#but not like. in a hater way. in an intellectual way

[bigskydreaming]

@hood-ex Do you happen to have that post handy where you talked about the differences in Watters' approach to having Dick try and tackle social issues in Bludhaven vs Taylor's more shallow "look I had him create a foundation, it fixed things, I don't intend to explore why or how but trust me, it fixed stuff" approach? I noticed it when I was online briefly a couple weeks ago and I was like "that sounds right but I don't know enough to support it" at the time, but I've caught up and now I feel like I know enough. I would like to support it.

[crucialplayer]

Thoughts on Mars placements 

!! everything is based purely on my experiences with signs, written with no other purpose than to share my observations and be unserious.

Aries mars. Practical jokes lovers, gentle touch haters. Hit u while laughing. Love the banter, sometimes a lil too much. Go for it (whatever it is) fiercely and without a single backthought. Explosive in conflict, but in a sense of crying screaming throwing up banging against the wall. 

Taurus mars. Life could be on Mars but they still be going on and on about that one thing. Sudden outbursts of anger. It might seem out of the blue but they’ve probably been brooding some hurt for a long time. They just hoped it’d go away… naturally. Also surprisingly horny. 

Gemini mars. Mind fuckers. That one guy defending polygamy «as a concept» rather too enthusiastically. Can talk their way out of hell with one leg already in the hottest boiling cauldron. I suppose it’s a placement most people will find charming at some point (says a lot about society…). 

Cancer mars. Rumors are true, the sky is blue, and they are manipulative. Watching anybody else display vulnerability is the same as watching a children’s play to them. Ur rawest and most disturbing moment? To a cancer mars its a chill Tuesday morning. Humanization of a silent treatment. 

Leo mars. You’d gather that its serious by the sheer scale of their reaction but I promise its not. 9 times out of 10 will cause a huge scene and won't be able to remember it 2 days after. Very defensive. Won't put themselves out there if they’re not guaranteed a 10-minute standing ovation. 

Virgo mars. They believe that they make sense but usually they don't. They’re calculating but it’s like they do it backwards resulting in some of the most unhinged decisions made. Want to be praised for… um… existing as they are. Kind of a menace in conflict. 

Libra mars. If u think it's hard for you to wait for them to make up their mind imagine how they feel. It’s similar to watching a plant move without a time-lapse. Cry when they’re angry. Go with the flow not because they’re chill but more cause it's easier for them. 

Scorpio mars. They ARE vengeance and I'm scared. Slash 3 tires after one fight mars. Not the person you’d try to make jokingly jealous. For further information read the lyrics to… really any Taylor Swift song. 

Sagittarius mars. Don't think before they do and think after they’ve done smth only if u make them. The kind of people that will try everything once just to know how it feels (and then present that to everyone as if they’ve found god by bungee jumping one time). Very easy to dare. Also are always checking someone out. 

Capricorn mars. Blood is cold, the heart is beating twice per minute. ISN’T IT lonely on top of the world fellas??? If u get them to like u your love language better not be words of affirmation. Instead of arguing chances are high they disappear for a while or just go into a rock regime. 

Aquarius mars. Are only attracted to intellectuals so naturally in a room full of sweet gentle people will go for the most narcissistic motherfucker out there. They’re sorta very patient but I feel maybe it's just them dissociating… Ponder a lot before making a move. 

Pisces mars. I'm afraid no one knows whats going on there. It's like they’re never actually present. Therefore often times can have a delayed reaction to smth, which people might read as passive aggression. Very sentimental, will write u a song or a poem on a second date. Also low LOW energy. 

[wanderloveshater]

Two smart guys with 80’s tech can only do so much. It took them years to make the portal, one that breaks down everytime it activates.

For Commander Peepers? He can make a portal in a quarter of that time that’s stable.

It wouldn’t break down and would be able to control the excess energy that emits from it.

Peepers is the perfect pawn for Bill. Socially outcast with a crippling insecurity about his height, the desire to be praised and hold power over others, painfully lonely with a brilliant mind- he mirrors Ford in this way. I believe one of the WOY crew members emphasized him being different from the watchdogs.

It’s so easy for Bill; what do we have here? A smart guy who builds evil planet-destroying devices? Handling complex machinery?

He’s got a high IQ- misguided by his adoration for his stupid leader. The need for approval is crippling. So what can we do? Our little song and dance-

Bill’s experience speaks for itself. It would take very little effort, no questioning or anything- kind of boring, really.

Oh and Peepers has just been WAITING for someone to realize his true potential!

It’s all the same with Ford. He wants to feel special. The way Peepers would cling, claw, ride the high of the teensy bit of praise Hater gave him months ago…it makes Bill laugh. Such a sucker. A mathematically talented genius with more weaknesses than anyone can count.

So here we are, Peepers wants power. He wants respect. He wants to be seen. Bill promises Peepers a sense of social validation- to be adored- and eventually feared by his peers, and in extension, the galaxy. In return, Bill wants a portal- instead of spinning it as a “gateway for infinite knowledge of the universe” he can actually be a little more truthful. He’ll tell Peepers it can be used as an unstoppable weapon of destruction, better than what Major Threat had, better than what Lord Dominator had. The Peepers empire- I mean- The Hater empire would conquer the galaxy. Bill can come into this plane and they’ll rule everyone, side by side, Muse by Painter.

It’s a win win! Come on Peepers! Take the deal! When was the last time you played chess with someone that was actually smart enough to compete against you?

Infatuation: We saw how easy it was for Ford to be a Cipherholic. For many others to be. Peepers would unfortunately fall for his flattery. Under the assumption that Peepers is in love with Hater- (idolization if you wish) this prevents him from fully going evil, betraying everyone at once, I think.

But Peepers does get a little tired here and there putting up with Hater’s stupidity. Everyone’s stupidity, actually.

But Bill?

Bill has a lot of knowledge of the universe and intelligence.

Peepers would feel so intellectually stimulated by their conversations- likely about quantum theories, astrophysics, how stupid everyone is. There’s one thing Peepers has going on instead of Ford. Ford isn’t directly malicious or evil (besides the revenge fantasies), but Peepers is. He’d find Bill’s sadistic humor to be funnier than Ford ever did. Bill likes that.

Planting these seeds in Peeper’s brain- like the portal- Peepers would reach worship levels faster than Ford.

“I want to feel tall.”

“I’ll make you feel tall.”

Possession: This one is funny to think about, Bill’s unhinged behavior is exponential. He uses his charisma to gain social approval with the watchdogs and Hater’s favor in Peepers’ body. He probably wouldn’t have to complete all the calculations that Ford needed help with- really the possession is just so Peepers is more likable.

Bill’s feelings: Peepers was the easiest pawn to entrance. Bill finds this rather boring. There’s nothing to sink his teeth into- nothing to tear. Just a hollow puppet. He isn’t weird enough for Bill to enjoy, he seems rather logical and put together. Sure he’s shorter than everyone but was he born with any extra features that makes him an anomaly? But he’s certainly the most efficient puppet, so he’s gotta keep that going.

Peepers would also catch Fiddleford and Ford’s mistakes with the portal’s code.

Sort of like, “Oh haha, whoever did this code is so stupid, have they considered their calculations would blow up the entire room?!”

Bill being Bill, filled with bitterness, would agree in tandem at first. “Haha YEAH my last guy wasn’t up to par!”

Before uh, Peepers gets carried away and Bill’s own complicated feelings about Ford arise.

“Seriously, have you seen this derivative answer?! A traffic cone could have done better-”

“That’s enough”

Ford: I don’t have a set story/timeline for these two in mind, but I would like to imagine Ford’s reaction. Being unable to stop the vicious cycle repeat chokes him. Warning Peepers and all, oh don’t fall for it, he’ll betray you, promise you a galaxy, yadda yadda…

But Peepers only hears that last part.

“My own galaxy…?”

“Yes, he’ll make you ‘one of them’ and promise ultimate power with no law or restrictions- everything you could dream of- but DO NOT fall for it!”

Peepers falls for it. Or rather embarasses himself- Bill does not care for Peepers in this way. He’d never offer this unless it was for gain, so what does Peepers do? Throw himself to Bill and the Henchmaniacs- pleading to be a part of them. All that results from that is being laughed out of the room. Doesn’t help that he's the shortest.

Peepers doesn’t fit in with the watchdogs, or even the crazy weirdos/freaks.

He is truly alone.

[kwillow]

Mail time. Theo clearly isn't the best candidate to lecture people on "good manners" but that's not going to stop him.

Also using this as a header for more LORE RAMBLES: THEO EDITION, because again I have more interesting asks about Theo than I can answer with drawings -- so REAMS OF WORDS it is!

Questions and answers under the cut...

Well, Theo isn’t terribly fond of the guy. He’s never met him, of course, but from his research into Old Kingdom history, he thinks of Ambroys as a conceited, shallow, disloyal, cowardly liar – and he’s not exactly wrong, ha.

If they met in the past, when Ambroys was his cocky, younger self, I think Ambroys would take advantage of Theo’s poor social skills and unpopularity by bullying him for some cheap points with other people who would find amusement in that. Ambroys wouldn’t have much use for him otherwise. Theo would spend far more time seething about Ambroys and plans for his revenge on that POMPOUS POPINJAY than Ambroys would spend thinking about Theo at all.

If they met in modern times – well that’s something we’ll address eventually, but Theo and Ambroys would not get along much better. Present-day Ambroys does not like mages one bit. Also, he is quite used to being literally worshipped. A little hater like Theo would not be looked upon kindly.

Thank you!! Now you too are present in a lore dump!

Theo is indeed a fan of the performing arts, and art in general (though he is, predictably, very particular in his tastes). Opera and such was performed during Ambroys’ time, and much of it was likely lost during the apocalyptic era between the time of the Old Kingdoms and the modern day, but I imagine some scant examples of the genre (and traditional plays by the likes of Furry Shakespeare, because Shakespeare is one of those people who just exists in every universe no matter how bizarre) would still survive into the Theo’s time.

Theo’s hometown of Northcrest would be too small and rural to have a real theatre, so experiencing “proper” performances would be rare treats for him, when he followed his mother on business excursions to the rich districts of Ironfrost. I love that you picked up on the fact that he would want his own private box, haha. He wants to observe, not be observed!

You’re right that musicals would probably still be in their vaudeville and burlesque era, and Theo would find them to be distasteful, vulgar pap suited only for the soft, feeble minds of the unwashed masses, not a refined intellectual like himself. (Which is funny because I think a real-world modern-day Theo would like musicals because in some ways, he is a theater kid without the charisma or confidence to actually perform.) While his mother did not enjoy theatre to the same extent he did (her tastes were more in feats of choreographry and human/anthro excellence like ballet), they would bitch about the decline of society together if they saw a poster for one of those terrible, gaudy cabaret catastrophes. In general, Theo hates anything modern and likes anything old-fashioned, and that shifts according to the decade he lives in. An Amaranthine Theo would hate swing music, but a real-world modern-day Theo would like it. Embarrassing!

Also, he will memorize and quote his favorite soliloquies at people for the faintest of reasons. Don’t test him.

No, I don’t think Hyden has strong enough arms or a sturdy enough back to lift an entire person, even one as little as Theo. Hyden might be large but he’s not as powerful as his height and bulk make him look. I think even Theo is more physically adept than Hyden is (and that’s not saying much).

Also, while he would learn to tolerate it from someone like Hyden (in the same way your cat might begrudgingly tolerate you grabbing their little feet), Theo does not like being picked up by people. I can speak from experience than when you’re a short person, people love to pick you up randomly to establish dominance and it’s not a very dignified experience. Theo has a hard enough time being taken seriously even without being lugged about like a wheezing sack of flour.

Theo would be the first to inform you he is not the person to consult on romantic matters. At the same time, he would still give his advice: stop being a fatuous little fool and turn your efforts to matters of greater importance, like work or supporting your family or collecting every edition of your favorite encyclopedia or hitting your head against a wall. All would be better ways to spend your energy.

(I think you’re alluding to a person with a crush on him – God knows why such a person would exist in his universe – asking him for romantic advice, but I feel compelled to specify that the message he’d give a man seeking instructions on how to deal with a lady would be akin to “GET A JOB. STAY AWAY FROM HER”)

(Or maybe you mean someone Theo has a crush on? Well, the answer would be the same. Theo isn't duplicitous enough or proud enough to try to swindle someone towards viewing him as a romantic prospect. But he sure wouldn't suggest they get with someone else. NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO BE IN LOVE. STOP IT, HE SAYS.)

Yes, those are self-inflicted injuries. He’s had a compulsion to bite and scratch himself ever since he was a kid. Sometimes as a punishment, sometimes as a ritual to quell distressing thoughts, sometimes out of the need to replace distressing sensations and events that are out of his control with one that is in his control, no matter how painful.

He does not particularly value his body nor its integrity. However, he is aware the scars are alarming, and finds them somewhat embarrassing reminders of his flaws in self-regulation. He deals with both the sight of the scars and the urge to harm by wearing his gloves, which is something he started doing in his late teens – they cover the marks and help redirect him by replacing the sensation of flesh with fabric when he goes to bite down.

On your question about Theo’s body-image: no, he does not care for how he looks. He likes that his eyes are grey (like mother’s) and that his fur is monochrome (like mother’s), and if pressed he might say the eyebrows aren’t bad, except for the parts where he’s pulled the hair out of them, but that’s it. He hates that he’s not just short but dwarfish, he does not like his heavy-set build, he would not choose to be born a rat, he despises his face, his teeth repulse him, he at least can make peace with the fact that he can’t grow facial hair because he’d never want a mustache like his father’s but it’s still somewhat emasculating, and on and on and on with the insecurities. He definitely feels physically inferior to other males. Your average man is not only much, much taller than him (and the world is cruel to a short king), but stronger and more classically virile as well. But he makes the best of that by dismissing those physical qualities as consolation prizes afforded to males who are obviously inferior to him intellectually, morally, and spiritually. He doesn’t care for brutes, but he doesn’t highly value machismo anyway… He thinks of himself as a gentleman whose best qualities reside in his mind and actions. A man who is reedy and petite but smarter or more charismatic than him is much more threatening to his ego than the bulkiest bruiser. (However, he will still try to fight both for dominance, either physically or verbally, and probably lose.)

Theo is highly offended and disgusted by nudity, both other’s and his own. Even states of mild undress are distressing to him, hence why he looks away when buttoning Hyden’s shirt. He’s willing to stomach some discomfort when it comes to helping a loved one, but only if it’s strictly necessary. He would pointedly not look and scold someone, even someone he was more comfortable with, if they were “too underdressed,” and freak out if they came into his vicinity in the nude. I think it would take years of gradual desensitization to lessen his negative reactions to nudity. It’s not just him being fussy, it borders on a phobia.

(Haha this shows how long I sit on asks before I get around to answering them SORRY...!!!!)

I don’t talk about it a lot because while the character’s sexual orientations do inform their lives and development, romance and sex are not usually at the top of my priority list when it comes to my stories… but I’ve alluded and mentioned directly that Theo is “canonically” bisexual (always feels weird to say “canon” about my imaginary friends, ha). But he is in denial/in the closet about it. Of course, he wouldn’t be aware of the concept of “bisexuality”, nor would that exact label exist in his world, so it’s not like he would identify that way even if he wasn’t repressing hardcore.

He is revolted by sex and intimacy, but that’s more due to his psychological baggage, his perception of his parent’s relationship and his cultural mores than something necessarily inborn or inherent to him.

(Hyden is actually Also Straight, possibly even straighter than Ambroys if we’re measuring by “creator’s admittance that character may be bi-curious one day.” I have a track record.)

Only if it’s karmic in some way, involving a person or persons he’s already predisposed to hating. Granted, dying of one’s own stupidity would be a form of justice in his eyes, but there’s limitations to that. Hearing about, say, an incident like Nutty Putty cave would not be amusing even though he would argue it’s the cave explorer’s “own fault” for going in there because it was such a gruesome and prolonged end, far outweighing the punishment Theo would find fair for such hubris. Of course, if the same cave explorer bullied him in prep school, then yes, it would be hilarious.

I don’t have a character named Herbert, so I am assuming you mean Theo here, from context. :’D

I’d like to draw Theo practicing his fencing some day! It’s on The List along with, er, fifty other drawings, ha. There’s just so much I need to make and so little time…

But besides that, Theo is not a particularly sporty guy. He doesn’t tend to enjoy competitive sports, either participating or watching. Physically he’s just not suited to them, and his schoolboy days did not endear him to them.

He does enjoy taking walks and admiring picturesque landscapes. He also hunted with his mother. One of the duties of the Norths is (or was, before he started shirking all his duties to focus entirely on his madness quest) to eliminate monstrous predators lurking on the outskirts of their territory before they could terrorize the mundane locals. Mages can sense magic, and thus are more capable of tracking down and felling corrupt magical beasts than your average person. Also, sometimes one wants a pheasant for dinner on special occasions. So, he grew up learning to hunt, and he’s decent with a rifle. He doesn’t go out to do much anymore, though. His mother’s death and subsequent self-imposed isolation exacerbated his already present issues with social phobia and paranoia, so he doesn’t feel safe outside his house. Someone could see him out there, and Something could happen. (He isn’t sure what exactly, but surely nothing good.)

During the course of Amaranthine’s story he is, of course, forced to go outside again and travel, so he’ll rediscover his hobby of killing animals again. …Good for him. I suppose.

(This is in reference to the tags I put on my post of Theo's romance meme: #ok one piece of commentary: brain problems + highly repressed upbringing = where i put theo on the kinky slider. it had to be there #you should think less '50 shades' and more '50 year old guys waxing poetic about quicksand scenes in old adventure films' for that one #he's not a quicksand guy. but that's the vibe.)

Hahaha, I appreciate your curiosity, but I’m not sure if it’s a terrific idea to share Theo’s “quicksand” equivalents. Alas, I don’t want to encourage the perception that my characters exist to be romantic or sexual wish-fulfillment, instead of the dysfunctional little narrative fidget toys they are, by going too in-depth too often on their hypothetical sex lives. Also, I get my (un)fair share of fetish-mining asks, and if I mention certain kinks, the senders of those asks might think they can wheedle that kind of smut art from me, which… is not the case, even if I did like the things Theo is partial to. Frankly, I don’t have time to draw smut art when I have so many comics of my characters angsting at each other that I ought to be drawing instead!!!

Anyway, complaining over. But I do know what Theo’s “interests” are, and don’t worry, they are suitably cringe. I find amusement in giving embarrassing proclivities to all my favorite characters, even if it will never come up in their stories. It keeps them humble.

The Theo befriending scenarios are becoming more elaborate…!

Magic can’t really do that in Amaranthine (it’s more limited than a lot of people think)! But even if you could, I think Theo might realize something was off eventually. Granted, he is blind to a lot of manipulation when he trusts someone, and for his own stupid reasons he trusts Hyden, so that alone would provide cover for some time. Being nice to him in Hyden’s guise might even fulfill some boyhood dreams of his, so that helps too. Still, I don’t think anyone but Hyden could manage to act like Hyden forever.

Theo abhors liars, manipulators, and traitors (I know, this is very funny considering I just talked about how Theo likes Hyden – again, Theo is not a great judge of character). While he would be mortified at his own gullibility, it’s not like he’d spare you any judgment for being the one to take advantage of his hospitality in the first place.

So, in attempting to befriend him, you would have 1) caused harm to someone he has charged himself with protecting by kidnapping Hyden, 2) committed the sin of deceiving him and 3) wounded his ego by exposing a huge vulnerability in his psychological armor. These are not crimes he is likely to excuse. Among Theo’s many faults are his capacity for spite and appetite for disproportionate vengeance. In other words, he would want to hurt you very, very badly.

Anyway, in summation, this is not a great way to try and win Theo’s affection. If befriending something hostile is what you’re after, I’d recommend purchasing a pet cobra or something, it would be more rewarding and less difficult to manage.

Ooh, this is another one of those “it depends” sort of questions… an Amaranthine Theo is completely unsuited for parenthood because he is just totally off his rocker and devoted to an impossible, nature-impugning, corruptive madness quest, so there’s not really much space left in his brain for any of the tasks involved in parenting.

Also, how well and in what way he would approach parenting would depend on if he has a partner and who they are, if the kid is biological (and therefore an extension of the North line) or adopted (and therefore might be spared some of those expectations), and what the kid or kids are like.

But, I’ll try to speak generally. He does put an importance on family so he would not be neglectful. In fact, I think he’d tend towards being smothering, way too over-protective. He would have high expectations for their academic career (despite flopping in his own) and would be upset if his children didn’t share his interest in intellectual pursuits. He lacks a lot of knowledge about life, and so he wouldn’t be able to pass that on to his children, despite desiring that they be self-sufficient and capable. He would try and keep them from being romantically involved until they could marry, which he wouldn’t think would be difficult considering how he himself is, but I think he would be disappointed and frustrated by the fact that most people (and therefore probably his kids) aren’t so averse to macking on other teenagers in their school days. His tendency towards being neurotic and temperamental would be an issue, and I think even if he tried to control his explosive tendencies around his children, they’d still pick up on it and be afraid of his moods. I think, with his immature development, he would have a lot of difficulty not descending to a teenager’s level of petty sniping if his teenage child did what teenagers do and started challenging him.

So… this is not painting a rosy picture. Don’t get me wrong, he’d try his best, and he would aim to be a good, supportive, and loving parent, but the man has issues. He wouldn’t be perfect. He might not even be good. He is Theo, after all.

Speaking of parenthood, let's get into some...

Family Matters

NO, they did not like each other. Their passive-aggression is as genuine as it is petty. They were the most divorced people to still technically be married.

Love was never in the cards for these two. The marriage was purely strategic, and all parties were aware of that. Leonard would have liked to have his wife love him, if only because it would be much more pleasant and convenient for him, but it wasn’t a requirement. He could seek love elsewhere if need be. He was always an opportunistic fellow that way.

Jo never held fondness for Leonard, either before or after their engagement. The marriage was at the behest of her father, and Jo had always put her duties to her family line above whatever selfish wants she might have had. She was willing to tolerate Leonard, which is about the best you could expect from her. However, he tried her patience too often to maintain even that level of camaraderie.

Leonard liked how Jo looked, and he liked the idea he had of her personality. Because Jo was deferential to her father, he assumed she would be similarly deferential to him. Hahaha. Not so. After her father passed, she inherited the Barony and thus, in her mind, the right to dictate the use of her family’s assets, the alliances she would forge with her noble connections, and the future of her estate. All her plans conflicted sharply with Leonard’s ideas of what he was going to do with the North’s influence, and he thought himself the keeper of their assets by patriarchal right. They clashed often and they both were too proud, power-hungry, and conniving to reconcile.

Leonard stayed because giving up the marriage would be giving up his avenue to social power. If he wanted to appear like he held the reins to potential allies and business connections, he had to stay in the manor, stay in Northcrest, and keep that ring on his finger. But he did take a very “I just live here” attitude to his home life. Jo stayed because her family’s long-held values maintained that it was her duty to do so, and to falter in her duties would be a permanent black stain on her good name. Also, it proved her superiority to the clearly weak-willed, dissolute Leonard, and that was an ego boost she wouldn’t pass up.

AHAHAH. THEO PEGGED FOR INBRED.

Yes, well, as you intuited, the Norths are one of those inbred noble families, like those you mentioned.

They’re a mage bloodline, and in the old days, mage nobility was a separate form of titled aristocracy from mundane nobility. Legitimate heirs had to have magical ability. If a mundane Viscount produced a mundane child, that was the end of the line of inheritance. Hence, noble mages in the Old Kingdoms only married other mages, to try to ensure their offspring could inherit their titles. While not all practiced inbreeding, it was a practice some families employed to try to “enhance” the magical ability and purity of their line, or just keep their wealth and power within their family (the Hyden family is another infamous example).

However, most magical lineages were wiped out during the fall of the Old Kingdoms, and those that survived were scattered to remote areas of the continent. Very few mages still exist, and the North family is one of the only lineages to survive “intact” to the modern day. They cling to their family’s history and their magical bloodline as their source of power and would never risk a union with a mundane. Like many other old traditions best left in the past, the Norths clung to the old ways, marrying within their line, inbreeding like an endangered species (which I suppose you could argue they were).

Of course, as the North’s numbers declined, the marriages shifted from pairing distant relatives to being cousin-cousin pairs. That level of consanguinity isn’t great for your offspring’s health or fertility, as it turns out, and further diminished their numbers (and options) until it came time for Jocosa to make their dying lineage limp along for another generation. By the time she was of age, there were no branches on the family tree left to harvest a husband from. Thus, the Norths needed to go further afield of the stagnant gene pool they’d been festering in.

Because of that, Theo is arguably a bit less inbred than previous generations of his family. The damage was already done, though. The fruits of the North’s unfortunate marriage practices have garnered them a deserved reputation for weak bodies, sick minds and dying young, and so far, Theo is two-for-three. We’ll see if he gets the triple.

Related to the above: if you haven’t realized already, the Norths are fucking freaks. Especially in the modern day of Amaranthine, caring about matching species in a marriage is seen as hyper-traditionalist, bizarre and absurdly impractical. But, well, the Norths are all those things. Jocosa’s parents were a stoat-stoat pair, their parents were stoat-stoat, and so on up the family tree, with maybe some rare exceptions where you might find a few polecats or minks scattered about in amongst the other long pointy-faced carnivores. Jocosa’s parents really would have preferred to have another mustelid marriage rather than wed their daughter to a rat.

But, that was a preference, and magical ability was a necessity. When Jocosa needed to marry, there were no other magical stoats, weasels, or even an otter for them to choose from.

That’s when an opportunistic young rat caught wind that there was a beautiful noble girl in need of a husband, just when he needed a rise in social station. Leonard was reasonably wealthy, and more importantly charming, quick-witted, and not afraid of lying his ass off to close a deal. He befriended Jocosa’s father and was able to delicately pick his way around or find loopholes in the Norths’ strict rules for marriage. Importantly for the Norths, Leonard had magical ability, albeit extremely weakly. You might say he was a sparkler while Jocosa was a flamethrower (in this analogy, in his prime, Hyden was an atomic bomb). Not ideal, but Leonard had enough magic to count as a mage for heir-producing purposes. Ultimately, Jocosa’s parents saw Leonard as the best option in a bad situation, rat or no. Preferable to dying out altogether, at least.

...

AND ON THAT, UH, HAPPY NOTE: thanks for reading and thank you all as always for sending questions about my little guy and being interested in him, even with all his slimy, weird, unpleasant foibles and flaws!

[anxiouspotatorants]

Actually you know what I need to rant about this: while literati is technically a good girl x bad boy dynamic it is written so incredibly well and avoids so many pitfalls and stereotypes that it makes a good girl x bad boy hater like myself (I’m only half joking — I don’t think any trope is inherently good or bad but I tend to dislike most pairings with this dynamic) fall head over heels for their story and relationship.

So much of what makes the two of them work is the contrast between how others perceive them and how they truly are. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people who understand who Rory is as a person (Lorelai, Lane, Paris, Richard and Emily to a certain degree for starters), but she's constantly met with the expectation that she just does good and is supposed to make everyone proud 24/7. Stars Hollow as a group especially are big on this, as seen f. ex. through how Taylor takes Rory's one comment about an inappropriate DVD and twists the whole thing into a censorship crusade and makes Rory its poster-child even though she wants nothing to do with it and tells him so repeatedly. But instead of hearing Rory disagree with him (like he would Lorelai and Luke) he assumes that she actually agrees with him - and why shouldn't she when she's the perfect sunshine paragon of good who would never disagree with her elders? Also her grandparents treat her as incredibly fragile and childlike, like she must be too innocent to ever do anything wrong and so whenever she does something it has to be somebody else's fault (usually Lorelai, but occasionally Jess or whoever else was present). Time and time again Rory is treated like something innocent and naive and weak — but not by Jess. He sees her as a person.

And it obviously goes the other way too. Jess is treated like shit by pretty much everyone else. Either people hate him unprovoked or very much provoked (he did do a lot of pranks in his first few weeks and while I'm a Dean-hater I'm not blind to how much Jess picked fights with him), or they’ve simply given up on him. He tells Rory himself that every authority figure he had back in New York gave up on him too, from teachers to principals to his very own mother. But Rory doesn’t treat him like a lost cause, she treats him like the smart, brilliant and asshole-ish teen that he is. By having faith in him she also often holds him more accountable than others. Where f. ex. Lorelai or the other adults just roll their eyes, Rory physically drags Jess into doing his shifts at the diner. While others write him off, Rory chews Jess’ ear out for not helping Luke more and for willfully making enemies out of the Stars Hollow adults.

They don't put each other on pedestals or below each other. Jess doesn’t try to make a sinner out of Rory and she doesn’t try to make a saint out of him. There’s genuine respect between them. They expect each other to have integrity and treat others with kindness and honesty, and the rest is good old chemistry and common interests.

I particularly love how in so many of their scenes (especially pre-relationship) when they spend time alone they just get to be these goofy nerdy kids. They argue about controversial authors and dig through records shops and eat hot dogs and make fun of each other and try to make each other laugh. It’s not just sexual chemistry as it too often is in a dynamic like this (and often uncomfortably sexual when writing teenagers - looking at you Gossip Girl), and not just well written intellectual chemistry — they have platonic chemistry too. A hell of a lot of it actually.

While I don’t think ASP wrote them through a purely deconstructionist lens on the good girl x bad boy dynamic (if she did plan on writing the dynamic at all), there is something to be said about how where many around them treat them like stereotypes they treat each other like people. To so many people, Rory is a perfect small town princess, a little miss sunshine with booksmarts for days but too delicate and sweet for anything with grit and weight. To a lot of the same people and many more Jess is a pathetic brutish and maniacal lost cause, hell personified in a chainsmoking leather-wearing teenager. But to each other they are actual human beings. Kind and mean and flirtatious and scared and reckless and smart. Rory really thinks that with the right motivation and mindset Jess can be the kind who does (and at the end wrote) incredible things. Jess really believes that with a little more practice and support to step out of her comfort zone she can be the amazing journalist she wishes to be.

They don’t have this stupid «we’re so bad for each other but we can’t stay away» thing that too many trope users rely on and don’t even justify in the plot. Everyone else might think they’re not fit for each other, but they knew they were each other’s person from the very first day.

[lurkingshan]

(Different anon) I agree with and understand your points re: ~why you watch GMMTV if don't like??~ and why the question is/feels hostile.

But taking the question itself in good faith as "why do you (should I) keep watching shows I think/know I will not like based on how others have been handled?" in the genuine spirit of "explain like I'm 5 because I don't understand the lingo and background but want to understand the concept, how would you explain it to people not as into/knowledgeable/etc BL and the history of GMMTV?

Hi anon! This is an interesting question, because it depends so much on you as an individual and what makes you happy.

I think there is often a misconception that people who post critical meta are having a miserable time and torturing themselves with media they hate, but it's just not true. For folks like me who enjoy thinking critically, this is how we have fun. When I love something, I want to rip open its guts and see how it's all assembled. It's what stimulates my brain and gets me excited. And when I don't love something wholeheartedly, I am interested in figuring out why. I've often had the experience of watching something that I know should be working on me, and if it isn't, that creates an intellectual puzzle that I find very satisfying to solve. Why isn't it working, and what can that help me learn about storytelling? This is also fun for me.

Another misconception I often see in fandom is that if you like something, you can't have negative thoughts about it and you have to pretend it's perfect to be a good fan. Nonsense! Being a hater is fun, especially about things you truly love. I'll give you a really concrete example: Bad Buddy is one of my all time favorite shows. It first aired three years ago and I still think about it nearly every day. It's a show that stimulates my brain but also hits me straight in the heart. But I do not think it's perfect and I get a lot of joy from thinking about the parts that did not work (Wai's redemption, that stupid fake out in the finale, all of episode 9) and making fun of it (have you heard that PAT GOT SHOT??). This, too, is a form of love and source of joy.

So with those misconceptions addressed, why do I keep watching shows I suspect I won't like? First, because you truly never know until you try, and I like to be pleasantly surprised. Two of my favorite shows of this year, Cherry Magic Thailand and Knock Knock Boys, shocked the hell out of me. I went into CMT deeply skeptical only to be charmed against my will and so impressed by how they adapted it, and I went into KKB expecting it to be like 95% of weak Thai pulps only to realize its writing and themes were stronger than they had any right to be. If I stayed away from all media I thought I might not like, I would have never had the amazing experience of watching and discussing those two shows live with friends who also loved them.

Second, like I said above, I still have fun examining shows that are not quite working for me, and sometimes I am compelled by the ambition of shows even if I don't think the execution is serving. A great example of that is The Sign. I wanted to support that show because of who was making it, and it had so much early promise that when it fell apart halfway through, I stuck it out to try to make sense of what went wrong. In cases like that, I like to figure out what a show thinks it's doing, what it's actually doing, and where the disconnect is. It's a fun puzzle for me to sort through such an ambitious mess of a show. This is why, btw, I am never really moved by fanwanks to fill in gaps in story and characterization. I understand why others enjoy fixing shows in their brains and then pretending that's what they actually saw, but it's not what motivates me. My goal with shows like this is not to get myself to like it no matter what, it's to figure out why I don't like it and what could be changed to address that.

Third, I care about ql as a genre, and I like to be aware of how it's evolving and be part of the collective experience of watching it. QL fandom is tiny and I like to know what my friends are talking about! I can't watch everything because there is simply way too much content these days, but I like to watch or at least pay attention to most of the big buzzy shows to track trends and see what's getting the fandom frustrated or excited. I didn't watch We Are because I knew enough about what it was doing and who was involved to understand it was not for me, but I did pay attention to reactions to it. Watching Jack & Joker with Thai bl fandom right now is some of the most fun we've had since Only Friends killed our spirit. J&J is directed by my parasocial frenemy Tee Bundit, whose shows often frustrate the hell out of me and whom I have ripped to shreds on this platform many times over. But I'm not gonna let that stop me from having fun with this new show, because Joke is The Moment and we're all in this together.

So truly, anon: whether or not you should be like me and watch things you may not like or continue watching shows you don't think are very good depends on what motivates you. You should figure out what is most fun for you re: media consumption, and do that. You can seek out people who enjoy media the same way you do, and also befriend people who think differently if you want to learn from each other and don't mind a bit of productive discomfort from time to time. I have gotten better recently at recognizing when I'm just getting nothing out of a show and dropping it like a hot potato (because some shows are not bad in an interesting way, they are just bad), or realizing which shows I will like better on a binge (usually the ones with terrible pacing, that is not as tortuous for me when I can just watch it all in one go). You gotta do some testing to figure it out.

All of this has all been a really long-winded way to say you should do what makes you happy, and don't assume that just because someone else's happiness looks different from yours, that it's wrong.

[shesnake]

sorry to talk about star wars on main but

Leslye Headland is truly the funniest person alive for saying on record that oshamir was inspired by reylo. like it's the most transparent marketing line to simply tell you that they're "enemies to lovers" (pending) and to bait the reylos (who are arguably the strongest voice in the disney era fandom... like look what they achieved [derogratory]) into caring about non-white characters because yeah The Acolyte Does need the numbers.

and sure this is bringing people into the show for the wrong reasons and also deterring people from the show for the wrong reasons but it's a TRAP lol ms Headland has a comically large shovel-shaped lightsaber and is digging a hole in the ground right in front of us all. and I am DIVING IN HEAD FIRST before she's even sprinkled leaves over it. because oshamir is nothing like reylo, because The Acolyte is nothing like disney era star wars!

The Acolyte is critical of the jedi order and the absolutism of the dark side. it's not about Anakin but it does Understand Anakin and what went down in the prequels (unlike the kenobi series which essentially nullified his whole corruption arc...) and the jedi order's unique form of oppression through repression. up until this point we've only seen our protagonists being lured to the dark side through grooming and sabotage by a sith actively turning them away from the jedi.

but in the acolyte, our protagonist Osha has already been fucked over by the jedi without the influence of any sith! they killed her family, they killed her PEOPLE/RELIGION, they left her sister Mae to die (after they already decided she had terrible vibes), and they abandoned her as a "failure" because after all they did to cut her away from her life THEY DIDN'T WANT HER because she was affected by the trauma THEY CAUSED.

and they did say to Sol from the start that she was too old to be recruited. how many other padawans must they have done this to while they were too young for that trauma to grow and could still be groomed to believe in the force in the way the jedi order do. Sol is horrified at Qimir/The Stranger for killing a child and he just shrugs and says "you brought her here" because it really is on him.

but yeah Osha at this point in the story with her lived experiences is an adult who cannot be manipulated like that, by a jedi OR a sith. and so what other approach can Qimir really make to lure Osha over to the dark side except to... talk to her? sure there's a seductive subtext to it, but this is the first time we've seen someone with the force, sith or jedi, have to present their case like an adult To an adult.

and as the no.1 jedi order hater this is SO compelling to me because everything Qimir has to say is SO true and yeah manny is hot and amandla is hot and when you think about it he did kind of give her a knife lightsaber because he wants someone on that same level of enlightenment with him which does expose him to creating someone who could very well destroy him but he's taking that risk with her because he does Know her already from what he sees of himself and he's just going to get to know her better and they're both just going to keep talking it through and developing that set of beliefs together in That Beautiful Separation They Felt and she'll learn more about him and his particular history his real name and the scars on his back and also there's what he represents as a minority in the world and Headland's connection to him as a lesbian and how it feels like they don't want you to exist and let's not forget the colonial metaphors the manifest destiny of the way the jedi operate she'll see how alike they are and she'll be able to come into herself as an empowered user of the force and that'll be thanks to him and the journey will be Glorious!

but none of that is going to change the fact that before he made this intellectual/civilised/human/seductive approach with her as an adult HE STILL GROOMED HER SISTER and Osha is NEVER going to forget that because if she and Mae are the same person she's the only one left to remember he did that to her/them and I cannot fucking WAIT to see her lightsaber turn green when she finally runs it through his chest god bless 🥰

[italian-lit-tournament]

Italian literature tournament - First round.

Propaganda in support of the authors is accepted, you can write it both in the tag if reblog the poll (explaining maybe that is propaganda and you want to see posted) or in the comments. Every few days it will be recollected and posted here under the cut.

The propaganda here are in order from left to right, first Carlo Gozzi and then Guid Cavalcanti

Carlo Gozzi propaganda by @girlboccaccio

Do you like theatre? Do you like opera? Are you interested in commedia dell'arte? Do you like fables with dubious morales, fairy tales with dark hidden meanings, plays inspired by 16th morally ambiguous short tales and The thousand and one nights? If yes you should take two second and vote for Carlo Gozzi (yeah the funky guy in b/w on the left). Without him we couldn't have masterpieces like Puccini's Turandot and The Love for Three Oranges by Sergei Prokofiev. He was a great admirer of spanish literature and theatre. He defended commedia dell'arte and funky plays when this manners of making theatre were dying. Immaculate yeah? He wrote an autobiography named Useless Memories, truly cunty, right? He was a rate A+ hater when he decided to start shitting against the king of the new modern way of writing theatre, Carlo Goldoni. He died in a Country that stopped existing in the last decade of his life (The Not So Serene Republic Of Venice) and lost all his friends in exile. He was the bitch of the venetian intellectual life. He was the bitch of the coolest italian actresses of the time. He was friend with Francesco Algarotti, the loveboy of Frederich the Great.

Fella, if you love the 18th century, you have only one choice in you hand: vote Carlo Gozzi.

Propaganda in favor of Guido Cavalcanti by @eresia-catara

May I add further propaganda for Guido: He's a noble, he disdains aristocrats, he was Florence's number one Server of Cunt, he was the city's faggot, he was heretical, he went on a random pilgrimage but interrupted it and managed to be buried in a church anyway, he had an archenemy who sent some men to murder him on said pilgrimage, he came back and tried to murder him back in plain daylight, he gave zero fucks about politics, he got exiled because he was considered a menace for the city. He SAW DANTE's poetical talent, encouraged it, shaped it, and through him the whole of italian literature. Think about it. Also they became besties until they evolved to a tormented psychosexual haunting dynamic (see break-up poem) where Dante himself actually exiled him. In the 13th century his poetry anticipates so many of the literary themes of the XXth century, going from fragmentation of the self (his is basically vivisection and dispersion of his parts), to dissociation from one's own mind and body, lack of identity, irony, desecration, his poetry is full of schizophrenic-like hallucinations, reading them is truly a trip, and yet his language is profoundly meoldic and sweet. And there's also gender-fuckery. and theater, of course, because his poems develop like a scene from a theater (adding layers to the dissociation). So really he has it all guys.

Guido Cavalcanti propaganda by @girldante

GUIDO CAVALCANTI PROPAGANDA ABBIAMO:

LA DISSOCIAZIONE SCHIZOFRENICA:

IL COMICO, IL SIMPATICO BURLONE, IL MEMATORE ANTE LITTERAM:

IL MACABRO, IL GORE, I SINTOMI™

IL BREAKUP TOSSICO PASSIVO AGGRESSIVO CON DANTE

in conclusione

[olderthannetfic]

I find it really sad when proshippers partake in "cringe culture" so to speak. you can't build your platform on anti-harassment and then make fun of people for being into something you deem stupid/trash/etc.

Like, I know in my mind that proshipping is more about anti-censorship and being pro "darker" stuff so to speak, and that it's not REALLY built on "we shouldn't make fun of people for reading/watching Stupid Stuff" but shouldn't the two be connected? I'd honestly argue that the latter argument is a stepping stool to the former?

Because how can you reblog "all ships are good ships" "ship and let ship" and then make fun of someone for being for an adult who still ships Steven Universe characters? How can you post "RPF is fine" but then make fun of that person on stan twitter who's a bit too into kpop rpf?

just makes me sad. The people who have made fun of me for the most for my MCU hyperfixation are my fellow proshippers. I've unfollowed people for posting book-tok screenshots that are clearly just mocking the OP for the fact that they read Colleen Hoover or whatever.

And I'm not talking about privately shittalking something, or just hating something in general; I'm not not even really talking about laughing at the *media/media creator itself* and criticizing it. I mean, I myself still laugh at the "read another book" Harry Potter meme (which, if i really need to add a disclaimer, i am DEFINITELY not talking about people who think it's weird and fucked up af that some people still like JKR as a person because. . .how can you at this point?). Moreso I mean people who claim to be SOOOO anti harassment and SOOOO pro-all-forms-of-art-even-'bad'-art (whether the art be bad in a moral way or in a creative way, whatever "art" "bad" "moral" and "creative" even MEAN because it changes with everyone.)

Obviously no one is going to like every single piece of art ever, and it's, imho, really human to be a "hater" to some degree! I just have a problem when someone genuinely makes fun of the FANS of something or thinks that someone is less intellectual just because the someone in general likes Disney/Twilight/Taylor Swift/Hamilton/whatever. No one gives af if you think a certain writing or acting style is cringe, but if you think the fans are cringe, that says more about you than it does about the fandom.

(also as a send off -- all the 'yous' i said here were general, def not directed at anyone on this blog. I'm just venting and this seems like the best place to do so where people will agree with my words.)

--

[cherrybomb107]

Guys I just saw something on Twitter that caused such a visceral reaction that I literally got up, went to the kitchen, got some aluminum foil, and folded it so it would somewhat resemble a hat. I’ve got a conspiracy theory. Reminder that the term was created by the government to discredit people, but yeah, using it felt apt.

So, we all know that I’m not a fan of Caitlyn. I liked her just fine, but her actions in season two, her obnoxious and aggressively anti black fan base, and the fact that the narrative never calls her out on her actions have caused me to dislike her now. To elaborate more on what makes her fan base so obnoxious, it’s the goal post moving, whataboutisms, intellectually dishonest hypotheticals, excuses, racism, the way they cheer for the establishment and play dumb when someone doesn’t like Caitlyn, and how they act like there’s something wrong with you if you’re not a fan of the cop dictator who gassed minorities and hit her partner. But it’s that last point that’s got me so riled up.

It is normal to make real world connections with the media you consume. It is normal to dislike characters who do bad things, no matter how “complex” or “nuanced” they are. However Cait stans, by and large, strongly disagree. To them, to hate or even be ambivalent towards Caitlyn means a great number of things. It means you are: lesohobic, hypocritical, have no media literacy, didn’t watch/pay attention to the show, you’re just a hater, you can’t handle complex female characters, you hate Caitlyn cause you’d be just like her, you don’t hate other characters who do bad things, you’re contributing to Caitlyn hate, etc etc ad infinitum. They won’t stop with the excuses. To me though, this reveals something. Arcane season two has introduced the idea of sympathy for the devil, and that’s the heart of the problem.

I’ve said it before, but I resent the concept of forgiveness. Or, to be precise, I resent the way forgiveness has been framed. As if you are obligated to forgive someone, otherwise you’re “bitter” or “holding a grudge”. This framing puts the onus of “moving on” onto the wronged party, and that doesn’t sit right with me. It’s the same problem with “sympathy for the devil”. It’s okay, but only to a point. Trying to see the humanity in someone who has harmed you and/or other people is good! Healthy, even! The problems start when it goes too far. When you’re no longer allowed to criticize this person, even mildly, without taking all their trauma and complexity into account. Yes I understand this person has gone through things no one should ever have to go through. But that does not give them the right to hurt me the way they did. I am not in the wrong for not feeling sorry for them. I shouldn’t be forced to center their feelings when I was the one who they decided to hurt.

This happens all the time irl. You can’t celebrate when some asshole politician or greedy CEO dies because “they had a family”. “They were human too!” “If you’re celebrating their death after they spent decades making the conscious decision to make hundreds of thousands, or even millions of people to suffer, then you’re just as bad as they are!” And so on and so forth. The excuses Cait stans use to defend her are very reminiscent of this. “Oh my God, it’s just a show, it’s not that deep!” “She never killed anyone!” “What about Jinx?!” “If you hate Caitlyn you have no media literacy!” They never stop. They will call your intelligence and your integrity as a fan, as a person, into question for disliking this character. They are trying to convince you of something that you know isn’t true. It is okay to dislike characters who do bad things. It is okay to dislike characters who have shitty fan bases. It always has been, and it always will be. Nothing can convince me otherwise.

Arcane, as brilliant as it is, perhaps did a bit too good of a job in humanizing its characters and giving them depth. Now folks are acting like any amount of nuance will make you any less of a villain. Silco is one of my favorite characters. He is chock full of nuance! He is also still ultimately a villain at the end of the day. But the way Arcane writes its characters allows and actively encourages the audience to believe in the idea of “sympathy for the devil”. The problem with that is, once you stop seeing the devil as who he really is, that’s when you end up in situations you have no business being in. Defending things you have no business defending. Excusing the inexcusable. And that’s not right.

TL;DR Arcane season two has successfully convinced people that “sympathy for the devil” is absolutely paramount to your understanding of the show and your value as a person. So much so that if you refuse to have sympathy for the utterly unsympathetic, you get labeled a “hater” and everything you say is discarded. Which pisses me off BAD🙄🙄🙄

[remembrancer-of-heresy]

What kind of love triangles I will write:

1) Konrad and Vulcan. They are opposites in the way they relate to people and the world. Konrad despises humanity, considers it a piece of meat, and Vulcan believes in goodness and wants to become a blacksmith after the war (uwu). And an important point! Konrad believes that he would have been better if he had not had the gift of foresight and had been born in another world. And someone (I don’t remember exactly) mentioned that Vulcan could have been the most cruel and deadly of the primarchs if not for his adoptive father.

2) Dorn and Perturabo. No comments.

3) Corvus Corax and Alpharius/Omegon. Both are stealthy, using quick and silent techniques to kill. But Corvus wants to find a family, to become a real human, and Alpharius/Omegon are quite happy with playing spies and that no one will ever truly understand them.

4) Leman Russ and Magnus, obviously. Psyker hater and psyker. Savage (but smart) and intellectual (but stupid).

5) Horus and Sanguinius. Beloved brothers. But too much responsibility fell on the shoulders of the self-centered Horus, and Sanguinius is not of this world. Probably the most difficult for me.

6) Guilliman and Lorgar. Not just because of the Monarchy, but because it is literally a battle between an atheist and a believer. Logic and feelings. Although it is Guilliman who is closest to people than Lorgar.

7) Angron and Lion. A man in the skin of a beast because of his nails. Experiences hatred and pain 24/7, although this particular primarch is the most empathic from birth. Lion looks like a knight, a noble man with a code of honor. But he literally lived in the forests of Caliban for several years like an animal.

8) Fulgrim and Ferus Manus. No comments.

9) Jaghatai Khan and Mortarion. The first one devotes time to his appearance, believes that enemies should underestimate you. Mortarion immediately shouts that he is "DEATH". Both knelt before the Emperor to their displeasure. But if Jaghatai Khan humbled himself and kept his oath as a warrior (what a great guy he is, the most underrated loyal primarch), then Mortarion harbored a grudge and gladly betrayed.

[lizzie-queenofmeigas]

Daenerys is the ONLY major character that GRRM considered making Black. The ONLY yt character that in-universe got mistaken for a brown-skinned ethnicity. She wants to be at the same level as her people yet she’s the only one who gets called a yt devilish nazi by yt pseudo-intellectuals.

People are not obligated to like Daenerys at all, but don’t try to frame your “this refugee teenage girl and her army of savage Dothraki and Unsullied don’t belong to the peaceful civilized Westeros” take as a groundbreaking progressive take. Daenerys’ haters have this violently racist and dehumanizing view on Daenerys’ people as a dangerous group of brown savages threatening the safety of white nobility. Calls Daenerys a racist blood purist then say “what’s Daenerys’ plan to incorporate these animalistic savages into civilized Westerosi way of life.”

The Dany haters have a strong mix of misogyny, racism and xenophobia in their beliefs and their arguements. Is honestly so disgusting. The worst thing is that they really don't seem to realize this, because is incredibly normalize it to them. Either that or they just don't care, which is worse.

[sapphiresaphics]

———

^^^ I’ve seen some disingenuous interpretations of Arcane season 2 before… but the “they turned the sister show into a story of two men” is a buck-wild thing to say. Especially given the fact the series was written by a queer woman.

Like… this interpretation is just factually not true? Like… At all???

Jinx doesn’t kill herself and she is able to be happy in the end.

Her mental instability isn’t “forgotten,” she’s just coping better.

Vi isn’t a plot device. I don’t even understand how they think this or what that means in their minds.

Vi has tons of agency.

Nobody treats her suffering as a joke.

And her relationship with Caitlyn has literally been a core aspect of the story since season 1. It’s not just “shipping” their relationship is literally integral to the plot.

I didn’t watch Jinx and Vi spend 2 full episodes reconnecting with each other for this person to say this show somehow “forgot about them in favor of two men.” They must’ve been TRYING to read this season in the worst way possible to even remotely come to that conclusion.

My problem with the arcane critical hashtag is that they’re so woefully anti-intellectual in their approach. They almost relish being intentionally ignorant there. I don’t understand why. There are absolutely things to criticize about the show, cuz no series is perfect… But the way in which these “haters” deliberately twist and contort the events of the show into these weird smooth-brained hot takes is absolutely infuriating to me.

I’m just getting tired of their bullshit. And I’m getting tired stumbling upon so much negativity and bad media literacy in the Arcane hashtag when honestly all I really want is cute fanart and fan fiction. Can we kick these intentional provocateurs out of our fandom?

[massivetyrantduck]

it’s time

more thoughts about outsiders musical

not being a hater I loved the show

I don’t like the mischaracterization of dally I thought about it but it took away from one of the huge points in the book: dally being the greaser version of bob. Which is important to me bc not many seem to understand how if bob cannot be redeemed than neither can dally. They both had good moments but were not very good people. Dally did horrible things and people tend to forget it simply bc the actors who play him are all hot

in the same way getting rid of randy destroyed the comparison of randy and Johnny. Which got rid of pony and Randy’s conversations and the realization that they really couldn’t change much of anything no matter how hard they tried but Randy chose to try anyway because it was right

speaking of comparison pony and cherry are obviously each others counterparts. Shipping them to me is wrong btw. Maybe in ten years but ponyboy is barely 14 and she’s like 16-17 and ponyboy never showed interest in her other than understanding her bc they are both different. I disagree with cherryboy shippers bc come on a guy and a girl can have an intellectual conversation without romantic energy. This doesn’t really have to do with the show I just have opinions

I did appreciate Paul yes bring attention to how if the curtises had more money and if their parents hadn’t died Darry could have been someone big. Someone known. Someone the world considered important. And probably to the gang he represented the idea that a greaser could make it out there but then he didn’t and it crushed them a little so they tried to joke about ‘him going soc’ as a way to cope and it just alienated him even more since he now needed a full time job and to raise his brothers and to keep the house standing

I think they fed into the johnnyboy just a little too much. I love me a gay ship but come on, there’s something so beautiful about choosing family and that is what ponyboy and Johnny have. Can we shut up about the ship for one second and admire brothers who would go anywhere for each other, who would kill for each other or die for each other. Brothers who spoke without speaking. Platonic love is amazing and I loved their songs but I know the johnnyboy shippers are gonna be annoying af whenever I try to interact with the fandom. Like just because some people are queer doesn’t mean every character you like has to be queer. I know we as a community are underrepresented but if you want queer representation write a new story with queer characters, dont ruin the kinship of the curtises and Johnny cade

I loved throwing in the towel but I did not like how ponyboy sang in it too. The whole point is he is gone, and also the literal next song is the three brothers so it would have made more sense if he wasn’t singing TITT. Also if there was a missing harmony it could have been chefs kiss

the Julie Andrews bit? Fucking iconic

who tf is blondie soc girl and greaser girl. Sure ig for harmonies but they added nothing to the story and seriously to me seemed pointless. Their characters did not have to be written and served no purpose and come on, outsiders isn’t even about girls. The only girl who was close to a main character was cherry, and the only side girls who could have added to the story were sandy and Marcia, and they already underutilized Marcia. Like if you needed another girl moment just add in the two bit Marcia stuff but blondie and greaser girl had no use other than harmonies and dancing.

dally seemed way older than he should. He’s 17 he’s not put together he’s in and out of jail he’s not a responsible older brother to the boys he’s dangerous and unstable and both twobit and Darry are older than him also

the dally vs darry brother stuff was stupid

twobit was everything I wanted him to be loved it

ITS A HOPELESS WAR WERE FIGHTING AND WE DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT FOR EVEN IN THE END EVEN IF YOU WIN IT DOESNT CHANGE A THING

I didn’t really like little brother. At first I was like YES dally only cared about Johnny so yes the devotion is eating but then he’s like ‘do it for ponyboy and Johnny’ like what? ‘I am killing myself for the sake of ponyboy and Johnny’? That accomplishes nothing. That makes no sense. He killed himself bc the only good thing in his life was gone, not for pony and johnnys benefit?? The song is a banger but the lyrics are not it

stay gold is beautiful and the message is beautiful it fit the end of johnnys story so well and hold on to the good things and make peace with the bad things bc holding on to bad things is how people become resentful and vengeful and easily tempted to do bad things and that’s how bob and dally became bob and dally anyways stay gold might lift me out of my depression bc the message is so powerful and if I just find the beauty in this world in the sky and in the kids I work with and in my pets and everywhere else and if I act with grace and mercy and kindness rather than anger and justice and a mean spirit then I think I’ll do okay

I don’t blame the writers for not putting it in bc time exists and there’s only so much of it but I wish we’d seen more of ponyboys mental struggles or maybe even a short court scene showing them labeled innocent and it could have included ponyboy getting confused like in the book but I’m not mad bc it was getting to be a long musical

I did think the idea of ponyboy choosing to share johnnys message of staying gold by writing their story was very cutesy

awwwwww the way they ate dinner together and showed him improving by him eating a little bit like yes baby steps disordered eating is no joke and family dinners are amazing especially since the first few months of family dinners were probably sad and empty and tense and angry and then Johnny happened and they were sad and empty again until he started eating and the way darry didn’t make a big deal out of it and let him go slow :,)

[saintsenara]

Hi! My curiosity was v v piqued by your proclamation in a recent ask that Hermione was by far least favourite character in the series-- not because I disagree, but because I agree, see; for me, it was always a kind of knee-jerk reaction to the incessant pedestaling of her in fandom spaces. I'd be very curious to know what it was for you or if the fanon contributed to it in some way (i totally recognise that letting fanon interpretations of a character sour the canon character itself is a wee bit silly).

no, i've been a #hater since day one.

it's nothing to do with fanon!hermione [who i primarily find boring], and nor is it about film!hermione [who is the trigger for fanon!hermione is also therefore boring]. emma watson seems perfectly fine - i can't say she's someone whose life and career i care to follow closely, but that's the case for the rest of the cast of the film series - and so it's nothing to do with projection about her either.

it's for the reason that i find - and have always found - real-life people who are like book!hermione extremely difficult to get along with.

i still think she's a fascinating character and a complex, interesting person. i'm not going to be found bashing her, and i think she's compelling to explore as her canon self - warts and all - without the tiresome flattening she undergoes in order to become flawless in fanon...

but she's not a character i have ever clicked with or related to - and so she's not my priority when it comes to what i get out of fandom either. if she were real, there are no circumstances in which we would ever be anything more than glacially polite acquaintances. there are some people who see her on the page and think "that's me" and go through the books engaging with her character as a friend - and who are then driven to seek out fandom content which focuses on her, whether in a romantic context or not - but i am definitely not one of them.

which was actually a really interesting way to experience the harry potter books as a pop culture phenomenon.

a lot of fandom conversation about the way the books approach gender is now fairly critical - and quite rightly, given the real-world impact jkr's views on gender have. but i do think this criticism sometimes fails to appreciate just how dire the representation of female characters in children's media used to be - especially in children's media which was aimed primarily at boys or equally at boys and girls.

hermione was genuinely groundbreaking as a female main character in a piece of children's literature not exclusively aimed at girls who was allowed to be annoying without being an antagonist, and frightened without being a damsel in distress, and girly without being vacuous, and loyal without being a doormat, and argumentative without being preachy, and clever without needing to be preternaturally brilliant, and respected by harry and ron without it ever really being a big deal. her fingerprints are all over the representation of child and teen girls in contemporary media, no matter how far removed the creators are from jkr in terms of style or opinions, and there is a reason why so many girls identified with her when the books were coming out.

and it was genuinely really fascinating for me growing up to not have been one of them.

[not least because of the negative aspects of her becoming such an important character. above all the idea that - instead of this being a sexist stereotype rooted in ideas of female obedience and inability to be as intellectually limitless as men - intelligent girls would actively want to be seen as diligent, well-behaved, and disinterested in challenging authority...]

[thatscarletflycatcher]

can you tell me what your thesis is about if you're willing to share??

Hi!!! Yes, of course! I need to go over and over the description of this thing in order to turn in a precise and compelling project for the board (attempt #3 at finishing this cursed degree, here we go! *sobs*).

My area of interest has always been Medieval Philosophy, Metaphysics, Ethics, Virtue Ethics and Aristotelian Ethics-Politics. My very first attempt was writing something on Metaphysics (transcendentals) then Ethics Metaphysics (the role of intellectual intuition in moral reasoning in Aristotelian Ethics, Book VI of the Nicomachean Ethics)... Neither worked mainly because a problem when talking metaphysics is... well, there's few words to use and little to say and I have always been a very succinct academic writer (yeah, I know, but it is true).

When I reached acceptance about that XD I moved on to trying something about Aristotelian Ethics-politics. Alasdair MacIntyre is a key author in that area, and he's a favorite of mine because in agreement or disagreement he's thought provoking, he has a sense of humor, and he's a hater of the fun kind. I know it isn't proper to call or pick academic authors because they are fun, but hey, he is. He is a curmudgeonly old man (present tense: he's 95), who kind of manages to disagree with everyone because he hates being put in boxes, but he's also always been very willing and open to listen to other voices and change his opinions on things.

For example, the refinement and reformulation of many ideas between his After Virtue (1981) and his Dependent Rational Animals (1999) came (declaredly) through a reading of certain feminist theory, which brought to the foreground to him how little academic Ethics had focused until that point on disability and caretaking.

He's also always been a versatile author in the sense of breaching the barriers between disciplines for the purposes of philosophical inquiry -After Virtue has a great deal to say about Sociology, and Dependent Rational Animals talks a lot about dolphins XD.

I decided I wanted to write something about this guy, but I got stuck because if you are writing on an author specifically, alone, how do you manage to write something that isn't like, textbook regurgitation? Theoretically I know it is possible, but it was very paralyzing to me all the same.

Enter Elizabeth Gaskell with a steel chair.

I love Gaskell dearly for many different reasons. I love the way in which she writes nuanced, believable, textured characters. I love the treatment of grief in her work, I love the compassion she has for her characters, I love how she makes interesting, central, and natural relationships between parents and children. I love that she's versatile too, and that she saw writing as a vocation, and how she manages to talk about so many different things in a novel without making it come across as didactic or preachy. But one very special thing that has called my attention is her specific interest in communities, and community building through friendship.

Very often her "proposals" of "solutions" to social problems, specifically in her industrial novels, have been dismissed as the utopian sugary pap of learning to share and be nice of someone completely out of touch with reality, but I think those readings are fundamentally missing the framework that makes her ideas make sense and be solid.

As an aside, I feel like that ungenerous reading is kinda rich when Hard Times and its "imagination to power!" concept or Shirley and its marriage solution keep getting praise to this day. You know. It comes across as a bit double standard-y, if you ask me.

But back to topic, guess who did consider friendship, understood as the ties that unite virtuous people in the pursuit of the good for themselves and their fellow men, the very foundation of society, and mankind as essentially social, and therefore for ethics and politics to be a continuum? That's right, my boy Aristotle!

And to that, between other things, when talking about the Aristotelian tradition of Ethics Politics, MacIntyre adds teleological narrative as the element that frames and anchors virtue ethics in this scheme. What is more, he dedicates A CHUNK of chapter 16 of After Virtue to Jane Austen, and why he thinks she's "the last key representative" of this tradition (which has sprung a non negligible amount of scholarship on Austen and virtue ethics).

And I'm persuaded that Gaskell is a significant successor to Austen in this way too, and that the certain sympathy people often perceive between them comes from this aspect (because, in all honestly, it's clearly not about tone or style).

So that's the aim/core of my thesis: to present/analyze/contextualize Gaskell's work within the framework of the Aristotelian Ethics-Politics tradition as understood by MacIntyre.

Of course because I am, in Nelly Dean's description of Edgar Linton, a venturesome fool, this is clearly very ambitious, and I am making it worse for myself by doing things like harvesting circa 350 titles for a thesis that won't require more than 50 and that cannot be more than 80 pages long. The clown shoes can be heard from the other side of the world no this has nothing to do with the fact that I don't think I'll ever get a masters or a PhD where I might be able to develop this concept beyond a very summary overview of N&S and maybe Cranford and My Lady Ludlow if I'm lucky.

And that's how I should have sent something to my advisor three weeks ago (I haven't yet) and how I'm half agony half hope about the whole thing, because I'm scared and anxious and full on rowing through Nutella executive function wise. Maybe I should get a rubber duck.