#but i do think this makes sense within the context of the evil ending

[galedekarios]

gale's evil ending: devnotes

this post will take a closer look at the devnotes for gale's evil ending. they aren't that revealing, most of it is exactly what is shown in the cinematic that goes along with it, but they do have some interesting tidbits.

synopsis

Avatar Gale has delcared his intention to destroy all gods. Using the token of Mystra he still has (her earring) he casts a spell upon the city of Baldur's Gate, 'awakening' them and inciting them to rid the city of religious worship. He opens a rift to the heavens and sets off to destroy the rest of the pantheon with his army of nautiloids in tow.

dialogue + devnotes

Narrator: *They bow before you, prayers and pleas mingling into a single, submissive drone. But you are not here to yoke them - you come to set them free.* devnote: Gale turns his back on the awestruck, kneeling crowd and spreads his arms wide, dark energy crackling around him as he begins to float upwards. Narrator: *The Absolute lies broken at your feet. The first god to fall - but not, perhaps, the last.* devnote: Short from behind Gale's back, upwards at the heavens. With a gesture, Gale splits the dark skies, opening a rift through which brilliant, otherworldly light spills. [TagCinematic]  devnote: As Gale ascends, he lifts a hand to his head. CLOSE UP as, almost idly, he carresses the earring gifted to him by Mystra - then unclasps it, allowing it to fall behind him as he rises with a fleet of nautiloids lining the way before him. [TagCinematic]  devnote: CLOSE-UP as we stay with the earring, tracing its path downwards as it begins to break up, fragmenting into streamers of blue Mystran magic. Almost gently, they descend upon the watching crowds. As the spell settles on them, they rise to their feet, and begin to riot. The streets roil with anarchy as the enraged mob tears down the tokens of the old religions - statues, clerics, and temples. [TagCinematic]  devnote: A single magial streamer (spelling?) settles on a statue of Mystra, facing gazing upwards, and runs down her cheek like a single tear - before the statue is torn down and broken upon the cobbles. Narrator: *The heavens are waiting. And you have work to do.* devnote: Final shot of the wide split in the heaves, a fleet of nautiloids preparing to pass through.

i found the devnotes interesting in so far as they confirm a few things i had been wondering:

the earring was indeed a gift from mystra to her newest chosen (it was touched on in an item description in idle champions as well, but i wasn't sure how trustworthy that information was)

The Chosen's Earring A symbol of Mystra's faith in me. Former faith, I suppose...

2. the earring was likely, in addition to being a symbol bestowed upon him by mystra, gale's spellcasting focus:

An arcane focus is a special item designed to channel the power of arcane spells. A sorcerer, warlock, or wizard can use such an item as a spellcasting focus.

they used to be relegated to being a hand-held object like a wand, staff, orb, or something of that nature, but the rules have been a bit more lax now and we do know that larian bends the lore (and sometimes breaks it) in bg3 as well. a chosen should not need one either, then again mystra did withdraw her favour.

either way, it makes sense why he would discard it in his evil ending, both as a statement for his newest goal (destroying the entire pantheon), as well as him no longer being in need of such a token, now instead using it and the magic it's imbued with to incite the people of baldur's gate to rally against the "old" gods.

[duchezss]

All my favorite moments in blue beetle: a very long and silly list because this is my new fav movie ever (latinos on top fr)

The fact that the entire movie is low key a representation of how lost people can feel after they finish college and don't know what to do with their life.

How celebrated it is that Jaime is a first gen college student

As much as I loved him being from el paso, I love that he now gets his own city that it still deeply rooted in latino culture

How despite the fact that everything is going bad for the family, Jaime still tries to keep moral up and be positive

Jaime stands up for Jenny without thinking

How his persistence is what ends him landing up with the scarab, and subsequently keeping it out of victorias hands

Am I allowed to say his entire family? The scene where they're all pushing him to open to the box was so funny. Their dynamic felt so real, and it makes even more sense because apparently any time they were bickering it was improv.

How well the movie handled micro-aggressions against latinos. Like the receptionist didn't even attempt Jaime name, and how Victoria would never get her scientist's name right. They are subtle, but very real problems.

Maybe this was just me, but from the trailers I thought Jenny and Jaime already new each other, but I liked that they just met. It made their story more interesting.

The body horror route they decided to take with the suit was so cool.

The suit in general. I missed practical suits so much, and it just looked so amazing.

Another thing, that has already been talked about a lot but idc, is that I still am so in love that his family knows from the get go. Of course it wasn't really his choice, but I love how there is never any big secret, and they are constantly in the picture.

I know the Khaji-Da doesn't have as much personality compared to the comics, but the whole sequence where Jaime first gets the suit was so funny.

Notoriously in the comics the beetles were sent out to worlds to be the harbingers for their creator species to invade said world. I loved the small detail in the intro of the blue beetle crashing into the green beetle and then having a flash of electricity. I wonder if that was to hint at a malfunction, since the Khaji-Da never goes to evil with Jaime.

I love Rudy's truck. It's stupid but that's why it's so good.

The whole family debrief was was funnier than it should've been, and the beetle on Jaime spine looked wicked as well.

I thought it was interesting how much of a presence Ted Kord had on the movie, mainly because. of Jenny, but it was still there.

Every. Single. Latino. Reference. I could barely keep up there were so many good ones omg, the details were amazing.

For Jenny being an original character I thought she was done very well

I love how Rudy was useful and basically got them into kord industries.

I love the way we only see Jaime eyes in the suit. It's a different approach to what we've seen with masked heroes so far and I love it

How much they talked about the first two blue beetles, I thought adding that context made it better

They made it very evident how lonely Jenny feels, and I think her small emotional moments really paid off in the end.

I love how Jaime was so openly affectionate with both Rudy and his father, it's something uncommon with men in latino cultures and I loved seeing it.

The entire sequence where Jaime's house was being raided was so uncomfortable. And it was in moments like this were I thought Soto did a great job of weaving real world problems latinos face within a superhero movie.

The moment when Jaime's father had a heart attack, and Jaime was being dragged away, and his sister was screaming was just so heartbreaking and powerful. All of them were hurting so much.

I loved how active his family was, and how all of them immediately went to go rescue him.

Side note: the bug ship looked so cool and goofy and I loved it so much

How Jose was actually very curious about Jaime's connection to the beetle, but Victoria didn't care

The whole dream scene with Jaime and his father. I thought it perfectly mirrored their conversation from the beginning of the movie, and I thought it was incredibly moving. Not to mention I loved the detail of Jaime wearing the last outfit he saw his father in.

I loved that Jaime saved himself, but that his family greatly aided him. I thought it was a great metaphor for the fact that you can do things on your own, but having support can really make the difference

I thought it was so funny that Jaime absolutely refused to kill, and his family members did it was a smile on their face lmaoo.

I know it's cheesy, but I always love it in superhero movies when the main character finally accepts their destiny and it was a very cool moment for Jaime too. But I will say I think they did it with an interesting approach. For most superhero movies the big moment is the superhero finally deciding to go out of their way and fight the big bad, but in this movie he just finally fights what's right in front of him.

How once Jaime accepted himself as the Blue Beetle, Khaji-Da started speaking to him in spanish and adopted his ideologies, further proving their relationship is a two way street.

I loved that Khaji-Da stopped Jaime from killing Carapax, because he was justifiable angry, but he would've regretted it at some point

The low key plot twist of the locket Carapax had not being his wife and child, but being him and his mother. That was genius tbh.

I loved that Jaime had the iconic 2000s superhero half masked fight. This movie felt so 2000's but in the best way possible.

How the entire final act was circling back to the point of loving his family making him weak, but throughout everything we've seen, it's clearly the opposite.

I liked how once Jaime bonded with Khaji his mask would come on and off on command.

How Jaime started wearing his father's necklace in the ending :(

I loved the entire score so much, the synth wave vibe they decided to take was fantastic. I also love how iconic and recognizable they made blue beetle's main theme. Like the bum bum bummm that kept showing up was so good.

I really loved how they aged Jaime up to 22 as a newly college grad. I feel like superheros are always either 16 or 40 and there's never any in between, so it was nice to see.

And for my last point to a very long list: I loved that in the end Carapax helped Jaime and Jenny. Because the real villain was Victoria making them fight each other, and in my opinion that was such a powerful metaphor for latinos and any pocs

[future-island-egghead]

something quick n dirty but tl;dr i think york's betrayal is more deeply motivated than wanting to be a celestial dragon specifically

a running theme with egghead is that no matter how hard one tries, one can never truly extinguish the wills, instincts, and dreams of any living creatures. egghead literally opens with this when lilith's mecha-shark eats the sunny instead of observing it and she has to call it off and takes the crew to egghead.

we see this idea that as amazing as science is, it can never fully overcome the spirit of individuality, and making a living creature completely subservient to your will is impossible multiple times with the seraphim and pacifista and kuma himself. but something i dont know if people kind of register is that this also applies to vegapunk's satellites, too. despite originating from vegapunk and being based on an aspect of his personality, they are canonically all six unique people with thoughts, feelings, and wills of their own. and despite this, and despite the generally positive relationship they share, they are, in effect, meant to be extensions of stella. they're just part of him. and in the end, they're basically meant to just be.. that. and nothing more.

i think york's betrayal, at heart, is motivated by wanting more. more than... this. she's the greedy vegapunk, which makes her, by definition, the ambitious vegapunk, too. while she lived a life of luxury on egghead, she wanted more because she was so tired of being unable to control her own life. she was tired of essentially (alongside the other satellites) being stella's slave.

lilith says something very interesting during the buster call. she says she's never left the island before, and wants to see the world. the way she acts and behaves makes it clear that at heart, she kind of idolizes pirates like luffy for being so free, and wants to be more like him.

according to stella, when he went to marijoise to talk with the elders, he took some satellites with him. it's not specified who was in the group beyond york, but we do know she came back from that trip very different.

I wonder if york's ever left the island before. i wonder if she was ever allowed to leave egghead aside from that trip to marijoise.

i think that when she went to marijoise, she mistook the lavish, seemingly-consequence-free lifestyles of the celestial dragons for the total freedom and power she so desperately craved, and became inspired by them the way lilith became inspired by pirates.

the pinnacle of greed and the pinnacle of evil.

i dont know if i'd call it a tragic mistake, because york seems to just overall be much more callous and impersonal than the others in general, but this might be due to having been created as a naturally ambitious person, but forced into a role of servitude effectively for life, from birth.

of all the vegapunks, she and lilith have the greatest sense of ambition and drive, and as smart as stella was, he never seemed to quite grasp that quelling these ambitions was never going to work.

one of the things i kind of don't know if people register in this series is that every named character is, within the context of the world, a complete human (nonhuman species notwithstanding) person with wills and dreams of their own. the seraphim are people (and not just. bosses for the straw hats to fight), the satellites are people, Stussy is a person, and even the hundreds of clones of Kuma and Germa soldiers are people, despite their circumstances.

York, at heart, was a person who was designed to live in eternal servitude to Vegapunk, but held desires so intrinsic to her being that ignoring them was, by design, impossible.

Is it any wonder she eventually took matters into her own hands?

[emmabirb8]

I've been an Invader Zim fan since 2011.

I was 15-16 at that time, and though I did thoroughly enjoy the show, I was not mature enough to really get it. Sure, it was funny, but I didn't pick up on the subtleties and style of humor beyond the surface level. I liked the wackiness and the characters, but I SURELY wasn't at a point of being able to deconstruct themes or analyze character motivations and narratives (like I very much enjoy doing now). I remember discovering an artist on DeviantArt who drew cute ZaGr stuff, so that was the pairing I liked too. I didn't think too deeply about much, and honestly, I don't think the majority of fans (if they were my age or younger, that is) did either. Everything was taken as dumb and silly for the most part, and that IS truthfully a major component of the show itself.

Getting back into Invader Zim within this past year though, I'm looking at it through a WILDLY different lens. I like Invader Zim for what it is and how it's intended to be perceived. I like that the show is meant to be dark, satirical, and tragic at the same time that it's silly, chaotic, and nonsensical. Almost everything that happens onscreen is written in to be funny above all else. (I've mentioned before that I've been watching Jhonen's Twitch streams for a while now, and I have a MUCH better understanding of his sense of humor bc of that. IZ makes way more sense if you can sorta see things from JV's perspective, lol.)

But at the same time, I also like Invader Zim for what it offers in terms of interpretation and what it can imply (intentionally or not). There is genuinely SO MUCH DEPTH to this dorky lil cartoon that a casual viewer wouldn't immediately pick up on. And a lot of that depth, I think, was not woven in purposely. The show itself was never meant to be taken so seriously. Nevertheless, I'm constantly fascinated by what IZ implies about good and evil, the nature of general society, and especially how it goes about demonstrating the devastating effects of social isolation and bullying. Meta for this series is always pretty damn *chef's kiss.* And what's even more interesting is how viewers manipulate canon to expand upon this world and these characters.

Given that I've come to understand Invader Zim better, I've also grown very fond of ZaDr. Now, while I wouldn't want to see this pairing happen in canon material, I love the potential it possesses in transformative contexts.

In reality, I get that these characters were intended to have a deep hatred for one another and a never-ending rivalry for the sake of comedy and not much else. It's an extraterrestrial perpetually throwing hands with a 12 year old because he's incompetent and his plans often fail. And that's funny. That's the point. But beyond that, canonically, these are two characters who are mirrors of each other; they're both treated like garbage by their respective peers, and they both crave acknowledgment, validation, and a sense of purpose. Throughout their story, they find they're only able to obtain these things from each other, so as a consequence of their similar personalities, they become utterly, unhingedly obsessed with each other (to a sometimes unhealthy degree). They are undeniably forever intertwined by design of how the show is set up.

And because of that, shipping of these characters was, frankly, inevitable in fandom spaces. I myself fell victim to their appeal too. (Sorry, Jhonen. 😅)

I'm not gonna go into any discourse surrounding this pairing because there's already PLENTY of that to go around online. Everyone has their own opinion on the subject, and that's fine. I respect that. Point is, even though I understand and appreciate what Zim and Dib are supposed to be in the context of the show, I also enjoy the idea of them as friends and romantic partners outside of and beyond the confines of canon.

And that's something that I think many fans who are biased toward ZaDr would also agree with! Actually, I'd say the majority of people who ship characters in ANY media would concur. We like the idea of seeing how specific relationships could develop over time and/or within different settings and circumstances. It's NOT always about wanting to see a relationship unfold on screen or in fan works strictly adhering to canon. It's about stretching canon, or in some cases, scratching canon entirely however you see fit! Who cares! It's fiction!

For me personally, I enjoy ZaDr because its attributes fall into so many trope categories that I've come to adore over the years (ones that I either wasn't aware of when I was younger, or that I didn't enjoy in the same intensity as I do now). Zim and Dib are, or could be, depending on context:

Codependent toxic soulmates

Human x non-human

Shared history

Classic enemies to lovers (or, as I often prefer it, enemies to friends to lovers)

Bicker couple

Battle couple, when put in the right setting for it

Violence as a love language

Smol and tol

The wild card paired with the rational one, the best part about this being that sometimes the more rational one is Dib, and sometimes it's Zim bc they're both a special flavor of insane

Make each other worse/stupider when together, tho oddly, they also kinda bring out the best in each other too

And, my personal favorites, the potential for hurt/comfort and angst with a happy ending, with the comfort and happiness aspects ultimately coming from each other

I like what these characters could be, to and for each other, apart from their roles in the show.

I would never want to explore a dynamic between Zim and Dib that goes beyond "frenemies" territory in canon (because that doesn't fit what the show is, and I do appreciate the integrity of Jhonen's vision). The subtle foundation for them is there, it's just that it can't really work unless a few key details are changed or manipulated, and, well...

I sure as hell like exploring every bit of that expanded potential in fan works because it's fun to imagine the various directions things could go if they were different!

This isn't me, like... trying to defend my (or anyone else's) enjoyment of this particular ship or trying to convince people to like it. Or the show for that matter! To each their own, truly. And I'm obv aware of the controversy ZaDr often incites and why. Everyone has valid reasons for liking OR not liking it, and I accept differing viewpoints on it. It's a touchy, nuanced subject to be sure. But this isn't about that.

I don't really know what this is, actually, aside from a very long very weird essay, lol. I just wanted to process why and how all of this works for me with my changed perspective from when I was first introduced to Invader Zim in my teens up until now.

It's strange, looking back. I didn't get ZaDr years ago. But I do now, and so much of it, at least from my perspective, has to do with taking the crumbs present in canon (that are undeniably there, whether you choose to acknowledge them or not, and whether they're intentional or not) and absolutely running with them to the ends of your own wild imagination.

(ZaDr content is always tagged appropriately on my blog. Pls use tag blocking functions if needed.)

[tobiasdrake]

Do you think Anakin Skywalker's redemption balances out the evils of Darth Vader? I ask because sometimes I think about it, and it seems disproportionate to think that killing one old fuck who was harming a blood family member makes up for murdering people indiscriminately for decades. But maybe that's just cynical thinking on my end.

I have such complicated feelings about the redemption of Darth Vader. Because. Like. Star Wars and I do not get along well on a pretty fundamental level. Despite being built on a pretty simple basis of White-and-Black morality - White Hats and Black Hats with very little nuance or moral complexity between - I don't think Star Wars as it exists today really gets morality.

Here's the thing.

At the time it was written, within the scope of what Star Wars originally was, it made sense.

Star Wars was not designed to be this massive multimedia franchise with hundreds of entries and elaborate storylines starring every single character ever to appear for even five seconds. It was not made to be the story of a vast universe with no true main character.

Star Wars was made to be the story of Luke. It's a Chosen One space opera faerie tale about a young boy receiving a call to adventure, discovering great power within himself, and finding his place in the world.

Vader's redemption, as originally written, wasn't about Vader. It was Luke's catharsis; His reward for resisting the temptations offered by both Obi-Wan and the Emperor and instead choosing mercy. Luke ends his story by putting faith in his father's love for him. Vader's redemption is his reward for choosing to believe in better angels.

Strictly within the context of The Story of Luke Skywalker And Nothing Else, Vader's redemption works.

But Star Wars isn't the story of Luke Skywalker and nothing else anymore. Now it is about the vast universe of characters and ideas. This transition has resulted in a lot of friction because the original trilogy made choices that work for The Story of Luke but are not conducive to horizontal storytelling.

Like. The idea of the Jedi being gone, that Luke is the "last hope" for the Jedi because there's literally nobody left but him and Leia? Yeah. Writers have been going "NO HE DIDN'T SAY THAT YOU'RE WRONG" pretty much since the EU began. The original trilogy said no other Jedi but we want to have Jedi characters in stories we write so the original trilogy gets told to go fuck itself.

There are like eighty billion Jedi running around the Imperial Era now. Nobody actually died in the Purge 'cause not being able to write Jedi characters isn't fun.

And. Unfortunately. One of those problems is Vader. Because if he's not just Luke's cathartic reward for believing in his father's love? If we have to actually engage with this man as a "real" person within the context of a universe? Then. Uh. Yeah, he's Patient Zero for unsatisfying lightswitch redemptions.

The problem, the fundamental problem underpinning Vader's redemption, is that he doesn't change in any meaningful way.

There was a bit of that already present in the original redemption. In Empire Strikes Back, Vader wanted Luke to join him and then they'd kill the Emperor together. In Return of the Jedi, Vader joins Luke and then kills the Emperor for him. Right from the get-go, he already wanted to kill the Emperor with Luke; It's only the context surrounding the act that's different.

Within the Story of Luke, it nonetheless works because Luke receives his father's love and approval without compromising his, Luke's moral values to get it. His father kills the Emperor and dies for him, which is super meaningful from Luke's (and only Luke's) perspective.

But as the series grew, Vader's redemption became further devalued. Revenge of the Sith told us that this is a man whose road to wickedness came about when he threw away everything he loved, when he murdered the people in his court, out of a violent and desperate love for his family. For his family, he will betray his own side and slaughter those he was meant to be loyal to. That is the action that brought him to where he is today.

That. Uh. That makes it feel a lot less impactful when he suddenly betrays his own side and slaughters the Emperor for Luke. Like. I don't know how Palpatine didn't see that coming when it's just Anakin doing the thing that made him Vader in the first place.

There is a point to be made that Anakin's love for his family up to that point was possessive and violent. In jealousy and rage, he choked Padme to death. He cut off Luke's hand. This is not a man who loves his family well. But Return of the Jedi doesn't undercut that in any meaningful way. He can be violently possessive of his family and stab anyone who looks at them funny; These two things don't contradict each other.

This man butchered children and lightsaber dueled Obi-Wan because he was mad about his family. Did Palpatine really think he wasn't going to huck him down a reactor shaft for literally the exact same reason, no difference whatsoever?

But that's only the tip of the iceberg, because the developing Star Wars universe makes another significant point about Vader dying for Luke: In the grand scheme of things. Like. Who gives a shit whether or not he loves his son? Insufficiently loving his family is the least of Vader's transgressions.

As early as Attack of the Clones, we see that Anakin Skywalker is a violent fascistic monster with a propensity for genocide. The Clone Wars cartoon does a phenomenal job of portraying Anakin's gradual seduction into fascistic systems of belief.

Anakin loves the idea of keeping peace via brutal military dictatorship. He has "fun" political chats with Tarkin about the merits of a galactic police state. He's emotionally abusive and violently possessive of his secret wife. He slaughters children who've done nothing to him without hesitation, sometimes because he's pissed off at other members of their family and sometimes 'cause that's just the price of keeping peace yo.

Hell, even his desire to kill Palpatine and make his family into the official galactic monarchs gets reframed into something he's wanted since Revenge of the Sith. That wasn't even a reaction to meeting Luke; he's legit wanted to supplant Palpatine with a Skywalker Dynasty forever. And we're supposed to take it as a major act of repentance when he ultimately stabs Palpatine for Luke? This man has been trying to stab Palpatine for Luke for twenty years.

All of this context makes Vader's redemption difficult to swallow in the grand scheme of things. He lived as an unrepentant brutal fascist monster guilty of multiple acts of genocide, chomping at the bit to betray his master for the sake of his family. He died as an unrepentant brutal fascist monster guilty of multiple acts of genocide who betrayed his master for the sake of his family. And the best thing that can be said of him is that he accepted Luke's lifestyle choices in the end.

A sweet moment for Luke, yet far from an inspiring transformation of a vile man into a hero - but which nonetheless inspired a thousand unsatisfying, terrible copycats.

[noodles-doodles01]

Women and HOTD Pt 1: Alicent

All the women in the series are very passive, and not in a good way. Everything in the show just happens to them and they have no autonomy no matter what. I will admit that yes, Westeros is not kind to women, however within every confine there is some space. Rhaenyra is a princess and soon to be heir to the throne, Alicent is Queen consort. They hold some semblance of power whether it be between themselves or toward other male characters. The show seems to take on this false idea that women would never go to war because they're not hot headed like the men around them, but they place this idea in the most inopportune moments where it makes them seem stupid.

Going into specifics, let's start with Alicent: In FnB, she is more of an evil stepmother rather than an ex best friend. I did not mind this change because the opportunities were there: Alicent was treated as an equal by Rhaenyra when they were friends, so despite Rhaenyra's class above Alicent in society, she did not feel it. Then, post marriage to the king, Alicent is alone, and forced to pump out babies for a man the age of her father and cannot complain about it. Moreover, Rhaenyra seems to take out her anger and frustration on her, not seeing the pressures she endures frm her own father. That kind of reaction shows the first aspect of Rhaenyra's privilege: She can tell her father off about being married away. In Alicent's eyes, Rhaenyra's living her best life, and the lack of understanding would rub anyone the wrong way.

Like Alicent dealing with Rhaenyra's anger would hold so much of the following:

I did not choose to marry your father

Do you truly think if this was what I wanted that I wouldn't tell you?

You act as though producing heirs is your greatest fear and a burden you pity women for, yet here I sit before you and all you give me is contempt

Add that to the religious trauma she's inducing but clings to it anyway bc its how she copes (as we know from Alicent explaining how praying is the closest she can get to her own mother).

So right then, the shift of perceived equality is there. Alicent is Queen Consort but a child bride, who watches as the princess waltzes around huffing and puffing as she actively lives out being a baby factory.

But Alicent is someone driven by principle, hence her clutching to religion. She is doing this for duty. For the sake of her father. She is being rewarded for her perserverance, and would be punished for sinning.

Until Rhaenyra sleeps with Daemon and Cole.

I don't think it's entirely the fact that Rhaenyra did it unmarried, but rather the fact that she is able to do it without any sense of consequence. Add this to the fact that she lies to Alicent's face, swearing upon her mother (as though that isn't a soft spot for Alicent), and it results in getting Otto taken away.

Where is the justice Alicent sticks by in that?

Rhaenyra sinned, she lied to her face, and instead of dealing with any consequence, she is stranded amongst people she doesn't know, whilst Rhaenyra gets hush hush tea.

The shift grows wider.

Alicent, realizing she is all alone and is unsupported on all sides, decides to wear the green dress. Which is iconic in itself; she realizes that in her marriage to Viserys, the man who is meant to protect her in this context, is leaving her out to dry whilst tending for his daughter. This act of the dress is the first form of wiggle room Alicent gets in her cage; she has tried being nice and forgiving and she ended up alone for it.

By the end of the wedding, Criston Cole as her protector is added to her confinement. Another bit of growth, and the shift grows wider.

I do wish the show depicted how Alicent tormented Rhaenyra more, because that would display how Rhaenyra had grown more tension with Alicent, showing how both sides are at fault to some degree for their falling out. Nonetheless, the years pass and Rhaenyra has bastard sons, and its obvious (ideally for me they would follow some semblance of similarity to the books but we do with what we got), and Viserys does.not.care.

At this point, I feel like Alicent's resentment for Rhaenyra would not be solely from comparing their lives, but also because of how much Viserys ignores Alicent, removing any sense of power she may hold, for the sake of catering to Rhaenyra. We see this in his ignorance to the bastards, we see this in his lack of care for his children with Alicent, and his overall cheery attitude no matter what happens for the sake of "family". In Alicent's eyes, Rhaenyra is still the spoiled child from back when they were children.

Wouldn't that fill her with utter rage? The concept that Alicent is QUEEN, yet is constantly upstaged by the princess and her sinful whims whilst Alicent's children suffer for it? Wouldn't Otto's words echo in her mind that her children would not be safe should Rhaenyra be queen?

And, being the religious woman she is, she would spread those complaints to her children. She would spread her ideas of Rhaenyra and her children to Aemond, Aegon and even Helaena. She tells them out of fear, that they need to know that Rhaenyra acts kind but will hurt others to protect herself. Those ideas will stick in her kids brains because of course it does. I will go into more detail about Alicent's kids in a separate post.

This all comes to a peak when Aemond loses his eye, which is a personal fave episode of mine because I had thought we would get some glimpse of book Alicent after this. Aemond is fatally injured, especially considering the time they live in. Westeros is not kind to those who are visibly different, and it was the resul of a children's spat. Of COURSE Alicent would assume that the boys attacked her own son; it's a projection of sorts, she spreads this hatred against Rhaenyra's kids to her own children, she would assume Rhaenyra does the same. And her son has paid the price for it.

Yet Viserys gives Rhaenyra a slap on the wrist, and instead berates Aegon and Aemond about a comment made, completely ignoring the fact that Aemond is MISSING AN EYE. Alicent is given full proof here and now that Rhaenyra will always get what she wants no matter the cost, and her "Thank you father" acts as a way to rub it in. So of course, she grabs the knife and attacks Rhaenyra, where is duty? Where is sacrifice?

THIS is when she show decides "lol and then she forgot all about that"

Because afterwards, Alicent becomes passive; the usurpation is based on a stupid misunderstanding, when it could have simply been Alicent pushing for Aegon to protect her children, because she can control her own action, she cannot control Rhaenyra's.

In S2, they shift even further with this idea of Alicent being someone who has things happen to them, not even done to them. BnC should have had Alicent present, because it is her first view of consequence she gets from the Dance. It is a foretelling of tragedy and she only suffers more for it. Instead, she is with Criston Cole.

I will always hate the pairing, because I would never believe that Alicent, who has suffered SA at the hands of men, would simply turn to another man once Viserys is dead, when that man is CRISTON COLE. Alicent is canonically weirded out by Cole's interest in Rhaenyra in the books, and it makes perfect sense for that to translate in the show with Alicent being younger. Why on earth would she get with him?

Worst of all, they have Alicent almost depending on the men in her life for protection? As though she wouldn't already know that they're useless from her experiences with Viserys and her father?

And the worst part of it is that the writers STILL could have gotten the "woe is me im a victim of the patriarchy" idea of Alicent in S2, because that is when Aegon and Aemond do take the wheel. Aemond murdered a child, and in return Jahaerys was taken. She could have been depicted having little to no control over the actions after, and how her family suffers for it, because it is literally canon that later in the story, when she loses everything in the war, she regrets ever wearing the green dress.

So could you imagine, Alicent, a woman who has pushed past her position given the small amount of room she had in power, slowly being taken out of the picture because the situation soon snowballs into a tragedy she can no longer control? And how at the end of it all, she loses everything she fought tooth and nail to protect.

Instead, we get a wishy washy character, who could have been executed PERFECTLY by Olivia Cooke if done right, wandering around the castle because the writers don't know what to do with her anymore.

[generalluxun]

Looking at the episode listings now & Season 3 just gets more tragic, cos from Chloe's perspective its like this:

Mums back, but still hates me (Killed me) but hey I can be a super hero cos destiny, chance, choice whatever!

Oh no, I messed up being a super hero, was humiliated before everyone and... Well at least mom seems to like me now?

Followed with, well everyone hates me and I'm useless I might as well leave, oh gosh Ladybug thinks I can be good and useful & chose me!

Capped off with, I helped Ladybug and the rest of the team battle an army of Akuma, we almost defeated Hawk Moth and even had a team photo!

Like, yes I know you know all this, sorry, but like...

From her perspective at the end of season 2, she had zero reason to think she was not on the team.

Then its months of radio silence, rejections and battles at her door.

Still, she tries at times, like with Star Train, even if no one takes her seriously.

Then she's targeted by the villains & almost manages to defeat Hawk Moths second in command but is told she can't be hero anymore.

Followed very shortly afterwards by her parents declaring she only loves herself, attacking her and Ladybug choosing the only other hero with a known identity & then Hawk Moth ambushing her.

Again you know this, but it really does just emphasize the tragedy to me.

Now,

I am sure there will be someone who will go, "She's not owed a Miraculous" and sure, but frankly no one is owed super powers. Or, "Marinette is not obligated to help improve a girl who is always awful to her." Again, fair in concept, but here's the issue.

As I noted elsewhere, she already was chosen to use a Miraculous several times, as in sequentially there were no massive gaps that would give her the impression this would be a rare or one off thing.

Thing is, as only Ladybug is making these calls & chose her each time despite their history it is Ladybug's job to tell her that it was never going to last. Or at least order someone else too, or to have opted against choosing her again in the first place.

& as for Marinette, well again, she wasn't obliged to try and fix the family situation but she chose too. We can argue about whether it was in character to try, or the method she picked was out of character.

But within the context of the story, she did opt to insert herself into the this situation. It feels disingenuous to then turn around and say she can just divorce herself from it. If nothing else, she should maybe like... Tell an adult?

Like, its for sure a messy situation.

I'm not blaming Marinette for how messy it became but I do think its fair to note how this would look from Chloe's perspective without Marinette or our audience context. IE, her beloved idol who she's given adoration & obedience told her she could be a good & useful hero; then dropped her for months, & seemingly lied about why.

I also think its fair to note that regardless of whether it was the personally logical or morally right choice, Marinette did choose to involve herself of her own accord. Even suggesting involving Chloe could make her a better person! So people acting as though she's, at the very least, not involved at all is just feels disingenuous ya now?

The Season 3 finalé sets up so much for the folks who believe S4/5 was a retcon as opposed to plan. I don't think it was a retcon, but I DO believe it was a betrayal of the narrative before that point.

The S3 Finalé frames Chloé's fall *explicitly* as a tragedy. Fu uses the phrase 'Some lose hope' to describe her situation. Losing hope isn't an act of evil, it's an act of desperation and defeat. In a greater sense it is also framed as a failure of *Ladybug*.

Because no matter what people want to say about Marinette's duty to hep, *Ladybug* does have duties and responsibilities. On her watch a child was isolated and broken down over several episodes by Hawkmoth and Mayura. Season 3 starts the pattern of Ladybug failing with every Finale *Which is a very weird story to write!*

Now, the S3 Finalé would have worked as a low-point/mistake for LB to circle back to and address shortly after. Have her find out about Hawkmoth/Mayura's manipulation, about Queen Bee confronting Mayura and rejecting her. About her rejecting an akuma before anyone else. Have Marinette discover that things are not what they appeared on the surface (come on this is a classic theme for superheros!) and institute a process of mending fences. Ladybug grows from the experience, Chloé clearly will have growing to do too. In the end though the abused child is heard, and healing/help is given.

Instead they just went with 'nah ignore all the setup, Chloé is just evil, always has been, she is actually the abuser not her parents, and she deserves it.' (A statement Thomas wrote into S5E23 which was removed in production without his knowledge)

So yeah, no wonder people think it was a retcon. There's no world where the reality makes sense.

[tallerthantale]

What Does Aziraphale Actually Believe, Part 6: Philosophy Time

This is a series of my takes on what Aziraphale believes through the timeline of the show. It is all my personal interpretation, and I am happy to hear others. You don’t need to read them all in order, but know that I am coming from a perspective on Aziraphale’s machinations that can be difficult for people without a psychology background to follow without the first two as a primer. The quick version is that Aziraphale has a set of beliefs that exist in some form or another within his mind. However, at any given moment, only some of them exist ‘with awareness’ or as I am putting it here, conscious!Aziraphale only has access to the beliefs that the rest of his mind, veil!Aziraphale, allows him to know about. The context of the moment will determine what lives on the surface and what stays buried behind the veil, whatever arrangement best prevents a threat to Aziraphale’s sense of self and makes whatever he is inclined to do feel right.

This post finishes the minisode and flashback content, starting from 1800's Edinburgh through to the 1960's bit. There is a lot of attention given to how Aziraphale conceptualises good and evil, and the roles of angels, demons, and humans within the divine system. About 3k words.

A Spot of Body Snatch

Some juicy bits of philosophy show up in the Edinburgh flashback. While Aziraphale has been able to disagree with the archangels, or think that they are misguided about God’s will, the general moral esthetics of what heaven is supposed to represent have largely been left intact. The idea is you put a bunch of people out in the world, you see who does the good things and who does the bad things, and you reward and punish accordingly. Aziraphale still believes that is a component of the ineffable plan, and advocates for some version of it in the modern era. At this point he thinks that it’s all going rather well, and you can easily sort the good and bad humans apart. He doesn’t look too closely, because that’s not going to help preserve his sense of self. He has been on the earth for over 5800 years at this point. His ignorance to the disadvantages of the poor is willful. See end note.

At the start of the adventure, Aziraphale believes body snatching is wicked. It is a morally bad thing to do, people who do it are morally bad. People who finance it are morally bad. This is an intuitive judgement, it feels wrong. As is commonly the case with intuitive judgements, it gets messy on the application, the devil's in the details. When he miracles the freshly dug up body into a skeleton, why does that feel right? Ostensibly the wickedness of the body snatching is the desecration of the dead. By turning the body into skeleton soup, Aziraphale has personally desecrated the dead. You could make the argument that it was a necessary evil in the name of a greater good, but Aziraphale doesn't make that argument, he claims that what he did was directly a morally good act. Why? Because it felt good to him to do it. He was sticking it to the morally bad people by making their life harder. Sometimes Aziraphale is a petty bitch like that.  

When he learns that the body snatching operation functions to alleviate human suffering, his feelings change first, then his judgement changes. After the talk with the surgeon, holding the tumour in a jar, participating in the body snatching feels like helping to relieve human suffering, therefore his involvement in it is in alignment with the ineffable plan, therefore let's go do it. It is worth noting that for all Aziraphale emphasises forgiveness in his interactions with Crowley, he doesn’t ask for it here. There are many factors involved in that, and @takeme-totheworld has some very relevant things to say on the way Aziraphale engages with forgiveness from ex-Christian perspective.

I think one of the other factors involved is that Aziraphale is pretty normalised to reshuffling his beliefs to feel better about himself, and a feature of that normalisation is not fully taking accountability when you shuffle a disavowed belief out. Veil!Aziraphale allows just enough awareness for conscious!Aziraphale to express that his previous belief was incorrect, and then it’s yeeted like that belief never existed. Accountability, apologising, asking forgiveness, all of that would require conscious!Aziraphale to retain awareness of the offending prior belief and prior action. Believing he did a bad thing before breaks his ability to believe that as an angel he is incapable of doing bad things. He doesn't need to believe the absolutist stuff all the time, but it can't coexist in conscious awareness with the knowledge that he has been wrong. It is a known problem with shame responses, they sometimes motivate us to eliminate our awareness of our actions rather than motivate us to make amends.

When Wee Morag is mortally wounded, Aziraphale decides he is going to break heaven's rules, and asserts that the thing he will do, which isn't allowed by heaven, is the right thing to do. Since Uz Aziraphale has been able to believe that the policy of the institution of heaven is wrong and has been willing to go against it. He can shuffle that belief in when needed, and then shuffle it back out to go back to his day to day believing in heaven most of the time. His inclination to break the rules to save Wee Morag is in keeping with that shuffling ability, but we can observe that he slips into it a lot more comfortably than he used to, though not as comfortably as we might like, and not fast enough to save her.

People Get a Choice

What stands out in this era is his continued attachment, just previously in the minisode, to the idea that angel = good and demon = evil. For all he is willing to believe heaven is wrong, he will not let go of categorising the angels as ‘good,’ even into the modern era. It is deeply tied to his internal understanding of his personal relationship to God as an angel, and therefore his sense of self. He knows the other angels would deliberately let Wee Morag die. But the other angels are still angels, and therefore ‘good.’ Crowley, who is working to alleviate human suffering, is ‘evil’ so long as he remains a demon. 

The exact phrasing is: "I am good. You, I'm afraid, are evil. But people get a choice."  As for Crowley being evil, yes, Aziraphale thinks Crowley is nice. Yes, he thinks Crowley is a good person. Yes, he 100% loves Crowley as he is. But Crowley’s existence is conceptually evil in the abstract through no fault of his choices. Humans can choose. Crowley can't. Aziraphale’s attachment to this point drives most of the serious conflict between them. The worst things Aziraphale says to Crowley are on this theme. So why is he so defensive of it 5800 years in? What is this position doing for him? What does believing this save him from believing instead?

What Aziraphale is protecting himself from is the existential crisis of the pointlessness of it all. He is keeping himself from believing that the entire set up of the sides of good and evil, and humanity having the choice between good and evil, is all a sham. He is protecting himself from believing that he has no side. That there cannot ever be an idealised heaven that represents good. It isn’t just unachievable, it is incoherent. That his behaviour isn’t about furthering the cause of the greater good, he’s just doing what makes himself happy and deciding that is the right thing after the fact. That his sense of what feels right is no substitute for actual ethical principles. To prevent himself from processing all that, he will believe that Crowley is ‘evil’ in the abstract. 

Aziraphale's mind likes to protect itself from responsibility. "You're an angel, I don't think you can do the wrong thing." Aziraphale grasped at straws to take that at face value from a fallen angel, but he grabbed that straw and he didn't let it go. Believing angels are inherently naturally good helps support his inclination to intuit morality. He can just let his innate angel vibes tell him what the right thing is (it’s whatever feels right to do) and he can be confident that is good, because he was an angel when he wanted to do it, and he is still an angel after having done it.

However, this is a very precarious defence for a lot of reasons. If we are working with a definition of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ that have no relationship to personality or behaviour, that’s not very reassuring. Aziraphale cant prove to himself his actions are morally good actions if his continued status as an angel is utterly unconnected to his actions. If angelic / demonic status defining celestials as good and evil is connected to actions or inclinations, how does Aziraphale parse the questionable actions of the other angels, and does he think less of Crowley? I suspect that for the most part he is generating definitions moment to moment that serve the interests of whatever else he is trying to believe at the time. Entirely abandoning the association of good/angel and evil/demon feels too much like abandoning his internal concept of God, so he won’t. Thinking Crowley is a bad person because he is a demon would be equally horrific, so he won’t do that either. He will roll through shifting definitions and avoid looking too hard at the consequences of his positions.

One option for what he can believe that I suspect has been growing stronger, is believing that God has a plan for Crowley that involves a deliberately unjust fall, to return him from later. It solves a lot of the above conflicts. He doesn’t have to consider if Crowley had a choice in becoming a demon, he doesn’t have to believe Crowley ever ‘did the wrong thing’ voluntarily while an angel, it makes it easier for him to rationalise that he is personally incapable of doing the wrong thing, it helps him rationalise his own relationship with Crowley. The only real downside is the part where Crowley would never in a million years endorse this viewpoint, and at some level Aziraphale must be aware of that because he doesn’t tend to express anything like this openly. However it very much looks to me like the missing piece that makes everything else fit. See end note.

Obviously!

Sometimes thinking Crowley's fall is part of an ineffable plan won't stop Aziraphale from being petty about Crowley's demonic status when that opinion isn't on his mind. "We may have both started out as angels, but you are fallen." It might be the rudest version of all of Aziraphale's 'holier than thou' moments, and in the context of what Crowley had likely recently been through, that was really unnecessarily mean.

Now for one of my more counter intuitive takes; Aziraphale is mean to Crowley because he puts him on a pedestal. When you believe someone is so magnificent, so perfect, so destined, you can believe nothing you do or say is capable of causing them harm. Then you can get really careless, particularly if the person you're putting on a pedestal doesn't readily show you their pain. If they are so grand, and your opinion doesn't have any value anyway, why bother considering what you say?

When asked for holy water, Aziraphale's mind goes to a suicide pill, because Aziraphale could not cope with being a demon. He’s had a lot of time to think about it now, he has come to understand that Crowley really isn’t “free to do whatever [he] want[s]” and I think he would genuinely prefer not to exist than to be in Crowley’s position. He projects his feelings about how horrible it would be for him onto Crowley, but also thinks Crowley is the stronger one, and the better one. Crowley just got back from being yanked down to hell for doing a good deed. A good deed that involved bullying Aziraphale into giving his money away, which he wouldn’t have done on his own. Crowley’s good deed for which he was likely tortured involved pressuring an angel into doing the right thing, after Aziraphale had been too slow to properly help the humans, while accurately sassing him for not understanding the impacts of poverty on humanity. It's not hard to see why Aziraphale might believe Crowley would prefer not to be a demon. There are times he makes a better angel than Aziraphale. Although to be fair, Crowley did overdo it on that hole. 

Date Night

A toast ‘to shades of grey’. Aziraphale’s choice of words, Aziraphale’s choice to make it a toast. It’s an interesting pair of choices. Aziraphale has been in the middle with Crowley for thousands of years, but this is the moment he lets himself acknowledge the value of shades of grey. What does it mean, given everything Aziraphale has already done? Aziraphale had been believing everything he had done was 100% good, he just had convoluted justifications. Now his convoluted justifications only get him as far as very light grey, and he is finally starting to make his peace with that. 

Does that mean he isn’t thinking of himself as 100% aligned with God? I think sometimes yes, but also sometimes no. The other option is that he doesn’t think God is 100% good anymore. Each version represents a massive shift. If we understand Aziraphale’s journey to being at peace with himself as a Daoist one, and I think there is a lot of subtext to that effect, Daoism doesn’t do absolutist good and evil. Things just… are. The divine isn’t a refined extreme. The Dao isn’t ‘good.’ It is. Full stop. I think Aziraphale will consider God less good more readily than he will consider himself misaligned with Her. 

Why now? Because he realised, fully into his conscious awareness, that he was in love with a demon, as a demon. Nothing else fits the toast because nothing else changed in terms of Aziraphale’s philosophical alignment. Many flashbacks have brought us new things Aziraphale is willing to do that might distance himself from the ranks of the institution of heaven. Nothing new happened on that front in 1941. Many flashbacks have shown Aziraphale having new ways he is willing to understand the human world. Nothing new happened on that front in 1941. Something shifted in the way he understands his sense of self and his relationship to God, and one of the few things that still ties back to that is the role of angels and demons in the universe. It wasn’t what he was willing to do that broke new ideological ground, it was what he was willing to feel.

That willingness to feel broke a psychological wall for Aziraphale, and I believe with that wall down he can now think of himself and Crowley as somewhat ‘human aligned’ when it comes to certain aspects of their morality. Aziraphale talks with Crowley about the shades of grey they prefer. The way the term prefer is used here implies they have options. Options implies a choice. Choice was supposed to be for people. They may not have the ability to choose their employer, but they are both choosing to be a bit grey, and now they can say it to each other out loud. I will come back to this point in a future post.

You Go Too Fast For Me

He knows he is in love with a demon, but he still isn’t ready to act on it. He says maybe one day. I think all of him wants Crowley, but not all of him wants to want a demon. I think some of the fandom doesn’t want to process this about Aziraphale, but really think about it. If Crowley was an angel rescuing him and the books in the church, then in the 60’s offering to take him anywhere he wants to go, do you really think he would still say no? There is of course a conflation between their roles on opposite sides of celestial conflict and Crowley’s metaphysical status as a demon. It's the being on opposite sides that's the problem. I don’t think Aziraphale has any sort of disgust reaction or aversion to demonic features or demonic energy. But the metaphysical status of demon is the origin of their opposite sides situation, and Aziraphale isn’t prepared to feel like that is entirely arbitrary, even if it’s part of a bigger ineffable plan. Too fast isn’t a forever no, it’s check back later. Aziraphale knows it will ‘feel right’ down the line, and I don’t think that depends on demonic status going away, just on him needing time to process his feelings. For Aziraphale’s lifetime, 1941-1967 is the blink of an eye. 

Part 6/10

End Notes

On willful ignorance: In my opinion, IRL willful ignorance mostly takes the form of a motivated lack of awareness. If a particular perspective, interpretation, relevant factor, explanation, ect… doesn’t line up with a person’s sense of self or behaviour, it stays out of awareness because the background mechanisms of the mind work to keep it out of awareness. The information they do not absorb is targeted. It isn’t random, it follows a strategy, and yet, they have no idea that they are doing it. It is… exhausting… to engage with that.

On pedestals: It has been observed that the level of misogyny in a country correlates very highly with a tendency to put women on pedestals. The more prevalent attitudes about how wonderful and perfect women are for doing all the womanly things so well predicts both a strong demand that women conform to those expectations and harsh penalties when they don't. Putting a person on a pedestal is a way to feel like you are honoring that person when you are actually threatening them.

On God having a plan for Crowley: I’ll be going into further detail as to why I think Aziraphale believes this and what it means in a future post, probably the final post. The closest we see him get to expressing this perspective to Crowley is the “May you be forgiven,” and if that is where he was going with it, that was like, the worst way he could possibly have put it. I do wonder if the 1941 apology dance could have come from Aziraphale telling Crowley he thinks God has a martyr plan for him. I think internally acknowledging that he was in love could have led to him saying it, and I think Crowley would be very valid in wanting an apology if he had. That said, I think the apology dance could also be explained by Aziraphale almost getting them caught with the magic show, and taking his time to reveal that he had swapped the photos. 

While we're talking about old apology dances, I think the 1650 one probably had something to do with Anne Greene.

[kylesvariouslistsandstuff]

Animation-twitter, animation video essay youtube, etc. would probably be better off if they assumed every upcoming animated movie was going to be CRAP.

The director of INSIDE OUT 2, Kelsey Mann, has talked a bit about the picture recently. After all, it's out in less than two months... And immediately, so much of what he's saying is either being misread or quoted out of context. Something something Anxiety is going to be "the villain", something something they cut characters Shame and Guilt out of the movie because they felt it was too heavy, something something-

And we've got other people freaking out that Pixar showed 35 minutes of it at CinemaCon... LIKE... What's THE issue? Pixar has done that before! CinemaCon attendees were treated to half-hour chunks of Pixar movies in the past, like MONSTERS UNIVERSITY. When TOY STORY 3 was coming out, Pixar prepared a cut of the movie that ended just as the toys were escaping Sunnyside Daycare... to show to college campuses across the country a month before release.

Y'all need to calm down.

This movie isn't even out. We don't know how it'll tell its story exactly. Maybe there's more here than it seems? Maybe Anxiety will be an antagonist in the sense that she's doing what she feels is right, or is straight-up malevolent. I doubt it's the latter, that would be kind of... Not nuanced? For a sequel to INSIDE OUT? Having Anxiety just be an evil scheming bad guy just doesn't seem like it'll happen, nor is it a good idea. I think director Kelsey Mann meant that by her kicking the other emotions out of the main control room, she'll be the "big bad" of the movie. Why she kicks those emotions out could be related to how anxiety tends to work within the human brain. Taking control of your brain, thinking that it's steering you to make the right decision, making you cautious of dangers more so than "Fear" does. Pixar movies have had antagonists in the past that aren't necessarily evil, they just think what they're doing is right.

I also doubt that Pixar would let out a movie that flat-out stigmatizes people who suffer from anxiety disorders, such as myself. Maybe the Shame and Guilt characters were cut from the movie because director Mann, writer Meg LeFauve, and several others just didn't like the direction the story was going with them in it. Maybe it was too depressing for THEM, not because of any concerns for kids in the audience. People tend to associate Pixar with "tearjerking storylines", maybe it's possible that this went WAY TOO FAR at one point? I don't know, neither do you. Pixar's team isn't Disney Animation's leadership. Pete Docter is less controlling than John Lasseter based on everything I see and hear, but there are probably still some ground rules and some do's-and-don'ts. But I think it was ultimately down to the director not enjoying making the film back when it had these characters in it. As a writer/creator myself, I sometimes pull back when I feel something I'm making is causing ME lose the drive to make the thing in the first place. Maybe it hit too close to home for Mann, LeFauve, someone- Just a few variables, ya know? Not just "Pixar is too afraid to be sad", "Disney's telling them what to do", etc. etc.

Maybe animated movies shouldn't have this kind of pre-release thing... How about, just... Movie title, release date, BOOM. Nothing else. No interviews with the filmmakers and cast, no nothing... Wanna know more? You have to see it when it comes out! Put that in big letters in the teaser trailer!

But if they did that, twitter and the YouTube Animation Opinion Industrial Complex would sound the alarm: "They're not saying anything... IS THIS MOVIE IN TROUBLE???"

(sarcasm for those last two sets of sentences)

You can't win. And watch... It'll come out, and it'll be disliked for some weird reason. Probably because it isn't... PUSS IN BOOTS 2 or whatever. While the rest of the world goes, "Yeah, that's was pretty solid." And said population streams it on Disney+ a gazillion times. I'm not part of this "animation fandom" thing, quite frankly I don't even know what half of these people want most of the time. It seems like every movie is an oncoming stinker to them, and it ends up being a stinker. Sometimes the worst thing ever made, a work of evil. You know I still see people raging over that completely harmless CHIP N' DALE RESCUE RANGERS movie from two years back? The fuck is that all about?

I get that INSIDE OUT is a sequel to a beloved Pixar movie, I get that the original movie means a lot to so many people. I love it myself. At the same time, I'm not gonna be weird about a sequel I never even wanted until the day they announced it. Okay, if it isn't very good, I'll just go on with my life. But we're not even there yet... It's not out... This is the only INSIDE OUT sequel. Now if we were coming up on an INSIDE OUT 3, and INSIDE OUT 2 managed to somehow upset everybody? Then I'd somewhat understand...

Others will dole out their dislike of recent Pixar movies as their reason, but you know me... I feel each Pixar movie - for the most part - is a statement of its filmmaking team. Not a Mr. Pixar person coming up with each and every movie. (That was Lasseter in a sense, lol.) If "animation is cinema", then you oughta look at these movies as director-driven. I feel the other way around reduces the films to a brand, and not the people who actually make them. INSIDE OUT is first and foremost a Pete Docter-directed film... Made at Pixar. Not a "Pixar film". Pixar isn't a person nor is it a collective, it's a place. It should be judged on how functions as a movie and as a sequel to INSIDE OUT, not up against other movies made at the studio by other people. Like I'm not here for THE INCREDIBLES or UP, I'm here for an INSIDE OUT sequel. I know, that's a very radical opinion to have. Silly me!

I just don't get it... I'm just gonna do it the old-fashioned way... I'm going to see the movie, and hope that I like it or get something out of it.

[venus-is-thinking]

A Narrative Defense of Eden Culprit Theory

Hello everyone! 

As I’m sure many of you know, I, among others (notably @accirax, @1moreff-creator and @thebadjoe) believe Eden to be the culprit of the Chapter 2 murder case. I’ve seen a fair number of people say they aren’t convinced for one reason or another. While I fully understand people who don’t buy all the evidence/the insane contraptions we’ve come up with or people who are in denial, I was a little surprised at how many people I saw say that it would be bad writing for Eden to be the killer here. 

While others are fully entitled to their opinions on who the killer is, I want to address this claim. Personally, whenever I’m reading a fangan, I always believe that I shouldn’t consider any killer to be “bad writing” until I see how it’s actually written. After all, there can always be a key twist you’re not expecting to make it actually make sense. Plus, in Eden’s case, I actually fully believe that all the building blocks of a narratively successful killer are already put into place. So, in this post, I’m going to attempt to back up my claim that Eden being the second killer actually makes narrative sense, and it isn’t bad writing either.

Because fangan writing is subjective and what any given author believes is the right move varies, I’ll be doing my best to support my claims with similar content from the canon game trilogy (given that that’s a pretty standard baseline) and from what we’ve already seen of DRDT thus far. That should (hopefully) give us some fair perspective into the sorts of narrative decisions the creator would want to make.

I’ll be going through various points at which I think something could or could not be bad writing, so hopefully that’ll provide some much needed structure to this theory.

Topic 1: Motive

I want to say this early: I do not think Eden is secretly evil. I think that in the context of killing games, “good” people can end up being killers, and I think that’s where Eden’s headed. I understand why, if some people have only seen Eden killer theories in the context of her being evil, they don’t like it. I don't like it either. I think it completely misinterprets her character.

For now, though, I want to talk about what motive she does have. There’s the fact that Arturo is threatening her, obviously. If she feels there’s a genuine threat to her safety, it would be decently reasonable to decide that, if her priority is her life, she’d rather try to get away with a murder than let herself be taken out by Arturo. 

There’s another potential motive out there for Eden that might be enough to push her over the edge. That being, we know she cares a lot about her friends and relationships outside of the killing game too. 

A lot of people, I think, have seen the theory floating around that goes “Eden is trying to leave to get back to the girl she kissed.” I’ve also seen it mentioned that this could be problematic, given that it could be saying “being gay = becoming a killer,” but I think there are several reasons why that doesn’t hold up.

First of all, we have a lot of canonically LGBT cast members. Nico is nonbinary, Whit is bisexual, and in the most recent Q&A, other characters such as Ace, Veronika and Eden herself were also all confirmed to be LGBT+. Given that Eden isn’t the “token gay character,” I think it’s a lot safer to make her a killer without sending the message “if you’re gay you’re a killer.” 

Secondly, I think that there’s more to Eden’s motive than just whoever that girl is. I think the girl will likely be part of it and be relevant, given that it’s Eden’s motive secret. Because it’s the Chapter 2 motive, the motive secrets should play into things in general. But, it’s not like that girl is the only one from Eden’s past that she cares about, right? 

Eden cares about her family, as we see in the scene where she talks to Levi. We know that Eden cares about her friends, as we clearly see within the killing game. We know that Eden cares about this girl. I think it’s safe to say that, for gay reasons or not, Eden has a lot of people she’d fight to get back to.

Rather than using her motive secret as the only way of justifying the “Eden wants to return to her previous life” motive, why don’t we look at other secret Eden content?

I’m talking about the secret quotes. I assume most people have heard about them by now, but basically, if you go to the characters’ profile pages on the main tumblr account and inspect elements, each character has a secret quote that you can find. Eden’s secret quote is “You can’t go back, no matter how hard you try.”

We haven’t really seen much of Eden trying to go back yet. I guess you could say that when she makes breakfast with Levi, she talks a lot about trying to get the group back together and back to normal, and that isn’t unrelated. Still, I think it makes a lot of sense if Eden is someone who’s focused on the past. After all, Eden’s talent is clockmaking. To the extent her talent influenced her personality/character themes, it seems like time is an important thing with her. Trying to turn back the clock and return to her life before the killing game would make a lot of sense thematically. 

I suspect that Eden’s secret quote relates to the fact that she tries to go back to her previous life by escaping the killing game. “No matter how hard you try” definitely sounds like she goes to pretty extreme lengths, but she still fails in the end. That would be when she’s caught as the blackened and executed; she never gets to go back. It’s precedented for secret quotes to directly relate to how characters died; both Min’s “I wanted to save you” and Arei’s “Because that’s what friends do” tie into the way in which they arrived at their death. I could definitely see it being the same for Eden.

Interestingly, there’s another reason to consider that Eden might be extra-motivated to leave the killing game. That point is that Eden has been shown to be the main person fighting against the killing game. For example, she and Hu brainstormed ways to deal with the Chapter 2 motive. 

That doesn’t really tell us anything though, right? It’s just trying to manage the killing game from within. That’s not it, though. It’s actually a repeated thing that Eden is constantly looking for ways to obstruct the killing game.

Even the plan to bore out the killing game, the one Veronika tells us couldn’t work because she’d get too horribly bored, originally came from Eden. I fully believe that there’s a reason we’re being told every other scene that Eden is working towards ending the killing game is that Eden has extra incentive to want the killing game to end, and that’s to try to return to the life and loved ones she left behind.

I also think it’s worth mentioning that, in the canon games, every single second killer commits their crime due to previous attachments that go beyond the killing game. Mondo kills because of the promise he made to his now-dead brother Daiya, Peko kills because of her allegiance to Fuyuhiko, who wants Mahiru dead due to the death of his sister Natsumi, and Kirumi kills because she’s actually the Prime Minister and needs to get back to her duties. Hell, Ryoma is even Kirumi’s victim because he doesn’t have previous outside attachments, which makes him feel like a more understandable victim for her crime. If you throw in “Eden has a lot of meaningful relationships back home and, here in the killing game, she misses them so badly that she’d kill to go back,” I don’t think it feels out of place. 

This is pretty niche, but there’s also something I want to look at in relation to Xander and Min. Notably, the pinned comments by the official account in their bonus episodes. 

Xander’s is “Someone who wants to hold onto the past.” Min’s is “Someone who wants to move on from the past.” While this trend doesn’t have to keep up, I think it would be interesting if every killer/victim pair had one of each. Arei pretty clearly wants to move on from the past where her sisters and classmates ruthlessly bullied her. Eden wants to hold onto it, hoping to return, but she can’t go back, no matter how hard she tries. Just an interesting thing to point out.

But Eden’s motive isn’t the only thing stopping people from believing she’d be a reasonable killer, right? There are other things to consider, too.

Topic 2: Story Arc

To be clear here, “Story Arc” refers to how Eden fits into the larger narrative and story of DRDT. I’ll be talking about her individual story and growth later on in the section labeled “Character Arc.” 

For the most part, the larger narrative, at present, seems to be relating to Teruko and how she navigates her trust and relationships with everyone else. Eden is certainly a key factor in that, given that Teruko has basically acknowledged that outright. 

Teruko actively tries to avoid being friends with Eden, given the fact that she’s very nice and it’d be easy for Teruko to be friends with her. To Teruko, that means she’d be opening up the door to get hurt to easily when Eden inevitably dies and/or betrays her. Wouldn’t it only be proving Teruko right if Eden were to become a killer?

Yeah. It would. And that’s the point at the story we’re at. 

I don’t think it would make any sense for Teruko’s beliefs to be strongly challenged in Chapter 2. Like, at some point, I’m sure Teruko will figure out why it’s a problem to not trust anyone. After all, her secret quote is “It is an equal failing to trust everybody, and to trust no one at all.” However, at this point in the story, things are going as she expects.

Think about it this way. Teruko believes that trusting people is opening yourself up for betrayal, and those who she gets close to will betray her and die. Let’s go through the people who have died so far, one by one, and see how they match up against that.

Xander: Was Teruko’s closest friend. Betrayed her by trying to kill her, then died. Check. Min: Was Teruko’s biggest supporter after she got stabbed. Betrayed her by actually being the killer, then died. Check. Arei: Previously shared Teruko’s worldview that being nice will just screw you over. Opened up and became friends. Had that friendship used against her to kill her. Check.

It definitely seems like, thus far, we’re validating Teruko’s worldview, basically as much as possible. No killer would validate her worldview more than Eden. That would make Arei an even closer parallel to Teruko (the person who she most tried to befriend was the one who tried to kill her in the end), and it would introduce another would-be friend as a killer.

Eden: Was Teruko’s biggest supporter after the first class trial. Betrayed her by being the second killer, then died. 

It looks an awful lot like Min’s, right?

In a more predictive sense, there’s also the popular theory that Charles will be one of the Chapter 3 victims. If that holds true, it’ll be another example in the same wavelength.

Charles: Was more like Teruko and didn’t trust people, avoiding them to stay safe. After rejoining the group and beginning to trust people, he died.

If that prediction is right, it’d mean that the trend continues past the point of the second victim to the point of a third victim, which would mean that the second killer would likely fit into the pattern.

But that’s a whole lot of my opinion, right? After all, maybe Levi or someone who isn’t particularly related to Teruko is the killer, so Teruko stays mostly the same, too. 

I do want to take a moment to acknowledge a bigger critique of this. It’s possible that some people might say that Eden killing here would be too repetitive in regards to Min and Xander. There are some key differences, though. 

Eden was Teruko’s friend after she started being mean and closed off to everyone. Min and Xander never really got the chance to react too much to Teruko’s antagonistic antics because they died before she was really pushing people away. That means it would carry more significance. Teruko has also spent more time with Eden, so their relationship is a little bit more developed. Eden is also someone that Teruko actively tried not to get close to before she killed, which wasn’t true of Xander or Min. 

Plus, I’d argue that it’s also supposed to feel a bit repetitive. This is what happens to Teruko, all the time. This is her life. It makes it feel more real and understandable how she reacts to Xander and Min if we as the audience begin to see and understand, oh, it really is like this every single time. 

Besides all of that, though, there are a few more thoughts that lead me to believe that someone closer to Teruko might be the killer this time around.

One of the biggest points in favor of this interpretation is the MonoCredits. 

MonoCredits are introduced in the scene where MonoTV asks Teruko to caulk the bathrooms. Then, she immediately uses one in the next scene where Charles is confronting her about her more antagonistic ways. At first glance, it seems like MonoCredits may have been introduced solely for that Charles interaction, and as a reason to plausibly get Teruko to help MonoTV out so that she could talk to it, too. However…

MonoTV gave Teruko two MonoCredits. That means she still has one. I wouldn’t blame you at all if you forgot this small detail– and that’s part of why I think the killer will be closer to Teruko. 

MonoCredits, and the fact that Teruko received two instead of one, are a pretty unimportant detail. I wouldn’t expect the creator to necessarily expect the audience to remember that Teruko still has one once we get to, like, the Chapter 4 daily life. I think that, because of that, Teruko will probably end up using this second one sometime soon, so that the audience will have that “oh yeah!” moment when it comes up, rather than an “oh… I kind of remember that…?” moment. 

There’s a very specific scenario in which I think Teruko might use it, too.

It’s pretty specific, but it’s already happened once, right? I think the most plausible situation for Teruko to use the second MonoCredit, if I’m right about it being this chapter, would be if she ends up in a similar situation before the execution again.

I can totally imagine Eden hugging Teruko and apologizing for betraying her trust, and Teruko, in the middle of freaking out, tells MonoTV she’s using a MonoCredit to get Eden away from her, which would then immediately launch into Eden being executed.

I think that could also be the right kind of push on Teruko’s character arc; her desire to get away from Eden led to Eden dying that much faster. It’d be something that could haunt Teruko a little bit and make her start thinking about how she pushes people away and what the potential failings of that are. 

The final reason I have is just, like… overall despair. Chapter 2 is usually a pretty emotionally devastating case for the cast. Taka loses Mondo and Chihiro meets a pretty tragic end; Peko dying launches Fuyuhiko into his grief → survivor arc while Hiyoko mourns Mahiru; Kirumi leaves the group feeling guilty about killing the Prime Minister, plus Ryoma’s death as a result of him loving no one and no one loving him is pretty sad. Chapter 2 is typically a chapter in the canon Danganronpa games where things get worse, not better. 

Then, Chapter 3 is used as a processing point where characters that aren’t in it for the long run are usually killed off, and Chapter 4 prompts the characters to start really moving towards the finale (Sakura’s death spurs people to want to fight and makes Byakuya realize why emotions are important, Gundham’s sacrifice sets the tone for Nagito’s insane Chapter 5 play and Gonta’s mercy kill in Chapter 4 directly leads into all the Kokichi “I’m the mastermind” stuff that happens in Chapter 5). 

I suspect DRDT will follow a roughly similar pattern. Because of that, it would make sense if the creator wants to pick a very emotionally devastating second killer, frequently due to the relationships that character has with the cast. Eden is the perfect pick for this position.

Eden has also gotten A LOT of focus this chapter. Getting focus doesn’t necessarily mean you’re going to die right then. After all, Charles, for instance, got a lot of focus in Chapter 1, but he’s still alive. It’s difficult to tell when a character is getting content that impacts their character moving forward and when a character is getting focus because their story is about to end. 

In DRDT’s case specifically, though, the creator seems to heavily emphasize a character shortly before they die. Excluding Teruko, Xander was the most visible character in the Chapter 1 daily life. They focused on Min heavily during the Chapter 1 investigation to make sure that she got enough content in before her death. Between her fight with MonoTV, her heartfelt conversation with David, and the conversations she had post-death confronting David about his secret and defending Eden from Arturo, Arei got a lot of focus just before dying, too. 

Eden is one of the most heavily featured characters, and to me, it feels more like one being set up for immediate payoff rather than long-term. 

For example, David’s personality has shifted in a way that’s very interesting. People will want to see how his relationships with other characters are impacted and get to know the “real him” more before any potential death. Because of that, it makes sense that David’s heel turn is being set up for later, rather than being focus on him before he dies in Chapter 2. 

Eden, on the other hand, has shown us pretty much everything she can with this perspective. If she’s already spent two chapters being nice, happy and supportive, where does she go from there that’s narratively interesting and different? The only answer I can really come up with is “becoming less nice, happy, and/or supportive.” If that’s where her character is heading anyways, then doesn’t it make sense that being a killer could be a succinct way to do it? We already have enough people running around who don’t trust people, and it would feel odd to add Eden to that contingent. 

There’s one more story reason that Eden being the killer would make sense here. Check out the Chapter 2 title screen.

It’s pretty faint, but if you look after the “Glitters,” you can see faint text. It’s easier to see if you crank up the exposure.

You can tell what it is if you squint hard enough. Here’s me tracing it: 

“A Good Person.” 

The original chapter title is “All That Glitters,” which is pretty clearly a play on the saying “All that glitters is not gold” (RIP to anyone who just heard “all that glitters is gold in All Star by Smashmouth and didn’t question it. I was with you there). That seemingly applies a lot to this chapter, with appearances of success not being what they seem. It relates to the fact that J’s celebrity wasn’t all it was cracked up to be, and David’s persona was too good to be true. 

The good person interpretation is interesting, too. If you input “A Good Person” into “All That Glitters,” you get “A good person is not gold.” Now, there’ve been a lot of characters who’ve claimed to be or mentioned wanting to be good people over the course of this chapter. However, I think the person most at the center of that is Eden, who’s been called a good or kind person by a lot of people– at the very least, I know Teruko, Arei and Levi do this.

Eden being the killer would be another way to show that people can’t be infallibly good. Again, I don’t think Eden’s gonna pull a 180 and suddenly become evil, I just think she’ll show a little more nuance. Her being suddenly evil does about the same thing for me as her being undeniably good; it reduces her character down to one trait rather than making her a full human. I don’t want her to be a pure cinnamon roll, I want her to be herself. 

Given this chapter title, I honestly think it’d be weirder if Eden didn’t do something notably Not Good this chapter. There could be other options, too, but Eden being the killer seems by far the most likely to me.

Topic 3: Relationships

I want to talk about Eden’s relationships to others in the cast. I’ve already mentioned Teruko a good bit, so I’m not really going to keep going over that. There are two others that I want to touch on.

One, Eden and Hu are known to be friends. They wash dishes together every night, and they generally seem to rely on each other for companionship and mutual help with steering the group in a more positive direction. Hu is someone who hasn’t gotten that much character arc focus, so I think she’ll probably be a bit more of a spotlighted character in the next daily life. Hu has already lost a friend and trusted co-leader in David, but I think it’d be even more interesting for her if she loses both of those people at once. With David in full-on evil theater kid mode and Eden dead as the killer, Hu will be forced to grapple with the fact that both of the people she trusted to help her guide the group not only aren’t helping her anymore, but did so in a way that betrayed her and her trust. 

That’s very speculative, though. The main relationship I’m here to analyze is with Arei, the victim of the case in question.

Arei and Eden have a very complicated relationship. At first, they were pretty neutral. Then, after the cake scene, Arei appeared to be jealous of Eden and her friends for, y’know, having friends. Later, when Eden tries to invite Arei, Arei goes off on Eden and Eden runs out of the room crying. Finally, when Arturo threatens Eden into silence over his secret, Arei shows up and promises to defend Eden and do whatever it takes to assure her that her friendship is real.

This is pretty much the entirety of Arei’s character arc. Because we know that Arei is the second victim, I want to examine that in the context of the canon games’ storylines in Chapter 2.

Chapter 2 frequently deals with the concept of bullying. Kirumi’s kinda doing her own thing here, but if you look at Mondo/Chihiro and especially Peko/Mahiru (and all the lore behind that one), it’s pretty standard. Chihiro is someone who I’m pretty sure has been bullied, and Mondo fits the bully role well enough. SDR2 is the big one, though, with Mahiru being bullied by Natsumi, Sato killing Natsumi because of that, then Peko killing Sato under Fuyuhiko’s command in revenge, and THEN Peko killing Mahiru in the killing game as even more revenge. So, let’s look at bullying in DRDT Chapter 2.

The big and obvious one is Ace and Nico. Ace bullied Nico, and eventually they snapped and tried to kill him in revenge. That means that the creator, at least in this case, opted for a situation where the bullied kills the bully, rather than the other way around.

Arei also bullies Eden notably in Chapter 2, and now she’s dead. I’m not saying that it has to be the same thing, but I think it would be interesting to parallel Ace and Arei and Nico and Eden. Ace, with his fear of death, would have to process just how close he came to being a victim, seeing the same thing play out with Arei, who actually did die. Nico, who’s trying to dodge any actual blame for their crime, would see Eden get executed for doing roughly the same thing. 

That’s something to address, though. What does this all mean for Eden? After all, Eden and Arei were friends now. It seems uncharacteristic of her to kill Arei for any reason. If I’m going to focus in on Eden’s character relationships, I really have to address that part.

Well, my answer is pretty simple. Eden simply didn’t believe her relationship with Arei actually changed. This might seem like an unfair claim at first, but if you look into it, it’s actually quite supported by the game.

Arei certainly thought Eden didn’t believe Arei’s sudden change of heart. She even goes as far as to call Eden out for it in the moment.

That’s not a very good argument though, is it? It disregards everything that happens afterwards, what with Arei explaining more and Eden hugging her and saying that her promise means “more than she knows.” It’s possible Arei convinced Eden during that second segment, so there’s not really any reason to believe that Eden didn’t believe her anymore.

Except…

Charles gets cut off by Whit here and immediately shuts up, which is played off as a joke. It is a joke, but I’ve noticed the DRDT creator is very good at putting in jokes that actually convey important information moving forwards. 

The fact that the creator put in not one, but two references to Eden possibly not believing Arei makes me think there’s more to it than making a joke or moving dialogue along. Whit even phrases it as “you wanna do that later?” which might be a hint that we actually are going to come back to that point of conversation later. 

For the record, I do think it’s also possible that Eden sort of half-believed Arei. She might’ve been committed to a murder plan by that point or something, so even if she thought Arei was being genuine, it’s possible she intentionally tried to convince herself Arei wasn’t genuine. That gets more into character interpretation, though.

Topic 4: Character Arc

This is the biggest one, in my opinion. If Eden is going to die here, what does her story say? Ignoring the big plot beats, Eden should get to have her own character arc, and if this is its conclusion, I want to look at where it went.

In the prologue, Eden is noted to stay positive, but she seems to be the most scared of the killing game itself. Here’s her slide from the official Prologue Recap video: 

In Chapter 1, we honestly didn’t see too much of Eden. What we did see was mostly her being nice and friendly. It was also established that Arei picked on her. Here’s her slide from the Chapter 1 Recap video:

Notably, the creator paired all the characters up for Chapter 1. We already know Arei is going to be important to Eden’s story, whether she’s the killer or not. They did pair up Xander and Min though, so it’s not like it’s impossible that they paired a victim with their killer.

Anyways, that means that, going into Chapter 2, the things the creator wanted us to remember about Eden are that she’s nice, cheerful, and one of the people who defended Teruko. Through Arei’s slide, we’re also encouraged to remember that Arei picked on Eden specifically for baking. (Arei also manipulated Levi in that scene pretty heavily, but Eden is the one they want us to remember.)

Where does Eden’s character arc go from there? Well, I’d say that she basically doubles down. 

Eden basically spends the chapter trying really hard to prevent conflict and stay friends/befriend everyone. She blackmails Teruko for the sole purpose of actually getting to hang out with her, she washes dishes with Hu, she makes breakfast with Levi, and she invites Arei to clockmaking to make sure she isn’t left out again. 

That means that Eden’s story in Chapter 2 is that she’s trying to be the one to get everyone through this hard time.

Because of that, killing seems rather counterproductive. After all, Eden’s been trying to end the killing game on her own terms, right? 

However, it’s possible that the message the creator wants to send us is that the cast isn’t currently capable of being entirely positive and friendly. While David pretended that the point of revealing all their secrets was so that they could get along, that was a lie. Eden being the killer would fit the messaging: with this cast, in this killing game, friendships aren’t a possibility right now. 

Would it be a change in Eden for her to kill now? Yes, of course. That’s how it goes with killers beyond Chapter 1; something changes that prompts them to kill. Like I examined earlier, I believe the motive of getting back to her previous life, in combination with the constant fighting, Arturo's threats against her and her apparent inability to actually make a meaningful change in those around her, would be enough to get her to break and kill in this Chapter 2 position.

I’ve talked about motive, overall narrative, Eden’s relationships and her character arc. That’s pretty much everything, but there’s one more big point I feel I need to touch on.

Topic 5: Eden’s Breakdown

This is what I assume makes people have the biggest problem with Eden culprit theory from a writing standpoint. After all, this is a very emotional moment and feels very important for Eden’s character arc. If she’s the killer, it would all be a lie, and it would invalidate everything we learned about Eden from this moment.

Except, I don’t think that’s fully true. It’s very possible to have a killer have an emotional breakdown moment mid-trial that makes them seem more innocent, but actually very much relates to the fact that they did kill. 

Even if she is a killer, I still believe Eden is a good person. Because of that, I think that she is genuinely haunted by Arei’s death, as well as Min’s. In fact, we know she’s haunted by Min’s death, before any of this Arei trial stuff happened. 

Given the fact that Eden runs out of the room crying after this, I think it’s fair to say that Arei’s words stuck with Eden. Because of that, pairing it with Eden’s breakdown in the trial, we can conclude that Eden feels guilty for both Min’s death and Arei’s death. Because Min’s death wasn’t Eden’s fault, it’s easy to disregard both as her blaming herself for things out of her control. 

It could be genuine this time, though. If Eden is the killer, at least some of that speech has to be fake (ex. When I saw that note, I knew someone must’ve overheard our conversation). However, what’s really interesting to me is what happens after the main part of Eden’s breakdown.

David goes on a little rant about how the victim would have to be incredibly stupid to actually fall for the note– or they’d have to be Arei, who wanted to be friends so desperately that she’d believe anything “Eden” told her. Afterwards, Eden says this: 

This is Eden agreeing with David’s rant. The non-killer interpretation of this is that Eden is just repeating the same thing, saying that Arei died because of her and her weakness. But, if you look at it from a different perspective, the phrasing is… a little odd?

In her speech earlier, what Eden said boiled down to “I couldn’t defend myself, and because Arei was nice to me and tried to defend me, she died.” Then, David says, “Because Arei wanted to be your friend, she died.” That’s basically the same information and logic, right? 

But Eden asks it as a question. Even though she said “it’s all my fault” earlier, this time she asks, “it really is my fault, isn’t it?” That means that there was something Eden didn’t know in David’s rant.

This could be several things, but I think the most likely thing is that, in my opinion, this is the point at which Eden realized that Arei was genuine about wanting to be her friend. Before this, she still wasn’t sure that Arei was being real, and that allowed her to proceed forward with her plan, keeping it together. However, once David, who got to see Arei in her breakdown, confirms that, yeah, Arei did that because she genuinely wanted to be Eden’s friend, Eden realizes that it was her fault. 

Arei wanted to be her friend, but now she’s dead, and it’s all Eden’s fault.

Interestingly, immediately after that last line, Teruko starts talking, bringing us back to mystery-solving mode. However, if you look at Eden while Teruko’s talking, she’s sobbing. 

Most of the time when a character is shown to the side, they’re left in whatever pose they were last in. For example, look at MonoTV making the :| face back there despite it having no relevance to the current point of the trial. In fact, MonoTV has that face for the entirety of Chapter 2, Episode 10. The last time MonoTV talked was in Episode 9, where…

Yeah, same face. It doesn’t change from there. My point is that, switching Eden’s sprite from the face-on, holding her wrist sprite to the sobbing and wiping her tears sprite is a conscious decision. They want to make sure we know that Eden is sobbing after that interaction with David. While that could be prolonged guilt from generally feeling at fault for Arei’s death, I think it makes more sense if it’s her coping with the fact that Arei did want to be her friend, and she killed her. 

Conclusion

Well, that’s my defense of Eden culprit theory from a writing perspective. Hopefully it was fun to read, whether you agree with it or not. Again, my point here isn’t to shame anyone who disagrees or anything, it’s to provide reasoning for why Eden could be the culprit and to defend the creator’s decision if that is the truth of this case. I’d love to hear about any and all other killer theories as well in order to have the greatest chance of catching the real criminal.

[schrodingers-water-wet]

This is how I’d write Dreamtale and does not reflect cannon. Dream and Nightmare belong to Joku.

One thing that's always bugged me about Dreamtale is the black and white morals of it. ‘Negative’ emotions are evil and ‘positive’ ones are good with very little room for complexity. Another is the themes of the story. It's muddy at best. Forgiveness could be a theme if you turn your head and squint but I'm hesitant to say forgiveness is a real theme because it hardly effects the story. It could be said that the theme is that, “hurt people hurt people” but that theme doesn't work in the cannon that when Nightmare finally starts hurting people he's not himself but instead is possessed. With the concept of possession it could be that the theme is identity but neither Dream nor Nightmare is ever shown to have any struggles within theirselves so that's not it either. I'm sure Dreamtale does have a clear theme I just can't find it.

So in my au of it I would like to give it one. It has so much potential in the context of the greater multiverse as it has two major players who intervene in other aus. I think an attempt to make this theme has already been made with Dreams motivations but as Dreams trauma rarely comes up in the story I'm hesitant to name it as such but: the theme should be the breaking of cycles. I'd also throw in a hint of guilt as an secondary theme. A lot of other aus are concerned with the idea of a cycle of trauma, a literal loop of death, or a character constantly suffering. So what if the point of Dream and Nightmare was the end of suffering?

Backstory: Dream and Nightmares backstory serves it's purpose but it doesn't serve mine. I would keep a lot of elements of it but I think it's important to change the meaning of it to make this theme of breaking cycles make sense. I'd also like to give the characters internal struggles that I feel they sorely lack in the original.

Dream: he shouldn't always be in the right. I do like the idea that he's absolutely sure of his moral soputitory but that should be a flaw not a fact. The main things I would change about Dream in the backstory is I'd make it so his naivity stems from the villagers. I think the villagers keeping him naive and moldable could be him having been groomed. I think in a cycle of trauma Dream needs some. Him being lied to, babied, and manipulated his whole early life would be a good start to giving him that trauma. His complete trust in the villagers will make it much more heartbreaking when they end up dead.

An interesting idea would be that the villagers completely shielded Dream from ‘bad’ things as if he was a child. Not inviting him to funerals, not telling him when people died, not letting him witness violence. Nightmare being the only one who treated Dream like an adult but also having to always be the bearer of bad news would already establish the starts of an emotional rift between the two of them. With Nightmare tired of having to baby Dream and Dream being tired of Nightmare telling him all about this awful stuff.

Dream being that naive would be partially willful on his part. He'd be a bit stubborn and turn a blind eye to Nightmares treatment. He wouldn't be fully aware of how awful Nightmare has it but he knows his friends are awful to his brother. He just ignores it for his own happiness, and for his friends. He's not evil or even bad but he's not perfect. It's also not fully his fault, he's only doing what he had been taught. After more time in the greater multiverse having learned more Dream would feel awfully guilty.

Nightmare: Nightmare could go in so many directions. He's brimming with potential that the possession arc squashed. So I'd throw that completely out. He'd still snap and kill all the villagers, but it would be him doing it. Everything after that would also still be him.

In Undertale Aus, especially the ‘Bad Sanses’ there's a underlying common aspect, that being that everyone who's hurting others is doing so as an necessary evil. It's a lot of ‘everyone I love is going to die anyway so I should be the one to do it' or ‘I literally have no choice but to either do this or die’. I think Nightmares snap should be like that. He put up with hundreds of years of abuse and never thinks he could escape (as in he physically couldn't escape) so when he snaps it's an abuse victim killing abusers. He's not doing it because he's a villain but because it's his only course of action. Or at least in his eyes it was. Dream ought to feel betrayed by that. Everyone he loves and had known has been killed by someone else who he loved. Who he thought cared about him enough not to literally murder everyone else.

If Nightmare feels guilty about what happened to the villagers it would only be because he feels guilty about doing that to Dream.

Nightmare probably isn't good with people and he lacks a lot of knowledge that may be considered common knowledge. His only source of information in the village would have been Dream who was being fed lies but at least Dream had an opportunity to develop people skills from constant interactions with the villagers. Nightmare would not have that luxury. So he's ill-informed and awkward. He also would massively struggle with self-worth. He's been told his whole life that his very existence is inherently immoral. I imagine that would mess him up mentally.

Nightmare terrorizing Aus isn't really something he would do if he wasn't possessed so he wouldn't. I do think there's room for him to get to help the ‘undesirables’ escape from their aus like he does in fannon. He could fill in the gaps that Core couldn’t fill. Taking in violent people who couldn't go to the Omega Timeline for the sake of others. He knows what it's like to be an undesirable in a bad situation and what that can do to you. He probably has more sympathy for those who's mental illness presents itself in uncomfortable ways than Dream does.

Also, Dream turning to stone should be much shorter. 500 years is too long for Nightmare to be out there alone, if he's left alone for 500 years he's gonna resolve all his issues before Dream even starts to resolve his own. Dream should only be stone for a decade or two, enough to make Nightmare more established in the Multiverse but not so much we run into the too much time issue. When Dream is freed he'd also be incredibly hurt, still like he lost everyone yesterday. Everything that was familiar for him had been destroyed, he should feel something about that. I think Dream helping people definitely works. I think him trying to help other people before helping himself is such a cool thing. I do think both Dream and Nightmare have to learn that ‘postive emotions’ aren't always good (joy from hurting others, excitement from awful events, peace at the cost of your brothers well-being) but more importantly they both need to learn that ‘negitive emotions’ aren't always bad (grieving someone who you loved, sadness as sympathy, righteous anger). Dream would learn that from trying to help people who didn't need to be helped, who were sad and needed to be sad.

Nightmare would have to learn it to find value in himself but idk how.

[destiny-in-the-universe]

Into the Ninjaverse: Rewritten

Good timezone, guys, gals, and everything in the beautiful spectrum~

I recently got brainrot from this idea, but after an old private discussion from someone who got interested in the AU - I realized I created too much of an overlap with the original ITSV/ATSV movies, so first let's talked scrapped/dropped/discontinued ideas for the AU!

Scrapped Concepts

~ The Ninja suit is more like the Spidersuits. I decided I had no idea what to do with this- unfortunately, I came to the conclusion to let this go. Like, it felt too much of a direct copy for one thing, and two I was running myself ragged in trying to figure out what this meant

~ Randy finding the USB? Yeah, no. I have no idea why I included that in an older post- that made no sense to me whatsover

I can't think of anything else I wanted scrapped; if you count the idea of Randy and the rest of the gang having been Spider People, then that's technically another but for now just consider it like, an AU of the AU ig?

Now comes the fun part-

Lore

I can't share everything because of spoilers, but I will share some stuff I can tell you~

The Ninja Society, which are ninjas tasked with keeping monsters and other evils from destroying the multiverse, was founded by "Nomi" and the First Ninja from E-616. Now the dimensions themselves are from ITSV but that's purely to keep myself from getting overwhelmed; Nomi and the Fin had gotten concerned following a sudden rise in problems, but the 'head honcho' - so to speak - is Nomi since Fin is technically retired.

Prior to that, the multiverse mostly kept to its own devices- not fully aware there were others, but of course - following a discovery from Nomi, this entirely changed and well, some universes were far more 'stable' than others. What does this mean exactly? Well, let’s just say, not all of the dimensions in the multiverse have happy endings. I don't know if canon events are a thing within the context of the AU, but I got mean with some of the backstories.

Monsters obviously exist around the entire multiverse and hardly any of them are spared from their influence. This will be key to the storyline later, but honestly the plot deserves its own post and once I can figure out how to do a masterlist- I'll be including it in that too!

As for the characters, I can't share too much without fully giving way the full plot but I will give credit to @thesoundofmadness because it was their Randyverse which gave me inspiration to write this.

I will be sharing more for this later but I'm going to be writing a separate post to explain something for a new blog I'm trying to make since I have no self control.

[fieognym]

I made an outline for a Sonic 06 rewrite that I will never actually write

So first off, Solaris is from the Sol Dimension. Fire god of destruction that starts off peaceful before people messed with him? Sounds very similar to Chaos, a water god of destruction who was peaceful before the Echidna messed with him. So they're counterparts now.

We're also fully removing Elise. She's not needed because we already have a fire princess capable of sealing Iblis and regardless of how people feel about her, she's redundant in this rewrite.

The people of the Sol Dimension decided to seal Solaris within Blaze after he killed a bunch of people (he was provoked), but they were worried that sticking a god in someone's brain would lead to possession, so they intentionally split Solaris into Iblis and Mephiles, so it's not an accident like in canon.

Next, Mephiles's motivations don't make a lot of sense in canon. He wants Iblis to be released, but Iblis is already free in Silver's time. No explanation as to why they can't just merge there is ever given. So instead in Silver's time the apocalypse happens because Solaris successfully merged.

But if Mephiles doesn't need to send Silver back in time, then how is Silver getting into the plot? Simple, he chooses to go back on his own terms, and retrieves the Time Stones from Little Planet. This can also give Silver and Amy stuff to talk about, since Amy is meant to be a Silver Story character in 06.

Shadow's story doesn't really have to change much, he still gets to deal with Mephiles, but he didn't seal Mephiles (Literally he was asleep on the ark when it first happens, even if he time travelled to do it in canon, what the hell went down the first time?). Instead Meph just hates him because he can sense that Shadow is powerful enough to interfere with his plans.

Sonic's story is the difficult one because No Elise, so we're in full fanfic territory here. I don't think the 06 writers knew what to do with him.

So what if Eggman summons Mephiles from wherever he was sealed, up to his usual plans of "use this powerful being as a means to an end, what do you mean it's going to backfire on me?"

And what if Mephiles being in Sonic's dimension makes the two worlds less separate, since Iblis is still in the Sol Dimension, allowing for easy travel between the two.

So Shadow is dealing with Mephiles, Silver with Iblis, and Sonic with Eggman

And maybe Eggman tricks Sonic into doing something to free Iblis, not making Blaze cry lol, but maybe getting him to accidentally lead her into a trap that lets Eggman extract Iblis, who immediately merges with Mephiles.

This means Sonic is still the Iblis Trigger and Silver still has motivation to kick his ass, except instead of being lied to by Mephiles maybe it's a known historical fact that despite all the good Sonic did for the world, he eventually becomes responsible for ending it. So Silver, missing a lot of context, thinks Sonic is destined to turn evil and decides to stop him for the sake of the world.

Also Blaze lives so we get Super Sonic Shadow and Silver, but also Burning Blaze.

[thebirdscomeback]

as we come to the end of the hero/claudio arc and therefore the end of hero/claudio gender posting, its interesting to think about how the femininity that has been so central to hero character and how she's been treated comes into play in the final plan. watching 'hello again' again, it became clear that hero was very much not the active participant in coming up the fake illness plot; she 'didn't really mind' but bea and ben were the ones who devised it. we once again see hero going along with what other people are asking of her. which isn't to suggest that she didn't really want to do it, or that bea and ben pressured her into it, just that it seems that she still hasn't found total agency. the norms of the kind of girl she is determine that she doesn't get a 'rip his heart out and eat it' moment, but she will follow with plan that makes that happen. in this way, the plan itself plays on these feminine tropes of passivity and weakness. unlike beatrice's speech to claudio, where we see her at her most candid and unrestrained, the plan relies on hero hiding, retreating, rather than speaking up like bea would. sickness too, is used in a way which emphasises a kind of 'feminine' weakness. in order to be listened to, it goes, a woman cannot get angry - this would lead to dimissal. in this context, it would just add to the 'hero's a lying bitch' narrative claudio and pedro have been relying on to make their accusations make any sense. instead, she has to do the opposite, she has to be weak, the only way people will listen to her is she if she removed from the 'bitch slut' archetype and places within the 'poor weak girl' archetype. the men then, can assume their roles. they no longer have to defend themselves against her, they can save her. claudio will listen to her now, will take her seriously, because this position is closer to the role she filled for him before, a perfectly passive feminine figure for him to be the perfect masculine saviour for. this isn't what she wants of course, but it acts here as the less of two evils. at the very least, it figures, claudio will feel bad for what he did. some kind of chivalry can come into play and hero can use her stereotypically femininty to take some power away from the boys. hero never gets to fully escape this feminine archetype, i imagine it's something she will be dealing with for a long time, but she does find a way to use it

[corellianhounds]

Curious to know your thoughts on Din’s separation from Ran’s Crew… (you said you wanted a discussion topic 😉)

I meant for this to be a two paragraph response and then when I looked up three hours had passed and my back was stiff from sitting at the keyboard for so long. I wrote ninety-five percent of this in one go, then made a gyro and literally went to go rewatch the episode to double check my quotes and notes before coming back 😆

~ 3.1k words

This ended up being a LOT more context because I don’t feel like I can give a solid answer without laying the groundwork for how I come to the conclusions that I do. I’m nothing if not able to justify my reasons/interpretations, but I also try not to lock into anything unchangeable when it comes to more nebulous parts of a character’s history because I can see how things can go several different ways, all of them interesting and plausible.

One of the things I’ve always loved about Mando from a mechanical/storytelling technique perspective is that he’s one of those characters with a mysterious past we only get in relevant bits and pieces, leaving so much open to speculation and interpretation. (I think that does contribute to how many wildly different takes we see in fan spaces about his character, but I digress.) He’s like Wolverine or Snake Eyes in that, when he’s being written well, his entire past and backstory isn’t spelled out in concrete detail which frees up storytellers to add things in later as they become relevant without contradicting themselves or having to refer back to/be confined by too much rigidly established history or canon.

(Personally I think more authors should do that when it comes to how characters are used in a story (meaning, the character should serve whatever story you’re writing first and you shouldn’t get too precious about elaborate backstories and irrelevant details if they end up blocking you from making stronger narrative decisions). I like only getting bits and pieces because we as the audience fill in the gaps for ourselves and stay intrigued by the remaining sense of mystery)

Because of that, I don’t have a concrete idea in mind for how Din got involved with or left Malk’s crew, and I hope it never gets spelled out unless the writers have a specific story in mind where that comes up.

As much as I like writing Din as a genuinely good man with a strong moral compass and personal code, that does also mean that I think there were times he wasn’t a good man. People are a lot of things in life, and it’s only through genuine trial and error, making mistakes and actively bad decisions and learning hard lessons from bad experiences that people grow into being good people (keeping in mind that everybody is capable of making good and bad choices in life at every step of the way. ‘Being good’ takes active work and it takes even more work to maintain that consistently).

Characters are more compelling and dynamic when they’ve actually done things that are contrary to how they behave in the present (provided the audience is shown the meaningful progression of that change). To that end, I think Din Djarin has done some things in his life he deeply regrets. Some of those decisions may have been forced out of him by virtue of circumstance, and some of them may have been on purpose (or the lesser of two evils).

Sometimes making the right choice will end up costing you something important, up to and including your life. Survivors of any kind have done a lot of things to ensure that survival. Everybody is capable of change, but change can go in a lot of different directions.

I think erasing a character’s flaws or implications of a flawed past does those characters and stories a disservice by uncomplicating the people and world within which the story is taking place. It truncates what decisions those characters are able to get away with as a story progresses if you insist they’ve only ever been morally upstanding up to the present. It closes off opportunities and directions for writers to take regarding the character’s future. That’s not a hard and fast rule, but if you start off with Steve Rogers being a good guy, you can’t have him do a complete 180 in a story unless that’s going to be given the time and focus it would take to make that arc believable and satisfying, and sometimes you just don’t have the time to dedicate to that if that isn’t the main story.

All of that to say, Din has probably done some bad things. You don’t end up working with criminals for (it’s implied) an extended period of time without having to make moral compromises, and though I believe Din’s faith as a Mandalorian has been steadfast since childhood, there are probably aspects of the more honorable teachings that he’s lapsed in at different points of time. (He did, at one point in time, turn over the life of a child to known enemies for payment.) He probably had to not ask questions about targets they were sent sabotage or steal from because if he doesn’t know for a fact that they were innocent people, he can tell himself that he’s not at fault for senselessly hurting people or robbing them of their livelihood (even if his guilt, intuition, and conscience tell him otherwise when he tries to sleep at night).

You know what you’re getting into going into mercenary work, so you can’t get tied up into moral quandaries every time you see the person on the other side of it. The more impersonal you can make it, the more you can do the job swiftly and mitigate as much suffering and collateral damage as possible.

I say all of this because Mando doesn’t exactly refute most of the things the crew says about him during the planning and travel phase of the mission, and I don’t think he has a problem correcting people when they’re objectively wrong about him (even if he’s at a disadvantage here being outnumbered, desperate, and coming to them for work). When Ran says they did a lot of crazy stuff back in the day, Din says “That was a long time ago,” which does admit to at least some of it being true, it’s just something Din makes a point to say he’s distanced himself from. He’s saying that he’s a different person than what he was like back then, which means there had to have been things he did that he’s not proud of.

Sometimes the more you protest though, the more people will pile on the jabs and mockery, especially if said jabs come from elements of truth you as the target can’t completely deny. If you don’t give people the response they want, oftentimes they’ll get bored and move on to something else, or at least won’t linger on that particular insult.

It’s also worth pointing out that anything the other members of the crew say about him could have been false or taken out of context or were perceived entirely different than what the reality was, them not knowing what Mando’s motives were at the time because he’s not exactly forthcoming. Anything they say that implies he did some shady things could have also been things Mando did in those moments that were actually cover for something else. Him letting them think the worst of him so they don’t notice how he’s freeing hostages remotely as they work, or sabotaging their demolition-heavy escape that would have hurt bystanders, or hailing the law to show up and interfere before things go too far and people end up dead when they could be saved. The quieter you are, the more people will reveal themselves and overlook you as part of the background, leaving you free to do what you need to.

Some of the things the mercenaries say about him could also be their skewed interpretations of events. Mando could have been quick, heavy-hitting, and ruthless, but ruthlessness doesn’t always equate bloodthirsty— Ruthlessness just means the most efficient route or means from point A to point B. If he went in on a mission and had to incapacitate people quickly and cleanly, they might have interpreted that to mean Mando was a violent person who liked killing or beating people up for the fun or glory or pleasure of it if he was volunteering to be the first one going in. The reality could have been Din not wanting people to suffer or be killed at the hands of mercenaries he knew would be harsher/more careless if they went ahead of him on a job.

Maybe the mercenaries all thought he was trigger happy because he would shoot first without asking questions, but Din was, in reality, six steps ahead of everybody else and had already analyzed the situation and come to the conclusion that that was the necessary thing to do at that juncture. Maybe the fact that he was brutal and quick to fight back when people on the crew antagonized him in their downtime or tried to take his things made them think he had a short temper and was always raring for a fight, when the reality is you have a much better chance of winning if you hit hard and hit fast, and he wasn’t going to put up with anybody’s disrespect or antagonism by rolling over and letting them think they could get away with pushing him around. As soon as you give people an inch they’ll take a mile.

Even if he was doing some shady jobs, there are still things he’s not going to do even if he had the skill sets for it. Din’s not going to torture people and wouldn’t have stood for it from others of the crew. He’s not a murderer and even when he’s had to kill people in the show it’s always done quickly and efficiently. (One reason why I can’t definitively say Mando would be entirely against hurting someone for information is that he did leave Gor Koresh to be torn apart by dogs at the beginning of Season 2, so he obviously thinks there are some people who have it coming. “You won’t die by my hand, but I don’t have to save you.” He gave Koresh a clear and concise opportunity in the arena to back off and give him the info he came for without killing him though and Gor Koresh didn’t take the chance Mando gave him, so Mando’s not going to lose sleep over what he did in leaving the don hanging there in the street. It’s probable there were similar instances like that while working for Ran.)

Though there are a lot of other immoral actions that come with the kinds of jobs it’s implied that they did, Mando wasn’t killing people left and right, especially since these guys are lower level criminals and thugs, not organized crime members or assassins, and murder gets you a lot more attention than you want if your primary jobs are stealth-based. Mando retained a sense of honor while working for Ran’s crew because Qin wouldn’t have used “You need me alive to get paid; isn’t that your code? Aren’t you a man of honor?” as a guilt trip/bargaining chip at the end of the episode otherwise. Qin’s (mockingly, but probably accurately) quoting back to him what Din had said to them in the past (same as what Xi’an did in transit regarding what he says about the helmet rule). It’s both possible and likely that Din was the one reining other people in when he could, mediating or diverting the crew from killing targets, security, or civilians who ended up in the way.

The reason I think Mando only killed people back then in self defense is that he left the merc crew alive at the end of “The Prisoner” when he obviously could have killed them. To me, what we’ve seen of his sense of justice in the present shows that, had they all proven to be merciless murderers to other people, he would have dealt out equal punishment in return by the end of it has retroactive retribution. Xi’an was the only one he’d worked with before (aside from Qin) and I don’t doubt that she enjoys killing people, and she did kill Davin so she was the most deserving if he had killed her there, but Mando still gave all of them the same last chance he gave Qin years ago; left behind and captured, but alive, despite the fact they all tried to kill him.

(A possible out-of-universe explanation for why he left them alive is that the writers may have had more planned for them in Season 2; there’s concept art in the second season’s Art of The Mandalorian that has Mayfeld, Xi’an, and Burrg on Boba Fett’s ship going into “The Believer.”)

We haven’t seen any evidence of Mando taking active enjoyment in killing people. Needless murder goes against the Mandalorian code, and violence typically isn’t (or is taught that it shouldn’t be) the first resort. Mandalorians are diplomatic enough to have a conversation first, but if you instigate a fight, they’re more than ready and able to finish it. Strike fast and get it over with, don’t drag it out. If you’re going to fight, do it out in the open and be willing to consider a genuine surrender when it’s asked for.

Mando’s not a bad guy. He’s just the best at what he does, and what he does isn’t very nice.

—

So now we’ve established some plausible parameters and the atmosphere for what it was like working with Ran’s crew in the past. There’s a lot of ways Mando could have ended up on the crew, and there’s a lot of reasons why he might have stayed there. He could have been ambitious and arrogant and setting out to make a name for himself, but I’m more inclined to think it was a matter of taking whatever jobs he could that would pay a lot of money and allow him to continue forward. Poor people without resources or connections are often driven to make decisions and find crummy or unethical work that goes against their personal code or preferences, especially when there are people relying on them as a source of income.

The importance of community and family among the Mandalorians is something that’s been made abundantly clear about Din from the beginning so that was probably a driving factor in how he conducted his life and work once he became an adult, and if he was one of the few people who was able to travel to find work and bring money and resources back to the tribe, then of course he was going to do it. There are mouths to feed, children to care for, armor to be built for others. You do what you can to survive.

Now say the more jobs he does with them, the worse they get, but he makes more money that can be brought home to the tribe. Say there are circumstances with bad timing that compel him to keep working for Malk as opposed to finding somebody else (potentially just as bad) to work for; working for the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t. Maybe he’s saving up for a ship. Maybe he somehow ended up indebted to Malk and was forced to work off that debt for longer than he obviously wanted.

Maybe he was desperate for any work and theirs seemed promising, especially since he had the exact skillset that would guarantee he’d succeed. Maybe the jobs they used to do were just legal enough to pass as legitimate (if difficult) work and it wasn’t until he’d been there a while that they started to become more dubiously ethical, or Ran used the fact that they had a Mandalorian with them to bargain for better paying jobs from clients (those jobs paying more because they were dirty work).

Say that he knew it would be hard to leave the merc crew because if he didn’t do it right, he knew they’d all be suspicious about what secrets and details he’d be taking with him. Who knows who he might talk to? If that were the case, they may have come after him once he departed just to make sure he couldn’t betray them and give them up.

Say Mando had other outside obligations that kept him working with Malk despite the fact he could see the red flags, and the slow, creeping decline in honest work took place over a longer length of time. It’s a lot easier to get somebody involved with criminal activity if it starts small, starts gradual, and can be reasonably justified, especially if you don’t have all the facts surrounding the circumstances under which the job is taking place. No questions asked, that’s the policy.

I think whatever job they took where Qin was left behind was close to if not the end of Mando’s time with them. I don’t get the impression they had a great relationship to begin with, and Qin also seems like he could have held his own against Mando for a good amount of time before either of them had to back down or their fights were broken up. Almost every episode involves somebody picking a fight with Din over the armor or the helmet (or just… anything really), and it’s clear he’s had a lifetime of similar treatment and he’s able to fight back every time, so it’s not a stretch to say he was probably on the receiving end of similar scuffles while working with the crew, including those instigated by Qin.

So if Mando already had reasons why he wouldn’t have risked his hide to go back for Qin, it’s possible something specific happened that was the last straw and Mando decided he would no longer go out of his way to help or protect him, meaning when whatever mission they were on went pear-shaped, Mando left him. A kind of “Those who fall behind get left behind,” mentality, considering he knew Qin could hold his own and would end up alive if he was smart enough to know what was good for him and back down when he was caught. That was Mando’s measure of grace extended Qin’s way. Mando could have killed him on the way out, but he didn’t. He considered that Qin’s last chance.

I don’t think Qin was necessarily caught by the law on that mission, but regardless of how it shook out that crew ended up back at home base with at least one less member among them and everybody having a hunch that it could have been done on purpose, even if Mando had viable justification for why he couldn’t have gone back for him without risking the rest of the mission. Mando was able to make a clean break and walk away from the encounter (because Malk wouldn’t have let him back on the crew in “The Prisoner” otherwise), but not without everybody’s suspicions cast on him as he went, and the longer time passes between people who part ways on a sour note, the more those accusatory thoughts fester and build.

Mando may have made the objectively right call in leaving Qin and had the evidence to back him up, but people’s feelings are finicky things and tend to overrule all better judgment regardless of the facts of a situation, so the fact that he’d been with that crew for a while and had a history there— one that likely included a well-known animosity between himself and Qin— meant that it didn’t matter how justified Din was. If he’d stayed and continued to take jobs with them nobody else would have trusted him to have their backs going forward, which meant there would be no way for Mando to trust that they would have his. For all he knew, their next mission would end with him being left behind, metaphorically or literally stabbed in the back for his trouble in thinking they could work together again.

[rake-the-leaves]

Analysis of Ring-Verse

I’ve been thinking about the Ring-verse, which opens most copies of Lord of the Rings, and I can’t stress how MUCH of a good opening it is.

Again, it runs thus:

“Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,

Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,

Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,

One for the Dark Lord on his Dark Throne

In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,

One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them

In the Land of Mordor where the shadows lie.”

It sets a perfect tone for the book and for many of its central themes. Chief among these is the sense of the darkness (which the rest of the book seeks to contrast with light), an overpowering force, one which is in many ways greater than the forces of light. And in the context of it being a sequel to the Hobbit, where the ring there was nothing more than a neat treasure, it adds importance and seriousness to the fantasy (a thing Tolkien has personally noted many scholars don’t do in their approach to reading what might be called “mere” “fairy-stories”). It feels like stumbling into a vast conflict with background, and it instills peril and gravitas.

I find it interesting how it provides characterization for the fantastical races of his world. The numbers of the rings themselves displaying the amount of magic, power, and enchantment lies with each of the races. Elves are named first (which sidenote funnily enough follows his cosmological order for when each race woke up before or after the others) and only need 3 Rings of Power to strive for magic they have and still do possess; the Dwarves need 7 Rings, a greater number for perhaps a less magically “graceful” group; and the most rings, 9, is given to Men, because they for the most part approach our current age, being mostly unmagical. The beauty of Men is not one that has passed out of this world, like it has gone with Elves and even Dwarves; needing more Rings to equal the same strength, and showing how that power is more further divided than the others displays how it is in some degree a lesser, non-magical existence that we live in reality (an almost encroachment of reality within the fantastical, at least so far as it is a remnant of what in his cosmology leads us to today’s age). Anyways, they’re characterized in more than just hierarchy; the ending part of each displays their aspects and to a degree the themes that go with them. Elves are “under the sky”, in the open air amongst that all-important thing to Tolkien: nature. Them being “under” it also suggests the nature elves to be tied to the circles of the world. Dwarves are also located in “halls of stone”; this shows their craftiwork, their striving for grandeur and home in great works of statue and construction. For Men, they are “doomed to die”, which is a peak into Tolkien’s philosophy that a story dealing with men by its nature deals with mortality; and it’s a concept he explores further in Lord of the Rings.

It’s also partly important to look at Tolkien’s theories on fantasy, specifically one idea, in which fantasy and the use of monsters as enemies rather than other men brings a story to a higher, more glorious display of human light fighting darkness. Its monsters aren’t just ideas or wholly symbolical, but also real and incarnate, a higher ambition for what can be fought. And in this verse, Tolkien introduces the origin of and the incarnation of all darkness and high evil; he makes it incarnate with a name, Mordor. It’s where “the Shadows lie”, capital S, the evil that lurks within and outside of people becoming one incarnate, the Enemy, the Foe.

The definition of who this evil is is also interesting, the lord of the dark, the “Dark Lord” with his “Dark Throne” who make One Ring. One because that is as much room that power and selfishness will allow, and because to Tolkien, darkness is more powerful than light even if the latter is more good; “history is but a long defeat” as he says. This evil seeks to control every other (every other ring), “rule them all”, and it has a terror to pursue one (it does not wait, but grows should one live through the world as static and inactive against it) to “find them” to get its hands on power however necessary. Then, the ultimate goal of all evil hearts, domination of all, “bring them”, “bind them”. The repetition of “One Ring” puts stress on it obviously, yet as each step is a progression in the plans of evil, it feels as though the peril grows in each. Whoever ends up controlling the Ring, will give themselves up wholly to evil ends, and whoever stands in their way will be made to suffer too before the end. And the other repeated word makes clear that what stands against them is “all”, everyone and everything. This is the destruction that will be brought on earth and people utterly in the success of the Ring. The final repetition, of “In the Land of Mordor, where the Shadows lie”, shows in some sense a sorrow and contempt for the gravity that this origin of evil made physical has unleashed upon the world. A darkness growing in the poem as much as it will be seen to be growing in the world through the reading of the story. Despair, that later in the story, the miraculous hope that’s held on to seems noble to fight against.

One last element to talk about is its place within the world he created. It reads in rhyme to balance the rhythm of what is given stress, as could be useful in lore, as it is a rhyme meant for memory of the history of the Rings by the Elves. This can be guessed at, as a warning of sorts by some inhabitant of the world for first time viewers. And the fact that the One Ring part is a quote from the inscription on the ring itself, places it further as a poem residing in Tolkien’s created world. The One Ring part shows Sauron’s intent for evil with the ring…

this also gives a commentary on language later. These words are through the enchantment of magic given power over the rest of the power structures within the world of Middle-Earth at the genesis of the Rings in the Second Age. Language has power, and as the inscription isn’t in English but in Sauron’s Black Speech created by him and him alone, we see how this power put in the hands of a unitary figure (who has room for only One, themself) erases the beauty of history and of living goodness that can reside in their meanings and diversity.

So… from this one short verse, it introduces themes of nature, mortality vs. immortality, ordinary light vs. overpowering darkness; as well as vital concepts outside the work, such as language, the importance and effect of fantasy. As well as introducing the reader to the rules of his world and the plot to unfold, and setting tone.