#but when I turn that into a scene within narrative I have more control if that makes any sense at all 👍👍👍👍

[foxmulderautism]

my experience as an autistic writer is my silly little story honestly feels like an alternate version of this universe that i just have access to for some reason and spectate which is why it feels so real because as far as im concerned it is real what else would it feel like to have entire lives playing out inside your head? but i don’t think i can just say that to people unless they feel the same 👍

[meanbossart]

Did Astarion kill DU Drow or did DU Drow pass the checks? (Or did that interaction not happen?)

Cause you’ve basically described DU Drow’s type as THAT Bitch™️ which I respect. But if THAT Bitch™️ killed him too?

Of course this could be me projecting, cause my Durge failed the checks and he came before he went 🫡.

Pretty face, legs for days, a mean streak, AND held a knife to his throat within five minutes of meeting, Astarion had already grabbed his attention, top that off with the fact Astarion actually killed him? My murder man was munted, the Bhaal boy was barking, slaughter son was salivating…

You get the idea

God damn it you're right, his type is just the conceptual archetype of That Bitch isn't it LOL

THAT BEING SAID you are actually mistaken! He may not like suck-ups, but he likes strangers putting knives to his throat even less.

Not to mention: Astarion's immediate order of business after that is to try and desperately get on your good side. In other words, doing the very thing that puts DU drow off. He didn't care for Astarion or his attempts at seduction at all, held him at arms' length, and was just a dismissive asshole to him throughout the majority of Act 1 (he was an asshole to everyone at that stage though, to be fair.)

It was only at the tiefling party when Astarion, completely unprompted, implied that the very idea of having sex with him disgusted him that DU drow became interested and started pursuing him. In the narrative I made up for this course of events, I like to think Astarion realized that his usual strategy wouldn't work here and that he was dealing with a man who only wants what he can't have. DU drow is a contrarian at heart, and for as long as Astarion was throwing himself at him he was going to be turned down.

Astarion only bit him after they started having sex, and at that point he had already told DU drow about his vampirism through normal dialogue ("Well, Obviously."). This is sincerely the only way he got away without being staked when that scene triggers (and it was honestly really cool to experience it in that order because it felt a lot more strategic from my POV as the player).

The bite was definitely a turning point in the relationship (DU drow enjoys being hurt by people he values under a controlled environment, but isn't fully aware of it due to his missing memory -> now his object of carnal desire puts that very concept on the table on a habitual basis, making it pretty much a pillar of the relationship -> DU drow begins to see Astarion as someone who actually has something to offer him, instead of just being a pretty conquest that he can show off.) However he still attempted and passed the first check to break free from it. They weren't close enough for DU drow to completely let go of his sense of self-preservation, nor did he come to trust Astarion entirely for a long time even after that. At that stage, if Astarion had sucked him dry (and then revived him, I guess) DU would have most definitely killed him.

(And If you're wondering how this translates to my actual gameplay - I wasn't taking the game seriously because I don't usually like fantasy as a genre, so I made a guy, named him Drow, and proceeded to be a huge dick to everyone until they all ultimately wormed their way into my heart while I kicked and screamed.)

[rainbow-crane]

got a totally random rush of Emotions about Chihiro's gender so hi let's talk about how the entire account of Chihiro 'totally being a cis dude guys' is told by Monokuma, the guy that later goes on to fake a suicide note and falsify an entire class trial just to be pissy. Ah yes top 10 most reliable narrators ever of all time, yes, yes, very convincing

Not to mention in the exact same fucking motive he's very obviously purposefully warping the truth and lying to the cast's faces?? Within the 'embarrassing memories' motive Mondo's is a warped version of the truth. "Mondo killed his own brother" but he didn't, and just about everyone is able to grasp that one. He indirectly led to the accident, but Daiya made his own choices. So wouldn't the same logic apply to Chihiro's motive? "He dresses like a girl but actually is a boy" sounds like you're actively warping her own life experience to send her into Despair.... which is Monokuma's primary character motive.... crazy how that works........

And now, a compilation of every line Chihiro delivers in her own backstory, without the narrative padding from Monokuma explaining to you why this is totally her hating being a woman and wanting to be a man

"Now nobody will be able to say anything about 'even though you're a boy'..."

"I'm... weak... Weak, weak, weak, weak, weak, weak, weak, weak...!"

"Now's my chance..."

"I'm going to get stronger... and accept who I am..."

"Strong enough so that when someone says 'even though you're a boy' it'll be okay. I'll get better!"

"Maybe talking to Mondo about it will help give me some courage..."

So yeah, once you pull out the unreliable narrator. You get like, 6 lines total. 1/3 of which specify that she IS AFRAID of people saying "even though you're a boy". Now, call me crazy, but if we're genuinely arguing that Chihiro is a cisgendered man, why the hell would she say the equivalent of "I need to accept being a boy. Gee, I sure hope no one calls me a boy while I do so!" That's. That's inherently contradictory. More than anything, looking at Chihiro's lines as the most reliable source of Chihiro's thoughts about herself, it starts to look less and less like a man who wants to rise above being gnc and be a true manly man, and more like someone who's about to get fucking outed and mocked by Monokuma and trying to do damage control, steeling herself to be called a man and strengthening her mind and body to prepare for said outing.

Earlier in chapter 2, Chihiro is already thinking of starting to try working out, but is too afraid to enter the lockers because she's well-aware she can only enter the boys' locker rooms. The inference that Makoto comes to is that Chihiro is an individual trapped in a killing game that couldn't defend herself verbally in the library the morning prior, and is visibly the physically weakest in the class. Ergo, perhaps she wants to be able to defend herself better? Well, neither of those facts that lead to said inference magically change after the discovery of her dick, so perchance, the reason she wanted to get stronger was still so she could defend herself both verbally and physically?? The ONLY reason you'd have to come to the conclusion she wants to reconnect with her assigned sex is because she is being actively threatened into it by Monokuma's motive, or if you take Monokuma's story at his word, that he'd speak respectfully of the dead. Just like he did with every other character in that game, right?

Also, it's worth noting that in the actual conversation-turned-spiral between Chihiro and Mondo before Chihiro's death, neither Chihiro nor Mondo actually talk about Chihiro's gender, only her strength and desire to destroy her weakness. Yes, Mondo is using he/him in the voiceover, but the entire class is atp, and again. Using that as genuine evidence falls flat because we see in that very same scene that Mondo WAS NOT completely present for that conversation. He saw Chihiro's willpower and spiraled, conflating Chihiro with his brother and lashing out in a ptsd-induced blackout.

Also also, if you're gonna argue Chihiro has no reason to need to get physically stronger unless it's to be more masculine, A) Sakura exists in the same game, and B) please god look up any statistics on the amount of violence trans teens receive. That alone is a perfectly reasonable justification for a trans woman to want to be able to defend herself, especially when locked in a place where you cannot escape your potential aggressors.

TLDR Chihiro is legitimately more believable as a trans woman, and every intervention attempting to explain otherwise comes from a character defined by his love of twisting the truth for the sake of causing suffering. Hi hello does anyone hear me

[platoapproved]

Okay so I'm looking back on season 2 and having some Thoughts about Dreamstat.

In 2x01 Louis says "he came by invitation," which is be backed up by how he consciously dismisses Dreamstat in 2x04. But in my opinion, it all gets way messier when - in 2x07, deeply shaken by talking about the trial - Louis hallucinates Lestat in the Dubai penthouse. It's SUCH a jarring moment; Louis' unreliability is at the forefront of the audience's mind since he has just admitted his version of Claudia's turning from 1x04 was inaccurate. Then the audience is shown that Louis is omitting things, particularly continued hallucinations. (We also see him have further non-Lestat hallucinations in 2x08 when he is plotting his revenge).

With all that in mind, I'm inclined to think that he's way less in control of Dreamstat than he insists he is. Louis says otherwise, but this is the Unreliable Narrator Show™.

So. Why I was thinking about this in the first place...

I see lots of people bringing up Dreamstat's reactions to things, mostly in a context of being angry with Louis. And I get it! Dreamstat is mocking and cruel. But I also think it's wrong to blame Louis fully for those things? At least, to blame him in the way people seem to do.

These are not things he is choosing to think, or that he is saying aloud. They exist only within his own head. Dreamstat is all his Louis's worst instinctive reactions and snap judgments, vocalized internally (we just see and hear them as the audience).

His paranoia while being romantically pursued, an understandable response given how things went down with Lestat:

His self-loathing (always comes back to the self-loathing with Louis :c):

His frustration while having an argument with his companion situationship:

These are Louis' thoughts, yes. But they're gut responses, all emotion, without filter or reasoning.

And I just can't wrap my head around thinking less of Louis for having these responses. It's a very honest and unflinching depiction of someone whose response to trauma (both from his relationship with Lestat but also, like, his entire human life) is kneejerk resentment and pettiness that he very VERY rarely vocalizes.

Even as Dreamstat is mocking Armand's romantic overtures, Louis is continuing to have discussions with him, to ask him what he needs to be happier in their relationship. Armand wants him to come around more, he shows up to the disastrous dinner where he fights with Santiago. Armand wants to bring flowers and apologize, Louis hears him out. He is CHOOSING, in spite of the cruel automatic responses of his thoughts, to treat Armand with as much fairness and gentleness as he can.

As a side note, I really read Dreamstat's laugh in the museum scene much differently than others on here. A lot of people seem to see it as Louis mocking Armand's history of sexual abuse. But Dreamstat only scowls through all that (which is, again, not great but it is understandable, given how Lestat deployed his Magnus story to win Louis back after exploding in anger, and the whole setup for Armand talking about his past is him explaining why he is not like Lestat). Dreamstat's only real reaction comes when Armand has moved on from that part of his speech, to discussing the vampiric cycle of violence.

The line he reacts to is Armand saying "Magnus who begat Lestat, Lestat who begat Louis, on and on, and on and on." And Dreamstat... doesn't laugh? I see people describing it as a laugh. He yells 'HAH!' in the angriest, bitterest, disbelieving voice. To me this is not Louis being unimpressed or mocking Armand's trauma, it's him adamantly refusing to be included in the narrative as a part of vampire culture / as a victim. We know Louis does not like people labeling him as a victim or abused. We know he wants to opt out of all Claudia's searching for vampire culture and vampire history. To me this moment is not at all about Armand, it's about Armand implying that Louis is connected with the covens, with a larger narrative of vampirism, including a narrative about makers exploiting and harming their fledglings.

No, Louis isn't perfect, and his handling of Armand is not perfect. But I think people are way too harsh on him for this scene and just in general. He is not his worst thoughts. His actions are much, much, much, much more important. He chooses Armand. I think he chooses to be as careful with Armand as he knows how to be, given the tools at his disposal. Yes, there's a horrible gremlin (ha, see what I did there?) in the bottom of his brain that tosses up vile mean judgy nonsense, but Louis then elects to ignore all that and be as kind as possible.

[rise-my-angel]

Would you say Jon would be more of a soft!dom? Also do you think Jon would be dominant in bed? Been reading so many people say that Jon would actually be submissive in bed and its been throwing me completely off :/

Listen I am a FIRM believer in Dominant Jon. I am on here with my smut to dismantle the sub Jon headcanons for good.

He is an intense man with very raw emotions and painting him as some good boy sub in bed is crazy to me. Now he would be a soft!dom, but that does not at all indicate he has any sub tendancies.

A soft dom is simply a dominant who is more gentle with their words, more romantic and less harsh. A soft dom is a little less kinky but they are passionate and intimate. Which is Jon. I think if you watch who Jon really is as his own individual you'd realize he is a dom, he always has something clawing at his chest to take control and when he does he is a very natural firm leader.

Jons sub headcanons come from one place, and it is the cave with Ygritte scene. Now I have made my opinons on that scene clear, that Jon is a victim of rape at Ygritte's hands and thus I put NONE of my theories of his sexual inclinations towards dom/sub dynamics as being based off of that. Most people who argue for sub Jon tend to also be people who don't think Ygritte is a rapist and thus base their headcanons on that scene. Which I think is gross and insulting to Jon, since it's pretty blatantly rape once you get passed the really dishonest way the show tried to frame it.

So, if you think Jon is a dom, my smut is the place for you. I have never seen a submissive Jon smut that doesnt suddenly turn him massively out of character just to suit that narrative.

Jon is a man who within a few short months of being in the Nights Watch, tried to STAB A COMMANDING OFFICER TO DEATH when said man insulted Jons fathers honor. That is not the actions of someone who is a sub in bed. That is a man who at his core is a protector, and that includes the bedroom.

Jon isn't mean in bed, and he isn't a hard dom, but being a soft dom is absolutely nowhere close to being a sub. Jon has been looked down on and walked all over his whole life and we know he hates that.

So I do not grasp why anyone thinks he'd also want to be treated that way in the bedroom. Why would he want a woman in bed to treat him the way he hates being treated in real life? Jon craves to be in control in his life, he would never want to be ordered around and told what to do in the most intimate of scenarios.

Sub Jon headcanoners are wrong. Sorry, but they do not know Jon Snow. They are wrong. Jon is a dom. A soft dom, but 100% a dom.

[canonizzyhours]

i read more canyon fic than i should.

it used to be because i was interested in the actual canon edizzy dynamic some other posts here have talked about and i wanted to find good darkfic about izzy topping from the bottom. then i realized i was never going to find that and it became something i did in good faith hope that i would understand the canyon better, maybe i'd find some really good fic about their take on fanon izzy and i would finally get why they found this compelling. at this point it's something i do out of morbid fascination, i'm still trying to understand the canyon but what i keep understanding is that their perspectives are always worse than i expected.

anyway here's what i was thinking about today. at this point i can sort canyon fic into categories and there's this one subgenre that's always fascinated me - and it goes well back into the early post-s1 hiatus era - where izzy becomes a weirdly passive character who never really does anything.

you can see exactly why this is happening. the author is so immersed in canyon meta that they refuse to engage with any of izzy's canonical motivations from s1 - the craving for power, the homophobia, the fetishizing obsession with masculinity, the contempt for the crew who work under him, the cruelty, the sense of entitlement to control ed's life: they've been convinced that none of that stuff is a part of izzy's character. but when you take it all away, you end up with a guy who would never actually do any of the stuff izzy canonically does in s1. and if you gave him any other motivations that pushed him to do other stuff instead it would become really obvious this is just a completely different guy (there's several OTHER genres of canyon fic where they do exactly that and it is super obvious this guy just has nothing to do with izzy anymore). so you end up with a character who does absolutely nothing except stand around in the background of scenes gazing at edward thinking sad thoughts about their dying relationship and every once in a while the author remembers to have him say "fuckin' twats."

so i was thinking about this today and what hit me like a lightning bolt is this exactly predicted what would happen in s2. the writers wanted to redeem him in one season and since all his motivations in s1 existed to push him to be awful, they had to resolve all of them as quickly as possible. so within the first half of the season izzy had let go of his creepy psychosexual obsession with ed and belief that he should control ed's life and his homophobia and contempt for effeminacy and learned to respect others instead of needing to dominate or be dominated.

but just like in those fics, this turned izzy into a character who no longer had any real personality traits besides saying twat sometimes, or any reason to actually do much of anything at all. and since the traits they got rid of so completely defined who he'd been up to that point, giving izzy any NEW motivations or personality traits would just make it really obvious this was functionally an entirely different guy.

this is the exact reason he was so boring in 2x05-2x07. with those traits gone there is no longer any reason for him to do anything in particular. the only thing they can do with him at this point is demonstrate that his redemption arc is complete by repeatedly having him do the opposite of evil stuff he did last season, and once they've checked off every box on that list, they have to kill him off because there is now nothing else he can possibly contribute to the narrative.

it's so funny to me that if i had taken seriously the lessons i learned from reading canyon fic i would have been able to predict at the very beginning of the season, as soon as it became clear they were speedrunning the redemption, that he would be dead at the end of it. those fics showed me exactly why there couldn't possibly be any compelling reason to keep a fully redeemed izzy in the narrative.

#394.

[fizzigigsimmer]

Fargo s5 Episode 8: Manipulation and Codependency.

I am UNWELL after this last episode. I have so many thoughts. What it says on the tin, this is just me processing my reaction to the latest episode so if you are not caught up, spoilers will be found within.

Let’s start with the lady of the hour. Miss Dot. Miss Dorthy Lyon 👏🏾 Put some respect on her name. This character is endlessly fascinating to me. She’s incredibly complex. Almost over powered in one sense, but also incredibly fragile. We’re seeing now in clearer detail what an accomplished manipulator Dot is. She’s not just a fighter. She’s not just hiding and masking her trauma. She is actively playing the people around her and moving them around a board in her mind. The same way Roy does. The same way anyone in a position of power does, honestly.

Roy and Loraine and people in general, we seek control over others out of a place of insecurity, in order to make ourselves feel safe in our little worlds. Survivors of abuse are particularly good at this, and it’s something I am so glad to see the narrative touching on. The media likes to paint victims with cinderella syndrome. They are often childlike innocent caricatures who are endlessly kind and pure in the face of unjustified cruelty, purely so that audiences will emotionally attach to them quickly and feel whatever amount of fear and revulsion the creator wants for the antagonist. But the reality for real people who suffer domestic violence and other forms of abuse is that they’re just people. They have the same potential for good and bad and selfishness, they developed unhealthy coping mechanisms and they learn to play the game just like everyone else. And when you live your life in fear, you have more incentive than most to get good fast at controlling your surroundings.

We see another example of this in Karen this episode. Roy’s current wife is no stranger to her husband’s violent temper and is very aware of the danger he represents. When he’s humiliated in spectacular fashion and likely to lose his election, there’s this palpable tension in the air as the family rides home. We know heads are going to roll, and from the look on Karen’s face so does she. When she first opened her mouth I was so scared for her. lol I wanted to reach through the screen and shake her, like “shut up! That man will kill you.” At first I thought she was being hopelessly naive, saying exactly all the wrong things to try and comfort Roy that were only pressing on the wound. BUT THEN! Then we watch her turn it on Dot. She calls her a curse, playing into Roy’s belief that there are scales to be balanced in order to make the world right again, and pointing out that all of this only happened when Dot came back. She basically says, Dot’s the reason you have bad luck not me. Go hurt her and not me. And then he does. It’s brilliant.

I was on the edge of my seat watching Dot desperately try and hang onto her world. Everything from her name down to who gets to remind Wayne to take his Lactaide medication, using anything and everything at her disposal to do it. When Roy isnt impressed by being reminded he married a child around his own son’s age - oh please, she had hair and her period so she wasn’t a child - she switches tactics quick as a whip and leans hard on Roy’s family man ideals. She relentlessly forces him to confront the contradictions in his actions by reminding him he is destroying a family. Finally, when that fails too she delivers a violent threat. You will do as I ask, or I’m going to hurt you. The writing here was so masterful. They are opposites. We’re rooting for her, and yet, they mirror each other. Dot has been using manipulation tactics she learned at the hands of her abusers to carefully curate a place where she feels safe, and now that it’s all crumbling around her she’s finally starting to see it for herself.

Her scene with Gator was particularly poignant. Because when he comes in, he’s subdued and we get the feeling that he’s there (whether he’s going to admit it or not) purely because he wants to see her. Her, the big sister who used to comfort him while he watched his father abuse his mother. Who then replaced his mother and became his father’s wife while his own mother seemingly abandoned him. The way she plays him in this scene is so heartbreaking to watch but also incredibly insightful. She knows why he’s here: because deep down he wanted to see her. She dances back and forth between playing on their buried bond ( “I didn’t tell the FBI anything” implying, she wouldn’t tell them anything that would hurt him) and plucking on his insecurities (you’re sloppy, you’re weak, you’re a fuck up and your daddy doesn’t love you).

But the biggest card that Dot tries to play is Linda. She tells Gator that she saw her and tries to bring him into her fantasy that Linda got out and has healed from her trauma. That she loves him and never meant to leave him, and that everything will be okay if he just helps her get out. She can take him to his mother and they can leave all of this behind him, and he can finally be free to be the person that deep down she knows he wants to be. And I just love the way this scene was played. Because while it is tempting to believe that Dot is purely just confused from the accident and the sleep deprivation, the music lets us know that more is going on here. We hear flutes, specifically those played by snake charmers. Gator is the snake, and Dot is hypnotizing him before our very eyes. This isn’t the first time Gator has been connected to snake imagery/symbolism either. When Dot decides to tell him why he’s not named Roy after his father, she likens him to a pale little lizard. @tdciago did an excellent post on some of the symbolism we’ve seen in the show thus far, and it really emphasis how often Gator is likened to or associated with snakes: His character bio compares him to the snake in the Garden. His LOL tattoo has forked tongues on the Ls. He's got a "Don't tread on me" flag featuring a snake in his room. He stopped at the Gas 'n Go to "drain the snake." He left an empty Slim Jim wrapper in Donny Ireland's evidence box, that looked like a shed snakeskin. He said that Munch came up "snake eyes."

And as much as Dot’s speech about Linda is about playing on his natural yearning for his mother, it’s also about them too. It’s about Dot. In a way, Dot is also saying that she’s sorry. She never meant to leave him alone. She loves him and she wants things to be alright. They can be if you just help me. Gator obviously wants to believe what Dot is saying is true all of it, but he’s not as dumb as everyone seems to think he is. He knows Dot lies to herself and to others and he calls her out on it. With a single line “You’re lying. You’ve never once in your life told the truth.” we’re left to wonder about all the lies Dot has had to tell over the years. First in order to survive on her own as a teenage runaway, then when she was taken in by the Tillmans, and again when Linda disappeared and she became Roy’s wife.

She told herself that Linda got out, that she was somewhere safe and free and building the life that she wanted. At first she used this lie not to have to face the reality of Roy, of her own likely end, maybe even to appease the twisted sense of guilt she would feel taking Linda’s place and in the light of Gator’s grief over his mother’s sudden absence. Later, she probably used this lie to give herself the courage to be her own Linda. To get out and make the life for herself that she deserved, even if it meant having to leave Gator behind. Even if he doesn’t understand all of the pieces, in his heart of hearts Gator knows his mother is never coming back. She’s either gone or dead, and either way she left him just like Dot did, and Dot is lying to herself.

“I hope you die in here Nadine and that you never see your kid again.” Because that would be justice in his eyes. That would balance the scales. Because he’s never getting out, so why should she?

“No you don’t.” And it’s true. She knows him. Knows he wouldn’t even be here if he weren’t soft. She gave him an opportunity. This was Gator’s crossroad and he chose to stay his course, and the looming figure of Munch reinforces the message that Officer Witt Later delivers, the consequences for Gator are almost here.

Dot too is approaching a crossroad. Because as the episode progresses she is forced to finally confront one of the lies she’s been telling herself for years. Linda is dead. She never made it out. She’s buried under the windmill with Roy’s other enemies. This is not the first time that Dot has seen this windmill, because it was also in her dream about Linda. I would not be surprised if all of Roy’s wives did not witness a body going into that ground at some point or another because of how Karen was so quick to redirect Roy’s rage to Dot. They’re on different sides of the line but they are both fighting for the same thing. To be with their children and not to end up rolled into an early grave.

[racefortheironthrone]

With how much focus she has received since the beginning of the Krakoa era, what are your thoughts on Storm ? And do you agree on the perception that she's becoming something of a Mary Sue?

I’m going to start with a mini-rant about the Mary Sue.

To the extent that there is any validity to the term at all, it is solely and exclusively within the realm of fanfiction. A Mary Sue is an OC (original character) whose supposed annoying omni-competence is really secondary to the main problem with the character, which is that they warp the narrative away from the main characters of the source material - Kirk and Spock or Picard and Data stop doing things that drive the plot, and instead just stand around asking "where's Poochie?"

Outside of fanfiction and in the realm of the media that gives rise to fanfiction, a prominent character who is incredibly talented and powerful and who makes the plot center around them is called a fucking protagonist - so no, Rey isn’t a Mary Sue, Carol Danvers isn’t a Mary Sue, Katniss Everdeen isn't a Mary Sue - none of them are Mary Sues and anyone who claims otherwise is showing that they have deep-seated Issues with female protagonists in their fiction.

Is Storm a Mary Sue?

Even if we weren't talking about the most prominent black woman character in fiction, I would consider this question pretty damn offensive, both because no one would ever ask this question about a male character and - in a franchise packed to the gills with hyper-powerful women who make the plots revolve around them and who even get the complementary Love Triangle - no one sends me asks about any of those (white) women.

But to answer your question: no, Storm is not a Mary Sue - she's the main character of the X-Men.

See, when Chris Claremont took over X-Men in 1975, he did so with a brand-new cast of characters, the so-called "All-New, All-Different X-Men." In no small part because they were far more diverse and more colorful than the O5 (suburban WASPs one and all), most of these characters would become break-out stars and the core of the X-Men from that day to this.

However, Claremont didn't vibe with all of the All-New X-Men equally: he had Sunfire quit the team (repeatedly), he killed off Thunderbird for shock value (a death that has only been reversed this last year), he would have killed off Wolverine if John Byrne hadn't stopped him (Claremont would later turn around on Logan once he worked out his voice), etc.

But one character that he vibed with right from the beginning was Ororo Monroe. From the very beginning, Claremont's Storm is the most powerful of the All-New X-Men, both in terms of her powers and in terms of her personality, being the only person who can face down Logan. At the same time, she's complicated by her struggles with crippling claustrophobia caused by the Suez Crisis-induced trauma of her childhood.

After a few years, Claremont tired of the African Nature Goddess routine and had Storm experience an almost total transformation that nonetheless was completely grounded in her character. Feeling overly limited by the total emotional control required of her powers, Ororo undergoes a subtextual lesbian awakening in Tokyo's underground punk scene and emerges out the other side a free spirit, leader of the X-Men, and Queen of the Morlocks.

In his most audacious move in LifeDeath I and II, Claremont had Storm lose her powers thanks to Forge's anti-mutant tech - and then defeat Cyclops in a duel for command of the X-Men without her powers - and then regain her powers in an epic cycle that saw the X-Men die and be reborn as outlaw heroes in the Australian Outback.

In sum, Storm was clearly Claremont's favorite character and, as a result had the most interesting character journey over his 16-year run on X-Men.

Storm in Krakoa

And then Storm basically lay fallow for almost thirty years. In no small part due to the pioneering work done by Claremont with this character, later writers were frankly too intimidated to touch the character and so starting in the 90s, Storm was increasingly sidelined in the comics in favor of the characters that were commercially "hot" at the time - Wolverine and Gambit, especially.

In the 2000s, the most significant thing to happen to Storm was her marriage to T'challa. While I think Reggie Hudlin had mostly good intentions with this decision - he wanted to create a black power couple at Marvel and thus put together Marvel's most prominent black man and black woman into a relationship - the result was to make Storm a supporting character in Black Panther comics, rather than a main character in X-Men comics.

I would argue that it is only recently with the advent of Al Ewing as a major writer in the X-office with S.W.O.R.D, X-Men Red, and Storm and the Brotherhood of Mutants that we've gotten a writer who's not afraid to write Storm as she deserves to be written - as the most powerful of the X-Men, the Regent of Arrako and the Voice of Sol, the standard-bearer of Magneto's legacy, and a woman trying to balance the demands of two planets and her own desires.

[chickenstrangers]

Bad Buddy, Tragedy, and Queer Futures

I want to take a closer look at Kwan & Riam and Romeo & Juliet, and the intertextual methods Bad Buddy employs with those narratives. Bad Buddy is an extremely self-aware show and comments on and subverts tropes and expectations of the genres it employs, putting itself in conversation with other BLs, but also romantic comedies and romantic tragedies more broadly. @shortpplfedup has done a much better job than I could do in her excellent Romeo and Juliet analysis series (which was very helpful in getting my thoughts in order), so instead I want to focus on how Bad Buddy plays with the idea of tragedy and explore it through a queer theoretical framework.

Bad Buddy straddles the line between comedy and tragedy. While, as a romance, the audience is primed to expect it will end happily, there is a thrum of tension behind all the jokes and banter. Specifically in the first half of the show, which feels the most rom-com like to me, there's sadness underlying Pat and Pran's interactions. Every time Pat makes a flirty joke, there's a spark of hope in Pran's eyes that he quickly pushes away, knowing or thinking that Pat doesn't feel the same way. It feels like the characters are on a knife's edge, and every little misstep cuts deeply.

The smiley face is an external representation of Pran's feeling (for example, he switches its direction on his door depending on his mood) but it also signifies a choice. He chooses to surround himself with icons of happiness and he chooses to turn the frowny face into a smiley face. People often don't have that much control over the big external things in their lives, but the important thing is adapting and making choices within their circumstances. The idea of choosing happiness is at the core of Bad Buddy.

Pran knows that this will probably not end happily for him. That even if his feelings are reciprocated it might not work. In some ways, his reactions can be read as genre-awareness, part of all the little signs that the show is putting out that this is not your typical rom-com, that it might not have the happy ending that the audience expects. He may not necessarily know that he is in a story, but he anticipates its trajectory. But then Pat comes in and breaks through these genre walls. He's in a rom-com! He's got all the tropes! He falls second but he falls hard and he doesn't have the years and years that Pran has had to build it up in his head.

This is exemplified so beautifully in the rooftop scene and the aftermath of the kiss. For Pat, this feels like the culmination of the story. All good rom-coms end with a kiss. After they kiss, Pat has such a blissful expression on his face, it's pure happiness and belief that things are working out all right in the end. But this isn't the end and Pran knows this. When Pat sees Pran's devastated face, he starts to realize this too.

The post-kiss episodes have a different tone, especially once Pat and Pran actually get together in episode 7. They feel a lot lighter now that Pat and Pran know how each other feel. There's a sense of domestic happiness once they're dating. But the buzzing of potential tragedy and heartbreak doesn't come from Pat and Pran anymore, but from nebulous external forces. This is also when the show starts to signal more and more explicitly that it is a tragedy.

The clearest case for this is the introduction of the school play. The inclusion of Kwan and Riam led to a lot of speculation that Bad Buddy might not get a happy ending, along with P'Aof's comments that they had taken liberties with the source material. Kwam and Riam's story is from the 1936 book Plae Kao or The Scar. The 1977 film adaptation was Thailand's highest grossing film up to that time and it's legacy continues, with two other adaptations in the twenty-first century (for more information and links, see @fiercynn's very helpful post). It tells the story of two star-crossed lovers whose families separate them, and it ultimately ends with both their deaths. Kwan is killed by Riam's brother, and Riam takes Kwan's knife and stabs herself to die alongside him.

Bad Buddy explicitly emulates Kwan and Riam's story. Pat and Pran's story is essentially the BL retelling of the story that the architecture faculty is producing. With the Kwan and Riam narrative shedding new light, we now see that Dissaya sending Pran to a different school mirrors Riam's father sending her away (though it is much darker in the original). Bad Buddy also has direct references to Romeo and Juliet, especially with the balcony scenes and the intense longstanding familial rivalry.

From this point on, Bad Buddy toes the line between whether it will end happily or tragically. But, crucially, the successive near-misses all hint towards the show's final message of queer futurity and queer possibility.

The first act of near disaster comes at the end of episode 8 when Wai pulls back the curtain on Pat and Pran on stage. The fact that this takes place on the set of the play puts it into direct parallel with Plae Kao. Kwan and Riam's story gets transposed onto Pat and Pran's story. They become the actors playing out the story in real life. After this point, we don't see much more about the play at all, other than the curtain call of the performance, we don't see Pat acting as Riam on stage, but we do see them playing out this narrative in real life.

This is the first real test to their dating relationship, but they do not break up. Their friends turn on them, especially Wai, who won't even talk to Pran. Pat suggests they pretend to break up and continue dating in secret (foreshadowing), but that is ultimately unnecessary. Pat's friends only put on a show of abandoning Pat, and Korn quickly reveals he still fully supports his friend. This is the first of a series of misdirects.

The next crisis seems completely anticlimactic, but maybe that's the point. In episode 9, Pat gets shot. It comes seemingly out of nowhere, and then is quickly resolved. We once again have a fake out: the audience is misled to think this is a dramatic event with the way the hospital scene is shot, and Pran is misled by Pat's friends, who play up how hurt Pat is. But Pat is complete fine, the bullet just grazed him. This incident feels very out of place in the narrative of Bad Buddy. Yes, it is an important step in reconciling Pran and Wai, but couldn't this have happened some other way, that didn't involve a random guy who we'd never seen before and a level of violence that the show hadn't prepared the audience to expect?

But what if this was a deliberate allusion to Kwan and Riam/Romeo and Juliet? Here we get the physical injury from those stories' conclusions, Kwan's fatal shooting. Except...its not a big deal. With this scene we get further hints that something else bad might be coming, but we get another sign of tragedy being forestalled. This is further emphasized by the following confrontation with Pat's dad, who is unhappy to see Pran at the hospital, but in the end shows grudging respect for Pran getting Pat's name cleared. Disaster averted.

Then we come to the true brink of tragedy: episode 10 and 11. Pat and Pran find out the real reason their families hate each other, the reason why they are meant to hate each other. At this point they both know that they're not going to be able to stay together and have their families' approval. Running away to the beach feels like a delay of the inevitable. On the beach, they are in a liminal state, a state of paralysis. They have their "honeymoon" but both know there's no happy wedded life to follow.

This calls back to the moment of death in Plae Kao, when Kwan flees into the water after being shot and Riam follows after him, taking his knife from him and stabbing herself while they're both underwater. The waves obscure their death in the film, suspending them in the moment of transition between life and death. This liminality carries over onto Pat and Pran's retreat, which echoes the water motif. This is the scene where Juliet takes the poison, creating the effect of death, though not death itself.

We are back to the beginning. Pran knows this is a tragedy. He's the one who first thinks about going home, even knowing they will not be able to go back together. Pat wants to cling to this little slice of possibility for just a bit longer, but Pran knows that this can't work forever, and Pat knows this too. While Pat is more willing to delay this looming conclusion, they both know they'll have to go home.

Okay, and so what? Romance stories often have a third-act breakup, there needs to be some sort of conflict. What makes this any different from a traditional romance narrative?

When the show was airing, there was a lot of worry that the show wouldn't have a happy ending, or if Pat and Pran did end up in a relationship, it would be after an extended breakup. The show definitely tried to cultivate this response with the inclusion of the Kwan and Riam play and the preview for episode 12. But the show also had put out all these little signals that things weren't as they seemed, and that disaster would be averted once again.

It is important to note that there isn't actually a third-act break up. They never break up! There's not even really any miscommunication. Bad Buddy has been laying clues for the audience, with the multiple bait and switch tragedies, from the curtain to the gunshot. Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy, but a key element of that tragedy is the deception: Juliet taking the poison to fake her own death so that she be with Romeo. But Romeo doesn't know about the lie, and he is tricked as well. Pat and Pran, alternatively, are together in this deception, lying to their families and most of their friends, and in turn, the audience.

They take control of the narrative. They choose what details to share and with whom. When they finally let the audience in on the deception, they do so directly, breaking the fourth wall by narrating their own story.

This is where I'd like to bring in the idea of queer futurity and queer temporality. Queer temporality addresses the idea that queer time operates outside of and in opposition to linear normative institutions and chronologies, and that experiences of the past, present, and future can feel different to queer people. For example, coming of age milestones can take place on different timelines for queer people. Queer futurity looks specifically to the future as queerness's domain. It allows us to imagine a possible world beyond the present, a future that is not yet here. (Shoutout to @shannankle who brilliantly applied this lens to The Eighth Sense and got me thinking about this topic).

Bad Buddy plays with the idea of queer time with the realization of the queer romance. There are two time skips in Bad Buddy (between episodes 6 and 7 and between 11 and 12). Already this creates the sense of delay. Much of Pat and Pran's relationship is characterized by waiting, from the three years when Pran was sent away before university to the four years where they hide their relationship. It wasn't the right time for them then, and it isn't even really the right time for them now. They are waiting for a time to be free, a future that is not here yet, but on the horizon.

Nevertheless, there is an optimistic turn to this waiting; they are facing this delay together. Discussions of queer futurity creates the impression of separation between the present and the future, but here they are holding hands, creating a continuum between these temporalities. This optimism is in direct defiance of the expectations of tragedy, especially as common as it is in queer narratives. So much of queer media does not end happily; however, Pat and Pran do get a happy ending and their story does not end in tragedy like Kwan and Riam's or Romeo and Juliet's.

But its a nuanced ending. The parents don't reconcile; although they are starting to thaw towards the idea of their sons dating, the show ends without the parents talking. But that's not what it's about. It goes back to Uncle Tong's words. As Pat says, "We might not be able to change the people around us, but they couldn't change the two of us either." All they could do was "adjust to it and live happily." They are looking towards a world beyond the present, but while they are waiting, they can still be happy.

Pat and Pran make the choice to have a happy ending. They have a lot of agency in this decision, thwarting familial and genre expectations. It all goes back to the smiley faces Pran surrounds himself, putting himself in a sea of optimism when he isn't necessarily a very optimistic person. It's about the ):) face. That face is also about choice, its about perspective, and how close happiness and sadness are to each other. But Pran chooses to have it be a smiley face instead of a frowny face. Pat and Pran choose to stay together.

Bad Buddy takes two straight romantic tragedies, combines them with audience expectations of queer tragedies, and subverts all of it.

In both Romeo and Juliet's and Kwan and Riam's stories, the lovers die alone. Pat and Pran live together.

Bibliography

Freeman, Elizabeth. Time Binds: Queer Temporalities, Queer Histories. Durham: Duke University Press, 2010.

Halberstam, Judith. A Queer Time and Place: Transgender Bodies, Subcultural Lives. New York: New York University Press, 2005.

Helmsing, Mark E. "Queer Futurity." Encyclopedia of Queer Studies in Education, ed. Kamden K. Strunk and Stephanie Anne Shelton. Leiden: Brill, 2022, p. 518-522.

Muñoz, José Estaban. Cruising Utopia: The Then and There of Queer Futurity. New York: New York University Press, 2009.

Plae Kao. Directed by Cherd Songsri, Cherdchai Production, 1977.

[thevulturesquadron]

Ok so this is me sorta headcanoning, so take this with a grain of salt, but one of the reasons why the infantilization of Rogue always bothers me is because I always felt like her powers were a metaphor for disability/chronic illness and fandom police act already like disabled women aren't capable of being in their own villain romances, example being Entrapdak antis denying Entrapta her own agency in her romance with Hordak in the She-Ra reboot.

Oh! But you make a really good point! It’s one of those subtle perspectives that can be dangerous just because of how easy they are to integrate into someone's view of the world. I'm not as vocal online as I used to be. I feel like there are people out there far better equipped to talk about it than I, while I grow old and cranky. But, you brought up a really important aspect that kinda sent me into a 'hold my beer' moment so apologies for the long answer! To start with, I wouldn’t call this a headcanon, not at all, clearly not in the context of X-men, and Rogue in particular. It’s a very apt analogy. The reason why these characters become relevant to us is because we recognize something from our personal journey in them, and the comparison you made for Rogue is a very strong one. Her inability to touch can absolutely be read as a disability! In so many of her stories/arcs it is often portrayed as a struggle, as an obstacle to a ‘normal life’. Her difficulties with gaining control over her powers and dealing with other personalities that are trying to take over her mind can also be a strong metaphor for mental health struggles/disorders. Rogue is a fantastic hero in that regard and seeing her be her own person, learning how to work and be proud of what she can do, can feel like a personal victory for so many people. It’s why it’s important to see her happy, to see her winning her battles and use who she is and what she can do in a positive and impactful way. There are many reasons why fans end up taking away her agency or attributing her choices to a different (often male) character. And, to be fair, a couple of comic-book writers have done this exact thing to her, so I can see where this skewed perspective might be coming from. Within fandom this happens mostly because it serves to support their arguments for whatever thing they prefer or project onto the character. If they don’t like a certain narrative or can’t accept that it might’ve be written for someone else, they have this to fall back on and point to. Or, sadly, one of the simplest reasons for doing this is the age-old turning their ship preferences into ‘I’m right, you are wrong’ arguments. But these things can hide some internalized misconceptions. Unfortunately I haven’t seen the reboot of She-Ra (shame on me) so I don’t have the full picture for the take on Entrapta, but now I have one more reason to invest some time in it. In this situation with Rogue, I believe that what you mentioned applies very well. The argument that I’ve seen going around a lot is that Rogue was manipulated/swayed by being presented with the opportunity to ‘be normal’. Because she wanted to be able to touch and as a result she was taken advantage of because of her ‘disability’. Which is entirely false. In no version of the relationship between Rogue and Magneto in the comics, and not even in the reinvented take in the animation, has he ever abused that. Her attraction to him has always, always, come first, and the ability to touch, second. He was never the first one to act upon it. Even in the animation, every shot in the flashback was carefully considered to portray that - she is shown as the initiator every time (my favourite scene is when she’s trying her very best to pose in a suggestive way and he just paints her as he sees her, lively and sincere). But some fans don’t want to see that. They don’t want to acknowledge the authenticity of her decisions because it doesn’t serve the narrative they want of her/for her.

I read your message and it hit like a hammer how much deeper this problem can actually go, because it’s masked by those surface-level justifications. Removing agency and responsibility from someone just because they operate differently than one’s expectations is damaging in and of itself, and within a fandom it perpetuates an idea that can stifle people’s perspective and critical thinking. (This whole topic actually reminded me of Madison Tevlin's “Assume that I can” commercial. I think it's relevant to the conversation) Thanks a lot for sharing this!!! We need to talk more about these things and if I misspoke on something or missed something important would love to hear it. 💜

[seraphcelene]

IWTV S2E4 - I Want You More Than Anything in the World

There are games being played.

Let's talk about Louis -- how he's been transformed from the melancholy, self-flagellating moral mess to almost equal parts temper and angst, ever balanced between joy and hope and rage.

I can't compare this series to the books because it is a different beast altogether, and I LOVE the changes.

There is something sinister and beautiful in the way that IwtV has turned gender politics on its head. Queer love is centered and the vulnerability of emotion demanded of women in depictions of romantic relationships gets equal demand in the male leads. That is wildly true of the novels and makes for a welcome shift in the way that men are portrayed on screen. Armand's NEED oozes out of his eyes when he's with Louis. He is so in love. He also opens a vein describing his life before vampirism. It's a narrative that typically frames womanhood -- objectified, sexualized, enslaved and without agency. Then there's Louis grief, guilt, and unrequited love for Lestat, a force in every scene Jacob Anderson is in.

The commentary on how women fit and are objectified within society are there too. Madeline's shunning after her affair with a young German solider is explained in equally by "patriotism" and loose morals (she is slut shamed). Claudia's infantilization, at complete odds with how she sees herself and wants to be seen is horrifying. Her "maman" in the play makes a comment about Baby Lulu distracting her father so that he keeps his hands off her (the mother). It's coarse theater, of course, and it's meant to be a purple comment that suggests and titillates. It is also, to a modern audience, or at least this person as audience, horrifying. It reminded me immediately of how women are portrayed as objectified stand ins to attract the male gaze. Claudia's debasement, sexualized infant for the mortals and walking ridicule as blasphemy to the immortals, is a game, a show and a joke for everyone. That girl is going to break. Her developing relationship with Madeline is the closest depiction of normalcy and something she craves and has craved since she accidentally ate that boy back in Season 1.

It all makes an interesting comment on power structure. Who has it, who doesn't, who wants it, who doesn't. Season 1 sets Louis as the beta to Lestat's alpha. It makes sense. Lestat is a natural born alpha, but Louis as a beta is a little sleight of hand. Yes with Lestat, but as is increasingly more obvious absolutely not with Armand. Louis even reminds us that he is good at running things.

I'd argue that Armand was never really an alpha vampire. He holds the coven because his dark gifts are strong enough to allow him to, but not because anyone is particularly afraid or in awe of him. It makes Louis and Armand as a coven of two an interesting question. @lynnenne has posited that Louis is the one in control. I find that idea deliciously fascinating and more likely as we're watching the events of the past. But because this is still a story of unreliable narrator's, I have to question the truth. Is he? or isn't he?

Louis dresses his disdain and his resistance to emotional intimacy in Lestat's figure. He holds on to him as armor to hold off real emotional attachment even as he stares lovingly into Armand's face in the present and declares that he loved him even back them. I don't know that him letting go of Lestat in the rain (SO FUCKING SAD AND OH!) was about him deciding to be in love so much as it is about him deciding to let go of guilt and fear so that he can move forward. Lestat was his past. Running the theater could be his future and it would be to protect Claudia as much as it would be to protect Armand.

But again … what of this story is real? Daniel's migraines, the reemerging memories of San Francisco that are very much centered around what looks like Armand playing mind games.

Little things I loved about this episode:

Madeline and Claudia in the shop and the way that Claudia is lamenting that she is a vampire and Madeline is dinner

"Go sit in your choice, sister." - That fight was epic and hurtful and real. Both of them abandoned in different ways.

Claudia calling Armand on his shit. She is Lestat's daughter for sure. She doesn't give a fuck about the rituals and the rules. Claudia is looking for a space to belong in, but it has to be shaped for her and according to her rules. Anything else will chafe.

"The wilderness that is our daughter."

Louis letting Lestat go is one of the saddest thing ever. The music is a slightly discordant, manipulative goodbye in this very constructed story reflecting a very constructed end between Louis and Lestat. I love the way that Louis makes Lestat say apple and then apple in French as proof that he is just a figment of his imagination because Lestat is never that accommodating. "There isn't going to be a hunt, is there?" And then he is washed away by the rain.

[tritoch]

the damsel and the hero: some thoughts on minfilia and elidibus

I get why many people have (understandable, justified, legitimate) gripes to this day about how Minfilia was handled, but I think you don't have to change anything about how she's presented in game to arrive at a reading that lets her feel like more than a sacrificial victim. Within the game as it exists, Minfilia is already a rich and layered heroic character. She is not a damsel or a tragic hero but a victorious figure whose very exit from the narrative affirmed her own ideals, and she controlled her own destiny to the end. All you have to do to see this more clearly is read her against one of her underexamined foils: Elidibus.

Spoilers through the end of Pandemonium (6.4) below.

After 5.3 dropped, the devs mentioned that because they basically had to develop and pay off Elidibus in the space of a patch or two, they drew conscious parallels between him and other characters. The game highlights the G'raha parallels in the scene just before Seat of Sacrifice. There's also the parallels to Alphinaud that people have noticed in both the broad strokes of their characterization (idealistic short kings who believe in the power of rhetoric and diplomacy to achieve true and lasting understanding between people, whose mission to save the world is forever held in balance with their duty to save those they love) and in specific lines of dialogue.

But a far more direct narrative parallel than either character is Minfilia. Like Elidibus and Zodiark, Minfilia offered herself to Hydaelyn, serving as the Word of the Mother, only to be called forth once more when an intractable conflict between her allies threatened the stability of the world. Both were messianic young figures who nonetheless lead their older allies by both example and command. Both, seeing an opportunity to save not just their close friends but everyone, offered themselves up to a higher power in an act not of desperation but of deliberate will. You can even poetically gloss both Antecedent and Emissary as "The One That Goes Before."

The difference between the two of them is that at every turn, where Elidibus failed, Minfilia succeeded.

Elidibus returned to broker peace between the Hydaelyn faction and the Convocation. He failed, and the result was the Sundering. Minfilia, entreated by Urianger, came back to resolve the conflict between the Warriors of Darkness (Hydaelyn's champions and Warriors of Light themselves) and the Scions, and succeeded in saving two worlds by her actions.

But more than that, Elidibus provided us a picture of what it actually looks like to lose your identity to a primal like Zodiark. He'd lived a thousand thousand lifetimes as himself and he was so broken he could scarcely remember anything more than his name and his duty. He is one of the most explicitly tragic figures in all of FFXIV, and his final sendoff in 5.3 was an image of him plagued by unanswerable grief, which for him was a consequence of his failure: "The rains have ceased, and we have been graced with another beautiful day. But you are not here to see it."

Meanwhile, in the preceding expansion, you actually had the chance to spend multiple scenes with Minfilia and they're all extremely clear: unlike Ardbert or Elidibus, after 100 years this was still Minfilia, she remained resolute in her mission to see the First saved, but she had not forgotten the woman she was or the people she loved. In both 3.4 and 5.0, she went out as herself, head held high.

Speaking to the Warrior of Light before she departs for the First: "So many times have I watched you depart, my heart filled with worry, and ever did you return to me in triumph. Someday, when I have found a way to free this star from Her sorrow, I promise you I shall repay the favor."

Her final words to Ryne: "No one, however powerful, is immune to the whisperings of doubt and despair. Do not give in to them, but do not deny them either. Look instead to the light within, that you may continue to serve as a beacon to others."

In both instances, we were given a Minfilia who had not merely accepted her fate, but who had chosen it of her own volition and rose confidently to meet it, even imparting to her successor some final hard-won words of wisdom. And unlike Elidibus, she met her friends again at duty's end; they live, and they are happy, and she is content. She's already heroic, but the contrast to Elidibus (and Ardbert, and Emet) underlines the extent to which we should see her as extraordinarily driven, self-possessed and ultimately victorious on her own terms.

And in making the connection between Elidibus and Minfilia, we can begin to let Elidibus's characterization inform hers in retrospect.

Elidibus as we see him in 5.3 and earlier more specifically paralleled Minfilia as the Word of the Mother. Prior to that point in her arc, Minfilia's parallel was Themis, the pre-Zodiark Elidibus we glimpse briefly in the 5.3 Echo flashbacks and would only meet properly an expansion later in Pandemonium. The important thing about Themis for our purposes is that he was not some naive or too-young figurehead tricked into serving as Zodiark's Emissary. This was not a Crystal Braves situation for him. In Pandemonium, you can see how the kind of man Themis was very clearly lead to him choosing to be offered up to Zodiark. He took seriously the principles and duties of the Convocation. He valued dearly the lives of all people generally and his friends and comrades in particular, but held those truths in balance rather than prizing one. He was rational, clear-sighted, and decisive.

All of these, obviously, were true of Minfilia. And unlike Elidibus, whose ascension into Zodiark was forever somewhat obscured by the narrative, we were quite close to Minfilia before she became the Word of the Mother. We were quite familiar with her grief and guilt over surviving where Louisoix did not, her fear that she could neither fill his shoes as a leader nor serve in action as others did. She confided in us about the difficulty of her task in serving as the pillar of strength and guiding light for the rest of the Scions. She despaired alongside the player character at both the death of Moenbryda and the disastrous events of the Banquet. We know what she believed, what she valued, what she feared, what frustrated her. When she chose to depart for the First, it paid off very directly everything else the game has said about her through 3.4. Her arc was one of trepidation and doubt, and it ended in her ultimate victory and an astonishingly clean win that compromises none of her values.

Both Urianger and some fans raised the question of whether it was wrong for Urianger to ever offer her the choice of sacrificing herself for the First at all. Minfilia, for her part, got a chance to speak to this directly: "Have we not walked together in the light of the Crystal, and at Her bidding borne witness to the joys and sorrows of this land? Each and every one of you knows my heart. If this be the price I must pay, I pay it gladly." It did not matter whether she was given this particular decision or not. You could have offered her this dilemma in a thousand different permutations in a thousand thousand different scenarios. This was the choice she made. This was her choice, forever and always: to save everyone she can, in honor of those she loves.

Candidly, I understand critiques of Minfilia's writing far better than any praise it could ever receive. Nothing I've written above answers the clear and obvious truths that she is underwritten, that she does not get much to do or much screentime for a putatively important character, that it is very easy and common to read her death as a fridging, that she is unfairly dismissed by many due to her role in the narrative and the way she leaves it. Her sacrifice plays into specific gendered tropes that are disappointingly common to see. Those things all remain true.

But I think as we remember those things we should also keep in mind that she does still get a complete arc that is interesting and thematically rich in itself, and which puts her in some senses on the same level in the narrative as characters like Elidibus, Emet-Selch, and Ardbert.

Her sacrifice continues to inform the game. Her literal ghost returns to affirm the truth and value of her beliefs and the choices she made. Her guiding words ("For those we have lost, for those we can yet save") remain a mantra not just for the Scions but specifically for the player character. They are not an empty slogan. The phrase succinctly conveys an ideal of all-encompassing humanism and compassion arising from grief. The ideal those words represent is one of many organizing principles and responses to grief that the game examines (because a lot of FFXIV is about grief and how we respond to tragedy and change), it is Minfilia who develops and articulates it, and it is the one the heroes continue to align themselves with. It is the same principle that leads her to the First, and G'raha, and us too. It is Minfilia's ideals--Minfilia's heroism--which continue to serve as the model to which the Warrior of Light aspires, in the game's text.

Truthfully, my gripe is this. I think it is very easy to imagine a male Minfilia--same lines, same screentime, same blocking, same ass cut-out--appearing in place of the Minfilia we have. And I feel quite sincerely, and quite frustratedly, that if we had Malefilia, both the fans and detractors of that character would ascribe to him more thoughtfulness and more thematic depth than the Minfilia we already have, even though their lines would be exactly the same. We are so ready to see the damsel we expect in Minfilia that we are unwilling to see her as the hero she is in the text, and my hope is that by holding her up to her mirror, Elidibus, we may see her as a rich character in her own right all the more clearly.

[dellovestorant]

If you want to read it all good luck.

For all we talk about Mercedes is doing this, Toto should stop doing this, why are they doing that or not doing that, it is all speculation at the end of the day and we really do not have a say in how they operate. A lot of people underestimate the mental strengths athletes and especially F1 drivers have these days, especially with the additional media scrutiny. George yes will have bad days and good days that's just part of being human but after everything he's gone through in terms of contract negotiations and the scare of being dropped when he was with Williams he's got the mental strength and right mentality to bounce back from a lot. Not to mention that man knows how to network. Toto might be the most outspoken person about George and his performances and whatnot due do their closeness from George's younger years and whatever but there are connections being made behind the scenes that go beyond Toto that we don't see. There are people with very sharp eyes that will pick out the 'secret' meetings here and there but at the end of the day there's even more behind that we don't know. Toto's relationship with the board just by looking at who's attending what sponsorship events is also somewhat starting to deteriote. The relationships between George/Toto, George/Leiws, Lewis/Toto and George/Toto/Lewis has definitely changed, it is blantly obvious through their actions and statements, but at the end of the day there is a line of professionalism that hasn't been crossed yet no matter how many lines their media team has already crossed. However,there has been a shift in how George reflects on a session or a race weekend from the start of this season to now. We're a quarter of the way through the season, nearly half way through the year, the way the media team and Toto treats him and his performances week in week out is becoming more and more obvious for everyone (well everyone but the demons). The obvious thing now though is to wait and see what the board of management at Mercedes Benz is going to do. You can't trust INEOS to actually do something about this as they are literally there to pay someone's salary and get their dividends. Someone on the board that's part of INEOS also looks AI generated but that's a topic for another day. The board has to do something soon to get this team on track and I don't mean just having Markus or Britta turn up inconspicuously at a race weekend to control Toto's yapping. Someone needs to stop that man from saying everything on his mind sure but overall the car is currently the most important thing. We're a quarter of the way through the season, nearly half way through the year and no one on the board is going to say anything publicly? Sure privately there definitely has to be talks going on but without public acknolwedgement you're letting TW control the narrative within F1 media. Yeah sure the european elections are from what i've heard are rightly so important but I would also say as CEO of a massive automotive company you're also not supposed to be letting someone who is technically considered your subordinate just runaway with this nonsense yapping. You can not want to interfere with immediate team dynamics sure but at the end of the day Mercedes-AMG PETRONAS F1 Team could and would/is been considered a subsidary of Mercedes as long as it carries the Mercedes name. The F1 team's performance is going to bleed into the reputation of Mercedes Benz whether you like it or not. Not to the extent of affecting car sales or anything major I'm not that delusional unlike some people but something will bleed over.

As for whether George will actually leave if given the chance? At the current moment in time I doubt it. No matter how many jokes we make here and there about oh Toto stop yapping about Max and Kimi you'll loose both your star drivers, at the end of the day again the board of management has majority of the say in driver line-up. The conversation of that bloody 10-year contract is about to expire might be true but honestly with the way George's network is going I don't think a contract with Toto is the thing we should be the most worried about. If Mercedes as a company don't want you there anymore you'll know it. It'll be blantly obvious. That whole Lewis situation I am sorry to say is half a product of his own fault. Who tf asks for a raise during a worldwide pandemic where the entire automotive industry is suffering from supply and sales issues not to mention the middle of freaking legal investigations/lawsuits still ongoing left by the previous CEO. With the amount of events and pr both online and offline that George is currently doing for Mercedes (the main company not the F1 team), the board still wants him. and they're not going to let him go very easily even if that contract with Toto runs out. Take a look at CH and HM's statements back in 2020/2021 about him only being on the Mercedes market. At the current moment yeah there's all that talk about oh George's contract is up again next year and CH is taking digs at Toto about taking George but realistically think about it. CH and TW have been going at it forever and ever taking digs at each other even when one of them is fighting the goddamn midfield. Unless the board at Mercedes gets involved in this little pissing contest these two are having I wouldn't be too sure about George leaving. And whilst Oliver Mintzlaff's comments for Toto are most definitely true I would say that man also has more to worry about. It might not be car performance but for rbr atm there worry is not car performance.

At the end of the day if the board still wants him, George is staying. Lando stayed with McLaren through all the shit they've been through and Charles and Ferrari. As much as this team is currently giving everyone a headache if you truly think George is leaving this project at the end of next year just because Toto can't stop yapping you haven't been paying that much attention. Rumours are just that. Rumours.

[thatsparrow]

post-dead man's chest rewatch thoughts

- (which number rewatch is this? how many times have I seen these movies since they first came out? couldn't possibly tell you)

- the opening scene is such a great mood-setter, and I think also exemplifies what makes these movies so fun when they're at their best (and from what I recall of the later entries, one of the most immediate places where they trip themselves up.) I am always having my most fun watching a pirates of the caribbean movie when it is being simultaneously earnest and self-indulgent—completely buying into its own concepts while also not taking itself too seriously—and that's what we get at the start of dead man's chest. the rain in the tea cups. elizabeth in her soaked wedding dress. will marched up in irons. on the one hand, it's a little cheesy, but it's all in service of something very sincere. the relevant information is that elizabeth and will were meant to be getting married, and that's been interrupted by will's arrest, but then we get all these fun set-dressing elements that aren't strictly necessary but heighten and underscore the emotions in visually dynamic, compelling ways

- all of that was a long way of saying that I like the opening scene, which I do! for all the above reasons, and because fundamentally I'm a sucker for will/elizabeth

- I think cutler beckett is a great villain, and tom hollander does such a fantastic job (obviously this is not within his control, but I love that he's a little short—the fact that he doesn't seem that physically imposing is then turned on its ear so effectively by his absolute surety and ruthlessness). narrative-wise, I also think it's a great way of raising the stakes from the 1v1 of jack and barbossa in the first film (which we still get in a sense with jack and davy jones, but now with the added looming threat of the entire east india company in the background)

- man, what's the point of the whole cannibal island sequence. just to call back to the "and then they made me their chief" line in black pearl? jack's afraid of the open ocean, so is the thinking that they moored at the first island they found (presumably where they also wouldn't be arrested for being pirates?) it just feels like such unnecessary, manufactured danger, and for what? okay, will found jack, and all but like 8 of the crew have been eaten/killed (relevant when jack tries to bargain with jones for his life) but surely there were more interesting, more plot-relevant, more character-driven ways of accomplishing that

- tia dalma is great, and so is naomie harris! I don't know if they were already planning for her to be calypso at this point, but I love the look of irritation she gives gibbs when he's like, "so was it the sea or a woman that davy jones loved?" and she says "both"

- I think this movie really glosses over jack's selfishness—or at least, it doesn't address it in the ways I want it to be addressed. we know he's selfish already, he makes it clear throughout black pearl that his first priority is himself, he's intending to screw will over from the jump if it means he gets the pearl back, but ultimately his and will's/elizabeth's goals align re: defeating barbossa, and so we don't actually see what would have happened if he had the choice to trade one of his allies lives for something he wanted. granted the stakes are higher in dead man's chest (his own life as opposed to the black pearl), but the whole movie, it's clear there is no one jack won't sacrifice if it means his own survival, and I don't think it's ever properly acknowledged. he tricks will onto the dutchman, tells him to say "jack sparrow sent me to settle his debt," which will doesn't have context for, but we do, and likely so does the rest of the pearl's crew listening, and that it's jack saying, will, tell davy jones that you're giving up your life for mine. and I guess, yeah, will has made it clear that he doesn't think of jack as a friend, and jack has no special loyalty to will at this point, but it's also not like there's no history between them—they were allies, they have taken turns saving the other, but now here's jack willing (no pun intended) to trade will's life for his own, seemingly without a second thought

- i love the design of the flying dutchman and jones' crew—a) it fucks tremendously and b) what a cool yet horrifying visual interpretation of these sailors who would have died at sea being literally reclaimed by it

- it's WILD to me that, in full view of the crew, jack makes the bargain with jones to trade 100 souls for his own (including will's!) and everyone, including gibbs, is like, hey sure thing captain, let's set sail for tortuga to find a bunch of dumb suckers we can trick into signing away their souls. no questions or concerns here. it's just baffling to me that at no point does anyone within the story question what's happening. jack, is your life really worth the lives of 100 other men? can we live with ourselves after misleading them into making this bargain? does will deserve this? do any of them deserve this? you already got like two-thirds of the crew killed while hiding out on cannibal island from jones and the kraken, and now you want to condemn 100 more men to death? at what point is enough, enough? maybe it's just me, but it feels like the movies sometimes swing into this place of expecting like, unquestioning loyalty from their audience when it comes to rooting for jack, like of course we all buy into the premise that saving jack is worth whatever it takes (to the point that rescuing him from the literal afterlife is the cliffhanger on which this movie ends)

- love the liar's dice scene, love stellan skarsgard's look of absolute horror when he realizes will is on the dutchman, love all of their interactions! the moment where bill is helping him escape and says something to the effect of, it'd be a lie to say I didn't feel the need to leave and find work at sea, but it'd also be a lie to say I didn't enjoy it

- man, the organ/music box motif, the complementary melody with tia dalma's, so good!! (although I feel like this watch, I only just appreciated how far forward davy jones is leaning over the organ so his tentacles can reach the upper rows of keys. like, he's really getting low over that organ)

- love the worldbuilding detail of how jones summons the kraken—practically, of course sending out this massive vibration would be the best way to catch the attention of something under the sea, and visually the build of the hammer rising and rising before the ominous heavy fall works so well

- (oh man, also, jones sending the kraken after that merchant ship and will escaping. one of jones' crew saying "maybe he was claimed by the sea" and jones immediate, furious "I am the sea" yes yes yes)

- when I was younger, I don't think I paid as much attention to what's happening politically between governor swann and beckett, but the whole sequence of him breaking elizabeth out of prison, that he's cashing in on the little loyalty and influence he still has, mercer murdering the captain at the docks, and governor swann now a political pawn for beckett to use on the promise of sparing elizabeth's life—all very compelling! so much of these movies seem to be about power in very immediate physical senses (who has a sword or gun, who's pointing it at whom, danger as something that can be escaped or overcome in the moment, an enemy in front of you that you can run from or attack), that then zooming out to beckett's institutional power, the dread that instills, how that motivates threatens compels norrington, elizabeth, will, and the governor—it's all so good

- i've said it before, I'll say it again, elizabeth disguising herself as a man while looking for will awoke something in me no less than any of her most iconic scenes in the first movie

- (I can't possibly call out all the specific shots I really love, that's what gifsets are for, but honorable mention to the shot of elizabeth's wedding dress sinking in the wreckage of the edinburgh trader with the music box melody in the background)

- way back at the beginning, when beckett mentions an arrest warrant for norrington, there's that reference to him having left port royal, and with most franchises, I'd assume that'd be their one-line way of saying the actor isn't going to be in this one, but no! I love having norrington show up in tortuga, drunk and disgraced, with no need to affect any of the restraint or decorum he had while being a commodore, and now he's blunt and reactive and so much fun to have on screen (would the old norrington have made that remark about elizabeth seeming attracted to jack? absolutely not! is it delightful that he's now in a position to notice and remark so freely on it, and that the observation hits so different coming from him, a man who sought elizabeth's love and was rejected, than it would from anyone else? yes absolutely!)

- but okay, speaking of jack and elizabeth—yes, I buy that elizabeth is attracted to jack, that he represents all the freedom adventure and excitement of piracy that she's found so enchanting since she was a kid, and of course I buy him trying to chase her as well, and I think it's a dynamic that nicely tees up the moment at the end of the movie when she distracts him with a kiss to handcuff him at the mast BUT I do quibble with its effect on the compass. like, there's attraction, sure, but it's a whole other set of implications to say that there are moments where jack is what elizabeth wants most in the world (cmon.)

- the isla cruces set piece!! god, sprawling dynamic swordfights that make the most of every aspect of their surroundings in inventive ways is such a staple and highlight of the potc films (though I do think this sequence also has some of the most examples of like, cheesy slapstick humor. which isn't a thing that bothers me on its face! but I do think the later potc films especially turn to those sorts of jokes as a way to undercut some of the sincerity, the old wink and nod at the camera, haha wasn't that crazy, looking at YOU sequence with dozens of jacks in the locker) — anyway, tremendous shout outs to jones' crew rising out of the surf, the flying dutchman exploding up out of the water, the absolute classic water wheel fight, elizabeth pintel and ragetti trading swords as needed while they jointly fight their way back to the ship, norrington stealing the heart! so fun, so much of the same energy of the cavern fight from black pearl (one of my absolute favorite scenes from the first movie)

- alright. okay. the kraken coming after the black pearl. what we've been building up to this whole movie. I like will using his prior experience of seeing the merchant ship being attacked to strategize how to best counter the kraken. I like that jack initially takes the last life boat and leaves! I think it's a very realistic conclusion to the, "to hell with everyone else, I am only interested in saving myself" attitude he's had for so much of the movie. I do like him looking back at the pearl being attacked and having a change of heart. I don't like that the movie seems to use that change of heart as a way of glossing over most of his prior actions (like, well he came back to help them fight this one time, and so see, he's fundamentally a good man, he was there when it counted, what about those 100 other men he was going to trade for his own soul? don't worry about it) the elizabeth/jack kiss would bug the absolute hell out of me except for the fact that it's her ploy to handcuff him to the mast, which is perfect. it's something will would never do, but elizabeth absolutely is calculating enough to realize the kraken won't stop chasing them if jack survives, and is ruthless enough to sacrifice his life for theirs. I like the look jack gives her once he realizes what she's done, a little disappointed, a little proud, fundamentally not surprised. I like that she's the one who forces jack to stop running (if he wasn't compelled to face the kraken, when would it have been over? how desperate would he have continued becoming in pursuit of saving his own life?)

- geoffrey rush descending the stairs as barbossa. peak ending. no notes. how I've missed you.

[emilykaldwen]

⭐️?

I cannot find the original post but send me a star for my commentary on something in my fic or a lil camera for a fake 'bts' commentary.

Thank you for sending this!!

I had to really think about what I wanted to talk about because some days I feel like I have everything to talk about, and then there's times where I'm like 'IDK wtf I'm doing'

So we're gonna talk about Chapter One of The Maiden and the Drowning Boy

From the start, this story always started with Alicent Hightower and her pain. (I have the original beginning that tracks over the course of several years that I want to post) One of the things I love about the show is that they breathed a lot more life into Alicent in terms of adding more layers and control into her narrative. In the book, she's about 19/20 years old when she marries Viserys, and takes agency in the death of Viserys, and really boils down into 'if you will not provide a life for our children, I will by any means necessary' which I love. In the Alicent I'm portraying, I'm doing my absolute best to strike a balance between the show and book. She is a woman full of grief and loss. She is a girl who was forced to grow up too fast, who has been betrayed, who has made mistakes, and she's just trying to do the best she can within the confines that she can. Dragons have taken everything from her, just as time erodes away kindness. It was important to me to start the story this way because of how polarizing Alicent is, and I felt that coming in where she's at, the audience would be able to see the thesis statement of I learned it by watching you. Alicent is embedded into the DNA of Aegon and Abby in that Aegon holds all of her grief and pain, and in Abby, it's the attempt to save the girl she had once been (boiling it down to the bare bones of it). It was also a great way for me to lay out why Aegon and Abby getting married was a good idea. She's not even thinking about it in terms of taking the throne (if she was, she would've gotten the Baratheon marriage, but that would've been overstepping/overly aggressive, which is why the Baratheon marriage works better for Aemond, once he starts fucking cooperating with her). For Alicent, it's ensuring that Aegon will be provided for since nothing else has been done for him by his father. And also it's here where I drop the very first hint of the Grand Maester Conspiracy. Blink and you'll miss it! I fretted endlessly over Abby's introduction. I don't like stories that are just the OC POV. I'm happy to read OCs, but I'm first here for the canon characters. At the end of the day, I needed to get ya'll introduced to Abby and how she fits in the world and I like to think her part is a solid intro. We see her relationship with Helaena and Aemond. We see her interactions with Otto, and then the betrothal scene where we know that Abby is an advantageous marriage, and that her and Aegon have known each other for years, and that she's being sized up. The scene originally went for longer (what became the chapter 2 garden fight) and it alluded to a situation I originally had between Aegon and Abby that I had mixed feelings about (basically Aegon's a dumb teenage boy that was like 'if I make you mine, your sister won't take you away'. It did not end well). I'm much happier with how it turned out, pushing that to chapter 2 and doing it from Aegon's POV.

[acephysicskarkat]

Hello, saw some of your anti c//a that mention how you think c//a is a bad enemies-to-lovers ship while griddlehark is a good one, and may i ask how that is? Genuine question, because i don’t like c//a, and i’m neutral on griddlehark (mainly because I don’t know much atm), from what i’ve seen/heard, it seems like it’s a lot more toxic of a dynamic than c//a is initially/pre canon? Again not trying to bait, am gen curious /genuine

This is going to be kind of disjointed, and I apologise, but this is kind of a topic that defies a simple summary.

Bear in mind that ahead be big Locked Tomb spoilers and the SP0P spoilers that basically everyone already knows.

I would say that the two critical differences are 1) the handling of the toxicity within the narrative, and 2) the structure and arrangement of the toxicity.

You are absolutely correct that pre-canon Griddlehark's mutual hatred is a toxic dynamic. They initially detest each other with a passion; one of the main plot points driving the entire series is a young Harrow having Gideon's blood under her nails after a fight.

As Gideon and Harrowhark work together, however - and here is the point where 100% of bad enemies-to-lovers arcs crash and burn - the toxicity goes down. It never becomes totally healthy - indeed, post-GtN Harrow invents an entirely new way to have an unhealthy relationship, involving performing brain surgery on herself at 17 - but the majority of the narrative is spent showing them moving from "would piss on the other's grave given the chance" to a mutually tolerated working relationship, to a growing loyalty, to the pool scene where Harrow shows Gideon more honesty and trust than she's had from anyone in her life. A lot of what makes this work is pacing and structure; every new step works because it's building on the previous ones, none of them feeling jarringly fast or unmotivated.

More than that, a big help is that the toxicity feels intentional. The relationship being Kinda Fucked is a 100% intentional thing that I'm pretty sure I've seen Tamsyn Muir talking about in interviews. It's a narrative element that Muir is monitoring and adjusting with the care of a good zookeeper trying to keep the humidity in the reptile enclosure exactly right.

(I genuinely cannot praise the writing in these books enough.)

Turning to SP0P as a contrast, its relationship has a more understated toxicity, but a much more pervasive one. Young Adora and C*tra weren't clawing at each other's faces whenever left unsupervised, but young C*tra sure did claw at Adora's face for wanting to have more than one friend! It's not the PVP arena of Growing Up Griddlehark, but "you are my friend, therefore your needs are subordinate to mine" is still far from a healthy dynamic, and the narrative never addresses it.

The bigger problem, though, is that the toxicity doesn't so much "go down" as trace out a parabola. The entire first half of the narrative shows the toxicity going up sharply, to the point of C*tra being willing to die just to make Adora miserable, then it hovers there for another quarter, and then it returns to an earlier level of toxicity. S5 C*tra's treatment of Adora stays awful. She spends "Taking Control" throwing a tantrum over how the real problem is Adora and the others being mad at her; she portrays herself as the wounded party in her like four separate murder attempts on Adora in "An Ill Wind" to produce the worst line of the show; she continues throwing tantrums whenever she doesn't get what she wants and making everything about herself right up to the love confession, including that confession ("stay with me, the person who spent four seasons refusing to stay with you!"). It feels bizarre that Adora goes from "even if you're my best friend, I won't let you blame me for shit that isn't my fault" in S4 to doing nothing but looking sad when C*tra portrays her as being in the wrong for not just meekly standing by while C*tra burned down her home and murdered her friends.

And - and I'll acknowledge that a big part of this is probably executive fuckery, I just don't think that really matters - the pacing and structure absolutely are not helping. I could buy S5's sudden reversal if C*tra and Adora had had a fun, weightless enmity where there was an obvious respect between them. They don't. C*tra spends a truly distressing amount of time utterly consumed by the desire to cause Adora as much pain as possible, to the point of attempting a murder-suicide on the entire world. No point in S2-S4 shows a C*tra who Can't Bring Herself to Really Hurt Adora, regardless of the things the stans have convinced themselves they saw; she's so totally driven by spite that she tears her own life to shreds in the hope Adora will be caught up in the edges. The relationship has to do a sudden R*ylo swerve rather than building on what's gone before because "what's gone before" is like three plot points in the first season that have been narratively overwhelmed by C*tra's multiseason campaign of cruelty like a single pea being weighed against the USS Nimitz.

This is where intentionality comes into play. The toxicity in c/a is just there. For all the bullshit about C*tra's story being about what happens when you're the toxic friend, it doesn't feel like an intentional narrative element that is seriously being examined; it feels like a writing fuck-up where C*tra was supposed to feel like way less of a stalker asshole.

Anyway, I hope this has made some vague semblance of sense, but I've been at this for like an hour and I'm tired and I need to go check on a craft project.