#but in terms of like themes and narratives and stuff there's just something about it that's so compelling

[laceratedlamiaceae]

Stede and Izzy watching the sun rise, drinking tea and discussing the plans for the day while Ed sleeps in.

Izzy and Ed watching the sun set, leaning back and reminiscing over old times while Stede tells the crew their bedtime story.

Ed and Stede stargazing, laying on the foretop and making up stories about the constellations while Izzy gets some well-deserved rest in their bed.

[inbarfink]

After all these years, ‘I Remember You’ is still one of the great highlights of Adventure Time Storytelling. And not just in the basic ‘what???? Silly children’s cartoon does something SAD??? HOLY SHIT MIND BLOWN’ way. But with the execution of that Something Sad. How it manages to pack so many Complex Emotions into just 11-minutes of television. And especially the way it utilizes the basic Adventure Time format for that purpose.

So Adventure Time is a Board-based show. Each episode has an outline pitched and written down by the writer’s room, and then this outline goes to a team of (usually) two Storyboard Artists who develop that simple outline into a full story. And with the show’s art-style deliberately eschewing staying perfectly ‘on-model’ in favor of having the animators take direct reference from how the different storyboarders draw the characters

And the show being generally extremely versatile in terms of themes and tone - AT has allowed a lot of their Storyboarders to really express themselves and their unique artistic vision as part of the Big Collaborative Narrative that is Adventure Time. 

Now, the Boarders who worked on ‘I Remember You’ are Cole Sanchez and Rebecca Sugar. These two were a Storyboarding Duo from the start of S4 and until Sugar left the AT Crew during S5, and they always struck me as a curious combination. I think really from all of the individual boarders working on AT during that time, these two really are the closest to having like… Totally Opposite Artistic Sensibilities as boarders. 

With Sugar favoring a style that is very loose and sketchy and also very rounded. Focusing on expressions and subtle body language and lighting. And being famous for going deep in depth into Big Moments of Emotional Catharsis

And Sanchez having a very clear art style that emphasizes strong silhouettes and clear lines that suggest flatness. Focusing more on major poses and the character’s positions in the space. And having just a really great eye for AT’s brand of silly humor.

Like, I almost kinda suspect these two were paired together so they can each cover for the other’s “weakspots” in writing ‘Adventure Time’. 

And there were a few episodes that did some really interesting stuff with this very contrasting pair - ‘Jake the Dog’ is another example. Giving most of the Farmworld scenes to Sugar and most of the Time Room scenes to Sanchez both plays to their personal strengths as storyboarders and helps to emphasize the strong emotional contrast between these two scenarios. 

And ‘I Remember You’ is actually kinda unique among Adventure Time episodes cause… Most episodes will have the two boarders alternate between working on the episode throughout it. Like you’d have Boarder A draw a bit and then Boarder B and then Boarder A again… But “I Remember You” is divided between Sanchez and Sugar… basically perfectly in the middle.

So the entirety of the first half of the episode was boarded by Sanchez

Until Ice King pushes Marceline and then leaves the room in shame.

And then, Sugar takes over.

And, like, even if you don’t know anything about the Behind the Scenes of Adventure Time or who Cole Sanchez and Rebecca Sugar even are - the Shift is noticeable. The shift in tone, in narrative focus, in the subtleties in which the characters are drawn. 

The entire first half of the episode has this thin veneer of just being a Silly Goofy Ice King Episode. Sanchez’s talent for Adventure Time’s brand of comedy is on full display… but there is also this underlying feeling that Something is Happening just under the surface. And these hints of the Big Emotions of ‘IRY’ expressed via Sanchez’s kinda goofy style really create this balance between putting the audience into a false sense of security that this is just a Very Normal Episode about two characters hanging out and the Tension constantly brewing in the subtext. 

And then it all comes to a blow.

And then the Shift happens. And now we are in Sugar’s court.

And this subtle shift in the artstyle and storytelling also coincide with Marceline finally openly expressing her feelings and the Reveal of Simon and Marcy's shared past. The episode changes focus from Ice King's silly antics to Marceline's feelings. Everything changes, everything in the first part of the episode gets recontextualized and... even on the most basic level, the episode is now Noticeably Different.

I would almost say that Sanchez’s half of the episode has Ice King define the tone, while Sugar’s half of the episode has Marceline define the tone. But more than anything it’s the catharsis. The reveal and release of those emotions that were building up so expertly through the Sanchez half of the episode. All of the Sugar-boarded scenes in this episode are really heartbreaking on their own, just through the tragedy of the story and Sugar’s expert knowledge of howto convey emotion in the visual medium - but it’s so enchanted by what came before it.

“I Remember You” is truly a great testament to how ‘Adventure Time’ could use every aspect of its medium to tell a great story in such a short time.

[got-into-worm-by-mistake]

Okay, I've Read Worm: A Retrospective Part 2: What The Fuck Did I Just Read?

So I don't mean literally 'what did I read'. I know and understand the plot, and while I probably didn't pick up on all the references and cape theme stuff Wildbow was going for, it was established a while ago that I wouldn't. And I may not have understood every scene and character the way may intended, but sincerely, fuck his intent, it sometimes sucks.

What I mean by this is -

I heard a lot about Worm before I read it. "Grimdark" "Depressing" "Optimistic" (Yes, someone actually called Worm an Optimistic Work which is... a take), "Bleak" "A Deconstruction" "A Love Letter To The Superhero Genre" "A Takedown of the Superhero Genre" "Just A Fucking Story" "The Greatest Piece Of Superhero Media Ever" and god knows what else.

I didn't hear anyone call worm a Reconstruction until I was partway into the Work, when I also discovered TV tropes calls it that which is... well, we'll get into that.

And I heard Wildbow called "A Hack" "A Nihilist" "A Guy Who Lets His Problems With Authority Get Ahead Of Him" (Or something to that effect" "An Amazing Writer" "A God Amongst Men" (Okay, not really on that last one, but I have made jokes about Wildbow having cultists or the 'Church of Wildbow' for a reason, because some people are really fucking out here acting like he's just... way better than he is, imo. Like, beyond just the degree of just subjective opinion. Not that I think Wildbow deliberately fostered such a mentality... probably)

So. What the fuck did I just read? What is Worm?

Well I am comfortable in saying that Worm is Grim, Bleak, Depressing. A lot of really bad shit happens without neat narrative resolution, there's a lot of hurt and not a lot of comfort. Taylor's life mostly gets worse, and most other people's lives mostly get worse. There's not a lot of unambiguous victories, even the ones that are straight up victories come at hilariously lopsided costs, the whole damn world is slowly collapsing, and everyone in authority is largely either complicit, incompetent, overwhelmed, corrupt, or useless. Almost nobody is just straight up heroic, and those who are usually die (in often pointless ways) or get treated as incredibly naïve by the narrative. Often both. Worm often feels pretty hopeless, and even the hope is pretty fragile and strained, when it's there.

Is Worm dark? Is it Grimdark? Well... that's trickier. There are a hell of a lot of dark implications of Worm, a lot of dark stuff that is hinted at, or insisted is there by the writer (*cough* *Cough*) but in terms of the actual darkness onscreen... depending on how one defines 'Grimdark' - how reliant are they on the conventional 4chan inspired definition or if they've expanded their understanding of the word and so on - it could qualify, but... *equivocating hand gesture*. I am reasonably comfortable that Worm itself never really quite qualifies as grimdark. The darkness on the screen is not really enough, and really, under the narrowest of 4chan definitions, it probably isn't even grim. Though I would say that there's a point where the 4chan Noble/Grim Bright/Dark four quadrant approach becomes a useless category of analysis.

I think in most cases people who call Worm grimdark are either parroting other people, lack adequate terminology to really describe what they mean (because Worm is rather hard to put a box around) or have very low standards for 'grimdark'. But I don't think everyone is talking out of their ass, because like I said, there's a lot of really dark implications of Worm. Some likely intended by Wildbow, some the result of probably oversights by him or didn't really quite grasp certain things and just kinda... threw stuff out there without following through. (Not that I blame him, Worm was huge and not every single detail needed to be followed through on, but still. Happens). Worm's entire universe and setting runs on people rather consistently making the decisions that make shit worse.

Like in 90% of the cases, each individual person's decision to make shit worse makes sense from their perspective and understanding their psyches, but it does strain credulity a little, and make it hard to say the story isn't kinda grimdark when almost every decision almost everyone makes makes things worse.

But... technically, I think Worm manages to skate by being grimdark. Sometimes just barely, but just barely can be enough.

I don't think it's particularly controversial to call Worm 'A Deconstruction' or to say that Worm deconstructs elements of the superhero genre. Does Worm Reconstruct... well, yes. It does the deconstructing thing (exploring how so many common elements of the superhero genre don't make a lot of sense) and then it does the reconstructing thing (putting them back together and designing the physics and rules of the universe so they kind of do make more sense).

But I would say that calling Worm a 'Reconstruction' is false advertising. Not because it isn't, but when most people hear the word Deconstruction, they expect a kind of depressing, bleak, grim, sometimes dark, etc story. Reconstructions are thus expected to be more upbeat and optimistic and bright. I don't think this is just me. To be fair, this doesn't have to be true. A deconstructed slasher flick would probably be fairly upbeat and bright, and a reconstructed slasher flick would... probably not be those things. But I think the general implications of the words remain true.

Telling someone Worm is a Reconstruction of the Superhero Genre, before they read it, without a lot of qualifiers, would, I think, be pretty deceptive. Accurate, but deceptive. It is possible to be misleading while being totally accurate, after all.

One thing I hear a lot about is how much more 'realistic' Worm is compared to other superhero media. Without being a deep aficionado about superhero media, I honestly can't say if this is true, but I can say that, as of itself, Worm is not what I would call realistic. Leaving aside the way Wildbow puts his thumb on the scale of 'everyone makes decisions that make shit worse' across the board, there's the fact that every element of the underlying rules of the universe are deliberately, and sometimes quite obviously, contrived to create the necessary parameters for the story he wants. Which is fine, that's perfectly fine worldbuilding and writing, but it's not 'realistic'.

He covers his ass with PtV, using it as an excuse for a lot of shit, but uh... that's still covering his ass, it's still obvious plot device is obvious. Not the worst thing the world, and I've seen much worse handlings of obvious plot device is obvious, but... man, sometimes with his worst WoGs, Wildbow really would have benefited from just admitting it was a plot hole and he made a mistake or he didn't consider something or that 'you know what, yes, it's unlikely that no one shot Jack Slash in the face during his entire career pre-Bonesaw's modifications, but it happened' (i.e. the Cauldron gun social engineering WoG is just so goddamn dumb. Less in of itself and more how it fits to everything else. String enough of his WoGs together and the whole damn setting starts to fall apart)

Things like the CUI, and the Gesellschaft and the way Africa and South America are written speak to the profound lack of realism and the contrived way that the Wormverse got constructed. The Gesellschaft is a perfectly fine plot device to have in a story - a reference and use of the way Nazi and Nazi-created and Nazi-descended and Nazi-related villains and villain organizations are a common trope in superhero comics - but it's not really all that realistic as presented. Wildbow has rather repeatedly insisted that it is, but uh... no, he's wrong. (He has admitted that his handling of South America and Africa weren't great, and to be fair, most of what we know of both could just be filtered through Taylor's own distinctly American Teenager view of the world, and to be more fair, developing entire continents that aren't even close to being in-focus for the story is a tall ask for anyone). But like, Worm isn't realistic. The way Shards work was deliberately contrived to have his intended outcome. Endbringers too. Cauldron. The backstories of characters and organizations show the way they were bent that way to achieve the outcome he wanted. And again, I don't really have a problem with elements of a story being constructed to achieve the intended outcome. People who get too focused on the worldbuilding will sometimes write themselves into a hole where the needs of the story and the needs of the Worldbuilding conflict. Wildbow almost always picked the story. It can be frustrating for people trying to isolate the elements of the world to write fanfics or analyze the world for like, versus fights or whatever, but... I don't blame the author for that. (Though his inability to just admit that he picked story over worldbuilding and instead keeps pulling a WoG out of the ether to cover his ass is... not great) To be fair, I don't think Wildbow has ever called his work 'More Realistic than Other Superhero Media'. I don't think he set out to create some hyperrealistic superhero story. And the word 'Realistic' is tossed around a lot without really clarifying what someone means. I honestly don't really call things realistic that often for that reason.

The problem here isn't Worm, or Wildbow, but some of his fans. Like I said, there's a reason why I joke about a 'Church of Wildbow.' There's people who have said that Worm has 'ruined' other superhero media for them and to those people... I mean, ruined is subjective, and like I've said repeatedly, I'm not really into superhero media, but like, deconstructing and even reconstructing the Superhero genre is not new? DC and Marvel and a lot of smaller presses have been doing that since like, the 90s? At least? I've already address how Worm doesn't seem particularly realistic to me. I think in some cases, what they may mean is that Worm is more cohesive. It's one single story told by one guy with one clear vision. Comic books in particular can experience all sorts of tonal and narrative whiplash between runs, as writers change, as artists change, as executive meddling can interfere. And that's pretty true. (*sings* We don't talk about Waaard oh-no-no).

But I also feel like if Worm really did ruin all other superhero media for you... maybe you weren't actually that into superhero media? Even if you've read a lot of it, maybe Superhero media wasn't actually for you? Just maybe?

Now, this all brings us back to the question that started this: What the Fuck did I just Read? And the disappointing answer is that... putting a box around Worm is really fucking hard. It doesn't really fit into a nice, simple, easy, pithy descriptor. Not one that doesn't mislead. I mean, Worm is grim, bleak and depressing, but it is more than that. Worm is... Worm a lot of things.

I think honestly the closest thing to a nice, succicnt, easy way to describe Worm is this one:

I don't know if Wildbow was the one to use this to describe Worm first, or if a Fan did or what, but... yeah. That's Worm.

That's what the fuck I just read.

(I did hope to go into 'Who the Hell is Worm For' question here, but uh... this is pretty long as it is, so we'll leave that off for later.)

[venomous-qwille]

hi qwille!!! I got questions for u! you have lots of characters planned out, and that’s super cool! but how do u usually go about that process? like all your characters are very unique, and I wonder about the design process, as well as how you make their personality distinct! how do you make character dynamics/relationships? because all the scenes I’ve read so far make the characters feel really organic, and mesh really well together! (sorry for all the questions! I’m super curious ^w^)

Hiya! Here is an answer I wrote for this question on discord recently ^^

I will try answer this as thoroughly as possible!

There was a LOT of kill your darlings involved in making characters for gitm. Originally I had a very long list of character ideas that I cut down and down based on the kind of things and themes they would give me the opportunity to write about. I love long ensemble cast stories, thinking back to ones I particularly enjoyed and the ways those characters gelled together helped me a lot. The most important thing when selecting characters was making sure they would give me something interesting to write about! I was also very keen on ones that let me explore the fics main theme of Family from a different angle. I'm not sure how helpful this all is! But yeah, I try to be pretty strict with myself about what I include. The only reason I would include two characters who were very very similar would be to emphasize a difference/divergence between them later on. Characters have to justify themselves by bringing something unique to the table, even if that thing is just a 'very different outlook on life' to the rest of the cast. Over time a lot of those character ideas became more fleshed out in my brain, and characters that were cut from the original shortlist made their way back in. They still have to be able to narratively justify themselves in order to earn a channel in the discord though!

For the gitm guys, while I dont have a literal sheet I fill out I do make sure to answer a couple of basic character work questions: What lie do they believe about themselves/the world? How does it impact the way they interact with others? What central theme do they embody most? What do they want more than anything else? How do they feel about humans? Who are they at their best and who are they at their worst? I found that by answering these sort of questions it helped me discover more about them, which creates more questions- rinse and repeat. The more questions I answered the further away they would get from each other in terms of similarities. The thing that really helped with the gitm boys, especially because their origins are so similar, was leaning in to how different their experiences were post-fazco. They are different people because the world has made them that way. Messing around with foils has been useful too! Characters are no fun in a vacuum, it's how they interact with others that makes them interesting. I like to create ones that will bring out the best and the worst in each other. I think about opposites a lot and I really like narrative symmetry- what lessons can the characters learn from each other? I find that stuff super exciting to read so I really wanted to include it. Some examples of character foils in gitm: Fool & Noon, Sombra & Sunspot, Misuta & Sol

When it comes to finding character voice, I do a lot of test drabbles (a couple of them are on this server), which I use to just fuck around until I find something that feels right. For instance- Sol was very very easy to find the voice of, where as Misuta took weeks of rewrites. Sometimes things take time. Spending this time figuring out their voices at the start really helps fic consistence in the long run, I think. Because of all that prep, I don't really have to do anything to 'get into character' when writing their dialogue (it's fairly second nature now).

In regards to coming up with a character's arc, I look at them and their themes and ask 'what the fuck happened to you, dude?' and then 'how has that entrenched a faulty world view on you?' 'what could you be driven to do because of that world view/misunderstanding?' 'what would it take to fix this world view/misunderstanding?' (the last question is the most important one!). Then voila, you have a very loose framework of a (hopepunk) character arc.

In regards to the actual planning of the fic/character arcs, I have a very big miro board (pic attached) that I use for all this! Most of the major character beats are marked out separately to plot beats etc etc. There are still a bunch of bits that only reside in my brain, but I do try to add them to my plan as soon as they become any kind of concrete. All of the characters also have a background chapter (or rather, a series of chapters that form a short story) attached to their arc, that will recontextualise everything you have learned about them so far! I am so deeply looking forward to dropping these (I already have quite a lot written).

I would say that- for your question on character relationships- the answer does come down to being really specific about what you include. Make sure characters are meaningfully different from eachother, give them goals and experiences that clash and then force them to live/work together in the same space. If you have put time into building your characters before that, then you just need to create opportunities for them to get into conflict and bring out the best/worst in eachother. I really do believe that characters are quite boring in a vacuum- which is why I put so much emphasis on including narrative foils ^^ Tyvm for the ask <3

[19burstraat]

queering futurity in crooked kingdom

if I had any real time for this (I do not) I'd be tempted to write a real essay about it, but I have a dissertation and two other real essays for my actual degree, so let's do a bad tunglr bullet point analysis. I'm... largely generalising and paraphrasing here, and I suspect this has a billion things to iron out or that I forgot about, but I hope this might be a bit interesting regardless of how much you may or may not know abt queer literary theory lmao.

in extreme short, there is a subset of queer theory around what is, in essence, queer time. there is a heteronormative future/'futurity', and it is marriage, children, a good job, a nice house, and dying at a good age after a fulfilling life. queer* and trans people both reject and often cannot access this: plenty couldn't/cannot get married or have children, or had to surpass lots of obstacles to do so, many queer and trans people were or are killed young, or died prematurely in the aids crisis. and so we get queer temporality; a resistance to the heteronormative future that is refused or inaccessible, and to reproductive futurism; the concept that people value the future over the present... and this manifests in kicking back against things like the symbolic 'child' as a representative of futurity. not real children, but empty platitudes like think of the children! think of the future for your children! there can also be a development of a death drive, which is sometimes literal and sometimes metaphorical, which is, again, basically a rejection of 'the future'.

while the grishaverse doesn't have homophobia as such, you can still do queer readings, bc it is ofc influenced by our world, by virtue of being Written By A Person From Our World. and especially in kerch, there's still stuff like patrilineal inheritance... buuuut reproductive futurity & friends are very deliberately destroyed by the end of crooked kingdom. mostly by the usual culprit (taps sign that says IT'S KAZ AGAIN LOL) but by the narrative and the other characters as well. walk w me! I don't think this is a real analysis more just a lot of Thoughts but... nvm

*used here as an umbrella term since the theory I'm pulling from is the field of queer theory

the two men (van eck and rollins) who are most concerned with reproductive futurism (having heirs and a legacy, 'building something that will outlast them'), are promptly buried under the rubble of their building efforts by our usual culprit. kaz uses the mentality of legacy and lineage against them both; he kidnaps van eck's pregnant wife to use as a bargaining chip, and he uses rollins's son and heir against him, because he knows what's most important to these men is their line, their work being handed down. he deduces that rollins has a son through rollins' vanity around building something to 'last', and his naming of the kaelish prince. rollins is literally themed around monarchy and descent; the king of the barrel, the kaelish prince, the emerald palace. kaz, for his part, is the bastard of the barrel. the illegitimate son, not produced by any conventional family structure, ketterdam his mother and profit his father... and therefore he is the perfect person to blow up this imagined monarchy

wylan is rejected by van eck for his disability, for being supposedly incapable of continuing his father's legacy; and so we gather that the actual child doesn't matter to van eck, it's what The Child represented to him, which was the future of the van eck company. the illegitimate kaz restores van eck's disowned son to the succession through sheer trickery, and jan van eck's trading empire is succeeded by his son he attempted to reject, and his farm-boy barrel-tough boyfriend. they bring home the first wife that van eck had committed, for failing to produce the 'perfect' heir. no perfect heteronormative future here!

(also by virtue of wylan and jesper being a mlm couple, there is now way less emphasis that can be put on the idea of biological children 'continuing' the line, and it somewhat stops the expectation that ruined wylan's life from being passed down)

the two m/f couples are also very distant from this idealised reproductive futurity. matthias dies, ruining any idea of a 'conventional' future he could have had with nina, and while his death is generally more about the extremist brainwashing stuff explored w the drüskelle, it does blow to shreds that futurity even more, and nina's power is also a very literal HEY GUYS. LET'S THINK ABOUT DEATH... plus she leaves ketterdam to take matthias to be buried at the end of the book.

kaz and inej both do very dangerous jobs and separate for long periods of time. they may marry or they may not, they may have children or they may not, they may be physical with one another or they may not. it doesn't really matter; they'll try, but we don't get to find out how far they may or may not get, which honestly I kinda like. their future is open, the river running carrying inej to the sea. also, inej makes an explicit rejection of this kind of 'normal' future:

So he wasn’t fit for a normal life. Was she meant to find a kindhearted husband, have his children, then sharpen her knives after they’d gone to sleep? How would she explain the nightmares she still had from the Menagerie? Or the blood on her hands?

we don't really know whether or not kaz as a character is queer (I do not think kaz knows either lol) but it doesn't really matter, you can still read him as a queer figure both a) just if you want to! and b) in this sense of queer temporality, bc he's the crux of a lot of it. we already covered the bastard thing and his happy habit of kicking reproductive futurism when it's down, and as Edelman says: 'If the fate of the queer is to figure the fate that cuts the thread of futurity...' well, kaz 'build something new. watch it burn' 'he knew exactly what he was going to leave behind: damage' brekker is our man!

he does not give a single flying fuck about the future. he destroyed van eck and rollins' legacies, and he'll do that shit again. he doesn't have enough of an ego to consider a 'legacy' for himself besides destruction, which is a rejection of a legacy in itself. his plans for the future amount to fucking shit up and making a bunch of money to use to do more damage, until he gets shot/stabbed/hanged/drowned/whatever, which he constantly anticipates.

kaz also has a massive distrust and disdain for traditional family structures, because he's seen them crumble twice; his actual family are all dead, and the hertzoon con was built on creating a convincing family mode to lure them in. "my mother is ketterdam, she birthed me in the harbour; my father is profit, I honour him daily" is a sneer at paterfamilias type families where the mother is there to just give birth and the father is the head of the family, to be honoured and served, rather than loved. he also has zero sympathy for the 'think of the children!' thing, bc he knows it's disingenuous; who thought of him? no one. rollins was happy to con kids with the false promise of family and safety, and all the people he paid off were happy to turn the other way. was there no one to look after you? no, there wasn't. his mother is ketterdam: filthy, feral ketterdam. no nurturing mother has he!

So he threatens Alby and Hanna with no qualms, because while he doesn't actually ever intend to hurt children (...not physically anyway, apparently upsetting them is fair game FJJFJD), he knows the power of the threat— the idea of the child— is often more impactful than the actual act itself. ("Inej, I could only kill Pekka’s son once. He can imagine his death a thousand times.") it certainly works on rollins and van eck! he'll make you think of the damn children alright!

inej takes direct action to defend actual children, not just the idea of them, and then we hear in rule of wolves she's hated by the kerch government for it because she's fucking with their profits. (look also to how they flapped about searching for wylan, one rich man's kid, and are completely useless about hundreds of forced indentures. what a surprise...)

she reunites with her parents, but she worries persistently about whether or not they will accept her for who she has become, and we are never quite told whether or not they do. we like to think so, but we don't actually know. and although she gets to see her parents again, her future is on the wraith, not with them.

most people have dead or splintered families, actually. only inej has both parents, and for three - four years, they didn't have a daughter.

The general proximity to death in general is very potent; nina's power, kaz's whole backstory, the camping out in a graveyard. jesper's recklessness and love for fights, inej being ready to die rather than be a captiver again and kaz's response to that being 'not just yet', rather than not at all...

all following into the whole no mourners, no funerals thing!!! the fact that they know they won't be remembered or cared about if they die!!!

Edelman: 'Choosing to stand, as many of us do, outside the cycles of reproduction, choosing to stand, as we also do, by the side of those living and dying each day with the complications of AIDS, we know the deception of the societal lie that endlessly looks toward a future whose promise is always a day away.'

SOC:

Inej's mother and father might still shed tears for the daughter they'd lost, but if Inej died tonight, there would be no one to grieve for the girl she was now. 

“No mourners, no funerals. Another way of saying good luck. But it was something more. A dark wink to the fact that there would be no expensive burials for people like them, no marble markers to remember their names, no wreaths of myrtle and rose.”

pick up what I'm putting down guys please please I don't have time to tease this out properly but like. I think kaz and wylan are the linchpins here. (again)

[killkaramazov]

This will be my worst post but fuck it. If you’re absolutely DETERMINED to take it there then Smerdy/Ivan absolutely BODIES Alyosha/Ivan in terms of narrative/characterization/dynamic/motif and theme/basically everything else that matters. But it is really not about that for the vast majority of people who are deadass about shipping yaoi from a Russian novel published in 1879. All the IvanYosha stuff seems like it’s really more about getting your rocks off on AO3 and drawing two conventionally attractive anime twinks kissing. To which I wonder why you wouldn’t pick literally any two characters from any media for that unless you’re just into incest or something. 

I really love the Grand Inquisitor kiss! And I don’t like seeing it interpreted that way! 

On the other hand something that drives me insane about my personal interpretation of the book is the juxtaposition between the Alyosha Ivan kiss vs Ivan’s general disgust for Smerdyakov. Why is Alyosha kissing Ivan a pure, innocent expression of Christian love for all humanity but Smerdyakov’s gesture of love (killing Fyodor) is something so perverse and horrifying? It shows us something about their station of life through the roles and the acts that are even allowed to them in the narrative.

As far as SmerdyIvan goes I am reminded of the JSTOR article I read (that I now cannot fucking find) where the author mentioned an idea that all of Dostoevsky’s novels center around or contain one central taboo that is so unspeakable that it is scarcely even outright mentioned, and that the central taboo in question in TBK is that Smerdyakov is the fourth brother.

Incest is already gotten into in canon and much has been written about this, especially regarding Dmitry and Fyodor’s rivalry over Grushenka, but also with Ivan falling in love with Dmitry’s ex. So even though we are going far afield from authorial intent, it is really not that much of a jump to start looking at emotional incest from other angles within the family, as we already know literally every other type of abuse was already occurring within that (entirely fractured) family unit. As far as I am concerned regarding authorial intent, any claim you want to make about a work of fiction is fair game as long as you can justify it with evidence from the text, and people have been writing academic articles and essays making wild inferences from this text for the last 150 years, so I defend my right to make this interpretation. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if Freud can diagnose Dostoevsky as bisexual we can say whatever we want about this book.

We know from the canon indisputably that Smerdyakov is unhealthily attached to Ivan, and we know that some vague thing about Smerdyakov sets Ivan’s Geiger counter for rancid horrific disgusting vibes to 10 immediately, anytime they are on the page together. So we can infer a lot from that.

Smerdyakov was literally born of sexual violence, and is a pariah in terms of his gender expression and sexuality, so him taking on the role of someone with a warped sexuality in the narrative just sort of… follows, in terms of the novels concern with the idea of inherited sin. 

There is something compelling to me about the idea that Smerdyakov would seek entrance into the Karamazov family in another, weirder way psychologically through attaching highly inappropriate feelings to Ivan. (‘If you think of me and my feelings toward you as incestuous, then that means you have acknowledged me as a family member’) 

And regardless of what I literally just said about authorial intent, Dostoevsky outright tells us how gay Smerdyakov is like every single time he’s on page. So there is also that.

Their relationship appeals to me greatly insofar as it is utterly disgusting and that’s my jam. There is lots to explore in this dynamic but one indisputable thing baked into the text between them is that it’s literally impossible to imagine any truly romantic union between them simply because of the way they both are. They repulse each other far too much for any expression of that sort. The actualization of their inappropriate relationship is not a culmination through an even vaguely romantic or sexual encounter, instead, it is the fulfilling a murder pact. 

They are like two oppositely charged magnets or something, in turns attracting and repulsing one another, pushing and pulling on each other’s gravitational pulls. Regarding the Tchermashnya-Moscow conversation, the way that their conversations are in doublespeak, with words said out loud and then literally entire other sentences written out in thought and illustrated through description of physicality, is incredibly fascinating to me. They seem to be literally communicating telepathically.  I am reminded of another JSTOR article I read that mentions the Dostoevskian doubles “exerting influence over one other that cannot be explained in any literal sense.”  The only reason they can communicate like this is because they are doubles, and this doublism is reinforced again in the narrative by their being fake twins, the same age but born to different mothers. 

They are each other’s shadows, they share a consciousness on some level, or access each other’s consciousnesses at different times through this shared plot in a way that seems incomprehensible to both of them. And Smerdyakov, in my own interpretation and opinion, as someone who is completely starved for any kind of positive regard, takes this for love. Whether that’s familial or otherwise or both. 

They engage in this mutual seduction towards an ultimate goal or realization: Ivan presents the idea, that “all is permitted” and that perhaps it would be for the better if Fyodor were dead, and Smerdyakov takes his lead from this and in turn pulls Ivan into the murder plot. Their relationship is romantic insofar as they are seducing one another in turn towards this unspeakable and forbidden act that they both desire: the murder.

They deny it right to each others faces, only Ivan’s is an earnest denial, to himself first and foremost, and to Smerdyakov it’s just sort of… foreplay. Like, “we’re just two clever people who are only saying this because we have to, and we get it, and you’re in this with me.” 

There is something really compelling too in the fact that Ivan is on board with the murder plot in one scene on a subconscious level, but later will utterly deny that any of this ever happened or that he ever felt that way. He has expressed and betrayed a desire that is so deviant, so forbidden, and so distressing to him that he has a psychological break over denying that that could have truly been something he wanted. Ivan expresses overwhelming disgust and disdain through the entire book, mostly towards Smerdyakov, but finally towards himself when he is forced to the realization of the role he has played as the idealogical murderer. Whereas Smerdyakov, the more active pursuer in their relationship, is not ashamed of his desires and is the one who ultimately has the lack of inhibition required to carry out The Forbidden Act. 

Ivan is attracted by Smerdyakov initially, despite himself, for reasons he can’t understand, like one is drawn to a cataclysmic disaster of fate in a Greek tragedy or something, and ultimately it descends into complete loathing on both sides, kills Smerdyakov, and mocks Ivan’s entire character by undermining his self concept and his entire value system and laying utterly bare his fatal flaws as a human being. Utterly doomed and hopeless relationship in every single way! 

Alas, no one wants to match my freak about this and that is definitely for the better. If I had to see ship art of them kissing anime style I would kms. Whatever the fuck they had going on is way better. 

[nyaagolor]

What are your thoughts on Apollo Justice (the character)?

OH BOY. OHHHHHH BOY. I have a fever and some free time lfg.

So honestly, I think part of the reason I love Apollo so much is because he runs parallel to Phoenix but also counter to him at the same time. I always saw Simon and Athena as the successors-- in terms of ideology and job and all that other stuff-- to the Phoenix-Edgeworth dynamic and status rather than Apollo and Klavier. Athena and Simon, to me, feel like extensions of the arcs of Phoenix and Edgeworth + the vibes of the original trilogy. Apollo and Klavier ( who I will not talk about bc we will be here all day)? They're the antithesis.

Apollo Justice The Game directly foils the original trilogy in so many ways, but I think even on a more base thematic level it runs counter to a lot of the ideas that we take for granted about the original trilogy, and because Apollo sits at the center of this, the things I love about the game are encapsulated in why I like him. There are a ton of themes in the ace attorney trilogy-- support networks, faith, trust, the truth-- and Apollo is defined by their limits, their failures, and their absence. He is let down, kicked around, defined by abandonment and betrayal and distrust. Apollo is defined by everything that Phoenix is not, and bc of how the timeline goes we don't really get any retribution for that, just a steady march forward, and I think that gives me a lot to think about with his character

Phoenix's arc right from Turnabout Sisters is about the building of a support network, and the ways that developing this support is integral for when things go wrong. We contrast Phoenix with Godot, Maya with Dahlia, and see how people left to stew in their resentment can chase vengeance to dark places (wow I wonder who also does this after the death of a dear friend leading to a crusade of misplaced revenge that almost leads someone they care about being killed.). With Apollo we get to stand on the precipice of resolution, but the important part is we don't get it. Apollo's life falls off the rails, and he's the one left to pick up the pieces.

We see through him how our trust can be betrayed by people of good and bad intentions, and the lingering consequences that has on one's ability to not only trust the people around them but themselves. And yeah!! That's why I adore him so much-- he's tested not by the possibility of failure like Phoenix often is, but climbing up from the reality of it. It's less "how do we make our way out of this mess before it goes nuclear" and more "things are already destroyed-- where do we go from here?". It has more of an element of recovery than prevention to me, and I think that's a fascinating avenue to explore in stories like these. Apollo pushes the envelope of the themes of the narrative and the characters-- he is the epitome of what it looks like when things fall apart, and it gives him and the trilogy characters something to reconcile

A lot of people have complained that Apollo barely feels like the protagonist in his own game, but that's honestly a huge part of the reason why I love him so much. He's defined by the spaces between, the limits and failures of things we had up to this point taken to be true, and left with a pretty limited degree of autonomy through it all. He's pushed around and puppeteered by people who mean well and those who don't, and I feel like a major theme of AA4 that I love but don't often see talked about is "what does it mean to have autonomy-- and by extension, control? What does it mean to take it back? What does it mean to lose it, and what does it mean when you'd do anything to keep it." Most of what I said is only partially resolved bc AA4 is... a game. A technically finished game. but!! Because it eviscerates our expectations of the franchise so thoroughly AND leaves open so many avenues, it makes Apollo and the rest of his crew some of my favorite characters because there's so much you can think about and do with them!!

also he's like. An insect to me. <3

[likeadevils]

most typical quintessential taylor song?

so the obvious answer is all too well. but i think the more interesting thing is what makes a song a quintessential taylor swift song? and in my head there’s two main contenders

fireflies: there’s this concept in my head that i call a “fireflies”, named after the owl city song, where basically everyone on earth privately goes through something, thinks they’re alone in it, and the down the line it’s revealed that the experience is universal. and taylor is fucking exceptional at catching fireflies— finding little hyper specific moments that are universal in their specificity. its not unique to her— it’s something all art strives for to some degree, and country music especially is built on building a scene out of small details— but man is she just. fucking good at it. the obvious example here is all too well, with him keeping her scarf, but the black dog and cornelia street are also amazing examples.

memories: its one of the most fascinating things to track in taylor’s career. there’s the obvious songs about her losing her relationships (all too well is another great example), and the songs about morning her childhood (the best day, seven, never grow up, would’ve could’ve should’ve to a lesser degree, etc), but i think the most interesting example is wildest dreams. in and of itself, it’s not a cliche in her work, but it is the end point of obsessing over building narratives out of your past: you end up seeing the present as your futures past. like. idk it’s just such a culmination of memory as a theme to beg someone who hasn’t even broken up with you to remember you fondly. it’s also what she started her career doing! just please think of me fondly when you hear my favorite song!!

there’s other mini-themes that pop up all the time— secrecy and public opinion, love as something reckless, love as knowledge of a person. and then there’s more structural stuff that’s peppered through her work— taking a common phrase and twisting it, taking the first line/early part of the song and bringing it back at the end of the song (another demonstration of memory, in a way). but in terms of what makes a taylor swift song A Taylor Swift Song, it’s fireflies and memories

[literary-illuminati]

2024 Book Review #28 – The Dead Take The A Train by Cassandra Khaw and Richard Kadrey

Oh I wanted to love this book so very much. On paper it’s basically made for me – incredibly messy fuckup of a heroine, cosmic horror through the idiom of wall street corporate sharks, grimy and gory urban fantasy full of knifing people in back alleys, the works! For the first fifty pages or so, I thought I was in love – which just made the disappointment as the wheels came off all the more bitter.

The book follows Julie, ‘barbed wire magician’ (it’s at least as unpleasant as it sounds), professional monster hunter, and all-around personal disaster. Her life takes a turn for the even messier when a) her best friend/comically oversized unresolved crush shows up at her door begging for help running from her abusive husband and b) unrelatededly but more or less simultaneously, her ex-partner-and-also-boyfriend, looking up to clean up embarrassing loose ends on his rise up the elldritch corporate ladder, baits her into trying to summon a guardian angel from a sabotaged tome and ends up releasing a metaphysical parasite that starts murdering its way through the city’s occult underground. From there things just get messier.

Drilling down as much as I can, my issues with this can be summed up as it feels like a first draft. There’s stuff there on the page – character arcs, relationships, bits of scenery and action setpieces, even themes! - but it’s all just..there. Exaggerated line sketches no one ever went back and turned into full illustrations. It’s most painful with the characters – every one of them is a caricature, precisely and exactly what they first appear to be with the same beats hit again and again every single time they appear on screen. Which more or less for the quirky supporting cast but like – we get multiple chapters from the perspective of the aforementioned abusive husband, and something like a fifth of the book is from the POV of the sleazy corporate striver ex. At no point does either one get the slightest bit of nuance or pathos – Tyler’s chapters in particular end up reading like bad SCP field reports, with so much self-destructive instituional backstabbing and betrayal it all ends up being slapstick.

Sarah the love interest gets a special anti-shout-out here. Like, I know I’m just picky about and have a low tolerance for romances, but I swear – the single most important dynamic in the book in terms of both wordcount and narrative signposting is her and Julie’s romance, and it is just So. Bad. Every single scene she’s in is dedicated to rubbing your face in how fragile and traumatized and selfless and adorable and good-hearted and damaged she is, and the entirety of the romance is essentially one of those jokes about how lesbians will spend six years living with each other awkwardly waiting for the other to ask them out but stretched across 400 pages. I spent half the book patiently waiting for any hint of hidden depths or surprising twists to her character, but nope! Just a perfect domestic angel.

The setting actually has something of a similar issue. It feels like an exaggerated pastiche of urban fantasy, assuming the reader is already familiar with all the tropes and conceits and making only the most perfunctory possible gestures towards exploring or justifying them. This can absolutely work, but if you’re doing it you kind of need to use the genre as the background or setup for something else that the book is actually about – deconstruction or satire or character study or Wacky Hijinks or something. When what’s gruesome action and drama is supposed to be the star attraction, the grounding and verisimilitude of the world is actually pretty key.

A really tight, tense plot could have absolutely redeemed the whole but, well, nope. The literal entire plot hinges on Tyler, in the course of one conversation several drinks in at a crowded bar, baiting Julie into looking for a particular type of tome from a particular store so she’ll try the ritual he had swapped out with one to curse her – but then also that he didn’t know what the ritual he swapped in actually did. The big evil wall street law firm has a corporate culture that should have collapsed about 48 hours after it was founded, and absolutely nothing about it makes sense for a place with lasting institutional power. Everyone’s morality and perceptiveness changes as the plot requires. The pacing feels like they had to pull a happy ending out of their asses at the 2/3 mark and shove the rest of the book into a sequel. It’s just, it’s bad!

Also the prose starts at fun and evocative and keeps pushing into Lovecraftian levels of adjective-addiction, and neither the A-Train nor the dead are actually at all important to the story.

Just, argh. This could have been good! The first 40 pages were a really fun schlocky monster-of-the-week story! The first ritual summoning the Proctor was basically perfect! I wanted to love this!

[wlwanakin]

The big problem with the Padme trilogy is that, instead of looking for interesting things to mine character wise, the author was more interested in 'fixing' Padme and making her more of a girlboss tm

(I'd also say that the author was much more interested in Sabe as a character - as she could build her basically from scratch)

i honestly don’t know if i’d describe the queen trilogy as really “girlbossifying” padmé but it definitely felt more concerned with making her a Good Female Character than like, a character who feels interesting. and maybe ekj was more interested in sabé but even sabé felt more like the foundations of a good character than an actual good character. in my opinion these books are mostly held back by being aggressively, aggressively young adult and therefore extremely surface-level and juvenile.

it frustrates me because you can tell they’re trying to do padmé justice and trying to expand on a beloved concept and set of characters. people love padmé and naboo and the handmaidens so books in padmé and sabé’s pov centering around their relationship where sabé is actually allowed to be queer should rule immensely. but these books try to sell us the most uncomplicated version possible of it’s presenting: naboo really is as idyllic as it looks, padmé suffers in her role as queen but only in the obvious ways, her handmaidens are all her friends and she gets along super well with all of them like they’re one epic girl gang, even the juicy stuff with sabé feels so muted and despite the tension between them they always end on good terms. and i really do think a level of subconscious gender essentialism is a component to why these books largely about teenage girls are unwilling to make their relationships with power and each other complicated despite being almost entirely about a girl who was crowned queen of a planet at fourteen and her decoys who are subservient to her to the point of death.

and it’s extra frustrating because there’s something there with a lot of what it’s presenting, it’s just not really committed to quite as much as i feel like it should be. and i feel like a lot of that is how they’re written—everyone has a very bland narrative voice including padmé herself and that makes any internal exploration feel shallow. but on top of that it’s just like, these books are so largely about all the roles padmé and her handmaidens play, about the extreme lengths they go to lose themselves and each other in padmé’s personas, and all these complicated themes about power and identity and loss of self are like right there and it feels like in this whole trilogy the surface was barely even scratched. even sabé, who i think is the best written character out of all of them, seems to have far less complicated emotions about padmé than i’d expect from someone who has spent a decade devoted to her at great cost to herself, quite literally loses herself in her, and is on top of that in unrequited love with her. like there’s enough there to intrigue me and worm its way into my brain and make me post shit like this but it’s not very substantive. i don’t feel like i know padmé much better because of them, just her circumstances. and i also think a handful of those circumstances are a bit stupid.

[aotopmha]

Being too exhausted to play has made me think about the Dawntrail story again.

I wanted to take a break, but it occupies my brain too much, turns out and I engaged with takes on the internet again.

(Some of it is really dumb and a negativity void with zero substance, which is, in fact, unfun and exhausting, as it is designed to be, so it probably is better to not engage with, but I also do very much enjoy discussing what I love and it offers fantastic springboards for that.)

Spoilers for the Dawntrail story!

You know the complaint that it's "not as good as Shadowbringers or Endwalker"?

Well, I think a lot of people have actually echoed this, but I really like that Dawntrail is not trying to one-up them.

It's really good that it's not only pulling back the scale, but also lightening up the tone.

In particular, there was a complaint I saw that said HW, ShB and EW were these "deep and dark" stories and had issues with DT not being that kind of narrative and I think a story being Endwalker all of the time would become boring in its own right.

If all you see is positivity, eventually it means nothing, but this is also true in the opposite sense.

If all you see is misery all of the time, at one point, it doesn't mean anything anymore.

Eventhough I myself mostly enjoyed it, I can see the argument that it went too far in the other direction and handled some ideas too simplistically, but I think the general idea to do this is a really good, refreshing move.

It's similar thematically (which is actually my biggest issue), but I really like that it mostly focused on new stories with new characters.

I also like that the Scions are taking a backseat.

I saw an opinion that "you can't have your cake and eat it, too" in regards of the Scions being minor roles and you should either write them out completely or entirely focus the story on them, but personally I don't see any issue with this.

They were set up to be support and behaved as such. I don't understand the take that they were "teased" too much when the setup was that it was not their story to begin with.

Now, I do think the friendly rivalry aspect was underutilised. I feel like getting to fight Thancred and Urianger in good fun would've been great, for example.

I love the vibe of adventure we haven't really had for such a long time, and I really think the mystery of the City of Gold might be one of the best ones in the entire narrative because many of the mysteries so far at least have some aspect of retconning to them.

The gate and everything with it is entirely new and didn't need any retconning to fit within the current concepts of the story, whereas you could always tell they had to slightly tweak everything with the Ascians once in a while.

I think the fact that most of the characters that people do like from this expansion are entirely new or characters we knew fairly little about before Dawntrail says it all.

People actually do want new stuff. I think the mostly positive response towards the actual gameplay content says this, too.

So I hope they don't give up on what they've built here despite some of the really loud negative voices.

Don't start trying to do Endwalker or Shadowbringers again before building a new bigger picture.

We've talked about legacy and memory and loss a bunch of times already; evolve from this and do something *entirely* new with new characters and ALSO entirely new theming.

Don't give up on making content just a little more engaging.

That's my worry in light of these very loud complaints.

And the thing is, during the Endwalker patch cycle and even before, these are things so many people wanted.

People wanted a break from the Scions. People wanted the story to reset and relax after Endwalker because it had been within that dark tone for so long.

People wanted us to go back to being an adventurer.

People were tired of the increasingly same-y encounter design (and lack of stuff to do during patch downtime, which you can also see improved in terms of certain rewards; thing is what I've seen is people loving the new content so much they just like playing it and I feel the same way, so it isn't always even more grinds or rewards people actually want).

And that's exactly what they gave us.

Again, I don't know the overlap between audience groups here, but in terms of sentiment, that's the craziest part to me.

They kind of gave us exactly what we asked for.

And I really hope they stick to their guns and get braver from here because new is fun and even if it doesn't always succeed, you can look at what people like and don't like and go from there in a more nuanced way, rather than leaning on overcorrective decisions as they have in terms of certain aspects of the game. It just stops the game from stagnating and getting boring in all aspects.

[allbluemin]

Results and responses from the survey on the divergent opinions regarding the human/ape ship of the Planet of the Apes franchise.

🔍How old are you?

🔍Do you consume monster/human content?

🔍Fiction is a term that designates imaginary and unreal narratives, which is why many people tend to defend their works using this term. They state that everything is nothing more than fiction, so, as in the case in question, the ape/human relationship should not be problematized as it should not be compared to the real world. Do you agree with this statement?

🔍Leave a comment delving deeper into your previous answer.

🍎It should not be compared to the real world because anthropomorphized apes that talk and have human intelligence and characteristics are not real. We created them. A lot of fandom's arguments against a human/ape romance use real life morality, but they forget these are fictional humanized apes in a scifi/fantasy story. A story whose narrative and overall themes will inevitably force us to ask hard questions and explore weird ideas. And yes, that includes asking: "What would it mean for a human and ape in this story to get together?"🍎

🌼In general, I agree with the statement above, however, I think that any problem in literature can be considered as a possible problem in real life. Perhaps metaphorical or something else. So. I agree that it can be compared to real life, but I am against giving too much meaning to fictional reality. Literature is a way to speculate “what if?”, limiting this is stupid and harmful. It also indicates some problem or set of problems in real life and society.🌼

🌻Fiction shouldn't be trated with the same moral or ethical compass as reality. With this I don't mean fiction doesn't impact reality, but just that we can't treat them equally. Ficition impacts reality, but at the end of the day, apes like the ones in the movie aren't real, so there's not really a morally good or morally bad thing to want to fuck them (or not fuck them), and same with a ship involving apes.🌻

🍓Statement about that instance, yes but we can clearly see how fiction is affected by who its made of and how it in turn affects us. Women (characters) barely having roles in the past or having to fit into a certain mold and still doing so for example. Fiction does not exist in a vaccum.🍓

🍒I believe that while the kind of fiction that does affect reality, things such as racism and stereotypes, are a problem. Many works of fiction are simply fiction and do not affect reality in the way many assume it does.🍒

🍑Fiction is a great way to explore themes, metaphors, What Ifs, and a whole slew of situations. It doesn’t need to be good and pure—in fact, the really interesting stuff happens beyond that. Also, it’s just fun.🍑

🌷Literally nothing even close to resembling this ship could ever or will ever happen in real life. They’re literally not real. They don’t look like, talk like, think like real apes. How is it even problematic??🌷

🍁I don’t think that the statement “is just fiction” is legit everytime. But in this case i don’t see anythib wrong with that ship.🍁

🌾The apes aren't just regular apes like at a zoo, they have achieved sentience and have a whole society.🌾

🥑There are human ape kisses in the classic movies and nobody cared idk why people care now🥑

🥀Depends how unrealistic the ape is, too real ape is icky, king kong? perfectly fine🥀

🍇Apes are not fictional🍇

🔍Do you think the ape/human ship is different from a monster/human ship?

🔍Could you elaborate on an answer to the previous question?

🌼I think that the ape/human ship is xenophilia. I don't think the apes in the film can fit into the term "monster", so I refuse to consider this pairing as a monster/human. However, I come from a different cultural background than the typical American/English person, so I apologize if my opinion sounds offensive. In my circle, “xenophilia” refers to any craving for something unknown and alien, the term covers relationships with a wide variety of fictional intelligent beings (the spectrum is extremely wide) and is even sometimes (extremely rarely) used in the context of relationships between two people from very different cultures (for example a modern person or a person from a world with magic). Although it is still believed that one partner must NOT be a person in the classical sense.🌼

🍒The kind of apes, in both the old planet of the apes and the reboot, are in fact not like everyday apes. They've created cultures and languages and are closer to homo sapiens than those of apes now. Even their appearances are also changing. Some shapes to their faces, the way they stand, and even their eyes. They are fictional/mythical creatures that while having similarities to actual creatures the same could say about centaurs, etc.🍒

🥑The apes in the POTA franchise are evolved physically and mentally enough to be functionally alien. They’re not only sentient, they’re sapient. They’re capable of communication, love, care, connection. There’s nothing weird about it, just like there’s nothing weird about a story about a human romancing a big monster or a slimy alien. It’s all fair game. The original 1968 movie pitches the apes like they’re aliens anyway.🥑

🍑It’s a human with a “non-human sentient Other” and comes with similar baggage as your typical monster pairings (the differences, the fear, the awkwardness, the unexpected similarities). Just because the uncanny valley isn’t that deep (as it would be with, I don’t know, The Predator alien or an Uruk Hai) doesn’t mean it’s not a monster. Like, human/vampire counts, and that can be presented as barely nonhuman.🍑

🌻Apes like the ones in the movies are the same as monsters bc they are a different species and have special characteristics that makes them "monstruous" enough. An ape can be a monster as long as you consider "monsters" like vampires to be that.🌻

🌾They aren't just apes, they've been genetically modified. But they aren't full monsters either. It'd be like fucking Scooby-Doo, he's a dog but he's a sentient dog that isn't really a dog anymore. But is still a recognizable animal.🌾

🍓The apes in this universe are monsters. While I'm not one who indulges in this type of shipping, I don't think the apes are animals in this fiction verse so they fit in the category of monsters.🍓

🌷I guess you could call it that, but the monster fiction trope has developed into its own sub genre that I don’t think Noa and Mae fall into. It’s the two lead characters in a blockbuster movie.🌷

🍉In the context of the POTA films, I don't.🍉

🍇An animal is not a monster.🍇

🥀Again, depends on the ape🥀

🔍If you want to comment on something other than the previous questions and/or add more arguments to your opinion, feel free...

🌾Things written in fiction don't have to be morally okay in real life. That's one of the reasons we write fiction. You aren't a bad person for shipping an ape and a human as long as you can fully realize that a real life ape would never be a consenting safe partner for anyone but another ape. The idea that everything written should be morally okay is harmful for a lot of people. Fantasy has its place and should never be held up to reality's standards of ethics. That path leads to shame and repression that could seriously impact the mental health of generations.🌾

🍑I have been in this fandom on and off for literal decades and human/ape pairings have always been a thing. They have even been suggested in canon (kisses in both Tim Burton’s remake and in two of the original films: the first one and in Escape From…). This isn’t new, and it used to be embraced as part of the fandom. The vitriol and hatred in the current fandom is an unexpected switch for me, but sadly, the way fandom in general has been trending (“purity culture” where only morally good things are allowed), I can’t say I am too surprised.🍑

🌼I think the term "monsterfucking" is pretty fun and I have nothing against it, but I think for the sake of convenience a new, more inclusive term should be popularized. That is, is it possible to consider, for example, aliens as monsters and read pairings with them as a monster/human? What about a human/vampire? And so on and so forth. To my surprise, I see such discussions relatively often. Although perhaps I am biased and that is the only reason I see this as a problem.🌼

🍓I would like to add that the shipping here is fiction, yes, so I agree with that part of it but I also do not think fiction in general exists in a vacum. Sorry for any mistakes, English is not my first language either.🍓

🌷Free yourself from the thought police. Thinking is not a crime. Nothing about shipping two characters is a crime.🌷

🌻Almost anything fictional can be considered a monster if you think about it long enough.🌻

The results of the poll at the moment.

(I didn't know I wouldn't have access to the answers so I had to vote, sorry😭)

Thanks to everyone who participated! 🥰

[moonshynecybin]

literally marc and devotion topic of alllllll time... wld love to hear all ur thoughts...

Okay your post got me on this and it is beautiful!!!!!!! essential scholarship…

like marc has never liked anything or anyone casually in his LIFE!!! i am. constantly thinking about this lol i think its a load-bearing aspect of his personality. idk like professional sports is already such a chaotic whirlwind of travel and media barrage and commodification of your person that it means you really need those big pillars in your life to ground you… and marc chose a lot of those people from a pretty young age. i mean his best friend is his brother. he cried about leaving his team all weekend in valencia he looooooves them. only way he was remotely okay leaving that team even to win was if he was going to the garage next to alex lbr. and he still maintains he might come back. 

and one big theme from all the motogp journo’s podcast and stuff i listen to is how kind of removed from the rest of the paddock and weird marc is. very good at holding everyone at arms length. not reallyyyy good friends with the other drivers. withholds in a very deliberate way. please consider this hilarious photo of him hanging out with joan mir and ignoring his ass to talk to his brother. like for example fabio loves marc! but marc likes fabio. hes still nice! hes friendly! hes not. well forgive me he is not going to anyones house in the offseason. anymore. wonder why.

hes just… so selective with this devotion and so complete with it. its an exclusive little club but he would die for them all…. never lost anything he didnt leave clawmarks on. including racing! he just cant except a reality in which the things he loves are absent from him he finds it intolerable. which is a big part of why i dont really believe him when he says he’s over his and vale’s epic breakup. I think he wants everyone to BELIEVE he is over it bc itll lead to less questions about it and well. my man marc only likes being percieved on his own terms and the sepang incident was something decidedly not on his own terms. and he hates showing his soft little underbelly about it. I think his little docuseries are very much coming from a place of discomfort wrt to how the inability to define his own narrative happened with all that. and also so he can tell the world he is Over valentino Please Stop Asking. so.

[got-into-worm-by-mistake]

Okay, I've Read Worm: A Retrospective Part 4: Let's Give Wildbow Some Fucking Well-Earned Praise

So, I've had a decent number of harsh words for Wildbow over the course of my liveblog, and also over on my main blog. Overall, most of them are about his WoGs or Ward, rather than Worm itself. I've also commented I don't think I'd enjoy talking to him (not that he's likely to ever reach out, but you know). But I've had some complaints about Worm too.

But the thing is, I did read Worm. I read the whole thing. A desire to write fanfic would not have kept me going through all 30 chapters if I hated it. Or even if I just thought it was like, mediocre. It's 1.6 Million words. I am not that kind of masochist.

Life is short, Worm is long, if I wasn't enjoying it, I'd have left a long time ago. So I did enjoy it.

And the thing is, even if I never pick up his other works (and I do intend to try some), I am no doubt going to have more harsh words for Wildbow in the future. And I have no doubt that even if I love say, Pact or Pale or Claw or Seek or... I dunno, his next Web Serial after Seek called *throws a dart at a wall* Iota, I'm sure I'll have harsh words. I can't think of a single creator of anything that I don't have at least some issues with something they put out.

And to be fair, even most people who fully like Worm and Ward tend to have some harsh words for him now and then, or at least negative ones.

BUT, I liked Worm. And so, I think it's fair to really sit down and give him some unalloyed, unambiguous praise.

The Pace of Output: This is probably low-hanging fruit, but it is genuinely impressive that Wildbow wrote Worm as quickly as he did, sticking to a schedule as consistently as he did. I am in awe. I think even if I didn't have to work at all, and was able to write all the time, I wouldn't even be able to match half of what he did in the same amount of time, in terms of output. Wildbow accomplished something that is genuinely amazing here.

The Shards, Entities and Powers: Shard mechanics are not my favorite thing about Worm. But the whole thing really does come together well. It's a pretty cohesive, pretty well directed power system to tell the story he wanted to tell. I don't consume much cape fiction, so I don't know what stuff beyond Marvel and DC are really like in terms of how powers work and how they all fit and service the story, but for Worm, the Shards work to tell the story he wants to tell, really well. I read and write mostly fantasy and sci-fi, and spend a lot of time in worldbuilding spaces dedicated to both, or have at least, and a lot of would be writers fall into the trap of trying to overdevelop the magic system or the rules for whatever crazy supertech their story has without really stopping to figure out how it fits for the story they want. That's generally not a great approach if the intent is to have a story, and not just a cool setting or a fun magic concept. Wildbow created a pretty cool system, and then managed to avoid the common trap of getting so attached to the power system and it's rules that it interfered with telling the story he wanted to tell. Instead, he built and bent the system with his story as the driving purpose, and kept it all cohesively working within that framework.

The Interludes: The Interludes are without a doubt some of the best shit in Worm, overall. The way he is able to convey so much about these characters in these cutaway scenes and expand the world and advance the story and develop ongoing themes and narratives? Nearly every Interlude is doing like, 4 things at once, I swear to got, and the way he juggles that all together is awesome, and the end result is great. I will never go back and reread all of Worm from start to finish. But I will sure as shit go back and read some of the interludes just for the sheer fun of it. The way these cutaways manage to get you inside the head of these people, see their perspective is really good, takes real skill to make you go 'I really kinda see Saint's POV here' for his Interlude, for instance. Really good.

Amy Dallon: So like, I think it's clear I love Amy. She's fascinating. I have big feelings about her, and she's a divisive as fuck character. But Amy Dallon is the most fascinating character in Worm for me personally and she's genuinely one of the most fascinating characters in anything I've read. I'll have more to say about Amy if I manage to get a version of that Amy retrospective I'm happy with written, but unironically? Wildbow, thank you for writing Amy Dallon. I bitch about how much she's taken over my brain, but Amy is such a fascinating, interesting, enjoyable and engrossing character that she has been a net positive for me. Reading Worm and reading about her has enriched my life. Thank you. You did a damn good job with her in Worm, Wildbow.

Taylor Hebert: As I said back in Part 1 of this retrospective, I was worried I'd find Taylor insufferable. Her capacity for self-rationalization should be an issue for me. It often can be in other characters. But Wildbow managed to write Taylor amazingly. He created a character who is multifaceted, multilayered, complex, nuanced and yet, pretty simple. She's intensely relatable, and yet, she is also deeply, deeply alien and abnormal. She does absolutely insane shit, and yet, when you're reading along with her POV, so much of what she does and thinks makes her seem like the only sane woman in the room. Even when you take a step back and realize what she does, she's very hard to not like. Even if you want to grab her by the shoulders and shake some sense into her, you like her. She's great. She's an everywoman, she's no woman. She's clever and stupid and brilliant and unimaginative all at once. She is... She's Taylor Hebert. She's an antihero, a villain protagonist, a hero hero and... she's just some fucking girl.

Heroes/Villains: What I mean by this bulletpoint is - villain protagonists, making villainous characters sympathetic - that's easy enough to do. And making the 'official heroes' of a setting not really as great as they might seem is also fairly easy to do. But it is hard to pair the two together as well as Wildbow did. The Undersiders do a lot of bad things (I would disagree with people who say they're all *fundamentally* bad people - even Regent... ish, kinda sorta. He's so fucked up due to his background that calling him fundamentally bad is probably not really accurate. Though some people draw red lines around some of what he did, so that's more subjective. But like, the key thing is that he did that while *also* still making them pretty sympathetic without like... running protag-centered morality and still making them have done quite a bit of good (and a ton of bad) AND the handling of the heroes. Because it really does look a lot like he's doing a bit where the 'official heroes' are the real bad guys of the story between things like Armsmaster's shit and Interlude 2, but he also doesn't actually do that. And he executes it in a way that is really well done, without doing the thing where the narrative acts like someone is evil but like... the person isn't.

This isn't really an exhaustive list of 'everything Worm did well' or even 'Everything I liked about Worm', but it is stuff that Wildbow did really fucking well, that I really liked or am impressed with, and that he deserves unalloyed praise for.

There are reasons why I kept reading Worm, and those are some of the reasons.

(There could also be a point on how he manages the readers' information diet, but it's really hard to say for sure if it's something that I really liked because I came in so thoroughly spoiled. From what I can see, I think I would have liked it and given it the unalloyed praise normally, but it's impossible to say because I knew what 75% of these clues were ahead of time).

Mr. Bow - you did a lot of shit I don't like. But holy motherfucking shit, you did some goddamn amazing stuff too.

[eightmandibles]

Mawaru Penguindrum Phrases Breakdown

I've written a big long post breaking down some of the repeated phrases of the show Mawaru Penguindrum because rewatching it a year ago gave me brainrot. Hope those who r interested enjoy.

Alright this has been occupying my brain for so long it should've started paying rent so I've decided to finally write it all up. Some of these are my own thoughts, but a lot of these are pieces of interpretations that are floating out there on the web. I just didn’t find any one place that compiles them all and puts them together.

Mawaru Penguindrum is the first Ikuhara show I ever watched and something about it really changed my brain forever even though I didn’t really understand what I was watching the first time through (because I was in middle school). I love its surreality and the density of its visual metaphors that all feed into each other has me like an insane person complete with a red string conspiracy board (that will be a section later). It’s show that challenges the viewers to piece together concepts and leaves questions for them to answer on their own, some intended and some probably not as much. I admire the ambition and the commitment to exist in a space that's between trite judgements of black and white, good and evil, and to trust the viewer to really engage with the work.

In this blog post I’m going to break down some of the major catchphrases of the show because they exemplify how the visual/thematic density rewards viewers who spend the time to really engage with the material. It also personally fascinates me as someone who enjoys these puzzle box-type themes and narratives that have the answers staring you right in the face from the beginning, but you just didn’t have the tools to understand what you were being cryptically told.

MAWARU PENGUINDRUM

We gotta start from the beginning and break down the title first of course.

MAWARU: spinning, turning, rotating - which brings themes like revolution and cycles to mind

It’s probably also nod to Revolutionary Girl Utena (though both shows share a lot of themes in examining and trying to challenge or examine societal norms, structures, and cycles).

PENGUINDRUM:

First layer of understanding: the physical diary that the Kanba and Shoma must find (actually it’d be more accurate the say the first layer is just being like “this is a nonsense word” but I digress)

Let’s do another layer of breakdowns -

PENGUIN: Flightless birds that belong neither to the land or the sea - chosen to represent the idea of the “unchosen.” Those in Antarctica need to rely on their community to survive in their harsh environment, huddling and rotating (mawaru…) to keep everyone warm.

There’s a common rumor out there that Ikuhara said penguins were also chosen because it sounds like “pingguo” which is apple in Chinese. Honestly I believe it because he seems to be the kind of person to say stuff like that, but also I’ve never found a source on this.

DRUM: An instrument that keeps a steady beat…like a heartbeat…badum tss. The apple in the show always being red reinforces this association.

Second layer of understanding: When the diary is lost, what the “penguindrum” is exactly becomes more nebulous and we start operating in a metaphor-as-reality world. In terms of visual representation in the show, the “penguindrum” is the “apple” the siblings have been sharing among themselves.

The Penguindrum being represented by an apple means there’s a lot of associations tied into its image. In the show, apples are a visual metaphor for being "chosen". Classically, apples are also the fruit of original sin (like fate…not to jump ahead but remember this for later) - which ties into the concept of “punishment” that Himari's fate is framed as.

Because of the breakdown from earlier (and also all the chest puncturing imagery in the show lol), we can also understand the Penguindrum to be associated with the heart - often in turn associated with love, which is a very loaded concept to dig through, especially as presented in the show (romantic, platonic, and/or familial connections; sacrifice, community, etc.)

Taking these all together, a third layer of interpretation is that Mawaru Penguindrum refers to the cycle (Mawaru) of sharing bonds/fate/connection/love (Penguindrum) between the show’s characters.

SURVIVAL STRATEGY

This phrase is what signals the Princess of the Crystal's presence and initiates the transformation sequence that takes the brothers into a surreal world.

The common reading of this is again the reference of penguins needing to huddle together to survive the cold of Antarctica. They rotate who bears the cold wind of the outside circle in order for the whole flock to survive. Basically, we need the help and support of each other to survive the cold winds of an uncaring society.

While thinking on this phrase, I was struck by how every character’s drive in the show can be explained as “survival strategies” they learned as children. Perhaps it’s a bit of a stretch to apply it in the way this phrase is used in psychology, but I do think it at least refers to the ideology characters take on as children due to their traumatic childhood events or from flawed role models.

Ringo’s “survival strategy” is the most explicitly stated in the show: in episode 6, she believes her parents are on the verge of divorce because she is not Momoka - therefore to keep her family together she resolves to become Momoka. 

The origin of Kanba and Himari’s core approaches to life appear in the flashbacks of episodes 5 and 9 respectively. The Takakura parents each protect the two adopted children from injury by glass, a nod to their original unchosen fate. In doing so, they’re set up as the direct masculine and feminine role models that the two children learn from and model themselves on. I’m not sure it’s accurate to say that the lessons they internalize are strictly “wrong,” because I don’t think Penguindrum is interested in discussing characters like that, but they definitely are flawed.

Shoma deals with guilt from his family’s “sin” and grapples with the idea of taking responsibility for his parents’ actions.

Tabuki and Yuri still believe themselves to be “unloved children” and that’s why they keep pursuing Momoka or seeking revenge for her. They struggle to believe there’s a place in the world for them without their savior there.

Masako is a pretty clear one as well - she internalizes her grandfather’s habits and beliefs in order to try and fit in, even if it never earned her any respect in his eyes.

The childhood of the characters in the show informed how they viewed the society they grew up in, and what they needed to do or become in order to survive.

YOU WHO WILL NEVER AMOUNT TO ANYTHING, FIND THE PENGUINDRUM

Honestly I’m obsessed with the phrases that first sound like absolute nonsense, but cool absolute nonsense. This is the phrase that made me want to write this blog post in the first place.

The phrase is the call-to-action by the mysterious Princess of the Crystal. On first viewing, we can interpret so little of this sentence it’s really just a tool to sound cool and give us a snapshot of the Princess of the Crystal’s personality - haughty, cryptic, and generally unhelpful. It gives Kanba and Shoma a goal, even though neither us nor them understand what the hell it is.

YOU WHO WILL NEVER AMOUNT TO ANYTHING

As the show goes on, the themes and concepts around being a chosen or unchosen child arise. Those who are unchosen and unloved go to the Child Broiler to be turned into glass. This is semi-metaphorical and semi-literal (diegetic might be an appropriate word in a weird way) - metaphorically it can be interpreted as becoming a forgettable, blandly molded member of society, though being processed is acknowledged more like death in the show. In some ways that’s still accurate.

Each of the siblings started without an apple, literally-metaphorically starving of love and unchosen - originally they were fated to never amount to anything.

FIND THE PENGUINDRUM

Obviously this initially refers to the diary in the show, but as we broke down earlier PENGUINDRUM eventually takes on a more loaded meaning akin to love, bond, and connection.

So over the course of watching the show, the phrase transforms from a one-sided order and condemnation to a call to action. Put all together with a little more elaboration: You who were unchosen and unloved from the beginning, in order to survive in this harsh world you must find love and connection with people to share your life with, through good and bad.

I COME FROM THE DESTINATION OF YOUR FATE

Time to bust out the conspiracy red string board, literally-metaphorically.

The Red Line is the literal, metaphorical, and thematic spine of the show. There are two big starting categories for viewing The Red Line in the show, which then mix together to create new meanings as the show references it through imagery and dialogue.

First up, the Red Line refers to an actual train line that the entire show takes place upon, the Tokyo Metro Marunouchi line. The entire show is structured around the train line which starts with the Ogikubo Station and ends at Ikebukuro, with important locations being linked with the actual train stops. It was one of the train lines attacked in real life as part of the Tokyo subway sarin attack in 1995 which the Pingu group’s terrorist attack in the show is a very transparent reference to. This single point in time in 1995 is the origin of almost everything in Mawaru Penguindrum, and in fact almost half the cast is born on the exact day the Pingu group attacks, just to emphasize how closely their fates are tied to the attack.

Second, the Red Line can be seen as a representation of fate, as in the red string of fate. Fate and destiny are concepts brought up over and over again, with Shoma and Ringo having their own monologues about it in the first two episodes (and Kanba having his much later). The visualization of the red string of fate can also be seen in the ending animations.

Somewhere in between is the Red Line as the metaphor of a train to visualize fate. Fate is something that can’t be changed - just like how trains run on fixed tracks with fixed destinations. Of course this is challenged in the show - Momoka even uses the metaphor of changing train tracks to explain her ability.

Now, fate has its own set of associations, such as: destiny, love, connection, bond (hmm familiar), as well as superstitions like fated meetings, fated demises, divine determination.

These can start branching off into concepts like blessings, sins, retribution, and karma (cue the Fate monologues again). And now we start getting back into the idea of cycles: downward spirals of getting what one deserves for their actions, passing on one’s sins to those after you - or virtuous cycles of doing good deeds and passing love and care forward.

Often in discussions of fate, familiar questions arise. Does the beginning determine the end? Is the end fated from the beginning? And so the Red Line becomes the Red Circle, another visual device seen throughout the show. It’s all over the motion graphics of the show and appears around the train stations as well as around ‘95’, referencing the originating incident of it all - the beginning of the Takakura family that determined their end.

What I love about this use of the Red Line is that however you progress your understanding of the its importance to the show, it all helps you further understand any concept Mawaru Penguindrum is discussing. This coherence and repetition of visual metaphors is what allows the show to feel more texturally and thematically cohesive even when it starts getting loose in a plot sense.

(Going back to the initial phrase, I COME FROM THE DESTINATION OF YOUR FATE is said by the Princess of the Crystal in her introduction monologue. It likely lampshades the predetermined ending that the Takakura brothers are so desperately trying to avoid. But also, there is a much funnier, much more literal interpretation I enjoy - Ikebukuro, the last stop on the train line, is where the aquarium the siblings visit is. It’s also where the brothers bought the novelty penguin hat for Himari. So the Princess of the Crystal literally came from the destination (last stop) of your fate (the red line)!)

LET’S SHARE THE FRUIT OF FATE

This turns out to be the secret key phrase needed to activate the diary in order to change the tracks of fate, which Ringo uses at the end of the show in order to prevent another train attack from succeeding.

It’s probably not too hard to piece together what the fruit of fate is after all of this. In a sense, this phrase is just a repeat of Mawaru Penguindrum, just as an actual sentence with a bit more coherence.

I’ll bear your burdens and you’ll bear mine, and in doing so, let us forever be connected.

Wow, finally expunged these thoughts from my brain. Maybe somewhere in me there's still something left for a discussion on how the show uses repeated imagery and visual metaphor to communicate information and associations to the viewer that are vital to actually understanding what's going on because it's a narrative that half exists a non-literal thematic space but for now:

Thanks for reading!

[alpaca-clouds]

Why Black Panther Is In All The Solarpunk Lists

If you google for "Solarpunk movies", you will quickly find out one thing: There is no actual Solarpunk movie out there, just a list of a couple of movies that people generally will consider to have some Solarpunk themes. Usually you will find some Studio Ghibli movies there, you will find some movies there that will leave you with more questions than answers, and then you will find the two Black Panther MCU movies there.

If you investigate this further, you will also find a long winded discussion on whether or not Black Panther really can be Solarpunk, because Wakanda has a king and that is very much against the idea of Solarpunk, right?

Which is of course very ironic. Because this usually will come from white people who will be very willing to compromise on almost any other aspect of Solarpunk... Unless it is about Black people.

So, let's look at the Black Panther movies - especially the movies - and see how much Solarpunk there is.

Now, Black Panther is first and foremost Afrofuturism. This is very much about the idea of an Africa that never was colonized and hence had not their development halted by exploitation. And in the story of Black Panther they then got access to Vibranium and in this time that at least Wakanda could develop figured out all the things they could then do with Vibranium. Giving them not only clean energy, but also all sorts of other nifty gadgets. This allows them to become a fairly equal society.

Sure, there is a king, but in general the movie does imply that the inhabitants of Wakanda do all live in fairly equally good conditions, not to say fairly luxorious compared to how other people live. They have the same access to technology, apparently just get their food, and are also living in a society where men and women are equal at the very least.

Now, we do not know a ton about the internal politica of Wakanda. Apparently the country gets mostly run by the king and the chieftons, but we do not know how they get into the position. It mostly seems to be inherited as a position. But is there any other government? Is there any form of democracy? Do people get to vote? Are we assuming just the typical "benevolent king" narrative? How many people even live in Wakanda? That is all the stuff that is never really answered, because the movies are actually not that interested in the specifics of Wakanda - rather than the idea that it represents, and the moral connundrum that comes with it.

Because that connundrum of Wakanda is of course never about Wakanda's internal politics. Wakanda basically says: "Hey, we totally do have a benevolent king and everyone in this country is in fact super happy!" Because that is all the story needs. The moral connundrum is this: Wakanda is rich and safe because when the colonialism of Africa happened, they did not intervene and just held themsevles back, made themselves appear poor and like this did never suffer too much from it - but also allowed others to be enslaved and exploited.

Wakanda's wealth is very much build on them ignoring the plight of all other Black people. And this is the moral that the movie is interested in exploring.

And this is the real question in terms of: "Is this Solarpunk?" And I would argue yes. Because the point is that the movie very much lands on the side of: "Yeah, actually we should do something about this. We should change stuff." And more than anything about the worldbuilding I would argue that this in theory is what makes this movie Solarpunk.

... ... ... That is looking at the movie on its own, because it still has the misery of existing within the MCU, that does not really want to change the status quo of the world too much. So it does not want to change the world into a state that is too different from our real world right now. So, whatever characters might want to change about the world... They won't. Because MCU.