beta? I don't think so 😅

[prometheanglory]

To feed my inner myth-loving child how about ⚡ with Vinh (OKAY SHSHSH I KNOW WHATS SHE'S BASED OFF OF BUT...), Chase, Xuehai, Holly and Edgar please!

(if that's too much I don't mind if you cut an OC or two out 😔)

⚡ What mythological god would you associate with your OC?

TEEHEHEHEHEHEH TY FOR THE ROT AYA 😳😳😳😳 fighting for my life to find mythological gods but its worth it

vinh:

HESTIA

the most ‘on the nose’ example would be hestia! goddess of the hearth, domesticity, and family! she is granted a position amongst the twelve olympians for her oath to maintaining the celestial fire (and subsequently keeping the peace by becoming a sworn virgin to evade marriage from either Poseidon or Apollo). I HAVE SO MUCH TO SAY… HESTIA IS SUCH A GOOD FIT FOR VINH…… EVEN IF SHE ISNT IN MANY MYTHS…

there’s smth mentioned abt how since she was tasked with the celestial fire, she was never able to leave the house of gods even when others were able of traversing as they pleased — she alone would stay in the temple and attend to her duties even when other gods could traverse between worlds…… 🙉🙉🙉 and there’s a subsequent issue of how hestia is later replaced by dionysus as one of the 12 olympians in later greek practices… smth abt it. yeah. vinhcore. also she’s the eldest daughter. and also she is kinda treated as an antithesis to aphrodite… and she’s usually depicted as a modest woman with very sparse honors and no actual chosen emblem… a very silent existence that went easy into that good night of silence. im going insane actually.

chase:

ARTEMIS

honestly it’s hard as hell to pick any gods for anyone from stagrove since theyre soooo….. well. u know. the entire point is that they cant rly be elevated or ostracized from their very… Grounded And Human Ways. BUT THAT IS NOT ENOUGH TO STOP ME. ANYWAY. ARTEMIS. MAIDEN GODDESS OF THE WILDERNESS, HUNT, WILD ANIMALS, AND MOON.

a chunk of the time when she’s killed people, it’s because they’ve asserted that they’re better than her. granted, chase is a little better at not killing people when they want to think of themselves as superior to him — but it doesn’t change much that they don’t take kindly to being treated as an underdog. speaking of dogs, i think its very… fitting that a chunk of artemis’ motifs suit stagrove well. u know. a hunting dog, a long range weapon (bow vs gun), a stag, and… well, cordell could be seen as the nymphs that were left to watch over the hunting dogs. anyway, chick that has no interest in anything other than spiting people and hanging out in the wilderness and dude who has no interest in anything other than spiting people and hanging out in the wilderness.

xuehai:

NEMESIS

ironically, mr. hubris himself gets to be the dispenser of dues for arrogance. I THINK ITS FITTING FOR HIM… goddess of balance, vengeance, and retribution… she operates in a rather karmic way, but is ultimately seen as an unyielding and implacable force of justice…

I LIKE TO THINK OF XUEHAI AS THAT TYPE OF CHARACTER. UNYIELDING. INESCAPABLE. A TYPE OF EXISTENCE U ALWAYS INADVERTENTLY DREAD. on that same note, theres the fact that she is also seen as a distributor of fortune — not in the scope of good or bad, but just giving what is already due. there is such a thing as too much good and too much bad and both of these wrath-filled monstrosities are ready to crack down on what must be done. also bc xuehai has that folkhero vibe contained in a big bad menace’s flourish of Everything I Say Is Right Because I Said So.

holly:

PERSEPHONE

not in the scope of wife to hades, but more so in the lens of the maiden of spring who’s name is near synonymous with death. I LIKE… THE JUXTAPOSITION… i don’t know how to explain it, but in the sense that in order to really be seen as persephone (or holly), spring and death must go hand in hand.

i’m disregarding the entire hades wife thing even if thats one of persephones biggest… known things ig ? but anyway i’m thinking more abt how she plays a role in other ppl’s mythos…. like when she was kind enough to give psyche a portion of her beauty, but unfortunately her beauty was imbued with the essence of death (so psyche died). also the way that she is hardly ever referred to directly by name when her mythos was being shared, so she’s generally just referred to with alternative names (the maiden, the mistress, etc.) likely due to superstition surrounding death and anything related to the figures surrounding it. she’s a kind woman, a responsible woman that just so happens to be shrouded in the looming threat of dying ❤️

edgar:

HADES

ummm <3 teehee <3 i don't know how to describe it other than the way he’s best contained in the idea of sparsely mentioned death figure. neither of them are evil people by nature, they’re just associated with incredibly grim and ill-spoken things. also the persephone thing. yeah. he kinda takes a backseat to persephone in terms of being mentioned and who gets to have prevalence in mythos bc it is easier to speak of her as a woman associated with death rather than the man who’s actually death. not to say that he’s ~more powerful and dreadful~ than persephone (or holly) but just in the sense that. you’d much rather mention one person than the other because they’re easier to deal with.

i WAS going to assign him the muses bc of his ties to art/culture/story-telling/etc… but 🕴nay methinks . hades it is. also the entire tricking persephone into staying in the underworld thing. and the kidnapping. yeah.

[gffa]

Something has been making me very confuse. I see a lot of people saying that the Force isn't divided in two (light and dark), that the Dark side is a tumor, a corruption, and that's why the Sith needs to be taken out of picture. However, whenever I search about the Force, I see a lot(and I mean A LOT) of sites saying that the Force IS divided in two, that the Dark and the Light side must be equilibrated(this is where they defend the Jedi purge). Why is that?

Hi!  Honestly, the answer comes down to a handful of things, in my experience the primary problems are: - Star Wars fandom has a terrible habit of passing around “I once heard that” statements that are treated as fact, when there’s often times no evidence to back them up - Legends often took the concepts of the Force and ran in interesting new directions with them that didn’t always match what George Lucas intended - People like their ideas of how the Force should work better than what’s actually there in the canon and in George’s commentary (which is fair enough! that’s no shade on those people who like their version better!) Take, for example, the “tumor” thing, which you’ll see passed around as “George Lucas once said the dark side is a tumor” and yet I have never seen a source on that, so I’m guessing what it comes from is this: "So the idea of temptation is one of the things we struggle against, and the temptation obviously is the temptation to go to the dark side. One of the themes throughout the films is that the Sith lords, when they started out thousands of years ago, embraced the dark side. They were greedy and self-centered and they all wanted to take over, so they killed each other. Eventually, there was only one left, and that one took on an apprentice. And for thousands of years, the master would teach the apprentice, the master would die, the apprentice would then teach another apprentice, become the master, and so on. But there could never be any more than two of them, because if there were, they would try to get rid of the leader, which is exactly what Vader was trying to do, and that's exactly what the Emperor was trying to do. The Emperor was trying to get rid of Vader, and Vader was trying to get rid of the Emperor. And that is the antithesis of a symbiotic relationship, in which if you do that, you become cancer, and you eventually kill the host, and everything dies."  --George Lucas (I’ve seen this attributed to a TIME Magazine interview, but also a Bill Moyers interview) Which is where he says the Sith become cancerous, not the dark side.  But there’s often a lot of people conflating the two, that the Sith and the dark side are the same thing, which the canon never does, the Jedi never do that, and I’ve never seen George Lucas say that, etc. Anyway, we’re digressing from your main question--as far as I’ve seen, the Force is sort of a nebulous concept, because there absolutely are two sides of it, the light side and the dark side and it’s not that there’s no middle ground, but that the way the Force works is that there’s a gravitational effect, I would say.  The Force is all about intention and mindset in the way mortals use it, that George Lucas talks about it in terms of light/dark, selfless/selfish, loving/fearful, compassionate/greedy, etc.  That the dark side is present within all of us, it has to be there because it is there, but the point is to discipline yourself against those things, to keep pulling yourself back towards the good. Because balance cannot be achieved in the middle for mortals.  The dark side corrupts--the Story Group has said:   “As George Lucas says, the dark side corrupts.  So one couldn’t remain in the middle for long.  Dark characteristics are inherent in human nature.  It’s about keeping that stuff in check.  And specifically in Star Wars, it’s not tapping into those negative emotions to utilize the dark side of the Force.”  Further, as shown in Master & Apprentice, this is exactly what the Jedi teach their children in the creche, that the dark side is part of them and you must learn to guard yourself against it, that this is what Yoda means in his speech to Anakin, that he has to train himself against the dark side, they’re specifically echoing George Lucas’ words on how the Force works. That’s the thing about the dark and the light both being necessary--nowhere does it say that they weigh the same.  George Lucas specifically talks about how you have a choice between the good side and the bad side in life, but the world works better if you’re on the side of good, that was one of the main points of his movies.  They’re both within you and balance is achieved by disciplining yourself against the dark side, by acknowledging that the dark is there and letting go of it.  (And again.) So the idea that balance means equal number of Jedi and equal number of Sith isn’t presented anywhere in the canon or by anything George Lucas has ever said.  In fact, once the Jedi Order is murdered, the Force is left in darkness.  In theory, it should be balanced if that were true--Obi-Wan and Yoda vs Anakin and Palpatine, right?  Yet that’s too much dark.  It’s “left in darkness”.

Hell, even as far back as Attack of the Clones, Mace says that the Force is becoming too dark for them to move as they used to, that their abilities have been diminished, which says that it has nothing to do with the amount of Jedi or Sith present, but that it’s about something else.  (I feel it’s about the state of the galaxy, the corruption that has been worming its way into the heart of the Senate and the galactic public.) But a lot of people like the imagery of equal number of lightsiders and darksiders and go with that.  Which, if that works for them, that’s perfectly fine!  But canon presents that as a really bad state of affairs, that the light side works better for the galaxy, and that with the Jedi gone, the galaxy plunges into darkness.

[neo-zone]

Alright, so-

Personally love the little original anime addition of Haschwalth being mildly surprised at the subtle display of Ishida's Antithesis by changing the position between Yhwach and his thrown medallion/button so Yhwach can escape from the giant trap set by Hikifune (well that's basically my interpretation, could be different for someone who knew how his schrift worked better than me)

Also can't help but making it a parallel to back when Ishida witnessed in shock and horror at the sheer demonstration of Haschwalth's Balance during the execution several episodes before

Can't help but getting nervous and excited for the final 1-hour long episodes. Praying for Ishida's 1 vs 1 anime exclusive fight. Praying even harder, while it's impossible, for Haschwalth and Ishida's tag team against the Zero Division

[monkey-network]

Why Shrek IS The Best

Tastes can change, you know? And it’s less about “What’s good about this now compared to before”, more of “Why would you like this now as opposed to before”? Unless allergic, you didn’t get why dark cola or hot chips tasted bad to you as a child, but when you grow up you can come to understand and appreciate it. Shouldn’t pressure yourself, that makes things worse, but things can certainly align in helping this newfound respect you get for something you’d believe you would never want again. That really is where I stand with Dreamworks’ Shrek. As a kid, while Toy Story left me traumatized for a while, Shrek left me side-eyeing with how crass and ugly it looked and I never wanted to think of it. But, as I grew up to respect animation a lot more, 2018 was where I looked back at Shrek and soon come to understand how wrong I was and how much greatness it has that I now consider it an all time great. And with it getting inducted into the Library of Congress, I thought it was finally time to present what I see in this film. Let’s do this right with...

The SOMEBODY

Now this frame has been meme’d to death. If there’s anything iconic about this film, ‘bout the franchise as a whole, it’s the exact moment when our main character charges out of his outhouse as Smash Mouth’s ‘All Star’ gets going. But this honestly just says a lot about Dreamworks’ direction from its previous films where compared to Disney that’ll take their time making the setup before getting into the hype point for its lead, Shrek gets going in one minute if we don’t count the logo intro. Not even The Emperor’s New Groove, which was going for the same tone before Shrek even released, took more of it’s time with the fairy tale aspect of it in its intro. Shrek literally wipes his ass with the fairy tale aspect before giving us the SOMEBODY, all around a minute. This frame really shows that this is sticking to the Disney formula in some way because it’s wasting no time getting into it. It represents the more brisk pace Shrek has with pulling you into what it’s gonna be about. This overall frame works in its thematic and parody aspect and I’ve yet to see anything top this exact moment, not even the greatest films I’ll ever remember.

But enough about the fact that I made a whole paragraph about this one frame of the movie. Let’s dive into what I say is a piece of the heart for this film.

The Earnestness

Speaking of Disney, you probably notice that their films have some cushioning in their presentation, like they generally don’t show things with a straightforward lens; there’s some theatrics in the way their best movies present themselves. That’s not a problem, mind you, but that helped me understand how Shrek does things very differently whether you consider it parody or not. While it throws mockery at the played out conventions associated with fairy tales, especially its most subtle jab at copyright, it doesn’t full on say fairy tales are annoying and bad. Hell, the film IS a fairy tale adapted from a fairy tale about a fookin’ OGRE that can eat lightning and kills with farts. But, it’s an accurate and earnest way to view a fairy tale from a somewhat realistic lens. Let’s take Shrek’s journey for instance.

Typically, the main character would want to experience something more; explore new horizons, prove themselves, find their calling. Shrek off the bat doesn’t need or desire any of that. He’s content with his life, beside the angry mob he casually scares off, and throughout the film he’s not interested in anything else outside getting the squatters out his swamp. He happily makes a deal with the villain of the film to exile those innocent refugees off his land so he could then build a wall to keep everybody out. Bringing up Emperor’s New Groove again, Shrek and Kuzco are the few characters I know that are actively antagonistic even when they’re forced into their situation from outside forces. However unlike Kuzco that gets to be emperor again but learns humility, Shrek is in the same spot as before but learns that there are people out here that can love him for who he is. I can’t say there’s anything grand about that, but it doesn’t need to be unlike the many Disney or any film that tries to shower you with the grandest themes. The relationships Shrek has with Donkey and Fiona are the most grounded I’ve ever seen because they’re not only natural, they’re hardly dolled up with the bells and whistles made to either drum up the biggest laughs or tug the heart strings viciously. When I think about it, I honestly could see myself in Shrek. He isn’t made to be a legend, he isn’t some secret genius or lost prince, he’s just an every-man ogre that wants to live peacefully or meet SOMEBODY that doesn’t treat as someone to be feared or disgusted at. Everything Shrek says is something anybody could or would say if they were his shoes because he, and the film in general, is the most grounded without making it all distractedly meta or genre-savvy. This is generally helped by...

The Dounkaey

Everyone’s talked about how Donkey is the best confidant for Shrek and Fiona. How he’s most true to himself to where he’s the most openly musical character in the film, and how he’s the most balanced here with his comedic vs serious moments. But I gotta say it too: Donkey is one of the greatest sidekicks ever. He’s a motormouth, but is never annoying to where you wish he left the film. The couple times he is purposefully annoying, not for a joke, is when he knows Shrek isn’t being truthful. He truly gets to know Shrek on this journey, and is the character Shrek gets to capacity to actually loosen up to, so it’s fitting that he’d be the one to push Shrek when the ogre’s sounding more vague than usual. Even when he’s harshly insulted, Donkey doesn’t take it as bad as when Shrek kept trying to shut him out again in the 3rd act after the Hallejulah sequence which is the scene in every Shrek movie where’s there a super sad song because Shrek is alone and yadda ya. I’ll get to it in a bit, but he is as much responsible in providing Fiona that seed of doubt that Shrek wouldn’t love her as the ogre she is. Donkey is the greatest friend because he wants to be there for those who are okay with him being around, and while you could give and take sidekick animals in your notable films with them in it, this film really wouldn’t have happened without him. Speaking of Fiona, I won’t retread what’s been said before like with Donkey but I did want to bring up something I haven’t seen many talk about,,,

The Love for An Ogre

I’ve seen many say the scene where Shrek overhears Fiona talk about “Who could love an ugly beast?” and misinterprets that as her talking about him as a cliched or contrived downside to the film, but I feel that a defense can be made. It personally makes sense that Shrek would misinterpret that and take it personally because 1) Who else would Fiona be talking about? 2) How would he know she was talking with Donkey? 3) Why would he just barge in on her? 4) Has no one considered that this moment is parallel to when Fiona overhears Shrek’s conversation with Donkey the night before?

Fiona is very much the antithesis to Shrek’s character where she can very much be open about what she wants but is scared at the idea of anyone figuring out who she really is. She’ll gladly be gross, kick ass, eat the young of a bird she let explode, but won’t let anyone see her true face. That’s why her curse makes sense, and why Shrek would take a fondness to her despite her initial disdain of him rescuing her. Fiona’s a character where the surface level beauty is her weakness as opposed to Shrek where it’s internal. Which is why when she overhears Shrek open up to Donkey about his societal isolation, she’s soon more comfortable around him. And it’s why when she opens up to Donkey about her looks, Shrek would unfortunately take it personal enough. I ask again, why would Shrek barge in on a conversation he wasn’t aware of or who she was talking about to not take it about anything else but him when what he heard such a cut so deep, especially from a character that bears his similar issues? It also helps that Donkey was in on it, as Shrek feels reasonably betrayed by the only other person he’s come to appreciate in his life. Contrived as it seems, it’s thematically important and appropriate to the conflict of Shrek’s character and the film overall. Don’t know how this could be conveyed any other way because it adds up at least.

I just wanna know how Shrek got to Faarquard’s and back by sunrise like did he run cuz that looked like a huge distance to travel on foot but anyways...

I’m sure things could’ve worked out if Shrek knew, either by barging in that night or through Donkey, but I think it’s fitting that the climax takes place at the wedding. After Shrek and Donkey understand their friendship, after Donkey reciprocates the Dragon’s love (more ways than one), and when Shrek grasps the mistake he made to charge over to Fuccquad’s chapel, we get to...

The End

After everything, we get to the moment where Shrek and Fiona get to share their first kiss, Fiona permanently transforms into an ogre, and we get this exchange. One of my favorite exchanges in the whole film:

Shrek: “Are you all right?” Fiona: “Well yes. But I don’t understand... I’m supposed to be beautiful.”

Shrek: “But you ARE beautiful”

We don’t need any other vows to understand their relationship was built up to this. This moment where Shrek can reaffirm Fiona’s feelings of being able to be herself in every way, because she allowed him to be himself in every way before. That’s that mutual love, baby, that just gets me every time and makes this film one of the best romance stories I know as well, even when it isn’t solely about the romance. This is Shrek’s story, and there’s nothing more touching than seeing this outcast not only get another to view him as a friend, not only someone to love, but people, if only a couple, to actually wanted to get to know him. I know Shrek 2 expands on this more, and it’s considered a golden sequel, but I will always cherish the first movie for how much it tells us off the bat while appearing as a “Take That” to Disney films. This is the genesis of Shrek feeling more accepted for himself and society and it just bears so much good commentary while being a good adventure nonetheless. Like you could say this film indeed has... dimensions? “You were trying to meme about la-”

The Conclusion

Mentioning it, I always had this thought with the conversation Shrek and Donkey had of why Shrek didn’t just “be an ogre” and pillage Fuccnut’s fortress. It’s possible Shrek could’ve taken out Faarquid himself, but that would mean being the beast he knows people have shunned him for, grabbed the torches and pitchfolks for, made him feel worse for. Shrek enjoys being an ogre, but he doesn’t like how society makes him feel lesser as an ogre. That really is what the four films have been about for him and what I’ve come to appreciate about these films personally. It can be easy to love yourself even when there are others out here that stand against you, but it’s hard to consider that anyone else could love you for who you are in spite of how you try to present yourself. But if there’s anything Shrek showed me, it’s that it’s possible. There can/will be people out here who appreciate the real you, will be there as much as you want to for them, and can help you realize more about yourself as opposed to suffering to silence eternally. Generally ideal, I know, but this film in the least offered me that thought in the most balanced way possible. It’s incredible how much of a tightrope this film has in its parody and sincerity and that makes its induction in the National Film Registry and being the first ever Best Animated Award winner pretty justified all things considered.

I know this film, the character, has been a meme over the years. As Schaffrillas mentions in his video, the direction Dreamworks made because of Shrek’s success kinda turned it into a heel people clowned on because, in theory, it was nothing but a joke with the onions and the swamp and IT’S NEVER OGRE. Then again, like I said in the beginning, tastes change. I’d say with Schaff’s masterful analyses on the film series and 3GI’s Shrek Retold and Shrekfest, the perception of the film sure enough shifted like the perception of Megamind. It’s one thing for a movie to blow people away or leave them thinking it’s horrible beyond belief, it’s another to take the time to then look back and see how those feelings have changed. For Shrek, it’s a film that was able to trudge out of the meme era to be a film many consider a strong, rewatchable, and unique. Like the beauty of Spongebob, Shrek is a considered a classic because as in the times as it appeared when it released, this film actually stood on its own with the most enjoyable and meaningful timelessness, exploring the desired love for the self, that deserves to be recognized. What else can I say, people?

It’s The Best

[tiktaalic]

ur jackles hate balances out that goddamn tweet of the person who supposedly got their pride destiel art signed and verbally approved by him. Verbally approved as in he said yes! and put his fist in the air while sweating droplets and grinding his teeth

yeah antithesis to my blog. paying for cons to lie and valorize jensen ackles for """"""""""liking"""""""""""" destiel vs my blog: not paying for consto lie and demonize jensen ackles for calling me a queer

[eijispumpkin]

some musings about yut-lung, inspired by a post i saw on the dash earlier today:

if the story of banana fish were to be reframed with yut-lung as the protagonist, ash would not actually be the primary antagonist of the final arc. eiji would.

why? because yut-lung’s issue was never really with ash. it was with his own lack of happiness after he got his revenge on his brothers. we can see this in episode 24 when he tells sing that his entire life’s purpose was to hate his brothers, and now that they’re gone, he’s empty.

now, obviously, during the beginning of this retelling, none of the characters we really care about from canon would matter. the primary antagonists would be the lee siblings, particularly wang-lung as head of the family. most of yut-lung’s actions in canon are behind the scenes, but in this retelling they would be front-and-center. i’m not gonna linger on that point because i think it’s fairly self-explanatory, but ash and eiji would not really be relevant to yut-lung’s story until after yut-lung’s plans are well underway (i.e. until hua-lung is drugged and has already become his puppet).

so, what is yut-lung’s relationship to ash?

i would posit that he latched onto ash as someone he saw himself in. someone that had been through similar trauma, someone who should have been as broken, unlovable, and unable to heal as himself. (or at least, as he saw himself.) that was the root of his fixation on ash: the belief that if yut-lung himself couldn’t heal and be happy, even after getting his revenge, why should someone else?

and, when we analyze why ash was more capable of healing in the timeframe he did than yut-lung, obviously there’s eiji, but eiji is not the only person to care for ash. there’s shorter, nadia, max, ibe, alex and the other gang members, etc; while ash has had an undeniably hard time, he has also found a support network.

yut-lung has not.

in fact, the whole thing is so foreign to him that he completely discounts the entire network, and decides that ash’s sole support is eiji. now, ash and eiji are definitely important to each other, but it would be remiss to say that eiji is the only person important to ash or the only person to care for him. this is a misinterpretation of ash, caused by yut-lung placing him on a pedestal as “the only one who understands”, so to speak, and it’s why yut-lung fixated so hard on eiji as the obstacle to remove in order to bring ash to his level.

ash’s actions towards yut-lung are not actually antagonistic. ash tells him he’ll kill him one day, but he never tries to actually act on it, or do anything else to hinder yut-lung’s plans in general. frankly, ash doesn’t really give two shits what yut-lung is doing, until ep 20 when yut-lung has eiji, alex, bones, and kong. that is (iirc) the second time ash and yut-lung even see each other after shorter’s death.

now let’s contrast that with eiji.

in episode 9, yut-lung says that eiji really annoys him, because he’s too innocent. he echoes that in episode 14, when he says that people either want to protect eiji, like ash, or they want to “tear him up and destroy him”, and that yut-lung himself is one of the latter. putting his idealization of ash aside for a moment, it’s pretty evident that this hatred is motivated by jealousy (a common theme in yut-lung’s story): why should eiji have had a happy childhood, when yut-lung didn’t? 

in fact, that whole conversation in episode 14 is pretty telling. yut-lung tells eiji that he’s stupid for thinking he’s ash’s friend, because “ash has no need for friends [...] all he needs are those who idolize him, and those, like arthur, who defy him. he doesn’t need anyone else. especially not you, who is only a burden to him.”

yut-lung isn’t talking about ash. he thinks he is, but really? he’s talking about himself. or, rather, what he wants himself to be.

in ep24, we see him breaking down because he doesn’t know what his life purpose is without having an enemy. that combined with how he thinks that someone like ash (i.e., someone like himself) “doesn’t need friends”, the fact that the heart of his quest for vengeance is his mother, and his jealousy regarding eiji’s happier childhood, all comes together to suggest to me, at least, that at his core, yut-lung craves companionship, and at the same time desperately wants to deny that he wants it.

this conflict is the crux of his character. yut-lung’s story is ultimately a man-vs-self battle; he has an image of himself that he wants to be (cold, calculating, alone, satisfied), and he’s trying desperately to force himself to fit into that box, but he can’t actually do it. he’s hurting, he’s lonely, and he’s scared, and he lashes out and gets petty, bitter, and vicious.

so how does eiji come in?

eiji is the antithesis of everything yut-lung wants. he’s evidence that ash (i.e. yut-lung’s mirror) can heal and be loved, and yut-lung doesn’t want to see that, because it shatters his worldview that he’s on a path no one else except ash and those like him can walk. he doesn’t want to accept that people like ash (i.e. himself) can need love and support and friendship. eiji threatens to undermine his entire outlook on life.

and how does eiji respond to that? 

eiji responds by loving ash harder. by insisting that yut-lung won’t ever understand, but that he will stay by ash’s side. that they understand that they both care for each other. yut-lung kidnaps him after ash is stabbed and reported dead, and eiji refuses to stay put. tries to escape many times, until he finally does. 

and when he does, yut-lung says that he’s just decided that he will be ash’s enemy, for as long as eiji is his only weak point. this is just a thinly-veiled attempt to make eiji leave ash, because eiji’s presence threatens yut-lung’s entire delicately-balanced view of himself. 

so yut-lung’s plan to get blanca to blackmail ash via eiji? meant to prove that eiji is nothing more than a weakness. really, he has no need to force ash back to golzine--he’s gotten his revenge, he could have done it without golzine’s involvement, he didn’t have to do this--but to him, it’s necessary to prove that he was right all along, that eiji is ash’s weakness and not an asset, that having eiji around was a detriment and he was right.

because if he’s wrong, it means he could have been healing, could have been loved, could have been less alone... and he wasn’t.

so yut-lung decides that ash has to fall back into hell in order to make himself feel secure in his own previously-established patterns of thought. unfortunately for him, eiji brings people together--as eiji is wont to do, like yut-lung said in ep14--to rescue ash, and turns everything on its head again.

this is why he goes to the museum to attempt to dupe golzine. it’s not really about ash. it’s about his view of himself, and the threat to that that eiji poses.

eiji is the real antagonist to yut-lung’s protagonist. ash is someone he puts on a pedestal and sees as a mirror of himself, and while ash is important to his story, eiji is the one who primarily acts in contention to yut-lung. he’s the one who thwarts so many of yut-lung’s plans, who tells him he’s wrong, who tries to stand in his way. 

overall, the main villain in yut-lung’s story is his own trauma. he developed many irrational thought patterns as ways to cope with what happened to him while he dealt with it alone, and wound up projecting them onto ash and eiji’s relationship (honestly, in a way blanca did as well, but that’s an essay for another day). however, within the bounds of that projection, eiji shows much more active opposition to him than ash.

[blacklinguist]

changing racial labels: from colored to negro to black to african american

summary + thoughts of an article by tom w. smith

what’s in a name ? this is actually part of the focus on my own work .. the power behind self-labeling, the ability of being able to stand in your identity / control that perception, and the strength fueling those choices

(p. 497)  

something i’m trying to describe linguistically is the difference in ‘feel’ of the various terms used to describe Black people in America. each one comes with its own set of contexts, and attached to those frames are emotions and assumptions from those being labeled with the terms, as well as those using the terms.

(p. 497) 

what does it mean to be a STRONGER word ? what does negro capture that African/Colored do not? undoubtably, negro speaks specifically to a Black individual, whereas both African/Colored can relate to nonBlack individuals. but is it stronger solely because it’s ‘etymologically and phonetically’ better, or is there some social weight to differ between them?

(p. 499)

beyond this, Black was “a great balance and antonym against white”, with a similar feeling of ‘power’ (of course, Black Power!). it was, the antithesis to white (Doris Wilkinson, 1990). initially being seen as a radical term, Black was popular with younger folk, while negro could have been construed as more ‘refined’ (respectability politics might have played a part in this as well).

however then, the negative side of using Black would be the ties to Black as evil, Black as dirty, Black as tainted, Black as unholy. the linguistic ties of the word Black in English and in countless other languages as the color of everything foul and corrupt. This was a concern of Ramona H. Edelin:

(p. 503)

Black people in America have the constant question of our culture and ‘place’ in this society. Though ‘having a place’ is not the focus of my own studies (nor do I want that--I’m not interested in fitting in), there is something to be said for wanting a connection to those abstract and illusive ‘roots’ that other ethnic groups hold so tightly onto. Another thread (also beyond the scope of my own interests) is the depth of Black culture that we have already, and reconciling that with the desire to ‘go back’. At what point do we stop going back / stop reaching for what is lost? I digress

what is in a name? a desire for a homeland, for a ‘haven’. for something of comfort:

(p. 507)

African American also brings into play the ‘hyphenated American’ problem. That your identity lies in two different hands, in the case of the Black person, in the abstract and complex idea of ‘home’ (a CONTINENT) vs your current location which in many ways rejects your very existence (redacted lemme not get in trouble with how I describe the US).

i end w this:

if it is truly nothing, then why have we fought for so long to be addressed in the ways in which we are addressed ? why do we fight for our birth names to be spoken and written in all their glory, not hidden behind shallow nicknames that are ‘easily pronounceable’ for those who do not respect us? 

it is not only sticks and stones that can break my bones. my words, and the words of those around me hold just as much power (proverbs 18:21)