#but i think putting it into the context of catalyst would be really interesting

[freezethebeez]

bit weird, but how are funeral practices different in the catalyst world? Because I feel like there’s an untapped angst potential in vampires turning their dead loved ones into soup. What’s more of an expression of grief than lettting your beloved’s dying cells become your cells, to convert a part of them to you and let them live on in all the parts of you forever? To one last time feel the warmth and flesh of your dead friend or lover before their bones are buried?

dead dove: do not eat? more like dead partner: turn him into soup but specifically the soup that your mother made and the one that he liked the most and have the most insane mental breakdown of all time while you eat it ^_^

[inhuman-obey-me]

Hello! Not a request, I just needed to get this Lilith related thought out, hope you guys don't mind! Alright, so in NB we learn Lilith believed demons, angels, etc. shouldn't interfere with humans, that she believed it to be arrogant. But then the whole catalyst for the war is because Lilith went and interfered with a human life, the life of her beloved. I thought about it, and I think I have a way for these to coexist! To put it bluntly, the angels trying to guide humans down certain paths is the angels robbing the humans of agency, but what Lilith did—or at least thought she was doing—was returning that agency to her beloved. Because the human fell ill, they were going to die from this illness, their choices have effectively been stolen from them. They were fated to die, and then Lilith returned their agency by saving their life. They're able to continue living, making their own choices, shaping their own destiny because their story is able to continue. Trying to guide humans down certain paths, convincing them to make certain decisions, manipulating them in a way, is arrogance in Lilith's eyes. Its robbing the humans of their agency, of their right to make their own choices, its forcefully shaping their lives which is something only that human should be allowed to do. But Lilith doesn't do this! I think, at least from Lilith's perspective, she not only didn't want to see her beloved one die but also she could have viewed this as returning their agency which was, in a way, stolen from them by their illness. Angels will shape a humans life as they see fit, arrogantly believing they know best, but Lilith was willing to face any consequences to return her loved ones agency to them.

Oh god we're so sorry, it's been so long since the post this was originally responding to but we're getting to it now!!

Agency is certainly an interesting point, and that could very well have been a way for Lilith to justify it to herself. It's true that humans are basically seen as the least powerful, and at least in terms of how Solomon describes it, the issue is that humans are looked down upon as not having the right to make their own choices.

Counter-point to Lilith, though: did she ask?

From what we know, Lilith had actually kept her true identity as an angel secret from her human lover. She stole the fruit from the Celestial Realm as an act of desperation to save him when he became deathly ill. And while it's true that this kind of death doesn't apply to demons and angels, that illness didn't come from them -- death is very much just part of human existence. So, to say that their choices were "stolen" isn't exactly accurate in that context, because it's not either side taking anything from him but simply humans' own natural limitations.

Lilith, as an angel who had never experienced that, couldn't bear the thought of his death and decided to take drastic action to save him. But stealing the fruit for him without telling him about herself, the Celestial Realm, the fruit, and the consequences? If he had no idea about any of that and she just gave it to him, which is what it seems like happened, that is actually her making the choice for him. She might have tried to justify it to herself, and it's not even to say she was "wrong" for it, but it's still hypocritical.

Plus, if the idea was that it would return agency to humans by not letting death take away their options -- why only him and not all of humanity?

Ultimately, humans do have some level of agency. While angels and demons try to influence and manipulate them, it's sort of the whole point that humans don't actually have to listen. Solomon's thing, and it seemed like maybe Lilith's as well, was that humans should not only have the ability to follow one or the other, but to freely forge their own path as well. The kind of freedom that Lilith and Solomon sought for humans isn't really about mortality vs immortality -- it's about respecting humans as equals capable of making their own choices. And if she indeed never asked and didn't allow her lover to make his own decision about the fruit, then it was hypocritical of her to interfere.

[scoobydoodean]

so the mind wipe was a bad move in context, i think most people will agree with that (i agree with you that it was the worst thing dean did). but beyond that, it barely even makes sense logistically unless you extrapolate that cas removed every piece of evidence of dean from their lives, phones, house, and friends’/neighbors’ memories… so how do you think they should’ve handled lisa and ben’s exit?

Setting aside how unfeasible it seems to truly erase Dean from their lives, it also just doesn't make sense to me because I don't understand how or why that would ever stop people from using them to hurt Dean. Like I guess they make it in the show as if it did in fact work (and it's better than the alternative the show likely would have come up with of killing them off) but why on earth would someone like Crowley for example not use Lisa and Ben still to hurt Dean just because they don't remember him??? They don't have to remember him for them to be used against him??

Like from Dean's perspective though, I think it was was about erasing the "poison". Like he felt he was this monster whose presence had ruined their lives irreparably, and by erasing himself from their lives as if he never existed, he could erase the "ruinous" impact he had on them. I think one of the biggest catalysts for this is ultimately having to put a gun in Ben's hand. When Ben expressed interest in Dean's gun collection in 6.02, Dean swore that Ben would never shoot a gun. Dean appears to have a lot of trauma tied up in his childhood experience with firearms. Lots of American kids grow up shooting, but for sport at targets and usually starting with BB guns. Dean was taken shooting (presumably real guns) for the first time when he was "six or seven" years old (2.06) and when he was taken to do that, he knew he was being trained to become a killer—to hunt monsters and to defend his brother—and John was proud. Dean repeats the story to Jo fondly (because what Jo wanted was a fond story—and Dean really struggles to deliver one because of what he's going through at the time), but there's something melancholic too, and this moment in 6.02 puts that in context, as does 3.10 where Dean expresses all the pent up hurt he feels at being treated as a solider and a weapon by his father, as does 1.18 where Dean is no older than 10 and left alone with Sam for days with a shotgun to defend them both. There's fear that has to be buried there and experiences with violence or the threat of it that Dean simply wasn't psychologically equipped to deal with. Most(arguably all) adults aren't equipped to handle that kind of stress and he was a child. So having to put a gun in Ben's hand so he could aid in defending his own mother was the greatest betrayal toward Ben's right to be a child that Dean could imagine and he HAD to erase it because he couldn't deal with the idea of Ben holding onto even a tenth of the childhood trauma that Dean has.

At the same time, Dean is so caught up in self-hatred and the idea of himself as a ruinous force that he loses track of boundaries and that it isn't his right to decide. And one of the repeated things echoed by Lisa and Ben that Dean never really allows himself to absorb is that they truly loved him and they didn't want to trade the experience of loving him despite the hardships. Lisa was very clear about this in 6.01 and 6.02, and so was Ben in 6.14 (though I don't think he understands all the dynamics in play no matter how much he insists he did).

I don't have a real opinion on anything that should have been done instead. It isn't something I would change just because I don't think Dean made a morally right choice but it is true that it doesn’t make much logical sense. From a practical safety perspective, I think it would have made more sense and been pretty interesting if Dean erased his own memories of them. This would still be in theme with Sam's wall and Cas's secrets and Bobby and Sam hiding Sam being alive and how we hide things to protect ourselves or others (and isn't all the talk from Cas and Death about protecting Sam from his own traumatic memories also probably an influence on Dean's decision to erase himself from Lisa and Ben's reality?). But I think ultimately, Dean wouldn't erase his memory because he would see carrying that experience with him as a "lesson" with scars he needed to bear so he'd never let that desire for a home cloud his judgement ever again and ruin someone's "normal" life.

[emotionallychargedtowel]

Desert Hearts rewatch notes

Desert Hearts (1985) is one of my favorite movies, but as with most of my favorites, I've gone quite a while without seeing it at times. I put it on the other day for the first time in years and took some screenshots in the hope that I might get some folks on here to give it a try that haven't, or at least bring back some memories for those who’ve seen it before. Then, when I sat down to post the images, I found I had more to say than I realized.

This was my first time watching this movie since I got into the whole BL/QL genre and I was curious to see if it would seem any different to me after a period of being more immersed in queer stories than usual. Mostly it swept me up into its own world, something this film is really good at. But I did find myself thinking at times about how aspects of it mapped onto QL tropes and more general romance tropes. I also couldn't help but see some parallels to the actual lived experiences of myself and people I know.

Queer romance tropes in Desert Hearts

Three tropes stood out at me that I've run into in the QL world, some of which I've seen in hetero romance settings as well.

Fish out of water - Vivian goes from her life as an academic in New York City to staying at a ranch outside Reno in pursuit of a "quick" divorce. (Having to spend six weeks in a strange place in order to get a divorce was "quick" by 1959 standards.) Helen Shaver, who played Vivian, points out in a featurette included with the Criterion version of the movie that Vivian has been living a very cerebral life, living inside her own head while cutting herself off from her body from the neck down. This radical change of scenery is exactly what she needs to be able to open up to something different.

There’s a similar dynamic at play in hetero fish-out-of-water romances. But I find this trope a lot more interesting in a queer context. Queer identities have a more complex relationship to difference. Among other things, characters who seem to be at home in the environment of the story often turn out to be alienated from it due to others’ perceptions of their sexuality.

Age gap (with the younger person pursuing) - Cay, who is ten years Vivian's junior, is definitely the pursuer here. This isn't a specifically queer trope per se, but it can manifest in some specific ways in queer love stories.

LGBTQ+ identity can put people on unusual timelines in their lives. (This is an idea I first ran into in a book by Jack Halberstam in undergrad.) Sometimes this means being in a more "youthful" mode later in life than cishet people. Other times it means being a particular kind of late bloomer. And so on. So with life stages not conforming to typical expectations, what does it mean to love someone you have a significant age difference with?

In the case of Vivian and Cay, Vivian may be older, but Cay is poised to initiate her into practices and feelings that are pretty familiar for Cay and totally, mind-blowingly new to Vivian. This creates a kind of role reversal. At the same time, Cay has never felt this way about a partner before, so in many ways, their relationship is causing her to have some new and intense experiences as well.

The thing where a character figures out their sexuality for the first time because their feelings toward a love interest act as a catalyst - This is certainly a trope that comes up in stories about queer romance, but it's more debatable whether it's a queer trope in the sense of a trope that is used by and resonates with queer people. I guess I'd say the theme comes up in different ways when a story is very geared toward the "straight gaze" and when it's more authentically queer. With the "straight gaze" version you get things like "gay for you." With more authentic versions, well, I don't think I've noticed many commonalities there. But I will always defend the use of this trope when it's done well in a way that centers queer experience, if only because falling for a specific person is exactly what forced me to come to terms with my own sexuality.

Side note: Speaking of coming to terms with my sexuality, it really is an indication of how deeply in denial I was about my bisexuality in college that seeing this movie for a class didn't help me figure it out. I was deeply affected by it and fixated on it for weeks after seeing it, but it didn't get through the thick shell of obliviousness I had built up around myself.

A connection to personal experience

There are quite a few ways that Desert Hearts resonates with my own experience but one really stood out to me this time around. [Spoilers ahead.] When Cay goes to see Vivian at the hotel where she’s staying after she leaves the ranch, she goes for a last-ditch, Hail Mary move—she takes off her clothes and climbs into Vivian’s bed. At first Vivian tells her to leave, but then she softens a bit, clearly interested but conflicted. Then this moment happens.

I related to this so much. When I fell in love with a someone who was (at that time) presenting as a woman and it started to look like I might actually have a chance, I had so much anxiety about whether and how I could be intimate with my crush and whether I’d be able to “perform” decently. It turns out, as we learned when we compared notes sometime later, we had each had the same worry and we’d both bought an instructional book about lesbian sex (I think it may even have been the exact same book!).

I think part of my anxiety back then stemmed from the prospect of starting from scratch with a new set of practices and skills after being acclimated to sex with men. It made me feel like I was off balance. But when I actually did get close to my crush, another, much more pleasant side to my inexperience came up. It turned out that not having a familiar script for what to do made me much more present and gave me a sense of freedom. I remember thinking that it was like going from traveling down the same old route to exploring a new place that we had to write our own maps for. And that was pretty exhilarating.

Soon after that relationship happened, I read Zami: A New Spelling of My Name by Audre Lorde. There was a passage where Lorde described something very similar from her own life. In this passage, she’s reflecting after her first sexual encounter with a woman after having a similar set of anxieties.

So this was what I had been so afraid of not doing properly. How ridiculous and far away those fears seemed now, as if loving were some task outside of myself, rather than simply reaching out and letting my own desire guide me. It was all so simple.

She’s so amazing at evoking these feelings, isn’t she?

I can’t think of any other places I’ve seen this type of experience discussed besides these two. (I’m pretty sure others exist, but the fact that I haven’t come across them suggests there aren’t very many.) There are plenty of stories out there about hetero sex performance anxiety and its eventual resolution, but I think the queer version of this kind of learning has some big inherent differences that go way beyond the genders of partners being different. So it’s really nice to see it come up here, and be handled in such a sweet way.

In case you’re wondering, once Vivian is able to “let her own desire guide her,” in Lorde’s words, she also finds that her fears were misplaced. The resulting love scene is beautifully executed even by current standards. It’s even more remarkable to see it in a film that was released in 1985. It’s equally remarkable that this sex scene was shown in rather explicit detail.

about, by, and/or for?

I'm also thinking about this movie in terms of the for/by/about queers typology that @wen-kexing-apologist came up with a while back. In my estimation, Desert Hearts belongs right in the center of WKA's Venn diagram. It's about queers, of course. I'd also place it in the "by queers" category. The director, Donna Deitch, who also co-wrote the screenplay, is an out lesbian. It's not clear whether the other co-screenwriter was queer. Her personal life was mysterious enough that it seems like a definite possibility. And the movie is based (somewhat loosely) on a novel by Jane Rule, who was also an out lesbian and whose work as a writer was very focused on lesbian characters.

I'd also consider this movie to be "for queers." It was marketed to a wider audience, of course. But as I watched some of the bonus material and looked at writing about the movie, I saw a lot of evidence that Deitch made the film for her community and they embraced it.

Shaver had a really lovely story in the featurette I watched about this. I forget the exact nature of it, but she described how she attended some kind of event with Deitch and Charbonneau where the audience was full of queer women who gave them an incredibly long standing ovation that she found very moving and helped her see how impactful the film had been.

I’m also sure Deitch had queer viewers in mind (at least in part) when she set out to fill a glaring gap in Sapphic representation. In an interview with AfterEllen, Deitch said, “My goal was to make a lesbian love story that did not end in a bisexual love triangle or a suicide. Because that’s all that had been made at the time I set out to make Desert Hearts.” (Note: I’m not linking due to transphobia concerns regarding that site but folks should be able to find it easily if they look.)

In summary…

If you haven’t seen Desert Hearts yet I really can’t recommend it highly enough.

(And yes, that’s Denise Crosby from Star Trek: The Next Generation sitting beside Jeffrey Tambor.)

[mayze2]

almost nobody in the fandom talks about this (possibly scrapped) wh character & it made me sad so I drew them interacting w/ the main beta home rivals a bit :) I love you n your raggedy fashion sense forever Maisie! put some of my thoughts about this playfellow + beta home in general under the cut if you’d like to read

there really isn’t much about her (check the context links included in the post for more info) that’s been divulged publicly BUT based on their name + clothing I think she was inspired by a scarecrow (maisie -> maize/corn -> corn field -> scarecrows go in corn fields) (the bandanna/scarf, long sleeves, and over-shirt together are v reminiscent of a scarecrow)? I also think that, going by the explicit religious imagery that was in beta home, they might have also been initially created as an allusion to the Crucifixion of Jesus within the Bible — since scarecrows are often put up in crucifixion pose.

As for what role I think she would’ve played in the beta version of welcome home, I think they likely did something that Wally didn’t like (maybe questioning his authority somehow if we choose build off of the possible aforementioned connections to Jesus and the cross) that resulted in her being mangled by him or someone else under his command (Wally is heavily implied to have been the villain in beta wh, so him causing physical pain to others wouldn’t be surprising).

Personally, I ascribe to the theory of them and Wally having previously been cohosts in beta home, but because of a disagreement they had (about the neighborhood maybe?) she got brutalized somehow, and thus was tucked away into some abandoned corner of the show to rot while Wally became the sole host. This event would have probably been the cause for Maisie to discover the true nature of something (probably related to the neighborhood itself), and this information they learn would act as the catalyst for Wally’s downfall. Sunny would discover her somehow as a result of his snooping around Home to calm his suspicions about Wally, and through some convincing the two would work together to stop whatever Wally is doing and save their friends from him. That’s just my speculation though lol

Beta Welcome Home is a very interesting thing to me, because it’s so different from the Welcome Home we have now. I like seeing the contrast between the versions of the playfellows a lot, and it kinda makes me feel oddly nostalgic for WH during the fandom boom it had? It was a pretty stressful time, but the wondering about how characters might act in canon before their personalities were further demonstrated back then was fun. I guess beta home is kind of a way for me to experience that again.

[viridiave]

❤️💚💀 for the ask game 👀👀

Hi Sly!! Thanks for the ask!! Gonna assume this is about the 8path games lmao

❤️: Which character do you think is the most egregiously mischaracterized by the fandom?

I'm not sure tbh - rather than mischaracterized I think Ochette tends to be handled carelessly? And it kind of frustrates me that this isn't COMPLETELY the fandom's fault, because canon doesn't really treat her much better despite having good potential. There's a lot about Ochette's character that I wish was explored on a deeper level, like her general philosophy on forming ties and using her love of food for something deeper than a quirk of her character - they ALMOST had it with how her Chapter 3 ended, but to me she didn't amount to being much more than like. The Christian kid in Filipino movies who tells the adults to stop fighting because it's silly (if you know, you know).

Other than Ochette I think Ogen gets bad credit sometimes too. Like I get that logistically speaking his license should be revoked but honestly looking at Alfyn's Chapter 3 and what he's supposed to represent to Alfyn, he WORKS - he's a jaded man whose ideals were shaken and this drove him down a morally complicated route, using his talents to render judgement as he sees fit. He's someone who clashes with Alfyn (who would beat the hell out of thugs if he really needs to but still ultimately turn the other cheek and heal them once he gets everything he needs) on a fundamental level - something that Alfyn was bound to face EVENTUALLY. I don't think Alfyn's Chapter 3 (and really. Alfyn's story in general) would have worked nearly as well without him and Miguel together.

💚: What does everyone else get wrong about your favorite character?

Damn I can't even pick who my favorite is. But I guess if I REALLY had to say something, I think how Crick's devotion to Temenos tends to be portrayed misses the mark on his relationship to him. Vice-versa too if I'm gonna be particularly nitpicky about things. As much as I enjoy Temenos and Crick's dynamic, there's a lot more broiling underneath the surface between them both - one such thing is like. The deeper implications and meaning behind Crick's devotion to the Sanctum Knights and why he's so quick to defend its name. We KNOW he wasn't raised in faith, faith saved HIM - and this does a LOT of mean things to his psyche. What Temenos does to him is cruel and tough but ultimately NECESSARY. I'd like to see more turbulence between them, that's honestly what makes their relationship so interesting to me - not because Temenos is some forbidden unknown that enters Crick's life, but because Temenos plays an active part in SHATTERING everything that was keeping Crick afloat in the years following him abandoning his old life.

Edit: on the Temenos doing cruel things bit I mostly refer to his subtler attempts at breaking Crick's rose-tinted view of the Church - starting with himself and the role of Inquisitor. Temenos is kind of the beginning of Crick's existential destruction and the catalyst for his rebirth and growth, if I had to put it to poetic words

💀: If you had to choose one major character to die, who would you choose?

Okay damn this is a hard question. Am I allowed to think about this in a postgame context. Because my honest answer would be either Cyrus or Temenos - like don't get me wrong, I love both of them to bits, but in my brain it just makes sense to me that out of their respective parties, they'd be the first ones to kick the bucket? It's hard to explain but if I was gonna kill anyone off in a fanfic they'd definitely be the easiest ones to come up with a reason for.

Cyrus I'm picking because I just think that regardless of how selfless anyone else in the party could be, in a life or death situation - he'd be the quickest one to make the hard decision, if he thinks that's the best solution to the problem at hand. Temenos more or less has the same reasoning for me but for him it'd also just be so much meaner to have him watch everyone ELSE die first, so I feel like in a script he'd die first just to spite my expectations.

[aihoshiino]

Thanks for translating Rie’s interview, I loved reading it but one part stood out to me. Although I can say I agreed with the rest of it, I believe at some point Rie said that if it wasn’t for the stabbing, Ai wouldn’t have ever been able to say “I love you.” Though I do agree that it would have taken her longer to say it without that kind of “it’s now or never” urgency, I like to imagine that eventually Ai does end up saying it. So I’d love to hear your thoughts, if you believe Ai would eventually say “I love you” to Aqua and Ruby, and when/what non-lethal circumstances would set the stage for that?

Glad you enjoyed it!

I've always been of the same mind as Takahashi in that it's really hard for me to imagine Ai saying an 'I love you' for the first time without some big emotional catalyst. Both because this is such a huge mental roadblock for Ai as a character but also just from a narrative perspective, that confession of love is her character arc - the prologue arc as a whole is the words "Aqua, Ruby, I love you". So I think for me, I would want those words to come from a similar place of catharsis as they do in canon, even without a similarly intense setup.

I have one scenario for it in mind but it's, uh, technically also spoilers for one of my in progress OnK fics so I'll keep it under my hat for now. All I'll say in that regard is that the foundation of Ai's issues regarding love all come back to her relationship with Ayumi, so I defo think putting her in a situation where she can work on/through some of that baggage would get her in a good place to try saying it.

I DID once manage to get her to say it in an ongoing RP au in a way that really satisfied me too… it took a very long time in-universe lol but it was basically the end result of two people very slowly inching towards falling in love with each other and Ai taking a chance to open up about her insecurities and the parts of herself she hides - her 'dirty, rough edges' as she puts it in 45510 - and being met with unconditional acceptance the way she's always wanted it. That was really interesting to write because I'd always felt kind of conflicted about the idea of her saying a truthful "I love you" to anyone else before Aqua and Ruby, but in that particular context & with that build up, I was like "oh, of course she would say it". It was actually literally the first time she'd ever said a 'I love you' since I'd started writing her because I'm intentionally super picky about dropping that for hopefully self explanatory reasons so getting to write it for the first time ever was so good…

[tulipanthousa]

tell us about the unwritten au 👀

okay, full disclosure, this will never be written. i have no intention of ever doing so. if someone else is willing to take a crack at it be my guest but this would be too much for me to handle

so, here it is

Content Warnings: angst, RAPE (<- read this. the dove is dead. do not pass go do not collect $200. youve been warned) both directly and via proxy, and other kinds of sexual coercion

LAOFT RELAMP but at what cost

In main story laoft, durant does not see roman and remy's dalliances as important or a threat to him/his control over roman.

in this story. he does

in an agonizing display of cruelty, he kidnaps remy and presents him to night roman as a gift.

its a terrible position - roman cant reject the gift and risk durants anger, which will end in disaster for both him and remy... but niether can he accept it and walk back into his day life with the knowledge that remy will remain here, trapped, alone with durant, and impossibly far away from anything roman can do to protect him

Roman takes the only path he can find - feign gratefulness so deep that he no longer had need of his day left, and giving it up. because at least if theyre both trapped remy's not alone.

Remy and Roman disappear the same night, stolen from their beds without a sound or a trace left behind.

In wickhills, Logan is incandescent with fury and patton cries so miserably the woods and hills around his house are bone-dead silent. not even the birds want to sing in his presence.

May sits alone in her house, the door locked, refusing to answer for anyone.

The Adams' put up posters across all of southeast ohio knowing nobody is going to call

And emile watches them all and churns with guilt because he didnt know remy, not really, so why does he think he has a right to be this sad?

Back in faerieland, things escalate in a bad way very quickly. Durant coerces Roman and Remy into increasingly intense sexual scenarios for his entertainment.

in the midst of this, having only one other person you can rely on or trust can, coupled with the rapid increase in intimacy, cross the wires a bit, and wwhoops, Remy and roman are in love now

Remy: or whatever passes for love in this shitshow Roman: you dont get to tell me i dont really love you Remy, crying: ok

and tbh, all of this is more of just context for what im ACTUALLY interested which is

they get out. now what?

Because in the meantime, Emile has reached out to patton, we still have LAMP and remile, and now we have pair-of-cats-that-cant-be-separated creativisleep

Logan: you thought canon logan had anger issues? ha. ha i say. this logan would kill a man sooner than let them make roman or remy even slightly uncomfortable. he'll snarled at his own mother if she gets too close. he'll snarl at thomas, though he'll feel bad about both. this is actually! not great! because logan tried to guard from the outside looks a lot like Guards Keeping Us Inside to remy and roman, so they have to figure out how to navigate logans nuclear reactor protectiveness vs it wigging roman and remy out.

Virgil: Virgil waking up is the catalyst for them getting free, and in the midst of his horror falls in QP love at first sight with remy, who was so brave and so strong and kept roman safe when virgil couldnt.

Remy: i dont know if 'safe' is even slihtly accurate Virgil: the safety of his heart and mind are of equal importance to me as his body. you have cherished both, and you can have anything you ask for as long as i live Remy: [gay fluster noises]

Patton keeps determinedly dragging emile to mays house (where they are holed up for close access to dizzy and jax) even though Emile feels like he's intruding

Patton, constantly on the verge of tears: I almost lost Roman and i've decided im in love with all of you and i CATEGORICALLY refuse to lose anyone else Emile: um Patton: RE. FUSE.

so pattons HOPE is that they all wind up in a big polycule pile, and its doesnt... not do that, but its not quite as clearcut as all that.

Theres stumbling blocks at the beginning withboth remy and roman wavering on whether or not their romantic feelings are genuine, and subsequently wondering if the fact that theeyre still in love with Emile and LAM respectively means that they arent.

this would go through some oscillations of both of them trying to deny those feelings to "prove" their love for each other, vs trying to push the other away so they can go be with p[eople they "really love"

do! not! separate them!

in my head this ends with romantic LAMP, Romantic Remile, Romantic Patmile, and QPR losleep and sleepxiety - everybody else is friends and cuddle buddies

Remy is actually super comforted by the fact that Patton is in love with him/attracted to him but never asks for more than friendship because he knows remy isnt. Metamour besties.

Dizzy suffers a lot from this ordeal (she hid from durant and subsequently roman, knowing if he found her as romans familiar it would be catastrophic) so their bond is.... stretched, lets say. overtaxed. she's a little sicklier. a little smaller, a little more timid. hides in remy or virgils jackets frequently

All of which is to say that this is a fraught extended metaphor that sometimes trauma changes you, and it changes your relationships, and it changes the way you feel attraction, and all of that is okay. it doesnt make those feelings or relationships less real or loving or valid.

anyway this is my monster. im not going to write it (please dont ask) but some people have expressed that they were glad i still shared it, so have some bite sized angst

[yinyuedijun]

actually i have more to say abt tokyo vice, particularly the nirei mention

it's really interesting to me that nirei's decided to completely steer clear, bc nirei's current arc in canon revolves so heavily around suo. his self-actualization seems to hinge on his determination to be able to stick out the messes that sakura gets himself into, and suo functions as a vehicle in which he achieves that goal. it's hard to believe That Nirei would refuse to hang around and keep in contact with reader for her safety.

but maybe in this au, bc suo goes off the rails, he also incidentally derails nirei's character development. if so, i have to give you props on being able to ground this au in the context of the existing canon and being able to extrapolate that far.

OR maybe because nirei is self actualized, he's able to put his foor down and draw a boundary that protects himself (and his current loved ones i imagine). in which case, suo has himself to thank for losing nirei. then i feel bad for him again, because he's clearly self-aware enough to understand how that series of events played out. i know he's like Icky and Evil but after that final confession scene i'll pretty much let him slide unforch

am i overthinking? yes.

i just feel like i don't see enough people acknowledge suo and nirei's special little weird thing (imho, its equally if not more strange than whatever sakura and suo have going on)

ps: sorry for blowing up your notifications i think i've just caught suo flu from you :p

HI FERN omg don't apologize, I love this ask and I love that I gave you suo flu <33 YOU ALSO AREN'T OVERTHINKING AT ALL !! I actually did think long and hard about Nirei's place in this universe, because his and Suo's relationship is probably the most important to Suo's canon characterization. (you are so right about it being a special weird little thing LOL)

can I just say I loved your Nirei analysis also?? it's so spot on about the Suo/Nirei relationship. you're right that Suo is a catalyst for Nirei's development, and also, Nirei is the character who reveals the most about Suo! It always did strike me how unnecessarily violent Suo got when Nirei got injured - that's when I was like oh this boy has yandere potential HRGFSLDHSKSH

in terms of your speculation, it's actually the latter scenario that happened in this universe! due to Suo's support, Nirei grew to the point where he can protect himself & his loved ones and also confidently uphold his values, which include a strong sense of justice. Suo taught him to "stand on his own two feet", so to speak. but because Nirei can now do this, he can't abide by Suo becoming the person he has become - which is, at the end of a day, a violent criminal who perpetuates destructive behaviour. (and you're right lol it does torture Suo a lot. he can't help but feel happy about how Nirei has grown, but he is also so lonely and it's his own fault 💔)

I rambled a little bit about this in my shitpost, but I think Nirei did really well at university and became either an investigative journalist or a detective. putting that analytical mind & strong sense of justice to good use, essentially. he was actually the first person from Furin to figure out that Suo had become such a vicious criminal (this is how Sakura knows Suo's identity, because Nirei told him). he has basically been entangled in a homoerotic game of cat and mouse with Suo, where he's been trying to investigate/catch Suo and Suo has been evading him. so he is indeed afraid of Suo now, but the way he handles his fear is actually confrontation with Suo, rather than avoidance (just as how in canon, he confronts people even when he has reason to be afraid). however, this has led to an estranged relationship between them since Nirei is so serious about it.

your point about Nirei & the reader is a really good one!! he actually does keep in touch with the reader, but he can't be heavily involved in their lives anymore because of the homoerotic cat and mouse game. I think he understands also that he can't make the reader leave Suo - the best way to break them up is to actually make Suo face legal consequences for his actions. I think he and Sakura actually had a bit of an intervention with the reader when they were younger (sometime between the ages of 19-22). they basically tried to get her to leave Suo, because they realised that she was at serious risk of being abused by him, but she reacted so badly that neither of them have brought it up since. so Sakura tries his best to stay close to her and help her in-person, whereas Nirei is trying to help her from afar :')

ANYWAY IM SO SORRY ABT HOW MUCH I TALKED LMFOAJDJS my delusions are too powerful 😔 thank you for this ask and for your Nirei takes!! I'm so happy that you're thinking so much about this little AU, and I love reading all your thoughts about it ♥️

[larrythefloridaman]

Mayhaps some thoughts on Valentine?

Oh, dear valentine... so mysterious... and the weight of being the perfect, gentle showman is such a heavy burden to bear...

Val is fascinating to me, because even though theres so much we don't know about what he really wants, really feels, really thinks, because most of his screentime is on the sidelines in an obviously staged persona, theres a lot of interesting inferences we can make from what he says when he breaks character, doesnt break character, or expresses his (oft-ignored) agency, but, with so many details missing, I am forced to turn to thematic analysis and context clues to fill in the blanks. I say forced as though I dont love doing this shit lmao

Val's occasional awkward fumbling breaks with his presenter persona lead me to assume hes that flavor of theater kid thats sort of... reserved, passive, awkward, almost shy in their personal life until they're onstage, where they Come Alive before the crowd, but also, hes presented in his introductory episode as a man who 'walks directly into explosions just to see if he can survive them.' contradiction between the private and public self, risk and spectacle and, of course, performance are important things to consider when evaluating Val. He wants to put on a good show for the people, after all! Talented and radiant and powerful and good, Val is an instant hit with the audience- and Val puts his body on the line trying to 'save the day' in a very risky move, a shady deal with a shady being with shady terms. Keep in mind Crimson really hadnt done anything REAL bad at this point- a little theft, a little homewrecking, his greatest crime we saw was being kinda spooky, really.

We don't hear the terms of Val and Crimson's bet, their discussion of the terms entirely held through crimson's ability for psychic communication, but we do see the result. Valentine looked at the quiet, eldritch thing Crimson began as, and wagered his body as Crimson's prize. Crimson wins, a gentleman keeps his word, and the Captain Crimson era begins. It isn't long before theres reason to regret his choice, although the Grunk's death wasn't something Crimson exactly wanted to happen either. Captain Crimson, given the privilege of choosing who in the tie at the bottom of top 8 gets to move on to the next part of what was supposed to be a two part tournament, the Grunk is shortly after found dead. Val remains in Crimson's thrall for another several months, Team Crimson formed amid the hiatus's offscreen chaos.

I think a feeling of guilt in the situation hes avoiding does haunt him. He claims little memory of his time as Captain Crimson, but the Grunk certainly seems to blame him some, even saying that 'at least hes not dead this time,' when Val successfully defends his championship from the Grunk. And hes in good company! Culpable in the Grunk's Death Club: Crimson (oops!) Hamhel (catalyst for both his and his killer's presence at the tournament,) Val (unintentional accomplice to manslaughter) Larry, Iggy and Chartreuse (knowingly complicit for timeloop reasons!)

Which adds some layers to Val breaking from his professionalism and stage persona a bit in 23's intros to express Intense Concern with J0hn's puppeteering of a murderer and VERY POINTEDLY bringing up the Grunk's own murder charges, audibly upset by the Grunk explicitly taking pride in them, he's clearly pretty disturbed by it- although he never pushes too hard against the tournament's regular function, even when it would be pretty fair to. One must remember the P. Rool Arc- the tournament is not an unquestionable arbiter of good or fairness, the tournament's rules are not unbreakable impartial tenets of the universe but the personal, often petty, choices of a jesterly godking, a TURTLE in a CLOWNCAR, and so going along with them is, within their world, a choice that all the characters are making! Everyone in the cast is, for better or worse, somewhat complicit in the tournament's failings, at least as much as any one actor who willingly works under a questionable director or in a questionable industry, if that makes sense. Technically, Valentine's championship was won at Plum's expense. Valentine participated- alongside an assortment of other fighters, including Rights Sentience, a so-called sentinel of that which is good and right- in the group free-for-all to take P. Rool's win away from him, and happened to come out on top. Relevant information to recall on P. Rool Day.

And, also relevantly to 23, he's pretty disturbed by Quad too, as we see in his introduction in 17. I think Quad is critical to understanding what Val's got going on under the surface- of the clones, theyre pretty explicitly the most directly similar from base to clone, and ive said it before and ill say it again, the thing Ryan's said about Quad and Val thats stuck with me characterization-wise is that 'Val is like a rollercoaster, Quad is like skydiving.' Rollercoasters are a thrill, with ups and downs and twists and turns but a careful calculation for safe results along a planned path, placing an implicit trust in the engineers who designed it for you to enjoy, although the controls are left out of your hands, and so when something goes wrong all you can do is wait for it to be over and hope noone gets hurt. Skydiving is throwing yourself directly to the whims of the world and letting go for a very INTENSE and STRAIGHTFORWARD thrill, running on the often CAREFULLY CONFIRMED trust that your parachute will work and with direct, conscious, personal control over when it deploys. I think of how Val often rolls with the tournaments decisions despite his misgivings, often seemingly not even informed until DAY OF what he'll be dealing with, and I think of how Quad was part of the first forfeit in tournament history and on another occasion caught just a whiff of horseshit and marched right up to god and beat her ass. Quad is like Val without the tact, the nuance, the subterfuge, like Val if you intentionally distilled and intensified him to the point of parody, and in the process, boiled out all the subtleties and passivity.

The natural instinct to compare Crimson and Val's relationship during Val's possession and Quad and Order's is... I think not EXACTLY wrong, but I don't think it's one-to-one at all. If Quad is, thematically, like Val with all the subtleties and nuance (not to say quad is UNnuanced because of course he is, but like. yknow what i mean in this context) wrung out, then maybe the intensity and circumstances of the awfulness of Quad and Order's relationship is a much more black-and-white case, but the baseline dynamic was similar? Just. Greyer. More complicated. Less extreme. Another all-take and little-to-no-give relationship between a controlling person and someone only wanted and valued by them in the first place as a useful, disposable tool in the pursuit of their own desires, who was never really all that interested in them personally as anything more than that, because at the end of the day they always wanted something or someone else, until someone else gets rid of the taker, and the giver is left alone to reevaluate things in their absence. But i suppose we already knew that. Another difference of course being they were two people who happened to collide for a while by chance and made regrettable choices, while Quad was born and designed with the purpose of being used. (And, of course, got to overcome that.)

Considering other Crimson'd folks were very much able to dispel Crimson from their bodies when they didnt want him there anymore, Hamhel 'defecting' offscreen, Chessmaster casting it off with all the casualness of flexing muscle, when they had come to some kind of epiphany and wanted to better themselves, while Val needed to have it dragged out of him by force, and even, in a moment of weakness and spite in response to the humiliation of Dani's Rat Stunt may have even considered taking crimson BACK if jay's speculation about val's feelings after the exorcism in 11 holds weight... its... interesting. And while they're plenty professionally friendly, I do think theres potentially some... lasting resentment, between him and Dantoinette in the mix, too. She did not need to rub his face in losing to the rat, and that could just be a dani-typical weak-filter shit-talk moment. But he did not need to bring up the bear. and Val's usually more careful than that.

Val lost a bet. They were together for months. They had to have developed some kind of dynamic and rapport in that time. While he absolutely was a controlling asshole, even just by nature of How Possession Literally Works, there isnt much reason to assume crimson was uniquely cruel to Val in their relationship compared to his other partnerships, and most folks who were possessed for more than a day came out of that relationship rightfully hating his ass and not wanting to be around him but not like. Life-Wreckingly Transformed by Him or anything. He's not an abuser, hes not that kind of evil. hes your dickhead ex that brought out the worst in you, he's the sketchy mp3 downloader thats BEGGING for you to let him install viruses, he's the best employee at a scam company. Crimson is just as disgusted by people like Prism or the Doc as anybody else reasonable. He's just a selfish, negative, dirtbag asshole thats rebellious for the sake of it and pressures you into and gives you excuses to pursue bad ideas- both his and your own, and living vicariously through those he controls to escape his circumstances and get to be anybody but who and what he actually is for a while, and Val was perfect for that. He 'got what he needed' by 'being' him. Vibrant, beloved by the crowd and community, comfortable in front of the camera, seemingly so confident warm and happy despite everything, so in control of his own destiny, at least in theory. The heartless coveting that which he cannot have. Val reduced more than once to an idealized object on a pedestal. The perfect man, and a being that from certain perspectives might barely qualify as a person at all- he certainly didnt present himself as one to start with. Hell, hes still imitating Val just a bit trying to play presenter in his stead in Orange.

BUT. All that being said. Order isn't what Val chooses to compare his time with Crimson to, in a rare instance we see of him actually trying to talk about it. No. His choice of comparison is a different object of Val's disdain- Cupid. Heartbreak and Cupid.

Heartbreak and Cupid are friends. and Heartbreak does say he WANTS to find someone that meets his romantic standards- but Cupid begins to push through his boundaries, FORCING it, making this OVERWHELMING UNASKED FOR SPECTACLE out of his issues on live broadcast, and when he decides he DOESNT want to pursue it actively anymore, Cupid refuses to back down from trying, because he DID want it and Cupid doesnt want him to Give Up on what he wants, but the reality is Heartbreak just found some peace with being by himself and doesn't want it so bad anymore, but Cupid seemingly wont take him at his word that he's genuinely just changed his mind. Tempered expectations, mistaken for lost hope. And it pisses heartbreak off so much that at least when the wound's fresh he doesn't even want to look at the color pink.

Val made a bet. We didnt see the terms. Val, in contrast with his perfect gentlemanly persona, flirts with villainy from time to time- quite literally in the case of his exchange with Dr. Order at the start of 16 before Quad was made, sometimes less literally and more subtly complicit with the tournament's less than perfect ethics record, nobody's perfect, no exceptions, not even the perfect man is unflawed- but never truly falls from grace again after his time with Crimson, while using the same cunning and subterfuge the god of treachery employs in facing challenges and claiming advantages all the same. Tempered subversion, mistaken for submission to conformity. And Crimson's presence is enough to make Val just want to stay home.

Am i cooking or is this nothing? YOU decide!

[taffywabbit]

I generally agree with most of the things you post about, but that recent reblog just really rubs me the wrong way. I think I understand the frustration's the OP got, but I don't know, it sorta comes across to me as "I just WISH people would've came to this realization in THIS SPECIFIC WAY" which is just...unrealistic? I feel as though it's almost a slap in the face to Bushnell himself, who probably knew exactly why he had to do what he did. He knew a lot of people WOULDN'T pay attention unless someone like him did something. An unfortunate reality, but, one that seems to at the very least worked. It is sad that he had to do such a thing, but at the same time I don't think it's in the right place to blame such people for not coming to this realization beforehand. I feel these people are vindicated for having been able to be drawn to whats happening. HOW they were drawn in really shouldn't...matter? I think there are people far more worthy of criticism and scorn than those whose eyes were opened by something closer to home than our own. And I think it's extremely disrespectful to Bushnell's act to look at the reaction of it and complain that it served as a catalyst for some people when they should've been more aware from the get go. Should they have? Yes. Is it realistic to expect the vast majority of the North American populace to be that aware of whats going on? No. Sadly. It isn't. Which is exactly why Bushnell did what he did.

i didn't really take it that way, i read it more as merely regret that it took this long AND such a blatant, violent display of protest for the reality of the situation to finally reach a lot of people (particularly in light of how much western news media outlets have been trying to keep the specifics and severity out of the public eye). i looked at that post not as any sort of disrespect towards Bushnell's sacrifice, but rather a frustration with how numb people often are to seeing faceless numbers and statistics in connection with tragedies these days. most american/canadian/british/etc news media LOVES to focus on "main characters" - people you can easily put a name and face to and plaster all over the headlines for people to discuss - and until there's someone like that to latch onto, folks are conditioned to feel like it's none of their business and those big numbers are merely an ongoing fact they cannot change.

if Aaron Bushnell's public suicide was the tipping point for someone to take more active interest in the Palestinian struggle, and reconsider the distorted/suppressed information they may have been receiving about it, that's undeniably a positive outcome and it would be wrong to assert otherwise. that was the goal, that was what he set out to accomplish. the risk comes from overemphasizing him as an individual martyr in all of this, at the cost of pushing the direct victims of the genocide out of the spotlight. considering (as far as i'm aware) the OP of that post i reblogged IS Palestinian, has personally lost loved ones to Israel's violence, and has been a consistent and invaluable resource over the past few months for educating people about the context and history of Palestine's struggles, i'm inclined to try not to take their post about this in bad faith. it doesn't really feel like my place to police their tone, frankly.

ultimately i can't speak on OP's behalf and i also can't control whether other people take away the same things i did from that post. but my personal belief is that Aaron Bushnell's act was bold and selfless and it's deeply unfortunate that things have reached a point where he felt it was necessary. i just also believe that he didn't do it to make himself the center of attention. i have no doubt that his status as a white american military serviceman is a factor in why many people are finally taking this as a wake-up call when they ignored all the previous ones, but i also think he understood that himself to some extent, and used that position of privilege (as well as the shock factor of defying what many americans expect from a man wearing their flag on his shoulder) to help ensure the message was heard by demographics of people who otherwise might not listen. to treat his sacrifice as a singular unique act, rather than one in a chain of many, and to give it special attention and fanfare when that energy could instead be turned to those who are still in need of it, feels like it runs directly counter to his goals. i think we should acknowledge and appreciate Bushnell's effort to sway more people in Palestine's favor, but not let it derail the greater conversation too much for those of us who are already engaged in this cause and do not need further convincing. he used his position to reach people, and it's our job to continue the momentum and help make sure those people know what their newly altered perspective should lead them to do. mourn the dead and fight like hell for the living, as they say

[ficretus]

Heresy and Knightfall

This one is not gonna be a theory, more of a thoughts based on assumptions about Knightfall I made in previous theories. I won't reference them here, feel free to check them out if you are interested.

Interesting thing with Jaune's Joan of Arc is that he is a heretic. Not in a literal sense of the word, more of in context of Joan of Arc and being a Huntsman in Remnant.

JAUNE THE HERETIC

His first major heresy is his enrollment at Beacon. He wants to become a Huntsman without having any knowledge or abilities required to do so. Yet, he does it anyways thanks to his forged transcripts that made him out to be skilled fighter. This is double heresy, both in universe, as well in the context to Joan of Arc.

It's obvious that you shouldn't be apply for position of responsibility without any qualifications, especially when that position requires you to save and protect others. In context of Joan, Jaune's minimal qualifications are reference to Joan being given role in military despite her having no combat experience.

Difference which makes Jaune heretical here is that Joan was given that role because she managed to convince her superiors she had divine visions that might help them in battle (or at least, at multiple occasions she convinced them her visions were not demonic or heretical). If Joan applied to lead relief army to Orleans while completely winging it, she too would have been a heretic.

____________________________________________________________

There are some other instances of Jaune being a heretic, but are either not heresy in universe or not major enough. Yeah, Jaune going on revenge quest to kill Cinder is fairly heretical when you think about it in context of Joan of Arc, but completely justified in universe. Nobody gave a shit when Blake and Yang murdered Adam, I sincerely doubt Jaune's friends would have freaked out if he murdered Cinder. You also have some minor naughty bits like Jaune suggesting stealing Atlas military airship. Yeah, you really shouldn't steal things, but circumstances required them to do so.

_____________________________________________________________

Second major heresy involves Jaune's mercy kill on Penny. This is once again double heresy. Joan of Arc at no point in her military career did murder anyone, despite carrying a sword. This doesn't translate literally to RWBY since existence of Grimm forces main cast to kill all the time, and Jaune doesn't have some hard "no killing" rule for it to translate to villains (he went straight for the head when he had a chance against Cinder). So they translated this to even bigger taboo of Jaune being forced to kill one of his friends.

I'd say this is intentional Joan of Arc reference/subversion. They could have had someone else kill Penny, Weiss for example would have been much more personal choice, yet they chose Jaune. This wasn't even necessary for turning Jaune into a mess he was in Ever After. The fact Penny died because he couldn't save her would have broke him either way (he would have felt similarly if Penny killed herself). Yet, they ended up going for an option that puts Penny's blood directly on Jaune's hands.

If you dissect for any other detail or reference, this incident can be read as another heresy. During the Joan of Arc's heresy trial, she was trialed for crowning a King (this was to delegitimize Dauphin's coronation by implying he was given power by heretic instead of God). Jaune's act of killing Penny gave Maiden power to Winter, and as I explained many times before, Maidens are royalty. He effectively "crowned a king" with heretical act.

MANY JUDGES OF JAUNE ARC

Of course, actions have consequences. Cardin realized Jaune forged his transcripts and used it as blackmail material. Cardin is on the nose reference to Cardinal of Winchester, one of the interrogators during Joan's heresy trial (even more on the nose when team CRDL is team Cardinal). The fact Jaune was a fraud is also catalyst to Ren lashing out against him during the Volume 8.

Interesting thing is that the ones judging Jaune in both instances were on his side faction wise (yeah Cardin is piece of shit, but at the end of the day he is fighting against Grimm and Salem). I suspect this trend will continue when it's eventually revealed Jaune was the one to kill Penny. No matter the reason, the fact one of their friends killed the other is not gonna sit well with everyone. They didn't pull this trigger when Ruby and Jaune had a falling out in Volume 9, which makes me think they are saving this for something big.

JAUNE IS... RIGHT?

Weird thing with Jaune's instances of heresy is that his actions end up being justified in a long run.

Yeah, applying to join huntsmen academy when you don't even know what Aura is and pretending you know what are you doing while people's lives are on the line is kind of dick move. But through his hard work Jaune indeed became full blown Huntsman with one of the most useful Semblances in entire verse. Removing Jaune from the plot would cause a butterfly effect that would negatively impact the odds of good guys winning.

Same thing with some minor instances mentioned above. Yeah, going on a revenge quest to kill Cinder is probably not the most morally sound idea, but it worked out in the end. Even ignoring all the instances his presence was somewhat useful, his encounter with Cinder was a catalyst that lead him to realize his worth and helped him to fully unlock his Semblance. Stealing Atlesian military airship is not morally right, but you do need to reach Atlas somehow. Without that, they'd have much harder time reaching it and making difference in Volumes 7 and 8.

His mercy kill on Penny is another similar case. Yeah, killing your friend is not a cool thing to do, however, when you think about it, it was overall net positive decision (disclaimer: don't kill your friend). Without Jaune killing Penny and letting her have a choice in passing Maiden power, Weiss and Winter would have both died immediately and Penny and Jaune would have likely died in the aftermath.

Jaune's morally questionable decisions positively drive the plot forward and allow his character to grow.

KNIGHTFALL IS HERESY

Well, this is self explanatory, thank you for reading..

Knightfall is indeed a heresy, very interesting heresy, but one nonetheless. I consider it to be plausible ending of Jaune's and Cinder's character arc, although not particularly likely at the moment (especially since show itself is kind of stuck in limbo).

My reasoning here is that it fits what to me seems like a running trend with Jaune's heresies: act needs to be morally questionable, condemnation comes from his side and Jaune is right in the long run. At the end of the day this is arbitrary and based on observations I made above. However, this to me feels like a good criteria, to have Jaune be morally questionable but never cross the line into villainy. After all, Joan of Arc was falsely accused heretic.

If you remove the first criteria, then it's not really heresy and his friends are picking on him for no reason. If you remove the other, then you just end up in "Blake and Yang murder Adam" situation (technically morally wrong, but justified). And if you remove the last one, then Jaune is just committing morally questionable acts (and he ends up feeling like Ironwood).

____________________________________________________________

Does Jaune need another heresy to commit? This is once again arbitrary, but I'd say yes.

While extremely important to his character, Penny incident aftermath is not resolution to Jaune's character arc. In fact, as seen in Volume 9, even though it was right thing to do, Jaune hits another character low point. I feel like whatever final heresy Jaune commits it will be resolution to his character arc, finally becoming a hero his own way and ending his self worth issues.

It also comes relatively too early. This might sound bit weird since it happened in climax of Volume 8, but I feel like whatever his final heresy is, it's gonna happen near the climax of story itself. Think about Ruby for example and repeated motif of wolves in her story. She has Beowulf in her backstory, she has Cinder as a wolf that tricked her and "ate" her friend, she has Hound as spiritual family member (since he is also silver eyed) getting devoured by Grimm. However, none of these feel like a final wolf. Ruby's final wolf likely being either Grimm Summer Rose or herself as Grimm. I feel the same way with Jaune, that there is another major heresy down the line.

____________________________________________________________

What was I yapping about before? Right... Knightfall. Sidenote, when I say Knightfall in my posts I consider both platonic and romantic versions. I tend to lean towards romantic interpretations mostly due to various literary allusions and themes.

As I said above, Knightfall is heresy of highest order. Hero redeeming the villain that completely broke him. That's what makes it appealing to me and why it seemingly fits with Jaune's previous heresies.

Is it morally questionable? Kind of, you are letting one of the main villains off the hook and are willing to give her a second chance. If they end up playing Joan of Arc allusion straightforward and Jaune ends up giving Cinder Crown of Choice, then that's magnitudes more questionable.

Would he face backlash from his side? Absolutely. Pretty much every major character was hurt in some way by Cinder. Once again, if he ends up giving her Crown, then it gets considerably worse.

Is it good in a long run? Yes, it is. Not only do they deny Salem one of her most powerful assets, they gain new powerful ally. Ally that is finally able to break free and make her own choice, completing her character arc. Jaune is also able to triumph in his own way by "weaponizing" his kindness.

_____________________________________________________________

Those were some of my thoughts on Jaune's heresies and how Cinder could fit in them in the end. Of course this is all purely speculative and could end up meaning nothing. Maybe there will be completely different event down the line that fits heresy motif. Maybe these are all just coincidences and writers are winging it, who knows.

Either way, what are your thoughts? Feel free to comment if you have your own interpretation of Jaune's heresy. That's all for today.

[crystalcanis]

Teaser for 2024!! Chapter 1 might have ended but the horrors continue.

Where to read my comic! LINK (coming to tumblr sometime this year hopefully)

I'm going to put some personal thoughts regarding chapter 1 below, it's there if you want context on how I see this story, but it can be ignored if you don't want to read a wall of text! I hope the teaser looks nice and spikes interest! I think this next chapter is going to be a fun one.

Arc 1 Chapter 1 was written when I was still in highschool, I have graduated college by now :' ) So needless to say, I am very excited to be jumping into the second arc of this story and be done and over with the stuff my teenage self wrote. 

I scripted Arc 2 Chapter 2 relatively recently (almost done scripting Arc 2 Chapter 3 too), so it has my current writing style and pacing! I'm really proud of it personally, I think its fun but I guess there is that underlying fear of people maybe not liking my current approach to the characters. Specially because I know this comic seems to be the favorite amongst my current two because of how long it's been around! Even if I made little edits on the way, Chapter 1 was basically the same script my teenage self wrote... I had to follow the planned pacing and events, and oh gosh there are so many scenes I would write differently (all the ones before we meet Noriel, basically.)

My biggest personal complain with chapter 1 is that I don't think I was clear enough with the theme of the story nor did I give it much justice : ( and that in part goes with my younger self just, not having enough experience writing heavier topics at the time. This story is based on my personal experiences with xenophobia, it's about xenophobia, back when I scripted chapter 1 I knew how it FELT like, but now as an adult I have been able to go deeper and analize why I feel that way, why people treat me the way they do, and much more that I plan to properly explore going forward. This doesn't mean that other people connecting with this story through other forms of bigotry like racism, transphobia, homophobia etc is wrong, though! I have seen your explanations for why and it's sooo so fair, I don't mind this story reasonating with how general bigotry feels like at all, intersectionality is a thing for a reason. But I wish to explore xenophobia as it was intended :]! It's personal to me. And the world of Ales is so HUGE! Chapter 1 did not give the worldbuilding justice either! There is so much to explore and I'm excited! I can't believe my younger self wanted to end the story here, man. Insane.

The only thing that's closest to my current writing style in chapter 1 is actually the flashback with Noriel and Kana we saw this year! That wasn't part of the original script, and I added it in preemptively, knowing I would need it for context in the new chapters but that I wouldnt have space for it later, it needed to happen Now or never. So I guess that's a good reference for what to expect! But fear not, just because chapter 2 and onward is technically an updated approach to things, that doesn't mean what happened in chapter 1 wont affect anything! Quite the contrary oh boy! What happened in chapter 1 is a big catalyst for so many things that happen in this story, and why Noriel and Kana act the way they do. I think it's going to be great and I can't wait to share it, I just hope other people like it as much as I do!

[natsubeatsrock]

Do I STILL really believe Nalu won’t happen?

Short answer: No.

But you know that's not how we do things here. 

It feels so good to be back! (sort of, at least) I know I've been away for some time. Part of it is being busy with things in real life. Part of it is mental health not doing too well. Some of my plans for things have shifted quite a bit, as you might be able to tell.

All that said, this hasn't changed.

I haven't talked about this in the proper context of the sequels. I've taken shots at the ship. But have I given this ship the treatment I'd probably be expected to?

Or, at least, have I explained my reasons for still doubting the ship will happen? Because I don't have to like that a ship is happening to believe it will happen.

Speaking of which, what better place to start with than talking about that other ship I rag on a lot: Gruvia. I've said this a few times, but I don't like Mashima's writing of Gruvia in the sequel. To be brief, the ship's focus is different from what I believe it should be. And having Juvia as an active series member has long since passed the point of straining reality.

At the same time, no one denies that Gray has decided to accept Juvia's feelings. He's come to terms with himself in this regard and will accept Juvia as a lover once the mission ends. (How are we still on the fourth dragon?) It's hard to see something like Gray wishing for an alternate universe where he's married with a kid and ask myself, "How serious is Mashima about this ship happening?" You know, as if it isn't only a matter of time.

The issue is that Nalu isn't on that level. That sounds like me being biased and denying the reality right, especially if I listen to certain people.

But let's compare these two ships and what's happened to them in the sequel.

When the gang visited Fairy Nali, their version of Juvia was the catalyst for Gray being as open with Juvia as he's poised to be. Fairy Nali has its own Nalu, but nothing meaningful came from it. Natsu got jealous because of Lucy, but that's not brought up again and doesn't affect anything.

They go to Edolas and see their alternate-world kids. I'll grant you that Natsu and Gray want to bring their "kids" to the Earthland. But what else happens? I mentioned what goes on with Greige already. Ashley talks with Lucy about the possibility of a future romance with Natsu, but she's not meaningfully moved by it.

Come to think of it, there was a similar conversation to that when they were on the Earth God Dragon. Lucy heard Touka had a romantic interest in Natsu. Her response wasn't one of jealousy. She figured it wouldn't go well once she heard about it. (It's almost as if she knows that Natsu isn't currently interested in a romantic relationship if he ever will be.)

Nothing showed that more than the one moment I've talked about the most from the sequel: Natsu and the women in his heart. The fact that Natsu's bunch of women is canonically juxtaposed with Gray's feelings for Juvia shows that Mashima's taking this ship as a joke.

To be a Nalu shipper, I must believe one of a few realities. It's possible that Natsu does have romantic feelings for all these women and can't decide between them. You know, despite Wendy being in that bunch. It's also possible Mashima, being in tune with fandom, is trying to appease fans of Natsu's most-popular ships, even outside of Nalu. It wasn't as if I expected anything involving Nali in the sequel. My theory, which I alluded to when it happened, is Mashima making a callback to a sketch he made a while back. That would explain why Mira and Cana were there but don't talk. They weren't in that old sketch.

I can't say for sure what this moment is supposed to mean. But I know that this isn't helping Nalu's case as a romantic ship. Not just because it's multiple women. Not just because Gray's only interested in Juvia. Natsu's focus in the matter is that Yakune put his friends against him. Not women he's interested in romantically used to distract him.

By the way, I'm sick of having to say this after eight years of having this blog. But I guess some things never change. Characters being put in awkward potentially sexual positions isn't proof your ship will happen. At best, it's a cheap gag that could reveal characters' feelings through their reactions. At worst, it's one of the most annoying tropes of the medium we love and want to take more seriously. Lucy wanting Natsu to touch her anywhere doesn't hold the kind of weight I'm annoyed to know so many fans want it to have. That doesn't matter how real or fake Lucy or whoever else is.

But what tells me Nalu isn't likely isn't any of that. It's not anything involving Gruvia or chapter 71 of the sequel. I don't think I'd say this a few years ago. But the thing that sells me against Nalu is Jerza. Of course, this isn't to say Jerza happening would jeopardize Nalu. But Jerza has been making strides toward becoming canon.

A few years ago, I concluded that Erza would never willingly leave Fairy Tail, even to be with Jellal. That means the only way Jerza could happen would be if Jellal accepted his actions as being forgiven and was willing to join Erza to some degree. This could be joining Fairy Tail or some sort of mutual partnership outside of it. Mind you, this was for how I was thinking of how to pair them in rewriting the series. (Also, thank "Kidnapping Erza".)

Now, what's happened in the sequel?

Awkward and annoying as it is, Jellal put his past behind him. At this point, it's more a matter of conviction, similar to Gray not using Iced Shell. Erza invited Jellal to join Fairy Tail. He's currently considering the offer and isn't too enthusiastic about it. But if the guild was willing to accept Gajeel destroying the guild and stapling Shadow Gear to a tree, Jellal's not too far from being accepted by the guild. Not because Tower of Heaven isn't objectively worse. Because if the one person in the guild hurt by his actions is willing to accept him, no one else has any reason to reject him. Especially considering she might become the next guild leader if Makarov dies (again).

And all the while, they genuinely get flustered at the idea of being in a relationship with each other. The notion of a Jerza romance is treated as all but a certainty by characters familiar with them multiple times in canon, including the the past few chapters we’ve got from the sequel. As far as I can tell, no one operates under the assumption this ship isn't happening. Nothing has convinced me this shouldn't be the case.

What can I say of Nalu in this regard?

It's one thing if I question whether or not Nalu will happen. I've never seriously liked it and have outright said it won't and shouldn't happen multiple times for multiple reasons. In years past, I probably would point to that and call it a day. But, if there’s any benefit to being away for the past few months, I’ve had time to justify something crazy.

For the past few years, Nalu fans have questioned if the ship will happen. People who like the ship genuinely wonder if Mashima will make the ship happen or if they're right to doubt its prospects. I've seen this all over the internet, not just here on Tumblr. It’s a question people bring up on Reddit. It’s mentioned in places like Youtube and Twitter.

And as much as people will reassure them that it's going to happen, this isn't true of the other ships in the Big 4. As a fandom, we're convinced Jerza will happen. We're convinced Gruvia will happen. No matter how people feel about them, I don't see anywhere near as many people questioning these ships happening as Nalu.  Gajevy's already happened, and we know how that's supposed to go.

And, to be honest, this has been amazing to notice. Going from everyone taking Nalu for granted to seeing the whispers of Nalu not being as possible genuinely makes me feel so vindicated. When I made my big post about Nalu years back, I was terrified someone would tell me I was wrong and tear down my post as idiotic. If I were to remake that post now, I'd have so much fewer worries making the post. Even making the sequel to that post after Mashima’s supposed positive comments about Nalu at NYCC was so much easier knowing they weren’t meant to be.

It's almost a shame that I've all but run out of things to say about the ship. At this point, there's not a whole lot else for me to say but "I told you so, idiots" to the people who doubted me and those who agreed with me. It's not unlikely that something new will happen that requires me to talk about Nalu between now and Mashima's final decision on the ship. Something always comes up, be it a moment or something in fandom. Some Nalu fans may reply to my posts, and I'll answer them. But nothing to change how we all view Nalu will likely happen for some time.

Is Nalu possible? Yes, Nalu can still happen as long as Mashima's still writing the series. I don't think that a canonized Nalu will look anywhere near as interesting as the fandom wants to believe it would be. However, it's not as if Nalu is entirely impossible. I said that when I made my first long post about Nalu. (I didn't in the sequel because I figured the series was over.) I said that when we learned Mashima didn't plan the ship originally. I still believe that now, despite everything that I've said.

While nothing is set in stone, I'll enjoy all the salt from the Nalu fandom.

[freakingoutthesquares]

Beginner's Fuck Words: Chris Roberts, Photographer: Phil Ward Taken from Melody Maker, 19 March 1994 Transcription: Acrylic Afternoons

For some, it was dark and grubby. For others, Blakean and euphoric. The loss of virginity is an event (or not) which most recall as imperfect but momentous, or at least crap but interesting.

Bob Mortimer cites an overwhelming sense of "I am about to do it, I am doing it, I have done it." Jo Brand remembers her head banging against the base of the toilet. "She was very into the Bay City Rollers," sighs Terry Hall (though not of Jo Brand), "which put me off a bit. But not enough." Jarvis Cocker didn't tell anyone about it for five years, fearing the secret might lose its magic.

We know all this because Pulp, right now Britain's most stimulating pop group, have made a half-hour film interviewing various surprisingly candid quasi-names (Justine Frischman, John Peel, Pam Hogg, Alison Steadman, etc) about their sexual awakening. The film premiered at the ICA last week and is a funny and touching - as the phrase goes - catalyst for discussion and irreverent nostalgia.

It also ties in (sort of) with Pulp's new single, "Do You Remember The First Time?", which revisits the bravado of "Lipgloss" and "Razzmatazz" and is in every way irresistible. After years of bruised suburban sonatas, Pulp - suddenly hailed across the media as sex gods and glam messiahs - are ready to be defiled by popular acclaim.

Talk about sex? Pulp have already done that more times than the average women's glossy. Yet when you ask Pulp if they sometimes think everything's been done before, guitarist/violinist Russell says, "The ancient Greeks were saying that as well, weren't they?" and mainman Jarvis says, "That would be a very defeatist attitude. Even if every experience in life has been had by someone before, it's not been had by you. Unless you believe in reincarnation, which I'm not that bothered about myself." 

"We tried to make an accessible film," begins bassist Steve. "The tone of it's light, watchable, funny. We've discouraged the tabloids - there are enough quotes to bury everyone on it, taken out of context, so we've been quite careful there."

"As it stands," adds Jarvis, "anyone could watch it, even people who might find our music distasteful. I'm not obsessed with sex, don't get me wrong. It's just that so often it gets written about in an idealised way or a 'Carry On' nudge-nudge way. Then again, I don't think it would be so great if it was more open, like I imagine Norway to be, where they discuss it over the breakfast table."

"There is a lot to be said for English restraint," muses Russell. "The fact that something is forbidden makes it more exciting.

"Ah, but that's when you get your suspenders on and your orange in your mouth," interrupts Jarvis. There is some confusion.

"No, not you personally Russell; I mean that bloke. They only do that cos you have to lock yourself away in private. If it wasn't 'bad' they wouldn't be drawn to that twisted sexuality."

"There's a frisson to the whole thing," continues Russell. "So when you do break it down it seems to mean something and it's not just something you do as a matter of course. I was on a train once with this German girl and she just got changed in front of me, and, well, it didn't turn me on... I felt really insulted by it, to tell you the truth. I thought: I'm a man..."

"Maybe she was trying to tell you something," suggests Jarvis.

"No, well, she wasn't, that was the thing. It was..." Russell tails off.

Was this in England or in Germany?

"It was in the former Yugoslavia."

What comes across repeatedly in the filmed interviews is the sense of relief everyone felt from adolescent peer pressure to have "done it".

"We found quite a difference between men and women," observes Jarvis, "in that men would be more inclined to brag off about it, the thing that 'I've pulled'. Whereas a girl wouldn't run around school going 'I've had a shag'. I'm not saying that's right. I think it probably isn't, but..."

I'm certain it isn't. Women talk in much earthier terms.

"I don't know," considers keyboardist Candida. "I think women want the romantic thing more than men do. But that doesn't mean they get it. I mean, yes, women talking about men can be really... joky."

"Men talk about women on a superficial level," says Steve. "They don't say: but does she love you?"

"There's all this laddishness, which is nonsense," says Russell. "And lads know it's nonsense but it's fun, like talking about cars and football."

Candida tells a story.

"My cousin was showing me round her house last night, and there's a boy living there, and on his wall he had five pictures of cars. I've never seen that before. No pictures of women or anything. Just cars."

"I always know when my girlfriend and her friend are talking about men in the kitchen," says Russell. "You hear the noise of geese cackling."

"A lot of men do think differently to before," reflects Candida. "That comedienne Jo Brand, she's all right, but she can be just too nasty to men sometimes, I think. It's just as bad as some awful big fat boozy men going on about women. Which you don't get any more on telly. But you do get a lot of women on telly being horrible about men."

"It just sets up a 'versus' situation again, doesn't it?" says Jarvis. "You're either on one side or the other. Still. It wouldn't do for us all to be the same, would it?"

"Good God no!" we all chime.

Pulp recently finished recording what they regard as their "first album proper" with producer to the stars Ed Buller.

"For the entirety of the Eighties we had to have a whip-round to spend 15 hours in the back of a cold transit van to play to 12 people", chuckles Russell. "Don't let anyone romanticise it, it's a load of rubbish, best off out of it."

"You'd get up in the morning," remembers drummer Nick, "feeling like you'd been shat out of a horse. Or something."

Jarvis surprises me by claiming The Velvet Underground are a bigger influence on him than Barry White, and he never records while naked.

"It's usually me, but not me as I would go down to the shops. But still me."

Pulp are enjoying their long overdue lift-off.

"It's a bit sad if you get too blasé about things; cynicism cuts down your opportunities. It's the same with sex, of course. I mean you have to have a certain degree of excitement just to... get it on."

Bang a gong. Let's.

[tauforged]

[anon from before again] I don’t think we have directly interacted before nor was I the person sending people the messages that were telling people to block you!! I just wanted to offer some perspective on what haUppened and that probably drama #1 was the catalyst for unfollowing. Most people who got the anon didn’t really care. I didn’t mean to upset you further and dont check your blog but tumblr keeps reccing your posts to me and I don’t want to block.

i have a very hard time believing that you’re someone i’ve never interacted with considering your previous messages were nearly word-for-word identical to dms i’ve received on the matter from someone i am doing my damnedest to avoid, but i’m willing to believe that it’s just a weird coincidence and take you at your word for now if it will just put a stop to this. if you’re genuinely incapable of seeing me minding my own business without bringing the entire incident up, i would really prefer you just block me because i have stated time and again that i want to be left alone. that means no more asks about the situation. you don’t need a reason to unfollow, i don’t care if you did or not - i’d much prefer people unfollow me than make their not liking the way i blog my problem ! i’ve never given a shit about follower count, i’m here to try and make connections with people who share my interests and talk about my life, idgaf about clout or whatever. i’d rather have 10 followers and they all be people i enjoy the company of than 5k while also feeling like i need to watch my back, yknow?

however i do have one more question — can you elaborate on what you mean when you says “most people who got the anon didn’t care”? because aside from a couple of close friends who got it and reached out to me directly and one(1) nonmutual id never interacted with one-on-one who very kindly dmed me to see if everything was okay after getting it , i haven’t heard or seen anything and wouldn’t have been aware it was even happening had one not gotten sent to my boyfriend of all people, so i’d genuinely really love to know how you know who got the ask in question. im not trying to be directly accusatory, i really hope there’s a benign explanation for that and id hope you’d understand why my thoughts immediately went where they did without any further context.