#but again i get how people would disagree with that and that’s okay 🫡

[roobylavender]

i mean most abusers do love the people they abuse. abuse isn’t something done with intention or malice half the time, it’s done by people thinking they’re doing the right thing. bruce’s love and need for control are constantly in conflict with each other and that’s why the robins are stuck waging a war against him. i feel like a big part of a dysfunctional parent-child dynamic is feeling trapped by your parent’s love. Even if you hate it, it’s still canon that Bruce has been historically bad with dealing with his kids. Half of them don’t even feel comfortable calling him dad cuz the relationship seems so undefined or shaky. In Dick’s case i feel like he has no grounds to oppose robin and his vigilantism because Bruce (deep down) loved having someone like dick around to fight crime with. They both refer that time as “the good old days” so it’s not like Bruce was truly opposed. It’s only when the actual reality of that negligent and naive behaviour materialises that he realises he fucked up (robin year one eg). Then he treats Dick in such a cold manner that Dick believes if he’s not robin, he’s not wanted. This has been a pattern since the golden days so no it’s not ooc for Bruce. Yes the natural conclusion to all the modern day tension should be for both parties to meet and resolve their issues but Bruce is still the abuser at the end of the day, and even though Dick’s self sacrificing nature might easily forgive him, on a textual level it should be clear that a true resolution between the two would need Dick to dig deeper, and for Bruce to be ready for rejection from his son.

i don’t disagree with that assessment of abuse like it’s absolutely true, but my problem is i don’t think the cold or controlling behavior is really a consistent enough pattern until we move into post-crisis canon. for several decades dick and bruce have a great rapport with each other bc that’s what everyone knows they’re supposed to have. like i don’t think most writers from the golden or silver age if asked that they intended to write bruce as an abuser would agree and say yes, and that distinction to me is impt, bc sure, we can take what we’re reading on a surface level and project our own experience or modern understanding of relationships onto it, but i don’t think that should happen to the extent authorial intent is superseded bc then you start to enter territory where you’re divorcing narrative from genre conventions. if we go by the assumption that bruce is an enabler and abuser for allowing dick to be a hero for so long without purported attention paid to his safety then that establishes practically every hero within the universe possessive of a sidekick as an abuser. and i do get that some people are interested in following that thread like esp in post-crisis we see that exploration a lot but ig for me personally it’s kinda like the thing that breaks the camel’s back and withholds the entire genre from actually allowing itself to explore more pertinent issues. not to say abuse isn’t a pertinent issue, it absolutely is and i do think there’s ways it can still be explored, but the primary reason the genre was established in the first place was in response to fascism. obv the engagement with that wasn’t necessarily complex early on but it’s incredibly impt to the development of the genre and as we can see in a modern context how that response to fascism or lack thereof is conveyed can be incredibly influential in terms of facilitating support or not for fascist government. so my issue is like, yes, it’s impt for bruce’s faults in these relationships to be addressed to a constructive and worthwhile extent, but i also think writers have gone so drastically far in curating those faults in the post crisis era that it’s effectively restricted the scope of the stories they’re allowed to tell, bc they’re more focused on individual instances and relationships within this world than they are on any form of commentary that reflects the operations of the world at large in relation to regulation of crime

[patroxlos]

hi! ive read your character analysis on ken sato and while they were specifically for your series, i found them really interesting. im planning to make a ken sato series myself, though i do intend it as a non-ultraman AU, but after reading ur latest analysis i kinda thought “yeah this might not work” dkdmdksks but thank you so much for the analysis, they were insightful, and thank you so much for putting your works out here, ive really enjoyed home base so far, and the vibe of the series is really up my alley. i hope youre doing well with your academics as well, and that youre always in good health & have enough to live comfortably!!

(im not sure if this mssg sounds negative or anything but i intend to just talk ab this, get it off my chest to the person who have written all the analysis. i did want to ask what you think would be viable in a non-ultraman AU but that would be crossing a line esp since im not close enough to u to discuss ideas for my own works akskdkw anyways this mssg has become too long!! again i hope u are always happy and healthy!!)

OMG please don’t feel discouraged from writing your own series I’m sure it would be lovely !!! AUs are a big part of fanfic culture and a non-Ultraman AU can definitely work!!

No worries at all if you need help w figuring out the AU hehe I think that as long as the following elements are still present, you’ll still be able to keep the essence of Ken Sato

He has a very complicated relationship with his father

He lacks any CLOSE relationships with others outside of his mom. I emphasize “close” bc I can see him being friendly and conversational with others and fitting in a crowd, maybe even have regular drinking buddies, but he would be the type of guy who you realize at the end of the night that you don’t know anything about him

He needs Emi in his life. There are a lot of fics that focus on Kenji post-Emi when she already left and that’s okay! I’m just saying that he won’t be the person he is at the end of the film without Emi, and SINGLE fatherhood is a BIG THEME of the film. Try incorporating her in any way if you want to write Ken post-character development. Also, remember that prior to Emi, Ken is self-serving! So don’t be afraid to write him to be selfish for that period.

He struggles with feelings of alienation from his culture and people. It doesn’t have to be the main focus of his struggles in your AU it’s just that we shouldn’t erase how he feels about being Japanese

Thank you for your kind words and I hope this helps!

Remember too that you’re always allowed to disagree with others regarding how they characterize Ken hehe just stick to your gut and do him justice in your own way 🫡