#blogger meta

[metamatar]

everytime i make a post trying to centre countries outside of the imperial core perspective someone always nitpicks my choice of terminology. i usually pick which term to use based on who i'm trying to speak to bc im intentional like that.

"waah third world is bad and outdated! it comes from the cold war! bandung only included a small set of countries!" like yeah the non aligned movement was limited but the term now represents more than that history to people conversant in imperialism. it is an ideological signifier! it is being explicitly used in that sense. when you make the kind of criticism i quoted you're telling me you lack familiarity with the theoretical frameworks in question.

the global south is an ngoism that has partly increased in popularity to distance itself from radical leftist ideological commitments implied by third world. it is a term popularly used to direct aid centred policymaking to address global poverty. i use this to talk to social democrats who don't have a coherent idea of what imperialism is.

developing world ofc indicates a framework that does not have an imagination for non capitalist modes of production. i use it to usually talk to neoliberals and libertarians.

i dont use the term periphery bc that term is the opposite of trying to centre the periphery to me. this is partly an aesthetic preference. but also bc it is a term that reifies a particular feature of economic relationships that is incomplete and obscures the ways that inter periphery relationships work (say india bangladesh)

[skydaemon]

Okay I’m awake again and something that really stood out to me with TSC was how different jean and neil are as protagonists. I expected they would be, but the thing I really noticed was how distinct their reactions were.

So, these books are HEAVY. There are many many traumatic events and the characters spend a lot of time in high-stress situations. Even when they’re not being attacked or threatened or XYZ, they’re often in a state of heightened physiological arousal (their sympathetic nervous system is going haywire). As a psychologist, the thing I find really interesting is that we see very different reactions that are all aligned with different adrenal responses, and I wanted to talk about it.

As a baseline, when your sympathetic nervous system is activated, you typically experience what some psychologists call the four Fs. Fight, flight, freeze, and/or fawn (some people use another word here but I don’t like it and think it’s less accurate to the situation). These can occur simultaneously or alone. And of the four characters who are most showing this response are the ones who are consistently in the highest stress situations, but who are also traumatised in such a way that even when they’re not actively in danger their sympathetic nervous system is overreactive and heightened.

So first off, we have Neil. He’s pretty clearly shown to have two responses: flight and fight. For his entire childhood, he’s been fleeing from danger and in the earlier parts of AFTG, we see this response - he tries to run as far as he can possibly get from anything that might be a risk. As a side point, this is pretty clearly a learned response from his mother. As Neil begins to feel more secure and his flight response is impeded (he can’t run away) we see the emergence of his other primary adrenal response - fight. I don’t feel like I need to explain this one, tbh, we’ve all seen how he runs his mouth. Fight is also typically shown when you believe you can defeat whatever’s threatening you, so I love what this says about how his confidence develops across the trilogy.

Then you have Andrew. He’s not a POV protagonist but I feel like his response might be the most obvious. His primary responses are fight and freeze (Andrew Minyard runs from/fawns for no man). Fight is pretty obvious - he’s a very violent person - but I feel like the most clear example of this is stopping Riko from attacking Neil. Andrew is obviously wired and his instinctive response is to protect. I love that for him. His other primary response, unfortunately, is freeze. Based on the most obvious time we see it (during Drake's attack), this is probably a response he developed as a child, before he felt strong/safe enough to fight back. God, these books make me sad sometimes.

Next is Kevin. He has a slightly more varied response - i can see the argument for him freezing, although i wouldnt say it's a primary response - but his main two responses are fight and fawn. Fight isn't necessarily literal, btw - the most obvious example is covering his tattoo. His fawn response is slightly more expanded on in TSC (mild spoilers if you haven't read that yet) when we see him responding to Riko's attack by begging first Riko and then Jean to intercede and stop the violence. he's trying to appeal to their affection for him, which is absolutely heartbreaking. Kevin i love you.

And finally, we have Jean, whose primary responses are only really made clear in TSC, although they are backed up by his appearances in the trilogy - freeze and fawn. We see freezing in Jean's response to sympathetic nervous system arousal, often from hearing about or recalling upsetting events/information. He closes in on himself and becomes unresponsive. Fawn is slightly more complicated, as we see it somewhat throughout AFTG. when he's loyal to riko and doing things he thinks riko will like in hopes of reducing any potential pain/threat he will experience, i'd call that fawning. an example at usc is him getting on his knees and handing coach rhemann his racket - he's not just submitting to punishment, he's trying to be helpful and well-behaved in hopes of lessening it. it's honestly a really strong response from him and it absolutely breaks my heart. jean in tsc is really struggling and i hope the last book brings him some peace. i also find it really painful that he's the only one of these boys without a fight response - he's never felt capable of winning against his abusers. i really hope the trojans and bee are able to help change that.

[herefortheships]

Lydia sleeping on one side of the bed like she's leaving a space open for Betelgeuse at the end there. 😌

No but seriously she totally is? Subconsciously there's a space for him in her life always. I know I keep saying this, but she totally has feelings for him, buried inside her. What those feelings actually are is something she has to figure out. (She started that journey in BJBJ; she even got to face him and banish him and all. Did that manage whatever feelings she has for him though? Nope).

She's sleeping alone and yet she's leaving all that space next to her like she's sleeping with a spouse. The visual storytelling here implies she's longing for someone to take that space.

And who else is she longing for if not Betelgeuse? It's not Richard, hello. Ok it's past midnight and I'm exhausted so maybe I'm reaching. But this makes sense to me rn so I'm posting.

[dreadfuldevotee]

Like Loumand-hate vexing aside, there actually is something truly insideous about reducing the complete absence of Jacob & Assad interviews and even questions pertaining to eachother this promo cycle to "they don't like Loumand". It not about Loustat vs. Loumand, or which actors are insane about eachother, It's the fact that this season hinges on the rise and fall of the relationship of queer black/brown men and AMC and interviewers alike sidelined that dynamic the entire time. You would not know from press that Assad is co-leading and the only time Jacob and Assad even talk about eachother is in reference to the ep 5 argument being their first scene together. Like, it would be willfully ignorant to ignore how Lestat is as present in this season because producers had no faith in the strength of the rest of the cast, and how Jacob and Assad are only ever paired up with their white co-workers who simply are not as essential to the season as they are to eachother.

In a show about toxic relationships and the way trauma lingers and effects one's ability to interact with another- There is so much to talk about between Louis and Armand. It is not only a diservice to a large chunk of the performances being given, but also to the story itself. I can sit here and wax about how these 77 years together are still worthy of discussion and careful consideration but the truth is- I wouldn't be writing this post if one or both of them were white. If Armand were still that redheaded russian boy we would have a wealth of promo and playing up the romance at the heart of their relationship all the way to the divorce hearings. But because our leading men are Black and South Asian, instead POC are asking you once again to please give a fuck about us even when a white person isn't around for you to latch on to.

[frecklenog]

there’s something about how most new worlds were born of wishes (“i wish the lich never existed” resulting in farmworld and things like “i wish simon never put on the crown” or “i wish finn and jake would never get old and die” being possible wishes for babyworld and vampworld respectively) and simon and betty playing out a little what-if of what it might’ve been like to go to australia together and the futility of it. will happen. could happen. did happen. didn’t.

there’s something about fionna and cake’s world in turn being born of a wish just to be. to live and to see life through. something about the vast and insignificant miracle that is the human experience. (“you’re going to be something extraordinary — you’re going to be a human being.” “you are an experience. make sure it’s a good experience.” “you were a wonderful experience.” “i think i was born to hang out. and love a lot.”)

there’s something about shermy and beth technically still coming down the pike from miles away. (will happen.) about all these stories that started so long ago still being told, still being happy in the end, still being worth telling even if you already know how all the songs go. (happening.) about how at the end of the day the past is immutable. you can never cross the same river twice and you never go home. you’ll never grow past this pain if you don’t let go. (happened. “it seems unforgiving when a good thing ends,”) about how simon thought golbetty was going to swallow him and free him of his anguish over her but instead she sent him tumbling back into his own world, into a life rich with love and laughter that makes his agonies worth it. (will happen. “you and i will always be best friends.”)

[shinelikethunder]

my most universally cancellable SPN opinion, in terms of the sheer variety of factions & grudges it manages to clip in passing:

Sera Gamble could've fixed the Gadreel arc. and the results would've FUCKED.

[cyborg-squid]

FGO's Arjuna and Krishna

Reading the (translated and abridged) Mahabharata has made me think a little bit more a character that is mentioned a couple times by Arjuna: Krishna.

When I watched Arjuna's second interlude (since I unfortunately don't have a copy of my own), Krishna is mentioned as a sort of... representation of Arjuna's dark side, the negative emotions he tried to repress no given form. But it was just that, a metaphor and a representation, a name given to the negative yet natural feelings that he experienced, which were amplified by his position as a Hero, specifically him being almost the 'chief' hero out of all five Pandava brothers. Digression: It's actually something that he has in common with Abigail Williams, the extreme pressures of their respective societies (mythic war India and puritan New England) making them view their natural emotions (Arjuna's jealousy and Abby's childlike mischief) as something dark and unwanted, and their repression of those feelings left them both open to malevolent outside influences.

So when this line happened in Lostbelt 4 (an otherwise extremely good chapter), I was a little put off by it. It felt like something of a cop-out, or a misntepretation on either my part or the writers, having Krishna/dark Arjuna be an actual entity contributing to the Lostbelt, instead of Krishna just being the sort of metaphor for Arjuna's dark internal feelings. On my first read of Lostbelt 4, at least.

But now having read (most) of the Mahabharata, my perspective on what 'Krishna' is in Fate has changed somewhat, in the Epic, Krishna is very much his own character and entity, rather than just something inside Arjuna. I'll admit to maybe not having the best grasp on the theology of it all, but Krishna is a manifestation and avatar of the god Vishnu, who is basically the omni-god (oversimplifcation) of the Hindu pantheon. And most importantly in the epic, more so than any death-becoming world-destroying powers, Krishna is dharma. The quickest way I can describe dharma is that it is like one's fate (concept not franchise) and conduct, it is what one must and will do, according to both one's class status (like the Ksatriya warrior class that most of the epic characters are) and ones own self. Despite being in the same class, two people can end up having very different dharma, like Bhima and Duryodhana, for example.

What ties in with the Fate series is that... Krishna is still a dark 'side'. I'm not saying this to slander him or portray him as a villain, he is dharma, what he says goes, and if an act is adharmic (going against dharma) to either the performer of the act or to others, it can be made dharmic simply by Krishna's will.

And that is a large part of what he does in the Mahabharata, as he is forbidden from fighting directly in the Kurukshetra war, instead acting as Arjuna's charioteer and the chief advisor of the Pandavas. It is he who instructs Arjuna to shoot Karna in the back while Karna's wheel is stuck (due to treachery), even though such an act would be cowardly, against the rules of war, and adharma, it is permitted because it is Krishna's will. Earlier and similarly, when a noble hero on the Kaurava side is about to slay one of Arjuna's disciples, the distant Arjuna, at Krishna's urging, interrupts their duel by shooting the arms off of the Kaurava general, saving his friends life but earning him the rebuke of said general, who correctly assesses that it was Krishna who drove Arjuna to commit such an adharmic act that he wouldn't otherwise commit.

It's not just Arjuna that Krishna manipulates, during Bhima and Duryodhana's final duel, Krishna instructs Bhima to strike his foe below the belt (literally), a move that incapacitated Duryodhana and was as illegal in a mace duel as it is in boxing, but was nonetheless permitted because Krishna.

And while Krishna permits acts that violate dhama when it benefits his friends and chosen side, he will not tolerate it from others, such as when Ashwatthaman, confronted after the night-raid where he killed hundreds of Pandava soldiers in their beds, throws his weapon at Arjuna's pregnant wife. Which is very uncool and very much adharmic (then as now), and Krishna punishes him by cursing him with eternal injuries (in FGO, it is the rage curse that Ash has) and immortality, condemning him to walk the world cursed forever. Maybe that's a fitting punishment, maybe it isn't, that's subjective, but it does kinda show how Krishna's double standard operates, he's willing to punish breaches of dharma done by others, while at the same time encouraging the Pandavas to violate dharma.

This does not go unnoticed by other characters in the epic, and Krishna is not completely infallible; many of the Pandavas express doubts or discomforts over their breaches of dharma, and only wise Yudhistra, himself a lord of dharma, can match Krishna in moral rhetoric. Krishna himself also blames several breaches of dharma, encouraged by him or not, on the fact that the world is, at this point, in the Kali Yuga, an age of pain and strife, where breaches of dharma are to be expected.

Duryodhana, himself a wicked man (not an insult, both he and the narrative know it), remonstrates Krishna as he lays dying, pointing out the various dirty tricks Krishna told the Pandavas to use, and then basically giving that Skyrim quote "My ancestors are smiling at me, [Pandava]. Can you say the same?" Because dharma is a multifaceted concept, a man as wicked as Duryodhana will still go to heaven and meet with his warriors and kinsmen there, for even with all the evil stuff he did, he still acted according his dharma as a Ksatriya, and his own personal dharma (being the villain of this story), while the Pandavas now have to live with the guilt and pain over what they have done. (The multifaceted nature of dharma is also why FGO Ash can have contradictory sounding skills of 'Violation of Chivalry' and 'Revered Soldier'.)

To bring it all back to Arjuna's interludes and Lostbelt 4, the mention of Krishna in LB4 makes a lot more sense to me and coheres more, know that I'm more well informed on Krishna as a proper 'character' than I was before. And Krishna as a character does, in fact, not clash (in my opinion) with 'Krishna' as Arjuna's dark side and the evil voice inside his head, because the 'real' Krishna was evil voice in his ear during the War. The point of Arjuna's 2nd interlude is that, even if such an adharmic act was permitted and encouraged by Krishna, Arjuna still bears guilt over killing Karna in that way. And coming to terms with that, recognizing that both the feelings that drove him to strike in that way, and subsequently feelings of guilt over it, are part of what makes him and us human, that he is allowed to be human and fallible yet still follow the path of the Ksatriya and a Servant to the best of his ability...

...Arjuna is a really good character, guys. Really good. And he and Karna's and Aśvatthāman's (and presumable Bhima and Duryodhana's, when OC1 arrives) stories mesh really really well with the Mahabharata, there's a real sense of cohesion between them that I'm really beginning to appreciate.

[zeravmeta]

Super Sankta 2 Exu sounds like an excellent idea Zerav. For maximum meme, she's a John Wick style Guard- just uses guns to bash in people's skulls.

Super Sankta 2 Exu whose going John Wick style on people is funny but my concept for Exia Alter was always based on like, the concept that Skadi Alter first introduced that we all thought at the time was gonna be the standard fare for alters

My Ultimate Sankta vs Exia 3 concept was based around the idea of a "Bad End" Exia the way Skadi Alter is, where Exia would be further mechanized ala Executor and become an emotionless seraphim-type unit who would essentially be the ultimate Sankta weapon. This would happen as the result of Laterano having some kind of big event that would cause them to pull all remaining Sankta from all corners of Terra for their promised day of ascension where they would leave Terra and all its problems behind, with certain Sankta (Like Exia) essentially being the vanguards and protectors of these people (I essentially just took the idea of the Rapture and assigned it to the Sankta), with the event concept in question being Penguin Logistics invading this holy land to save their girl.

So like. you can imagine how hard ive been popping off with all the new lore reveals we've gotten over the past 2 years. That said, this concept is a little outdated, and just leaving it at that would be no fun

So here's my pitch for how Exia Alter 4: The Quest For Peace would go with modern foresight (added read more because reasons)

The Popes basement computer in Zwillingsturme just let out a directive that they need to gather their best Sankta to fight against the end of the world. This is in conjunction with the last few events squarely tying together Iberia's Seaborn plotline with both Laterano and Siracusa and their dividing faiths. Now, all of this is in conjunction with the hints we've been getting that Penguin Logistics is going to split up (Lappland and Mostima have already flown the coop, and currently the rest are in Siracusa helping Texas the Amogus, but that will likely not last especially bc Exia's own anniversary line all but majorly hints at this split happening because they all got different stuff going on)

If Penguin Logistics splits, Exia will well and truly be left without a support system.

Now, Exia has always been kind of off as far as Sankta go, because for all intents and purposes she shouldn't be out of place: We see just how Sankta tend to act in Guide Ahead, and Exia didn't really seem all that different. Yet, when we look at her history and actions (she was basically kicked out, she was super accident prone which made other Sankta hate her, as part of Penguin Logistics shes constantly drunk, Texas herself says that Exia being an optimist makes her different, etc), she's actually Really different.

Almost like she has an abnormality compared to other Sankta. Me and a few others (check out @annierosaart post here) have speculated on her being different, but we also don't really know WHY: Even if she was suddenly disconnected from the Sankta empathy powers, we don't see any indication of how, and unlike Ezell we don't have any sort of 'wake-up' moment for her.

But given the weirdness about her and her lines, I think I know what the exact nature of her abnormality may be (and heres my pitch) when looking at the most relevant characters who have abnormalities, namely Executor and Arturia, because I think she falls in line with them (shameless plug to my old exia/executor buddies post):

Executor's abnormality is that his emotions are incredibly muted compared to others. He isn't heartless or emotionless, but more that his heart and mind runs on rationale and logic first and foremost, which almost disqualified him from being canonized had he also not been Laternos single most competent man because saint fedex is entirely disconnected from caring about petty things like being racist.

Arturia's abnormality is that she is receptively empathetic to the point she has nothing within her. She can remove the inhibitions of people, and this is in service to understanding them, because she lacks an understanding of herself: She has a grand dream of an empathy for the world even beyond the Sankta Empathy power, and to accomplish this she draws out the emotions that people hide. As a result, she reflects the emotions of others within herself and thus is incredibly empathetic to the point she's also lacking in emotions and a self.

Exia? I think that her abnormality is that she's too emotional, that the emotions she feels are far more amplified compared to others.

I believe this for a couple of reasons: All the weirdness surrounding her aside, whats the one thing that's always defined Exia? Her Rapid Casting EX. It's always been memed about, but simply firing a single bullet from a gun is akin to casting an Arts attack, with guns serving as a type of wand in these cases. Exia is the only character within the series whose been noted to be so fast with her arts and casting.

This post here does a phenomenal job expanding on this point, but Arts are an expression of the soul, they're influenced by emotions and become stronger with them because they are ultimately expressions of the self, which all characters in and of themselves having a "unique" arts inherent to them. Hell, all of Leithaniens arts are based around using musical expression, while Sarkaz are noted for their arts based on souls and memory, with the literal main heroine of Arknights having an empathy based arts superpower.

Exia, having Super Emotion as her Sankta halo abnormality, could explain why shes so good at gun, even without Oripathy, because said emotions are boosting her casting ability. Remember, anyone can use originum arts, it's just that oripathy is needed for them to be able to do it without a casting device.

This heightened emotion could also possibly explain her crush on Mostima, and even why Mostima is so weird/cruel about her: Mostima was simply a childhood friend alongside her and her sister, and yet when she left for Lungmen, Exia was hot on her trails and then waited 4 YEARS to be beside her and meet her again. She joined Penguin Logistics specifically because of Mostima. It's incredibly likely that Exia might have just had a small crush on her that then spiraled heavily because of this, and Mostima (with her chronic backstory-itis letting her find out that the whole Sankta and halo thing is a scam from her op files and events) might even be aware of this aspect of Exia, and may have wanted her to get over it, always leaving to try and make Exia move on but also always coming back because she needs to look after Exia. After all, if Exia had heightened extreme emotions, what are the chances she could die of grief? She already gets drunks regularly, and despite being cheerful and optimistic, Exia is wearing a mask hiding an incredibly depressed individual.

It could also be possible that the reason why Exia never noticed this is because while it doesn't let other Sankta feel her emotions, she can still feel that of others. She's always confused as to why back in Laterano people always accused her of being disingenuous, because can't they feel her emotions? Well, if she has Super Emotions, it could potentially be overloading her halo, so while she can receive signals, they can't be felt by others. Moreover, this mechanical aspect blends in well with her E2 art, where she is the single operator in the game without an animal/living motiff

Even other Sankta have birds and/or human statues and robotic elements (funnily enough, Executor Sniper only has crosses but even then he is clearly being themed as specifically an angel), but Exia? She has her guns, becoming wings as a ring forms with them. She's literally ascending while her wings become darker.

So what does all this mean?

Well, the Pope's basement bonzi buddy just sent out a directive for the Pope to gather the best Sankta to fight against the end of the world, and who else to recruit but a vulnerable, lonely Sankta who was kicked out for being TOO destructive? Exia's profile does make mention that despite appearances, she is also incredibly pious just like other Sankta, and if the Pope himself came knocking, wanting to give Exia a place back in Laterano, and in a high ranking, respected position no less?

She would jump at the chance, not only to be beside her sister (and possibly Mostima), but also to be accepted back into Laterano society.

Executors own halo has a mechanized element to it, where he also gains more parts to it when he goes from normalest man to saint fedex, so he likely underwent some kind of modification to go along with his promotion, especially because he also now carries an Nier Automata companion cube with him straight from the machine

If Exia is to be canonized, she might be adjusted in a similar way by The Law.

She might even be fully altered into becoming Laterano's perfect weapon to fight against the end of the world. The Witch King himself describes this approaching threat as a void of infinite knowledge which seeks to eliminate them, an unshakeable truth of existence that drives people insane.

The Creator must perish.

What better weapon to fight against such a thing than one who feels her own emotions so strongly she cannot be swayed? Or better yet, an equally as unshakeable, emotionless machine?

[a-dinosaur-a-day]

There are two types of ADAD (this blog) Fans:

folks who don't follow me elsewhere who treat me with far more respect than I am used to

and folks who follow me on my shitposting blog (@zygodactylus) and know I'm just as much of a gremlin as anyone else on this site, I just study dinosaurs for money

[joelletwo]

TAKI TIME

[impossiblefeat]

I'm impressed someone just straight up took all the images from my Knuckles & Espio posts and reposted it with the only additional image being from Archie, huh.

I made that translated image of his Knuckles Chaotix profile myself and the majority of the screencaps are also my own. This takes time and effort (and love) ya know. I even made sure that translation used the same font as the original image even if no one else would notice.

Kinda rude, but whatever.

[skydaemon]

does anyone want to hear the worst iwtv thought i've ever had? spoilers

so yknow how there's been a load of hints this season (and some last season) that claudia won't be killed by sunlight like she was in the book, but will die in a fire? i can't recall every instance right now, but in ep 4 there was her talk w santiago and daniel's question about the theatre, both of which could just be hinting at the fire in general, or could be suggesting that claudia dies in the theatre fire. there's loads more examples that someone else collated, but i can't find that right now. considering armand and louis are together in the present, it seems unlikely louis knows armand killed claudia, so if she died accidentally (or "accidentally") it would make sense for them to possibly have trauma bonded or just stayed together, rather than being torn apart the way they were in the book. again, could just be coincidence, or could be foreshadowing.

but i was watching ep 4 today in the scene where claudia confronts louis about armand and i found myself offhandedly thinking that the embers from louis' photographs were going everywhere, and they could start a fire.

then i stopped fucking DEAD.

because this episode sure focused a lot on the fact that louis is learning to control fire, huh? weird, since it's not a skill we see him use in present day. also showed he's not totally in control of it, and that he gets emotional and sets things on fire. so of course my brain jumped to the worst possible conclusion: what if louis set the theatre on fire and it killed claudia?

now, it's totally possible that, as in the book, louis just sets the theatre on fire in response to claudia's death. but before i could snuff out the terrible thought, another one followed: if he did, does he know?

because to me, there are four options. 1: he didn't kill her and he knows it. boring, basic, as per. 2: he killed her and he doesn't know. armand has mind-wipe powers that he's clearly used on louis, and it seems pretty in-character for him to hide this from louis. it would be absolutely devastating as a reveal and i KNOW jacob would kill me by acting it. 3: he killed her and he knows. this would be so INTERESTING!!! like retroactively making it canon that louis killed his daughter/sister/best friend and has been dealing with that for the last seventy-five years has INSANE implications and that would destroy me. 4, and possibly the most awful: he didn't kill her but armand made him think he did. this would explain the way louis in the present is significantly more under armand's thumb when daniel arrives compared to their 40s relationship, and why louis is so fucked in the head. it is so fucking juicy i want to rip into it with my teeth like a ripe mango.

anyway, very possible none of this will turn out to be right, but it was such an arresting thought in the moment that i felt pressed to share it.

[loveletterstomyenemy]

[aesterea]

finally watched Scream (2022) and that was... impressively bad

[hoelandah]

Icon Credit Zaboizu

Greetings

Hallooo. I'm Astrid. 32. He/She/They. This is a Homelander!Thirst/The Boys/Butchlander bloggo.

I do not assault my eyeballs with Kripke's botched show, I'm a former big SPN/Destiel fan, not a blind hater. I genuinely think that he is a very weak writer who is only carried by captivating characters that the actors give life to and active fandoms filling in his weak spots with fan works.

I basically read "The Boys" episode synopses, note audience and fandom reception/reactions and consume in other ways to try to know what I'm talking about. So, I may get things wrong or miss context that I would have gained watching the show. Just be patient with me.

I do not read the comic. I cannot stand it, I can barely take in its canon for comparison it squicks me so goddamn bad. I cannot read anything that Garth Ennis does. I personally think it's just shock value schlock with no artistic merit but that's an opinion. I tend to give comic less criticism than the show, however, because it is not trying to be anything besides what it is and it is not lampooning a current political climate clumsily. Ennis's work can absolutely be adapted successfully. Preacher, another Ennis property, was adapted pretty well for AMC and it was just as gross comic-wise.

So, in my opinion, The Boys and the characterization of Homelander suffers from trying to make something unfilmable mainstream, being unfortunately timed in US history, and the pervasive neolib tone of even the most progressive of American media.

About the Blog

This is a Homelander thirst blog ofc. I also play in the sandbox of the universe and love analyzing possible themes, in show politics and characters, in particular, in relation to Homelander. I'm a leftist that consumes politics and social issues discourse on a daily basis as a special interest so that features heavily in my meta and analysis.

Do know that my analysis is subjective. It is simply engagement with the media. I am not condemning or assuming malice of anyone in the writer's room unless it seems obvious and even then. The nature of analysis with art is that sometimes there are no right or wrong answers, there is only what we see, how it may be perceived, and what it could reflect. Talking about our media frankly with a conscious, not necessarily critical lens, is healthy even when it is deemed pretty "unproblematic." There is also a lot of Watsonian vs Doylist fuckery going on.

I'm also american, leftist, black, DFAB, bigender, and queer, I mention this only so that you all know what angle I'm coming from in my analyses.

Feel free to ask me anything or chat.

Disclaimer:

This is not a "Homelander Apologist" blog. I do, however, critically engage with how culpable Homelander is for his actions considering his neglect, absolute lack of genuine human relationships, lack of good behaviors to model, and people in his life actively influencing him to take questionable actions. Basically, I ponder on: If you were never taught "good," are you "evil" if you never knew the opposite? So, in my controversial opinion, he should not pay for his crimes because he would never understand it and it would let everyone else off the hook. Instead his demise is simply a public safety service.

Tags for your blocking pleasure:

Meta: 'the kays meta'

All meta is tagged this. Sometimes I back and forth reblog if I'm having a good meta discussion.

Asks: 'the kays asks'

Messages I answer are tagged this. Feel free to drop a line.

Me just yappin: 'kay talks'

Stuff that's not meta, just me talking in general, are tagged this.

My OCs tags

Celestia (a Magical Girl Supe): 'oc: celestia' | 'the contingency plan' | 'oc: naomi edgar'

Virtue (A secret Empath Supe): 'oc: virtue' | 'cursed virtue signaling' | 'oc: sera velois'

(Tags have my old name and I'm too lazy to change them. 😩😩😩)

[baramp4]

𝚆𝙴𝙻𝙲𝙾𝙼𝙴 𝚃𝙾 𝙼𝚈 𝙱𝙻𝙾𝙶

ᴴⁱ ᵐʸ ⁿᵃᵐᵉ ⁱˢ ᵇᵃʳᵃ ⁱ ᵃᵐ ᵃ ᵇᵒʸ,ᵃᵐ ˣᵛ ʸᵉᵃʳˢ ᵒˡᵈ,ⁱ ᵃᵐ ᵃ ˢⁱᵐᵖˡᵉ ᵖᵉʳˢᵒⁿˢ ᵗʰᵃᵗ ⁱ ʷᵃⁿⁿᵃ ᵇᵉ ᶜʳᵉᵃᵗⁱᵛᵉ ᵈⁱʳᵉᶜᵗᵒʳ,ⁱ ᵈᵒ ˢⁱᵐᵖˡᵉ ᵖʳᵒʲᵉᶜᵗˢ,ⁱⁿ ⁱᵍ ⁱ ᵃᵐ ᵃ ᶜˡᵃˢˢⁱᶜˢᵗᵃʳ ᵇᵘᵗ ʰⁱʳ ⁱ ᵃᵐ ʸ²ᵏ.

ᴵⁿ ᵗʰⁱˢ ᵇˡᵒᵍ ʸᵒᵘ ᶜᵃⁿ ᶜʰᵉᶜᵏ ᵐʸ ᶜʳᵉᵃᵗⁱᵛᵉ ᵖʳᵒᶜᵉˢˢ, ᴵ ᵃᵐ ᶜʳᵃᶻʸ ˢᵒ ʸᵒᵘ ᵃʳᵉ ᵖʳᵉᵖᵃʳᵉᵈ.

ᴬᴮᴼᵁᵀ ᴹᴱ?ⁱ ˡᵒᵛᵉ ᵐᵘˢⁱᶜ ᵉˢᵖᵉᶜⁱᵃˡˡʸ ᵐᵃᶜ ᵐⁱˡˡᵉʳ,ᵗʰᵉ ʷᵉᵉᵏᵉⁿᵈ,ᵏᵉⁿᵈʳⁱᶜᵏ ˡᵃᵐᵃʳ,ᵃˡᵛᵃʳᵒ ᵈⁱᵃᶻ,ᵗʰᵉ ᵐᵃʳⁱᵃˢ ᵃⁿᵈ ᵗᵃⁱⁿʸ,ⁱ ˡᵒᵛᵉ ᵃʳᵗ,ᵐʸ ᵖᵃˢᶜⁱᵒⁿ ⁱˢ ᵗʰᵉ ᵇᵃˡˡᵉᵗ,ⁱ ˡᵒᵛᵉ ᵈᵒ ᶜⁱⁿᵉᵐᵃᵗᵒᵍʳᵃᵖʰʸ,ᵐʸ ᶠᵃᵛᵒʳⁱᵗᵉˢ ᵖˡᵃᶜᵉˢ ⁱˢ ᵐʸ ʳᵒᵒᵐ,ⁱ ˡᵒᵛᵉ ᶜᵒᵒᵏ, ⁱ ˡᵒᵛᵉ ʳᵉᵃᵈ, ⁱ ʳᵉᵃᵈ ᵈᵃⁿ ᵇʳᵒʷⁿ, ᵃʳᵗᵘʳᵒ ʳᵉᵛᵉʳᵗᵉ ᵃⁿᵈ ᵒˢᶜᵃʳ ʷⁱˡᵈᵉ.

ᵗʰᵃⁿᵏ ʸᵒᵘ ᵃⁿᵈ ᵉⁿʲᵒʸ