#but also how great would it be if people had the same amount of discourse

[fourteentrout]

I say we stop or at least combat the gwynriel elriel discourse by completely 180-ing and shipping Azriel with every available MALE character. Azris? superb. flawless. no notes. im obssessed. lets go futher. Azriel x Tamlin. This one I'm genuinely considering. Hell, Azriel x ANY of the unmated High Lords. I've seen people suggest Beron (though I personally would never be able to like him, maybe getting dicked down by the hottest torturer of all time could spark a change of character). Azriel x Keir if we're sticking with the route of villain crackships. Azriel x Lord Devlon. Azriel x Jurian (shooting someone in the heart with a weapon sure to kill them can be very romantic actually). Azriel x Thesan AND his lover. Double wing duty for the Dawn Lord. Azriel x Graysen, elain's shitty ex fiancee. Shit, just give Az all the shitty ex fiancees. He can fix them, probably. or at least use them to help himself. Let my boy get some man power, maybe he'll stop practically jizzing his pants every time he smells elain if he's too busy getting railed til the walls come down.

[elexuscal]

the longer i stay in fandom, the longer i think a huge amount of bad takes and discourse come from an... abundance of identifying with a character

to be clear, i don't think it's bad to identify with a character. far from it! i think that's part of what makes fiction so powerful.

and it's only logical people often attach to a blorbo because they're just like me, for real. a person will see some element of themselves-- their race, their gender, their sexuality, their hobbies, their family life, their specific flavour of neurodivergence-- and something just resonates. it gives them a way to explore and name this important part of themselves, a part they maybe didn't even know existed before it.

and everything is well and good until some split between them and the character shows up

because of course, no character, except an explicit self-insert written by yourself, will ever be a perfect 1:1 for your own experiences. so sooner or later-- maybe in canon, maybe in a fanwork-- your blorbo diverges from your lived experience in a huge way.

I think this is why shipping culture in particular gets so toxic. While it is by no means the only way to indulge with shipping, a significant portion is 'if i was in that character's shoes, i would choose X'. the fight becomes for your own self-identity.

but this gets expanded in other ways. a character who is revealed to be black when the majority of the fandom had just assumed they were white. or revealed to be queer, or maybe the 'wrong' flavour of queer. or fuck, even some more innocuous part of their backstory, one that's nonetheless so meaningful for SOMEONE, but now it feels like the story is saying, fuck you, we're doing something else

i don't know. i just feel acknowledging this perceived-attack-on-identity helps me understand why people react it what seems to be such outsized way to canon and fanworks alike.

at the same time, i think it's a really important thing to check in yourself.

it's nice, to see a character who you identify with. who resonates with for being like you. but it's also nice to acknowledge and appreciate the way characters are not like you at All. how great it is to get insight into this totally different lived experience. and to muse on how wonderful that recognition might be for someone who does have that background.

[bird-inacage]

Net x James: An important reminder that BL partnerships consist of two individuals and they are not just a single entity.

So the Netjames news has been a notable bombshell in the fandom of late, and I've been quietly observing this as it unfolded earlier this week, particularly the varying reactions and discourse around it.

In his statement, James explained that his current career goals are moving in a different direction, which has resulted in him pulling out of 'Love Upon a Time', and by extension his acting partnership with Net. He wants to explore his other avenues as an artist, whereas Net is presumably focused on acting for now.

With BL partnerships, we often see the two co-stars tied at the hip. Its part of the gig and it comes with the territory. They don't just work together on their project, but they do a huge amount of activity (both public and private) outside of that. They travel, perform, they do fan meets, press events, and spend a huge amount of time together as a twosome. So we get accustomed to seeing them as a united entity, which means news like this tends to hit harder because it feels akin to a divorce. This is one of the pitfalls of the Thai BL industry. When you create a narrative around two people who exclusively come as a package, it makes it incredibly difficult for both the actors themselves and fans to accept or make peace with any possible deviation from that. I think it's natural for any actor or artist to desire collaboration with different people: to develop their craft, to further their experience, to broaden their versatility. If sticking to only one working partner 'for life' doesn't work for them, I completely empathise with that.

In their recent Instagram lives, Net and James were clearly sad and their feelings still very raw. This led to a lot of speculation regarding any ill-feeling or fall out between the two. But such accusations can be harmful. Even in an amicable or mutual break-up where ending a relationship is in both parties' best interests - the two people involved are still grieving. Being brutally honest and transparent with someone close to you, that things can no longer continue as they are, isn't easy. If fans feel upset, just imagine how difficult this is on them both. When you've been nurtured as a partnership from the get go, your co-star whose always been at your side provides a sense of safety and familiarity. And the prospect of now moving forward without them is a scary new unknown. On top of that, they probably feel an immense amount of pressure and guilt in digesting the potential fallout and response from their fans. There will be trepidation in how well their careers will fare in the immediate aftermath.

Despite this, there are also positives to be taken from this decision. Arguably, Net and James were still in the early stages of their partnership. Bed Friend really put them on the map as a couple. So for James to come forward with this realisation now, before they got too established as a pairing was a responsible thing to do. I'm sure the last thing anyone wants is for their favourite artists to feel stuck or obliged to continue working together, which would undoubtedly lead to feelings of resentment eventually.

So respectfully, these instances are not to be taken personally or to be deemed as a betrayal of your support. After all, what we know of these artists is only a very small piece of their identities as people. It's okay to be devastated, but be respectful of their wishes. You can choose to continue supporting them as individuals, or choose to no longer support them at all - either way, you are perfectly valid and entitled to your choice, just extend the same courtesy back and be mindful of casting unfair judgement on their choice.

For me, it is admittedly a shame because I did see great potential in them both as a pair, and they had fantastic chemistry which could have been nurtured with more time and experience. Regardless, I truly believe they both have immense love for one another, and I wish them both the very best. They've just come to terms with the fact they no longer share the same vision for what they want in their careers. And that's okay.

(I will always be grateful that they gave us THIS iconic moment).

[briarpatch-kids]

Seeing the latest discourse I feel like there needs to be some sort of. Disability dictionary? To outline "these are the terms with legal definitions that are not up for debate" and "these are the terms with general definitions that can be interpreted in x y z ways." Like the severely disabled thing, you were using the legal definition/understanding of the term, while that other person was using a social understanding of the term. They do absolutely deserve better help and the situation they're living in is abysmal, not being able to afford what you need to not live in pain every day would be horrible for anyone, but. They didn't seem to be understanding how the definition of "severely disabled" you were using had actual legal basis and guidelines for qualifications of the term and hence help. You weren't arguing the level of care and accommodations they would definitely benefit from, more just pointing out that legally speaking you two have different experiences, and only yours qualifies for the help offered in our current support systems for in home care. Which frankly that sucks! People who would benefit from care and higher level mobility aides should be given them, even if they can "do without" if they absolutely have to, even if they're in pain. But that isn't how the system works and it's not how "severely disabled," as a legal term, is defined. So many distinctions like these don't seem to be common knowledge. The scope of disability is wide and many people belong in this community, but if most people aren't on the same page on how to use the terms that already exist, it makes it harder not just to find people with similar experiences but also to just. Communicate with other people in the community. A lack of shared understanding of community terms can really create massive obstacles for mutual understanding and community organizing. I wonder if anyone's made a dictionary for things like this, and if they haven't, maybe it can be a community project...?

I feel like that would be awesome, but I also want to be nowhere NEAR the discourse of writing it. I'd imagine a whole lot of people like the one I dealt with earlier would want to control the narrative and the amount of arguments and stuff would be SO exhausting.

Ideally it would include things like "here's when I should have started using a manual wheelchair" "here's when I should have started using a powerchair" "this is what needing a ventilator feels like and heres why/how I got mine" and stuff like that from people with experience. Or like "this is how a disability assessment works and this is what theyre going to ask and what each question means" and "here's how to get aide hours in [country] and what qualifies for them."

Basic stuff for people new to disability and worried about what's going to happen or don't have any idea how it all works. It would be great to have multiple voices with a variety of circumstances and disabilities. Maybe a little section with different people and how they live just to give a picture of like... what life with SMA or a spinal cord injury or whatever is like. The good and bad and what kind of goals and hobbies they have and what they're interested in. The part that scares a lot of disabled people is the future and seeing people just out there living helps so much with that.

[wavesoutbeingtossed]

The whole discourse about the privacy/secrecy/support thing has been sitting with me for a few days (I mean other than it always does to a certain degree) thanks to all the excellent discussion happening and I know I'm not saying anything that hasn't been said a million times before, but I think what we're seeing and what we're going to learn (e.g. from TTPD) is that it wasn't just the support issue, but how it was shown/handled.

We've all gone out of our way to show that introversion =/= lack of support. Someone can be shy, reserved, etc. and still show up for their partner, whether in public or at home. To chalk any of the differences up to the clash between introversion and extroversion is unfair to folks who count themselves among either tbh.

@thisisctrying said something the other day that hit the nail on the head about how if that support had been offered in private, there very well may not have been a Joever to begin with, or at least not at this point in time. (Sorry for loosely paraphrasing, and for namedropping you! Long time listener, first time poster.)

If this were a case where the "shy" partner said, "I am really uncomfortable with the spotlight personally and do not want to court it, but I will support you in your ambitions and offer you whatever you need to make them happen and make the glare bearable," I suspect that would have gone a long way to making Taylor feel seen and comfortable in pursuing her goals in the way that she now has. Again, that might have been more akin to the balance that seemed to have been struck around 2019 from what we can see, but even speaking in a general sense, there are lots of couples out there, celebrity or not, that have similar approaches where there are highly driven people and busy careers involved.

(A famous example being Dolly Parton's marriage. Tbh I know next to nothing about her and Carl, but she's always heralded as an example in this regard, because her husband is famously uncomfortable with the spotlight and hasn't accompanied her to public events in decades, but she's said that she never minded that because that was always work to her, and what was important was that he supported her in pursuing all her career goals and basically ensured she had a place to call home to return to at the end of the day.)

We're kind of in a brave new world with her current relationship because it felt like, at least at the start, we were maybe watching her figure out her boundaries in real time as to what she was comfortable with or not and adjust accordingly. Like so many have said, I fully believe the extreme privacy thing was initially driven by herself and her experiences in 2016, and she needed that quiet time to recover from all of the things and figure out how to exist in the world again.

Stating the obvious, it seemed like eventually privacy was equated with secrecy, turning the relationship and the celebrity into the elephant in the room and something to never be spoken of to the outside world. People are free to choose whatever works best for themselves and their relationships, and for some the separate public lives might work, but the “kept me like a secret but I kept you like an oath” theme is all over her work and it’s clear that it’s a sore spot for her, because she’s been made to feel shame just for the life she leads so many times in the past.

What I’m trying to say is that it’s pretty obvious something Not Great was happening behind the scenes, which didn’t just amount to “she wanted to be a public celebrity and he wanted to be a private hermit.” (Also, in case anyone forgot, this is a person who also chose a public-facing career who also has to engage in press for it, but I digress.) As her career reached new heights post-folklore, if she had the support at home to do all the things without judgment and with encouragement, and in turn offer the same support to her partner, she may have very well lived just fine with that, not unlike Dolly Parton’s case.

By reading between the lines in all the press since, as well as comments on tour and general ~vibes~ with TTPD teasers, it seems like one of the issues was that that was likely not the case. There was all the stuff that we saw — the reticence to acknowledge each other in the media (particularly on one side), the lack of public support even at events at which they were both in attendance for their respective jobs, the great lengths they went to not to be photographed together at events they attended yet no problem taking pictures with other friends and coworkers, the jobs that separated them, the withdrawing from the public even for work accomplishments, etc. Which could all be manageable if a couple chooses to do so together and are not inherently a sign of trouble in themselves.

But what we’re seeing now I think is a reflection of the things we weren’t seeing then, and it seems to indicate some very deep hurt. (I know, call me Captain Obvious.) And like so many have been saying, it feels likely that that part of that hurt is rooted in that very lack of private support where a person would expect it from their partner. Obviously as a Taylor fan blog I’m going to be more inclined to understand her side of a story, but tbh, it’s also because… this is sooooooo common, and something I’ve experienced in my friend group. (@taylortruther is right when she says most breakups are the same one way or another lol.)

One partner is resentful of the other’s success, or resentful that the other’s priorities begin to evolve as new experiences unlock new goals, or feels the other’s ambitions are not worthy of pursuit, and coupled with perhaps their own struggles in the same domain, it’s easy to see where that can chip away at the other partner’s morale and faith in the relationship. I know I’m just speculating here, but I also don’t think it’s totally unfounded. (Again, because a) I’m picking up what she’s putting down and b) it happens to sooooooo many women even among us dull normals.)

With all the pointed mentions about how much Taylor feels supported in her current relationship and how she in turn loves to offer the same show of support to not only her partner but other loved ones, how she’s stepped out more in the last year to a whole host of events, how she’s mentioned feeling like she locked herself away for years and she’s just proud of her partner and happy she can show up for him even if the chaos around it is unsettling, it paints a picture of what perhaps was happening before last year.

To feel like you’re all alone in carrying the weight of the relationship (or burden of it), of twisting yourself into knots to accommodate the other person’s boundaries (or insecurities) but not feeling reciprocity for your own has to be so painful. (The idea that it may have been even darker and to have a partner not only be unreceptive to your own needs but even perhaps resentful/dismissive/belittling of them is even more painful to think of. I guess we’ll find out when TTPD comes out if that was the case, too.)

At a certain point, that lack of acknowledgement will force your hand to be able to reclaim yourself. And it feels like the further removed Taylor in particular is from it, the more she moves from being sad about the life she felt she gave up by leaving, to angry at the life she felt she was giving up by staying. Especially being in a relationship now where it seems like everything comes much easier, where she can be open about the person she’s with and show up for them, all the stuff that seemed as challenging as climbing Mount Everest in her past is nothing more than a molehill at best in her current life.

TL;DR: I don’t think it’s privacy that inherently spells doom for a celebrity relationship like this; it’s the mutual support and respect that does. If Taylor had felt that in the later years of her previous relationship, I think we could be seeing a different, though not necessarily unfulfilled, person right now in 2024, who’d be happy on tour but whose personal life would look a little different. But it seems like by losing that support she lost parts of herself, and we’ve seen her reclaim that in spades in the last year, and perhaps to degrees she didn’t even realize she could from before all the Bad Stuff started happening in her young adulthood.

I know this was extremely long-winded and unnecessary, especially about total strangers we only know through scraps fed through the media, but I just always bristle at this idea that issues like these boil down to “personality differences,” as though one person wants to live in a city and the other on a remote island, or some shit like that. The whole support (and gender tbh) issue is one that’s just very close to my heart because again, I have seen it play out with so many of my friends in long term relationships and marriages and I just think people in relationships (and women in particular in some circles) deserve better than to feel like they’re being, well, tolerated.

[laura1633]

the whole lestappen fanfiction discourse is actually so dumb because what *i*am getting is that on one hand people are complaining about there being too many fics that babygirlify max too much/ too many omega/ bottom max fics and then on the other side at the same time there are people complaining about too many fics babygirlifying charles and too many omega/bottom charles fics

????????

that is at least what i have been seeing

and funnily enough i only recently thought that lately there has been a healthy amount updated for both of these sides (bottom or omega max/bottom or omega charles) so there is a variety to choose from for whichever you like more i guess?

ao3 has a great filter system, why not use it if you really don‘t like one sort of fics that much?

i would understand the frustration if there‘s only ONE side represented and you really don’t get the side of the fics you would prefer to see, but this is not the case with lestappen. „there‘s too many fics uploaded rn lestappen is too popular,“ pick a side??? more fics=more variety to choose from. what do you want? there are great fics for both sides.

(sorry for ranting in your inbox laura😳)

No need to apologise anon!

I think it's probably only a very small discourse anyway. You know what tumblr is like, you say something on your blog and the next minute it is getting shared around and out of the space it originated in!

But yeah, I found it interesting because I personally have in the past had messages in my inbox annoyed that I am not writing more bottom Charles or omega Charles and, whilst I can't be 100% sure, I gathered from the context of the messages that they were Charles fans. Which I guess is exactly your point - some people like one thing, some people like another and so it's great there is choice there. (I'm not talking about the people here who have politely inboxed me about bottom Charles fics, believe me you would know if you were the anons I am talking about haha)

I mean it's also totally fine if people aren't into Lestappen anymore because of x, y, z reason 🤷‍♀️ or if certain things turn people off fics.

I think everyone sees things differently because some people tend to think that Lestappen authors tend to be Charles fans and some people think that Lestappen authors tend to be Max fans. I personally think there is just a mix.

I can completely see why some Charles fans would not want to read about him in the 'damsel in distress' role in the same way I can see why some Max fans don't want to see him in some sort of 'emotionally repressed aggressive asshole who needs enlightening' role. I think a lot of that has to do with how the in real life Max and Charles are unfairly judged. But at the same time I think there is a mixture of Max and Charles fans that enjoy all sorts of different interpretations and fics and I think there is space for them all and what is good or bad or right and wrong is just purely opinion.

[rottenjuice]

rant done. but I loved this ask, even tho I just went off topic

I was worried my rant was too long so honestly this was a great response, thanks! I've been frustrated because I feel like a lot of the discourse has been too hard on Tubbo without understanding where he's coming from. I actually agree with some of the criticisms but a lot of times the overall sentiment feels too harsh and like it ignores the fact that things just keep getting more difficult to manage. In lore I swear it's impossible to play a villain without getting attacked which is ridiculous when so many claim they want conflict and drama. And you're so right that adding members won't fix everything and could cause new issues (although a few good ones would help).

criticism is significant in making something better, but then I think that's something you should pay attention to more when a project is done. not everything is going to be perfect the first time around. that doesn't mean you shouldn't change things, get new ideas, or go with the flow. which I think the people who drive the server have already showed that they can and are open to.

a lot of the criticism IS valid, as even a lot of the creators have been having the same criticisms as the viewers. but to me, it's just lot of it is, a bunch of nothing-burger.

(like they bounties event. not every event is going to be most interesting for everyone. also the whole argument like "if the server changes this way more people would log on" like bro that is not the problem. don't push the creators to do something and don't blame it on tubbo when a lot of them have asked him to be able to join. they don't own u an explanation.)

it's just that with the server is so split on what it's main focus is and the creators play the server so different from each other, viewers get a bit too tied up in how their favorite plays and think that the world (the server) should accommodate them first. and when others get that "special" treatment, everything feels unfair. well... the server has always had that charm to it, where things aren't fair, like ros has a butterfly that gives her resistance, the snarmy, clown getting to keep his exp that now is very hard to get to, rules changing ect.

like they shouldn't have to tell us krow got permission to blow up some of sausages builds, we should just assume that it got it instead of people in chat throwing around "yeah that was BM" and so on. so many viewers are under this impression that they have to be the voice of their streamer.

+ I believe aimsey said that this server has had more player-to-admin communication than most. even tho it might have not been that way at the start.

like instead of becoming a keyboard warrior you could think: oh maybe this is some part of the lore, or maybe the admins are just trying their fucking best. I swear some people make the admins out to have some malicious agenda, and it's just soooo stupid. like the amount of times I go on here after cool lore and people are just dragging the admins :( makes me sad tbh. or that poor snoozer admin, having to ask foolish to say on stream that he doesn't actually hate snoozer is INSANE. like if a creator would hate the server, they don't have some contract keeping them stuck!

well oops, went on a rant again. ty for the ask ! <3 what creators would you like to be added? or is it less about the creators and more about the server being more active?

[utilitycaster]

Just wondering.... why is the Imodna codependency such an issue meanwhile no one had a problem with the codependency between Widobrave?

Hi anon, this is a great question!

I've actually covered this - I don't think their situations are as comparable as many people think! Here's the post about that in case you haven't seen it. And, as the anon in that post points out, Widobrave did get a lot of pushback and hate, actually. It sounds like you might be very new to the fandom, so I want to give some gentle advice: it's worth being careful about assuming a certain form of discourse did not occur. Often, it has. I understand it's difficult to prove a negative (ie, that Widobrave did not receive hate) and it's even more difficult to do so via the Tumblr search, but Caleb and Veth's relationship was frequently criticized, diminished, and treated as not just insistently platonic, but also strictly familial. But back to the original question: I think that Caleb and Veth far more quickly built other relationships and were able to express anger with each other - Veth's outburst towards Caleb in episode 48 is a standout moment that resulted in a greater understanding, and I think I'd feel much more positively towards Imogen and Laudna as a potential romance had Laudna been able to make the same accusation, that Imogen's people did this. Was it a fair accusation from Veth? No! But it eventually cleared the air, whereas Imogen and Laudna keep sweeping everything under the rug, ignoring that the rug is now so lumpy they can barely walk without failing.

Another reason is simple numbers and recency. Widobrave, as of this post, has about 280 fics on ao3. Imodna has 1,085. This increased popularity may indeed lead to increased scrutiny. We're also, as the previous paragraph hints, talking about a ship that is in an ongoing campaign, so you're going to see far more posts talking about it than a ship from a past campaign, simply because it's still unfolding and is the subject of current discussion! Recency bias is a very real thing, and it can be difficult to adjust for, but when making this sort of comparison, it is vital to do so.

I would also be remiss if I did not address the elephant in the room, which is the nature of the fans who ship them. I'm sure this question is intended in earnest good faith, but I'm afraid I've gotten a pretty significant amount of harassment specifically from people who ship Imogen and Laudna together and don't like anyone who points out the flaws in their relationship. I've never received the same from people who shipped Caleb and Veth, despite never really shipping the latter, and indeed, and this is obviously my limited experience, but the people I follow who do ship Widobrave often embrace the flaws and conflict inherent in the ship. There are many Imodna shippers who are wonderful - especially those who do like to explore the flaws and codependency and how it might one day resolve - but, understandably, those few bad actors attempting to ignore the lack of development in the relationship or even worse, advocating for it, have really been very unpleasant to deal with. As a result, it's led me to consider more deeply why I find Imogen and Laudna's relationship uninteresting, romantically, and so that's probably another factor in why I specifically have explored Imogen and Laudna's issues far more than Caleb and Veth's. (For me personally, it's also that I was a lurker for the first year of the Mighty Nein campaign; I was binging Campaign 1 concurrently and didn't finish until July 2018, and didn't make this blog until around New Year's 2019, so I've written comparatively fewer thoughts about early Campaign 2). But getting back to the previous point, I think something people who send hate or baiting questions on anon may not always realize is that it often has the opposite effect as intended; it leads people to defend their opinions, and in doing so often strengthens their convictions as they find more evidence, which leads them to make even more posts!

Anyway, I hope this helps - obviously, this is only my perspective, and I sincerely hope anyone else of whom you ask this question extends the same good faith, honesty, and openness to other perspectives that you are bringing. I do however urge you to at minimum attempt to find some discussion from the era of early Campaign 2 to get a better understanding of how Widobrave was treated, just to ensure better responses to your inquiries. Anyway, welcome to the fandom!

[canonizzyhours]

Similarly to one of the previous takes on here…

I wasn’t in fandom spaces between s1 and s2 so I wasn’t exposed to the Canyon takes at the time. Once the teaser and then the trailer dropped I was really excited. On the first day episodes 1-3 dropped, before I could even watch the episodes , I got spoiled that Ed was ‘’really unlikable this season’’.

It was gutting to read because he’s my absolute favorite and it put me on edge as I was scared watching the show would change my view on him. To hopefully help calm down the anxiety that comment brought on, I went looking for other comments. Maybe this was just one bad take, right? Wrong move, what was I thinking? So many negative comments about Ed! Takes after takes of how Ed was an abuser to Izzy, how he had gone way too far so they simply couldn’t root for him anymore and was now unredeemable in their eyes.

How could the writers make him this unlikable as a protagonist in a romantic comedy show?

It took me until the day before episodes 4-5 came out to to rip the bandage off and watch the episodes to see for myself what I thought and I was actually surprised at how much I disagreed with those people. I thought Ed dragging the crew down with him was not great (couldn’t care less about Izzy though, in my eyes he deserved it after season 1), but I could absolutely see the vulnerability and the deep depression that was plaguing him. It was such a nuanced performance that I empathized with him so much. Unlikable or unredeemable was far from words I would use for him.

It made me wonder if something was wrong with me because I didn’t feel the same as so many of the takes I’d seen. Was I missing something? And then after that, when I tried participating in conversations and express how I was feeling about Ed’s but also mostly Izzy’s storylines, I was often met with a lot of pushbacks and people being super defensive and demanding me to explain myself as if I owed them anything and it was sooo draining. I hate using the word gaslighting but some of the things those people do by basically establishing an alternate version of this show and bullying people who don’t play along, is truly something else. I think it’s then that I realize I was dealing with people that couldn’t handle opposing Povs, and I was over it. I ended up blocking Izzy’s tag and blocking users on every social media platforms because I just couldn’t deal with it anymore. It’s still blocked to this day.

I love season 2, flaws included, but the amount of discourse around Izzy is honestly ridiculous at this point and it really took away from my enjoyment when the show was airing. I wish he wasn’t such a talked about character, he takes too much space for someone who was actually pretty boring in season 2.

Anyways, RIP Izzy… I guess.

#35.

related posts: #31, #29

[bewires]

Fic 20 questions

tagged by @gallifreyburning! Thank you!

1. how many works do you have on Ao3?

130

2. what's your total Ao3 word count?

1,107,429 which is a startling amount. A lot (a lot) from the lockdown years.

3. what fandoms do you write for?

The old guard, top gun maverick, stranger things, star trek...ao3 will tell you i have also written a lot for supernatural, but that was a decade ago

4. what are your top five fics by kudos?

chrysalis

incurable

say the word (& I'll be your rennaissance man)

offer no absolutes

(don't) blame it on the moonlight

5. do you respond to comments?

I really really try to but it gives me a kind of social anxiety where I feel like a dick for saying the same thing over and sometimes that stops me from doing it until I feel like it's been way too long and I can't possibly answer now. I appreciate every single comment so so so much though!

6. What is the fic you wrote with the angstiest ending?

I don't really do angsty endings. I vaguely recall writing some angstier supernatural stuff back on livejournal? Or I guess I have some joe/nicky/booker stuff in TOG that ends on an angsty note.

7. What’s the fic you wrote with the happiest ending?

Probably say the word (and I'll be your rennaissance man) which is just high-octane fluff all the way through. but pretty much all my fic ends happy.

8. Do you get hate on fics?

Yeah but basically entirely related to all the dumb top!joe discourse stuff. So only people who wanted to send me or others threats for...idk writing about joe topping and bottoming versus only topping. hard to take seriously.

9. Do you write smut? If so, what kind?

Yes!

10. Do you write crossovers? What’s the craziest one you’ve written?

I think I have crossed over every major teen fandom of mine with TOG, so I did a star trek, a torchwood and an SPN one. Although I'm not sure when it stops counting as crossover and starts counting as fusion.

11. Have you ever had a fic stolen?

Not as far as I know, but i could be wrong

12. Have you ever had a fic translated?

Yeah once or twice

13. Have you ever co-written a fic before?

Yes, a few with @dreamtiwasanarchitect! Great experience

14. What’s your all time favorite ship?

I can't answer this lol. Changes with the hyperfixations

15. What’s a WIP you want to finish but doubt you ever will?

The choose your own adventure Joe x Nicky one, i wish i had the time and energy for it

16. What are your writing strengths?

I would say dialogue. And maybe, if this makes sense, conveying what a character is thinking and feeling out of the perspective of another character who is nominally oblivious to it

17. What are your writing weaknesses?

Describing scenery/physical characteristics/logistics of where what is. I am not a visual thinker

18. Thoughts on writing dialogue in another language in fic?

Depends on the context and whether it's understandable for the audience

19. First fandom you wrote for?

Tamora Pierce's Tortall books. fortunately, these fics are probably no longer findable on the internet.

20. Favorite fic you’ve written?

In terms of ambition, right where you left me which I co-wrote with @dreamtiwasanarchitect. The process of outlining and writing that one kickstarted my ambition to write my own actual book (a thing that exists out in the world now). In terms of style, I'm really proud of how (don't) blame it on the moonlight came out in that you really don't need Nicky's perspective because it's so obvious.

Tagging @regina-del-cielo @nicolos and anyone else who wants to!

[safflowerseason]

Late to the party, but I just finished Succession. Holy shit, what an ending. Anyway, I enjoyed going back and reading your takes from when it was still airing. Do you have any other morsels or headcanons to share?

Hey! Thank you so much for writing in with a Succession question!! I love it! And I'm glad you enjoyed my little takes and recaps...I didn't have the time to do full-on recaps for S4 like I did for S3, unfortunately, but I had such a great time watching in real time. I'll truly never forget watching 4.03 with the rest of the internet. I literally thought Logan's death was being faked until they told Shiv.

As for morsels/head-canons, oooh...compared to other viewers I don't have a ton of very specific headcanons about the upbringing/adolescence/early adult-hood of the Roys, beyond the few hints the show dropped. Apparently there was some debate early on about how far apart in age Kendall, Roman, and Shiv are (as well as whether Shiv or Roman was older, before the show confirmed Shiv as the youngest in S3)...I always assumed they were supposed to be quite close in age, five years max between Kendall and Shiv. The show itself is a bit blurry on the specifics of the backstory/everyone's timeline, though. I also wished we got more of the relationship between Logan and Caroline...we actually never (or barely) see them interact directly, and yet they seem to loom so large in each other's lives.

As for interpretative morsels...I actually haven't gone back and watched the finale again (if you can believe it) because it was soo good and devastating I literally haven't been able to work up the emotional fortitude. There was a great take here I saw that the finale didn't leave you with the same SHEER ADRENALINE RUSH of the other finales, which I will agree with but ultimately I think it fits with the show's overarching thesis that "everything is bullshit, especially billionaires." There's nothing about the finale I feel that will keep being re-litigated by fans (à la Veep)...there seemed to be some discourse about Shiv's ending and whether or not it fit with her character's arc (I think it does, but would love to hear your take!)

I will say that I was always interested in the decision to have Logan take up with Kerry in S3...I love the character of Marcia so much that the rise of Kerry was like a personal affront to me, lol, but I was also intrigued by how Marcia didn't seem threatened by Kerry the way she was by Rhea (or even Shiv). And it's also a relationship that Logan seems very passive about, and we never really hear his own take on it (except when he chickens out re: Kerry's audition tape for ATN). All the "facts" about what they do come from Kerry (or from other people, like Connor with the smoothie revelation). Like obviously, he seems fond of Kerry and is attracted to her (although I don't believe he was actually considering divorcing Marcia, not when he has literally just had to pay her a ridiculous amount of money to stick around in S3), but we don't see anything to indicate why he's okay letting her take on such an outsized role in the management of the business. (I also thought Brian Cox adopted an almost...fatherly air around the actress, which I guess would make sense due to the age difference...it wasn't like they had blazing sexual chemistry!) Is Kerry a symptom of Logan's growing passivity as he ages? A sign that he's getting old and predictable? Are we supposed to take away something about Kerry's naivëté, that she pins all her professional and personal hopes on an aging billionaire in ill health? Is she a parable in that sense? It's fitting for Succession, though, that a lot of the "intimacy" of the "romantic" relationships on the show take place offscreen, so in that sense I think the mystery is a bit purposeful. And the writers were always interested in "inverting" clichés to a certain degree (ie, the CEO having an affair with his much younger assistant)...but I guess I'm not sure how they inverted it in this instance, other than the incredibly ruthless way Kerry gets excised from the inner circle (a scene which will live in infamy!) as opposed to continuing the drama of their relationship after Logan's death.

That's one of the first things that comes to mind when I think about S4, but I'm sure there are many others, and would love to hear your specific thoughts about the season! My favorite episodes were, personally, 4.03 (Connor's Wedding), 4.04 (Honeymoon States--my pick for funniest episode of the season), and 4.09 (Church and State). My favorite season finale is probably S3, All the Bells Say...I think S2 is probably a tighter episode narratively, but my god, the emotional devastation of the S3 finale. You simply can't beat it!

[cogandstar]

20 Questions for Fic Writers

thanks to @flowersforthemachines for tagging me!

tagging. uh. you. no, not you, the other you. yeah that one. go forth and do it.

1) How many works do you have on AO3? I've got 31! (19 as my "main" CogAndStar pseud, 5 as greekviking412, and 7 as JarkosofTroy)

2) What’s your total AO3 word count? 125,896! I am inordinately pleased that it comes out to an even number.

3) What are your top 5 fics by kudos? "Mr. Jackson Was A Wanted Terrorist" (pjo, 775), then "flirty meme connoisseurs" (persona, 158), then "the role of insults in polycule formation" (persona, 110), then "delinquent, detective, delectable" (persona, 54), and then. uh. Champion of Light and Dark (pjo, 45)??? really?? that one?? fascinating

4) What fandoms do you write for? persona and percy jackson, mainly, for published works, but i have ideas bouncing around for a lot more!!!

5) Do you respond to comments? Why or why not? i try my best to, even if it's just like, saying thanks for commenting. i really like getting comments (even when they're asking questions already answered in the tags and notes) and i also really like it whenever an author replies to a comment i have left, so i try to share that joy!

6) What’s the fic you wrote with the angstiest ending? i was honestly wondering if i really had any fic that qualified as an angsty ending but then i remembered that "tell the others my last thoughts (were of them)" (fire emblem awakening, ~600 words) exists. so that one!

7) What’s the fic you wrote with the happiest ending? this is hard to pick uhhh. i think it's a tie between "flirty meme connoisseurs", "the role of insults in polycule formation", and "delinquent, detective, delectable" because they all end with ships getting together. does an ot3 getting together mathematically mean more happiness than a pairing, since it's three people being happy instead of just two? if so, then it's "role of insults".

8) Do you get hate on fics? no, i don't think i ever have. closest i've come to getting hate is a discourse anon about harriet bree from RWBY in either volume 7 or volume 8, but that was all here on tumblr!

9) Do you write smut? i have toyed with trying it, but never gotten too far. (there is, however, some small amount of existing smut written by me lurking in my google docs. i don't expect it to ever see the light of day)

10) Do you write crossovers? i've got about five on ao3, so i sure hope so! (i say "about five" because one of them is like, definitely between two different series but also they are canonically in the same universe, so. not sure if that counts as a crossover. ao3 says it does.)

11) Have you ever had a fic stolen? if there are any fic bandits who've target my fic, i remain unaware. though i do have my notes for my old abandoned fics brought over from ffn publicly available so if people want to, like, continue them or rewrite them or whatever they can use those. i don't think i've seen anything like that actually materialize, though.

12) Have you ever had a fic translated? nope! sometimes i think about translating one of my fics into Esperanto as practice, though.

13) Have you ever cowritten a fic before? nope!

14) What’s your all-time favorite ship? why would you make me choose like this. uhhhhhhh. i am going to say shuakesumi!

15) What’s the WIP you want to finish but doubt you ever will? i would slaughter and burn a hundred cows to see Persona Shatter finished.

16) What are your writing strengths? i like to think i'm good with dialogue, specifically writing like. banter? i'm also proud of my worldbuilding. oh yeah! i like my titles. i'm good with coming up with titles.

17) What are your writing weaknesses? -action scenes -transitions -consistency these are my great flaws.

18) Thoughts on writing dialogue in another language in a fic? i don't think i've ever done it?? if i can i can't remember. i think nowadays i generally wouldn't write it out in the other language; i would either narrate it as "Character X said something in another language" if the pov character doesn't understand, or if they do i would just write the dialogue out in English with narration establishing that the conversation is happening in the other language. i don't think it's like, a bad thing to do -- just generally unneeded.

19) First fandom you wrote for? the first fanfiction i ever wrote was in a composition book in third grade, about my percy jackson oc waking up in a cabin in the middle of nowhere with a sword, a windbreaker, and a pillow pet. i do not recall what happened next, but there is still a record of that oc! and another one i also made in elementary school. go forth and look upon them, and see what has changed and what remains the same. my first published fic was Son of Chronus, also for pjo.

20) Favorite fic you’ve ever written? cruelest possible question. cruel cruel cruel. i think, if i had to pick one, it would be "into the louring dark", a) because i really like the thieves as space pirates against the God-Emperor YALDABAOTH, and i'm also proud of myself for the degree to which i was able to hit the style i was going for (something like the main body of "Lord Vivec's Sword-Meeting with Cyrus the Restless" by Michael Kirkbride).

fun questions!!!!

[prettypaprika]

I'm trawling reddit posts for analysis about the trial scene and unreliability of Louis as a narrator and not finding the thesis that I want to satisfy my itch about just how momentous the effect of that revelation is on me (specifically for how I view Lestat and Louis's relationship).

I guess I'll just have to type out my own stream of conscious ramblings then...

(TW for discussion of domestic violence in the context of the show)

Going into the trial scene, I knew that Louis was an unreliable narrator. We're shown this in small ways--the rain/mud scene with Jonah and Lestat, some of the correcting by Armand etc. And also, just the way that human memory works (and space for "the odyssey of reflection" that Louis specifically asks for) is that memory is imperfect. So even though Louis is telling Daniel word for word dialogue and relating anecdotes, I assumed that his telling was imperfect.

And yet, I was still shocked at the unreliability--specifically in Lestat's retelling of what happened when Claudia returned after seven years. I really felt like season 1 Louis is framed as a victim of domestic violence and is often very passive. And, to be clear, I'm not saying that he isn't a victim of domestic violence--he clearly is attacked by his partner and is very injured. I also think that if Lestat threatened Louis's daughter, that makes Louis's very violent response and threats towards Lestat understandable.

But, given the context of their relationship and that it's between vampires, that violence isn't given the same weight as it would be in a human relationship. And Lestat's version of their relationship paints Louis as a more active and aggressive partner in their relationship. There are still power imbalances at play, and Lestat is also telling his side of the story with a slant (although Louis admits that for Claudia's turning and the Louis and Lestat fight, that Lestat's version is the more accurate one). Despite their imbalances, through Lestat's view, I suddenly felt like Louis and Lestat were much more close to equal given the fact that Louis graphically threatened Lestat (after forcing him to have a kid and then freezing Lestat out when their kid left).

I was really wondering how the show would get me to ship a domestic abuser and victim, but the trial really did a 180 on my thinking. (And it's also a thing where I can be like...oh yes, I am into this toxic relationship on tv but would not ever want that for someone in real life.) Louis is an active participant in his relationship with Lestat and I think that (i) Louis's aggressiveness in fighting Lestat and (ii) the fact that Louis had manipulated Lestat into a child that Lestat never wanted provides a lot of context that was like...oh wow. There is really screwed up stuff in their relationship that they both did, to each other. They can be equals (equally terrible?), Louis is capable of fighting back and maybe now, some 75 or so years later, they can be in a better relationship (still not going to say healthy, but maybe healthier?).

To be clear, I don't think that Louis thinks of himself as lying to Daniel in his initial telling (in 2022, not 1973), but more self-censoring in the way that people do when they did something that's not major but also doesn't look great. And I think that there's just stuff that has become obscured to him in the fog of his grief and shame about Claudia that's colored his view of those memories. Or that he's forgotten in the haze of time. We already knew from Louis's version that he manipulated Lestat about turning Claudia because we saw some of his pleading (filtered through Claudia), so it's not like Louis's version was massively different. But, it was different enough to provide a context shift. It's only through Lestat's version though that we saw that Louis wasn't just asking--Louis put an extreme amount of pressure on Lestat, ignoring everything Lestat was saying.

I saw a lot of discourse on reddit about how Louis's unreliability as a narrator frames the scene with Grace's baby or Paul's death. To me, that's kind of beside the point (and too major to lie about). Logically, if Louis drained Grace's baby, then she wouldn't have even tolerated his presence, much the less been upset when he didn't come for her kids' birthdays. And I think that Paul is far too important for Louis to have self-censored about that scene when he already felt a lot of self-recrimination for Paul's death.

But...I certainly find the Louis from Lestat's retelling of their history far more interesting of a character than how Louis had portrayed himself. Louis's passivity was a bit boring--the last two episodes of season 2, I was like...yes, I absolutely want more of this Louis. To be clear, I do think that Louis is a more passive character, and that's mostly fine. He seems to be ok with letting things happen to him than initiating things. But if he's completely passive, then how are he and Lestat drawn to each other? Lestat is a very active character and seems like someone who would need someone who can match that energy as well as to butt heads over things.

I would need to rewatch season 1 again, but I'm curious if Louis's passivity really came into play after Claudia was turned--if his portrayal of himself as passive is actually how he was at the time or if that's the blur of his memories around Claudia and his grief and shame about Claudia?

Either way, what an excellent revelation and I am just so awed by this show.

[thebibliosphere]

Not to dredge the Audible discourse up again, but I said I'd come back when I had more numbers, and this post is specifically aimed at the people still trying to claim in my inbox that 'Scribd pays authors better than Audible' and giving me shit for using Audible as an author.

So here we go. This is what I earn per 1 book via Audible purchase vs. Audible subscription:

Image ID: a screenshot from ACX, the Audible portal for authors. The text is broken up into boxes. Running from left to right, it reads Hunger Pangs: True Love Bites (Unabridged) by Joy Demorra. The sales region shown is the UK, and my royalty rate is Audible's standard of 25%. The number of units sold is 1. The amount the person paid is $25.59. My earnings from this sale is $6.40.

The following image is the same data but taken from Audible credits. The quality "sold" is 1, at a rate of $12.84, giving me a payment of $3.21. The next few numbers denote zero, showing no returns, making my earnings from Audible credit for this region $3.21. /End ID.

And this is what I earned from Scribd (sorry it's so small, I don't know if anyone will be able to read it):

Image ID: Another screenshot from the FindAwayVoices portal shows my royalty earnings from Scribd across three regions.

From top to bottom, it shows the number of sales for Hunger Pangs: True Love Bites, followed by a series of ID numbers. It also shows three individual sales from Sweden, Bulgaria, and the UK. The individuals have paid the equivalent of $19.99 in subscription fees. Out of that $19.99, Scribd pays me $1.21, and then FindawayVoices subtracts a further 0.24cents as a distribution fee leaving me with a total income of 0.97cents per book read. /End ID.

Now, I am aware that the Scribd subscription fee allows customers to listen to multiple things for the cost of their monthly fee without forcing them to return it the way Audible does. This means the author isn't subjected to negative income which is a good thing. And if that works for you, great. I'm happy for you. I am glad you have found a way to enjoy media that still pays authors something.

But can people who don't have a clue how the industry works please stop making unfounded claims that Scribd is 'better' and 'more ethical than Amazon' and 'actually pays authors' because, as you can see from the above, that's a crock of shit.

I'm not saying this to shame anyone. I'm not trying to guilt anyone for using Scribd services. Again, if it is something that works for you and you can afford it, great. Please keep using it. I would rather earn 97cents than nothing. But I am sick and tired of people who don't work the industry telling authors we have 'better options than Audible' then listing places like Scribd, seemingly operating on the belief that just because it isn't Amazon, it's inherently better.

My inbox is a nightmare of people telling me I deserve to have my work stolen for using Amazon at all, and I don't know how people can say things like that without realizing they're also the villain.

And just for the people saying it's illegal for Amazon to take refunds from the authors and leave us with negative income and we're all lying:

ID: another screenshot from ACX, the Audible portal for authors. The text is broken up into boxes. Running from left to right, it reads Hunger Pangs: True Love Bites (Unabridged) by Joy Demorra. The sales region shown is the UK, and my royalty rate is Audible's standard of 25%. There are no individual outright sales, but there is a negative credit indicating a return, with the subscription fee shown as -$13.31 (note: this is MORE than what Amazon charges for a sale ($12.84)) with a negative royalty rate of -$3.33 for the author, which is also 12 cents MORE than what we earn for a non-returned sale.

There is some debate over why this is, but the most prevalent idea at the moment is that this is Amazon factoring in the exchange rate, and making authors pay it. So not only are we paying for the return and making a negative income, but we're also paying the cost of the exchange rate. 🙃🙃🙃

And people are wondering why authors are screaming about booktok "hacks" that promote returning books even if you enjoyed them and begging people to use libraries instead. And just in case you want to see those figures:

Image ID: Another screenshot from the FindAwayVoices shows Library transaction details. The library paid $29.99 for the lending license, earning me a royalty fee of $13.50. FindAwayVoices took a further fee of $2.70 for distribution, making my total income from a single library transaction $10.80. /End ID.

With that single library transaction, I have earned more than what I made from 5 separate sales from both Amazon and Scribd combined. And I will continue to earn royalties from the library lending service. Not much. It will probably be about a dollar max depending on the country and exchange rate. BUT--that's a dollar I am making that YOU don't have to pay for. This is why library lending services are so essential and why authors are begging readers/listeners to use services like OverDrive and Libby instead of abusing Amazon return policies.

Libraries pay us. And the more people request our books and check them out, the more likely they will be to keep buying our stuff and keep us in their catalog.

So please, please, please, support your local libraries and also stop harassing creators for using multiple platforms to sell our work. Most of us are making a pittance from our work. We don't need people who don't understand how rigged the system is against us lecturing us about how it's our fault because of where we are forced to sell just to try and make a living. 😔

Anyway, support authors direct where you can. Support your local libraries. Stop being a dick to creators, etc.

I'm going to go scream into a pillow for a bit then get back to work.

Edit: sorry for the weird formatting. I have no idea how that happened. I couldn't see the excess text until it posted.

[stormblessed95]

"Insecure Jikookers"

When we say that like 60% insecure jikookers aren't actually jikookers at all. And another 25% of insecure jikookers are just brand new to the fandom and doesn't understand how content work or the full extent of just how close all 7 of the members are. Very few of them are ACTUALLY just chronically insecure shippers. Which is a problem on its own, but a totally seperate one. Bloggers can tell. When we get asks or DMs and they all start with "I fully believe in jikook, but..." or "I'm a jikooker, but sometimes when JK..." or "I'm not an insecure jikooker, but sometimes taekook...." or "I never once believed in taekook, but when they...."

It gives you away. Lol it's not always, and most bloggers like to give you the benefit of the doubt when answering asks. But trust us, when we say we tend to get ALOT of asks, when my anons are off, the amount of DMs I get increases and sometimes it's from burner accounts to stay anon without being anon. Lol and I promise I don't mind, I love talking with yall. But keep in mind when we get snippy or rude sometimes, it's because a "jikooker" has been in our inboxes consistently being... annoying for lack of a better word. FOR EXAMPLE. Lol this person who DMd me, starting the conversation off with....

We had a decent conversation. Lol but they also were talking to a friend too. With the same sort of stuff after this. Where their conversations went like this....

And when my friend eventually ended the conversation because they were just talking in circles and she didn't want to keep saying the same thing over and over... they messaged me again. With the same stuff they were sending her. Lol

And at this point, I wasn't as kind. It had been WEEKS of conversation between us, as well as between them and my friend. All over the same stuff. We both clocked in a while ago that they were probably a tkkr, but just figured we would keep answering questions honestly in hopes of having an open conversation about it. But with this message, I too, was done. Lol I had already seen that they had been having this conversation and didn't have any actual interest or intent to hear anyone else's actual opinion.

To which, they responded with the classic "whoops, I've been caught" move and deactivated their account. Lmao which just proved our point that they were never an insecure jikooker. They were just a tkkr pretending and trying to create doubt and discourse in jikooker spaces. And "convert" people into shipping taekook. Because that's what they do. They want to "win" so they set out to try and convince people that what they see is what everyone should see. And to get more people to join their cult. It's honestly EXACTLY how actual cults work in getting more people to join as well. Which is bonkers.

And no, I don't mind exposing their account and these messages because the account doesn't exist anymore. And I'm using it for a be patient with your favorite bloggers because sometimes we are dealing with a lot of back and forth. And rhe stuff we get in our inboxes from people under anon are generally even more insane and wild. Or trying to be manipulative under the guise of being "jikookers." "Im just like you, but I've seen the light. You should too."

For another example, I've gotten actual messages from taekookers before too. Who don't pretend to be anything other than taekookers. We've had decent conversations as well. The ones who don't try to manipulate and gaslight their way into your inbox usually aren't as crazy, so tracks. I've had some where we shared opinions and walked away nicely agreeing to disagree. I've had some really great conversations that ended even better too. Lol for example, one person who was a tkkr messaged me and their conversations started like this

And our conversation ended like this:

And we still talk too. Pretty sure she is a fully fledged jikooker at this point 😂🤣 maybe she will see this and let me know for sure if she is or not. 👀😂

Lmao but the difference in how the conversations started was telling. And I promise, bloggers can usually tell the genuinely insecure but sincere jikookers from just rhe confused baby armys from the tkkrs (or other shippers) in disguise anons. Lol if any of these secret shippers are hiding around on blogs, please just dont waste your time or mine (or anyone elses.) If you are just trying to convert people into shipping your ship, don't bother. Only do this if you want to legitimately have a genuine conversation and are willing to be open minded about people disagreeing with you.

Yall excuse the grammar and typo/spelling mistakes in these messages. I'm CLEARLY much more relaxed and usually typing in more of a rush in DMs then I do for posts. 🤣🤣 I'm also usually nicer in DMs too unless you drive me insane to this point like above. Lol

Basically just a post to highlight that we aren't dumb. We know what you are doing when you send us messages or anons like these. Lol and to remind everyone else to be patient with us bloggers at times. We really do have all types of conversations all the time 😂

[toovirgins]

I stumbled across this comment on YouTube earlier—and at first I was like haha nice but then I actually thought about it and I think there’s a really interesting opportunity for mclennon conspiracy discourse here. (yay!)

Under a cut because it’s a bit lengthy.

Nowhere Boy (2009) with Aaron Taylor Johnson and Thomas Brody Sangster: In this film about early John and his path to the Beatles, there are (arguably) new, nuanced details about his familial life and childhood/background that haven’t typically been conveyed in prior film portrayals of Lennon—and this “new, nuanced” bit comes from reading reviews and hearing comments about how many people watching the film (what I would consider, like, a “general population” of Beatles fans) didn’t even know about the details of his mother’s death. In the film, there’s a scene where Paul’s playing Julia’s banjo, and long story short John gets in a fight with someone and tosses the banjo and storms out. Paul follows him out there and he punches Paul in the face, who goes crumbling to the concrete. So, that’s the “punching scene”. The point is, Paul McCartney reportedly made it very clear that that never happened (i.e., that John had never hit him) after he saw the film and was not happy about it. (I’ve heard this “not happy about [the film]” narrative over and over, but I can’t seem to find any great direct quotes from Paul, other than people saying that Paul wasn’t a fan and suggesting he wasn’t happy about certain other portrayals [lol]- so if anyone has any, I’d love to hear about it!). Essentially, in response, Taylor Johnson tried to defend the emotional validity of the film and suggested, like, well we think John probably wanted to hit Paul a lot of the time, and the movie is just activating an interpretation of that. But, yeah, the point was that Paul was pissed about the punch scene and was reportedly very adamant that John never, ever hit him. And it’s not as though Paul had issues with the violence of it, because if it was that, why would he discuss it as an inaccuracy? Is there a nicer way to punch someone in the face? And, that would be completely neglecting the 0.2 seconds later when John realizes what he’s done and pulls Paul into a tight hug, which forms a very beautiful street shot of one morphed being shortly thereafter (side note: creative decision meant to emphasize the oneness in their bond of losing their mothers? anyway).

Two of Us (2000) television drama with Jared Harris and Aidan Quinn: First off, I feel like it’s worth mentioning that this is directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg (who is also the director of Let it Be (1970), so... guy who spend hours upon hours with and watching the Beatles?). In this movie, there’s an elevator scene where John and Paul are messing around, cracking jokes and getting in a playfight and whatnot, and in the midst of it all John kisses him. After a couple of seconds, Paul pushes him off and doesn’t say anything for a moment. Then, he just makes a joke (”Just ‘cause Yoko’s away doesn’t mean you have to stop brushing your teeth”) and they laugh it off. Contrary to Nowhere Boy, Paul rather liked Two of Us as remarked on by Aidan Quinn in an interview on April 18, 2004: “Just after I finished the film, I went on holiday and Paul McCartney was staying at the same place. I met him and we became quite friendly. Later, he saw the film and fortunately he liked it. It would have been terrible if he'd hated it.” It appears that Paul is very complimentary of Two of Us - hence, the joke in the fandom that like “paul likes the kissing scene”. Paul hasn’t said anything about the kiss directly that I can find (sus in and of itself), but there’s been reasonable arguments made for the validity of the scene in that all of the other portrayals of John and Paul in the film are so accurate and realistic and truthful (see: Martin Lewis quote)—why would this detail be any different?

We could analyze these films and creative decisions separately and in comparison for hours and hours, but I find the McCartney responses a particular area of interest. Because don’t we think if Paul was adamant about setting the narrative straight on things that did or didn’t happen between him and John, and if he wanted to continue to push his ever-insistent narrative of ‘John wasn’t gay bc if he was he would’ve made a pass at me (or someone else) in 20 years’, he would also want to make it very well-known that the kissing scene didn’t happen either? With the same level of insistence? Though the movies themselves aren’t reduced to these two polarized scenes, is it not worth considering why Paul chose to speak out about one, but not the other? If it was an issue of setting the record straight (no pun intended), would Paul not wish to exercise the same amount of caution with kissing scenes as with fighting scenes, especially given what we know about how he has typically viewed and discussed sexuality? 

Or, could it possibly be that the kissing scene—in its presentation of playfighting, spontaneity, a brief moment of confusion and realization, then laughed off and construed as a joke—isn’t an inaccuracy?