#but now that it takes this narrative shape it's bad?? like Okay

[raayllum]

i know it's mostly on reddit but any complaints about Rayla being Callum's Light / One Truth instead of something else and/or her and Ezran is like. His love for Rayla is what led him to darkness (doing dark magic twice), she's the carrier of his destruction and salvation pattern in every single season, she's Aaravos' primary narrative foil, she's the one climbing out of his window haloed in Light and framed in light as a repeated motif even in arc 1, she's the one who's stargazing with him about Leola in S5 and being Looked at when he's saying "to find their way in the endless darkness of the night," and the one telling him / repeatedly representing him taking a different path in S4. You don't have to like it but there's 6 seasons of legwork that went into this scene and framing and dynamic. It was never going to Go anywhere else

[charcubed]

I NEEEED people—especially those with unfathomably large platforms???—to start doing just a tiny bit of internal evaluation before they log onto a blue website and say “I don’t want these queer characters to fuck in canon” or “I’d be fine if these characters never kissed again” or whatever.

This is a post about Good Omens and the prospect of Aziraphale and Crowley potentially having sex in season 3. It's a response to a tweet that I'm crossposting, but let it be known the above statement and this topic applies broadly across multiple fandoms too.

But anyway, in regards to Good Omens specifically:

I am seeing this take that essentially boils down to "Canon has now made it clear that these characters want to have sex with each other through subtext (i.e. Aziraphale and the ox), but I don’t want that to reach narrative completion because the idea of them having sex makes me uncomfortable or isn’t my personal preference” and it is, to put it mildly and delicately, A Very Bad Take.

This is rhetorical (and I do not expect or particularly want an answer), but: explain to me how and why queer characters who are unavoidably visibly queer (aka 2 "man-shaped beings") fucking on screen wouldn’t be a net positive, especially when you can indicate how canon has set it up.

Presumably, some people say things like this because ~they want to see them as visibly ace.~ Okay. But by some of these people’s own admission, there IS more evidence in canon now to indicate these characters crave sex with each other (vs arguing otherwise)... yet people would rather that be ignored/erased all for the sake of them feeling comfortable or feeling better about what canon shows or doesn’t show explicitly??

I’m sorry, but—speaking as an ace person, to be clear—your personal preferences for the story shouldn’t / don’t affect anything here. There’s too much in this.

Yeah, I understand on a personal level not having “representation.” I almost never see myself or my unique experiences and identity reflected in stories. And yet, I also understand that that doesn’t change any story or the world in which we live. Things like this are not said in a vacuum.

Any queer characters having sex on screen IS a net positive. It is rare and impactful, and openly calling for or hoping for otherwise when canon points to its potential is a detrimental alliance with purity culture, whether intentionally or accidentally. Because we live in a Goddamn society!

Who knows (other than Neil Gaiman) whether Aziraphale and Crowley ARE going to fuck on international TV. None of us do! But the subtext right now blatantly says they’re starving for it. And you don’t have to like the prospect of that, but honestly? We SHOULD get to see it play out. There’s no truly legitimate reason we shouldn’t ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Whether you "prefer" it or not.

And my ultimate hot take is… if someone balks at the idea of that or doesn’t understand the importance of it, despite even seeing the subtext… then they should perhaps unpack that? Just a thought.

Truly the way fandoms are managing to hit either “subtext doesn’t count :/ ” or “let’s keep it to subtext so it’s ‘open to interpretation’ :) ” nowadays depending on what corner one visits is MADDENING. Whiplash-inducing. Surreal. And so much nonsense you can’t pick where to start.

So! I do genuinely hope I'm not kicking off discourse but I felt this Needed To Be Said (and on more than one site). Because posts like “even if they never kiss again, we’ve won <3 “ make me want to be like…

These characters are YEARNING. Do not doom them and us to it. For once, we can reach for the stars and maybe–against all odds–pull them down. Embrace it!

---

[Update: after more discourse has occurred, I have somewhat elaborated on this further, from the POV of the significance of the queer themes in Good Omens and more specifically how they center illicit pleasure/desire]

[third-generation-female-warrior]

As we get closer to the finale of the Bad Batch, I'd like to post something that's been in my head for a while.

I want to take an in-dept look at the theme of the show and how I think that shapes the ending.

Firstly, we'll need to look at the theme of the show.

The Bad Batch is a story about a group of rogue clones who must survive the rise of the Empire. Okay, that's what happens, but that's not the theme.

The theme is what the story is about. The lesson you want your audience to walk away with. It is the singular thing that shapes the character arcs and choices, from the protagonists to the antagonists.

I would argue that the theme of the Bad Batch is, "Our strength comes from our individuality and differences" and "We need to make our own choices and let people make their own choices; blind allegiance is the downfall of us all." There's also an ongoing argument about loyalty, but that's a different rant.

From the beginning, it's all been about individuality, and how stripping that away is wrong. The inhibitor chips was the first overarching plot device to further this argument.

The chips take away the individuality of the clones by making them a part of a monolithic hivemind. Gone are the individuals who fought with the Jedi, and in came the Empire. The sterile, uniform Empire where individuality and free thought is treated as dangerous and treacherous.

Our heroes, the titular Bad Batch, retain their individuality and differences and disobedient streak and are celebrated as a virtue, and, for the most part, do not fall into the trappings of becoming the monolith.

Now let's talk about Crosshair, specifically.

Crosshair, however different, fell into the Empire, thinking he was going to be heralded as better and superior than the other clones. His choice to stay with the Empire was a choice at first, but even when it was, this was treated as bad in the narration. Even if it was his choice, he came to ultimate realization that... no, he's not different than the other clones in the eyes of the Empire. He's not treated different or better. He's a number. He's cannon fodder. His blind allegiance almost led to his death (not for the first time (Bracca, anyone?)). It led to Mayday's death as they both realized too late: "We were good soldiers. We followed orders. And for what?"

So the first choice Crosshair makes for himself? The first free choice that he makes that contradicts the blind allegiance?

He shoots the Lieutenant.

And it was great! Narratively, it was treated as the right move because it was!

Okay, it lands him in Tantiss, but through that series of events, it eventually brought him back to his family. He was redeemed.

Moving on, let's look at another interesting character.

Emerie (beloved)

Dr. Emerie Karr, I would argue, is a woman who never had a choice.

I mean, how could she? Shipped off of Kamino, into the clutches of Hemlock?

Look me in the eyes and tell me that you think Hemlock (derogatory) was an affectionate father-figure to Emerie. Yeah, that's what I thought.

Emerie never had a choice. She was not in the battlefield or even with other clones to learn what her free thoughts were. I would argue she was raised to be afraid of the consequences of what Hemlock would do to her if she stepped "out of line" wherever that was when growing up.

She's constantly warning other clones what happens if they don't cooperate with Hemlock. She's constantly held back by her inability to think for herself.

Until Omega.

Time and time again, Emerie regards Omega as her sister in what way she can, in what little vocabulary she has for such a meaning.

Because Omega, Emerie breaks protocol, just in the little way she can, and returns the straw Lula to her. We see the beginnings of the Imperial bonds start to loosen. It's the first crack in the mirror, so to say, when Omega shows her what it could really be like, to have siblings to love, instead of whatever validation she fights to earn from Hemlock. (There's more on that, but again, another rant, another time.)

It keeps going for Emerie, when she's let into the Vault, all coming to a head when she meets Echo.

"I didn't have a choice," she says. "I've heard that before," he retorts, disbelieving.

She has a choice now, is what's not being said. Do the right thing, make a choice, for once in your life. Don't go along with what the doctor wants.

.

So, what's all this to say?

The ending of the Bad Batch will be dictated by the themes of individuality and free will.

It will all come down to a choice.

Omega, the protagonist, will have to make a choice.

Over this season, in Point of No Return especially, Omega sees how relentlessly the Empire hunts for her. Willing to do anything to get there hands on her.

It's this injustice that makes her angry. She can not let people suffer for her sake.

She won't let her brothers get hurt for her sake.

This drives home the foreshadowing of The Harbinger.

How Ventress warns Crosshair and Hunter, that if Omega was Force-Sensitive, she'd need to leave them to be properly trained.

When Ventress tamed a giant beast with the Force.

I know I'm not alone when I say that I think this will work with Omega's recent discovery of the Zillo Beast, in foreshadowing her and the other kids in the Vault using the Force to "reach out" (which Omega couldn't do with the distraction of her brothers) and tame the beast into wrecking the base and eating Hemlock.

With this discovery of abilities, and newfound charge over these young kids, Omega will be faced with a choice.

Stay with the Batch, or leave for them?

[txttletale]

what would you say are the flaws of thirsty sword lesbians? i got it in a itch.io bundle a while ago and i've been on the fence on whether or not to run a campaign with it since

things about tsl that suck

the name. its bad. im sure it was really funny to everyone involved when they pitched it in a brainstorming session and were like 'haha what if we actually called our game thirsty sword lesbians XD' but as the name of an actual game that you have to play and talk about with real people it fucking sucks. instantly dated. sounds bad to say aloud. awful

on a related note, the game has a particular sense of humour--a certain tone and tenor that was super in vogue among, like, millenials who livetweeted steven universe in 2018. there's a move in one of the playbooks called 'i ship it!'. there's another move called 'big dyke energy'. i personally find this shit incredibly grating and insufferable, but if you think it's fun, hey, more power to you. not necessarily a con i just wanted to be a hater

okay those two complaints are just me being a hater but i do have a much more serious one which is that the game's themes are at war with each other in a way that i find bafflng. like, 'you are queer people fighting against systemic oppression' is baked into the rules, to the point of forming an inextricable component of two of the playbooks--the game is built around the idea that you're going to be Fighting Oppression in a major way. like it is very unsubtle about that and often looks directly at the camera and says 'This Is About Homophobia'. but it's also a core part of the game that you're going to be doing, like, flirtatious swordfighting, getting seduced by and seducing Hot Evil Women, longingly gazing at your homoerotic nemesis. and this is also baked into the mechanics, there are special social moves you can only do while fighting someone! so you end up with this really bizarre paradox that to take both these elements to their logical conclusion you need to create a world where all the representatives/enforcers of Homophobia/Imperialism/Capitalism are sympathetic lesbians. and it's not doing something interesting with that either, this isn't the masquerade or helicopter story--it's not highlighting this or asking you to explore this--it's just kind of stumbled into this bizarre unforced error by not thinking through what the logical result of its mechanics & tone is.

now of course it's possible to play around that last one and figure out different things to do with it. the campaign i've been running has the players within a v. broad united front against imperialism, so i've made their homoerotic rivals are ideological enemies within that united front--but the fact that we had to work around the implications of the system as written is kind of a problem with the system!

and, since i don't necessarily want to put you off running TSL, here's my list of things about tsl that are good

the playbook design is incredible. a lot of the supplement playbooks fucking suck but every single playbook in the core book is like, peak PBtA playbook design--mechanically unique, thematically fulfilling, rich with opportunities to shape the world by implication when you design your character. they do really fun and interesting narrative things with the way the playbooks are designed and i like them all a lot.

the social move setup is my favourite that i've ever seen in a game--the phrasing behind the social moves means that you can never roll to 'make' an NPC do something or 'persuade' them to your point of view, only to make them 'give in to desire'--which is obviously phrased to enable seduction as a core gameplay mechanic, but it doesn't have to be played that way! other moves allow you to ask questions and figure out what NPCs want and what motivates them--you have a mechanical basis by which you can figure out that an NPC wants friendship, or security, or power, and the 'give in to desire' phrasing means you mechanically benefit from offering them that thing to get what you want from them. it really elegantly and cleverly circumvents the 'mind control persuasion check' problem that i've always found to be a deeply & profoundly antisocial way to model interaction (as inherently zero-sum, combative, dominatory) & leads to much more emotionally satisfying stories and tense and interesting social encounters

you know those are actually kind of the only two things. but they're really, really good things!

[bagog]

Star Trek: Discovery Narrative Highlights

So I really like Discovery, but differently than I like other Star Treks. My love for Voyager, for instance, is based off the sense of found-family in the face of sci-fi shenanigans. I could pick out favorite episodes, but my favorite episodes don't necessarily represent the epitome of what I love about the show, y'know?

It's different with Disco. There are concrete moments from through out the show that made me go "Okay, I like this, I want this. More of this." Here's some of them! This is indulgent and all from memory

Season 1 - Klingons Speak Klingon

In a story about Klingons fearing the Federation as an institution which will irrevocably alter their culture, the Klingons actually speak Klingon. Love it. Season 1 - Gabriel Lorca

I loved seeing a Star Fleet captain who seemed to have ascended because of his skill at war: a trait which ordinarily would not elevate one within Starfleet service, per se. It made him interesting. Your mileage may vary on where this went, but. He's still a big appeal on rewatch.

Season 2 - Queer People Helping Queer People

The introduction of Jet Reno is one of my favorite hallmarks in the show. I love Jet, and I love the way she serves as a foil to every other character. But best of all, I loved the scene when she is talking to Hugh Culber about how distant he's been from his husband (since coming back from the dead, so, you know) and helps him by relating her own story about her wife, who is now passed. To say I'm happy to see queer stories on Star Trek is a massive understatement, but this was the moment it locked in for me. In the world of the Federation, there's no difference between being queer or straight and anyone could've talked Hugh out of his funk. But in our world, it's usually queer people helping queer people make sense of their experiences. Recognizing the importance of that distinction and going with the queers-helping-queers take is a really big deal for me.

Season 2 - Amanda

This is hands-down the best representation of Amanda we've ever been given and she is so wonderfully human and warm that it helps you understand Spock and Michael so much better. I don't know what to say other than that, I love her.

Season 3 - The Future

I love that they went not just into the future, but further into the future than any mainline trek lore has gone. Hell yes. I'm bummed it's kinda a post-Utopian mess, but I get storywise why that's the case. I love the future starships, I love the future technology, I like that we just "BZP" to wherever we want to be in the ship now. In a show increasingly steeped in centuries of canon lore, it's smart and challenging to try to do "a millennium in the future."

Season 3 - Queer Family

Queer Family! Queer Family in Star Trek! This is my queers-helping-queers point but dialed up to 11. Love it, would do anything for it.

Season 4 - Artificial Intelligence

The ship is alive and she's named herself. This comes to a head in an episode in Season 4 where Paul Stamets feels very hesitant about this, after the plot of Season 2 was trying to stop AI from destroying the galaxy. There's this whole Measure of a Man but Not Quite Because Its the B Story thing going on, but at the end of it, there's a twist. Paul eventually learns to accept his new crewmate, but then he asks the person in-charge of the inquest "What would you have done if I said I wasn't comfortable serving with an AI?" and the dude goes "I would've assigned you to another ship. This was never about whether she has a soul or whatever, it's about if you can learn to accept that with you 22nd century brain." And that's.... that's great.

Season 4 - Mental Health

Mental Health is a thread running through some of Discovery (Season 2 flirts with Spock's neurodivergence, for instance) but never more than in Season 4. Hugh Culber, the ship's ray of sunshine and de facto counselor, is in bad shape, mentally, and he needs help. But the best moment is when the away-team is beset by chemical memories of panic and basically rendered useless with fear... except for Detmer, who helps them all get through it. When asked why she was unaffected, she says "Oh I totally was affected, but after my grievous injury during the war, I went to therapy for the PTSD and learned some coping strategies" AND THAT'S WHAT SAVES THE GALAXY.

Anyway, this is very indulgent and probably nobody reads this, but thanks if you did.

[rowenablade]

“You worship the sun, but you keep feeding the dark.”

Thoughts on Ed, Izzy and Miscommunication.

“Drowning in the Sound” by Amanda Palmer is not on my list of go-to Blackhands songs, but that line above sums up Izzy so well for me, and a comment on my most recent fic update got me thinking about one of the more controversial lines from the finale.

“I fed your darkness.”

First things first: I'm not a canyonite, but I do unapologetically love Izzy as a character and do not buy into the narrative that he was an abusive manipulator and Ed was a helpless victim. If that makes you decide that I'm a dumbass, feel free to scroll on past. You're not gonna like the rest of this post.

We good? Okay.

So I know a lot of people hated that line and that scene in general, for a lot of reasons I won't get into here, but I wasn't one of them. While I don't agree with the Izzy=Abusive Manipulator takes, I also don't agree with the interpretation that Izzy was 100% the victim and Ed was a monstrous abuser. To me, their relationship was always a complicated, messy arrangement between two deeply flawed people, with far too many unspoken assumptions at its core. And one of the things that made it so fascinating for me was Izzy's ability to harm Ed when he thought he was helping him.

Look. I fully believe that at one point in time, these two loved each other. By the time we meet them in canon, the foundation of their relationship has rotted, but they are both self-actualized enough to leave a situation if it truly never made them happy.

That doesn't mean I think they were ever explicitly a romantic couple, or ever physically intimate (I actually think that never happened in canon.) But they loved each other once, and tried to show each other that love, and they are both so. Fucking. Bad at it. Or at least, they're bad at understanding how the other interprets the ways they say "I love you."

Take Ed. Yes, he uses a lot of physical touch, but I think Ed's truest way of expressing affection is inviting someone else to play with him. That's why he falls so hard for Stede- he's the playmate Ed never had, the one person who's always ready to give him a "Yes, and." And we see this in his interactions with Izzy in s1e4- calling Izzy to check out things he thinks are cool, trying to get him talking about the shape of the clouds. He's inviting Izzy to play with him, and it's going completely over Izzy's head, because Izzy doesn't want to play! He's at work! Now's not the time, Edward! But that's the thing- they're Blackbeard and Izzy Hands. They're never not at work. And that's what causes Ed's despair and Izzy's frustration to build, because they don't know how to interact with each other outside the context of their jobs.

So what looks like love, to Izzy?

My guess? Bonnie & Clyde. Natural Born Killers. Thelma & Louise. Us against the world, baby. Life is cruel and short, and ends violently, but at least we've got each other. We don't get info about Izzy's background, but his interactions with Ed vs. everyone else, and especially his possessiveness of Edward behind the Blackbeard persona, suggests a man for whom personal relationships are Serious Business. It's not about fun. It's about survival.

I think to Izzy, being someone's only safe person to be around, being the only two people in the world who understand each other, being constantly under threat and prepared to kill to protect one another, is heart-stoppingly romantic.

But it's not romantic for Ed at all. It's terrifying.

Ed's worried he's unlovable. He's worried he's a monster deep down. It's not going to make him feel safe, to be told that there's only one person in the world who really gets him. It's going to feel terribly isolating, and on top of that, it feels so serious. Ed doesn't want a relationship rooted in violence- he grew up around that, and it destroyed his family.

And Izzy has no idea.

He doesn't know about any of Ed's baggage with his father, or the self-esteem issues that make him worry he's unlovable. He doesn't know how alone it makes Ed feel to be told there's no one like him, even in the context of a compliment ("the most brilliant sailor I had ever met") or how triggering it would be to watch one person he loves hurt another (how could Ed not have been thinking of his parents during the duel scene?)

I think a lot of people assume that when Izzy says "I fed your darkness," he's referring to the "namby pamby in a silk gown" scene. But that was Izzy in a state of near-panic, desperate to say something that would get Ed to take him seriously, and I don't think that's what their relationship normally looked like.

I think Izzy fed Ed's darkness "for years" by telling him, through words or actions, that there was only ever the two of them, that they couldn't trust anybody else, that one of them would die defending the other.

"I fed your darkness" was Izzy realizing that to Ed, that didn't sound like, "I love you." It sounded like, "Without me, you're completely alone." And being alone is the thing that frightens Ed the most.

[t00thpasteface]

hey! i was just curious if i could use your art in an artist study? i looked over your faq and i didn't see any mention of it so i just wanted to ask. it's okay if the answer is now, no pressure :)

(⁠ ⁠ꈍ⁠ᴗ⁠ꈍ⁠) sure, if you credit me! i would be incredibly flattered!!

now that being said, i would also like to share with you some artists whose work i've enjoyed doing studies of! i find it's very useful to "follow the money" with artists you like, and go along the chain of inspiration to see how ideas and styles can change from person to person.

vincent van gogh is my BIGGEST inspiration in terms of color and composition! his unique style of brush work is what he's best known for, but i recommend looking at his works holistically too, and seeing where the eye is led and how he plays with light, color, and mood. if you want to go further, he was very inspired not only by prior impressionists, but also by japanese ukiyo-e artwork— try comparing "starry night" to "great wave off kanagawa" and seeing the similarities in the grand, sweeping movements they convey.

i'm sure i've said this a million times, but genndy tartakovsky has probably my favorite cartoonist style. it's at its peak in samurai jack— opinions are mixed about the narrative quality of season 5, but if nothing else, the art direction is absolutely jawdropping. one of my favorite scenes is the bit in the tomb, where jack is hiding in a sarcophagus, because the music and visuals are paying homage to a scene at the climax of "the good the bad and the ugly"!

in a totally different direction from those two... i'm a huge fan of gil elvgren's pinup girls! i've had a few different pinup calendars over the years, and at the end of the year, i like to cut up the pages individually for mini posters— i've covered pretty much all my available wall space in his illustrations. i love it when artists don't feel the need to sacrifice expressiveness for realism; his girls are SO DARN CUTE and they all look like they're having so much whimsical, cartoonish, flirty fun!

here's a post where i talk about more inspirations!

here's a post listing some other tumblr artists i like!

i'm also just very heavily inspired by 50s-60s print illustration... things like advertisements, "clip art" (which you had to physically clip out of a book and paste onto the page), and of course, tv cartoons. one big trend i love with that "googie" art style is how incredibly limited the palettes were, and how efficient the economy of line was. as much as i love the bold, blocky, dynamic shapes of styles like tartakovsky, who takes insp

also, please remember i'm entirely self taught and am NOT an expert, so just be aware of that if you see any weird stylistic choices in my work... i admire the work of a lot of professionally trained artists, but that doesn't mean i have any training or real right to go around teaching people stuff. i'm just some guy from a big crazy family full of artists, only some of whom went to school for it.

okay, that got way longer than i meant it to, SORRY! here's a pic of my cat Carmen as a thanks for reading this far ^_^

[lionheartedmusings]

alright, finally put my thoughts together after watching like 6 povs on and off and processing what we saw today. i have two major points to make, and i guess i'll just start with the meta one.

on a meta level, the eggs are fine. narratively, to just grab them from their beds and "oops goodbye" is a level of lazy, awful storytelling that we just… don't get from the qsmp lore gods. who wants to watch these kids grow up and then one day they're all missing, the end? nah. also, i am fully convinced that they wouldn't do it without giving their regular players a chance to show up, and with phil, baghera, and etoiles gone i don't think they'd ever do that. plus vegetta would kill quackity lmao the eggs play a pivotal role in the qsmp, quackity's said so before, and i'm honestly still half convinced the new players will get eggs… maybe after the original ones hatch. either way, on a meta and / storytelling level it doesn't make sense, and my mind's not changing until something big happens.

now, on a more "in character" perspective? today felt like two distinct moments in qsmp history rolled into one, and it makes my stomach churn. i was watching bad's live when the code killed ramon, and all povs were dripping with that heartbroken but hopeful but empty feeling, the exact same one i had when i watched bad sit silently by ramon's dead body for hours, throwing totems at him. it also reminded me of the day we had to wait for a verdict on bobby's final death, how we were all so sure that he'd survive only to be hit with the news that no, no he didn't. no, bobby was gone. for good.

what the qsmp admins and ccs accomplished today was amazing, because my feelings right now? definitely don't match what i logically know as fact. i know the eggs have to be okay, but i thought that before and look what happened. the emotions, the dejection, the stillness, the silence of the server today is jarring and awful, and it makes me second guess myself at every turn. it takes a lot for media to be able to be so visceral and raw, but today it was.

today, we had a front row seat to grief, in all it's shapes and forms, and of the silence that children leave behind when they're no longer with us, and i won't ever forget the streams i watched tonight.

g fucking g qsmp, admins and streamers alike.

[inawearyworld]

little things in the wonka score/soundtrack that get me every time: a post made by a music major with severe brainrot (seriously it’s getting bad)

• even though i’m not sure how to feel abt what they did orchestrally to pure imagination when it was sung in full, i loved the way it was interwoven until then-the opening credits, the clock tower chiming its intro, etc

• when the intro to hatful of dreams ends and the instrumental HITS. that was the moment i was sitting in the theater like “…oh i’m going to be so charmed by this movie huh”

• something abt the way timmy sings “i’ve put everything i’ve got into my choc’late”. see above bullet point

• welcome to scrubbit’s has no right to be that much of a banger

• the low brass in scrub scrub HELLOOOOO?!?!? the chromatic slides. the muted trumpets. abacus’ bass moments (go off king). the song is literally about laundry and yet IT GOES SO HARD

• walk into the club on a friday night like FIRST YOU PICK UP THE APPAREL AND YOU

• the instrumental of ynhclt that plays while everyone’s flying is so cheesy and so golden-age-of-hollywood-children’s-musical and i cannot help but smile

• the cuh-lassic “one instrument at a time” opening of sweet tooth

• mathew baynton’s voice. that’s it that’s the bullet point.

• #GiveTheCartelMoreTight3PartHarmonies2k24

• well we’ve got lots and lots and lots and loTS AND LOTS AND LOWHY AM I SINGINGGGGGGG

• somethin about how the “noodle noodle” countermelody is a sort of arpeggiated outline of each chord, like a vocal warmup, like he’s letting her take the melody bc he knows she will in time. i’m gonna sob they’re literally family

• the orchestration of for a moment, esp while they’re dancing on the rooftop, just SOARS. idk if anyone here has seen mr magorium’s wonder emporium but that movie shaped my childhood, it’s probably my favorite film score ever, and this instrumental bit is SOOOO reminiscent of it

• clock tower. a fifty-second masterpiece

• CHOCOPOCALYPSE. (for those of us who were on the theatre kid side of the internet in 2018, i think chocopocalypse should be the new calculust. hear me out)

• mat’s voice gets a second bullet point bc what the hell man. literally the sonic embodiment of dark mint chocolate. h e l p m e

• …#fickelgruberisathinmint2k24

• noodle’s portion of ynhclt, while she’s teaching willy to read, has a few instrumental nods to mozart’s famous sonata in c, a typical piece for piano beginners-kids-to learn. in the 1971 film mrs teavee incorrectly identifies mozart as rachmaninoff. this MOVIE

• i wish there could have been more, and more involved/complex, ensemble vocal moments

• charlotte ritchie <3 (okay i’m biased sue me)

• the new orchestration for the oompa loompa song is straight fire

• the LEITMOTIFS the fucking LEITMOTIFS!!!!!!!! the opening fanfare that became the basis of hatful of dreams popping up here and there. the melody to a world of your own playing whenever he thinks of his mom. every time we think willy’s safe from the cartel, ope there’s that descending major sixth again.

• (now that i think about it. sweet tooth is in g major of all keys, rather atypical of a villain song. most of the intervals are major too. it’s the trembling strings that give it that “evil” sound. and it fits so well-like, “we’re not completely immoral! time for a fun little tango! there’s colorful lights! killthisguyplsOH LOOK CONFETTI!” they’re so sinister i love it)

• the way that the intro to a world of your own echoes the intro to pure imagination

• THE ORCHESTRATION DURING “chocolate bushes, chocolate trees” etc AND THE WAY IT BUILDS OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD. MY HEART JUST BURSTS. EVERY TIME. I AM NOT IMMUNE TO CHEESY MUSICALS.

• the!! chromatic!! basslines!! in!! that!! song!!!!!!!!

• the fact that the bridge comes before the second verse-name any other songs where that happens i dare you. just another example of willy changing the narrative in every way

• the fact that sorry noodle is AN ENTIRE *OTHER* COUNTERMELODY that then falls back into the for a moment melody at the end what the FUUUUUUUUUUUCK

• the monks chanting “giraffe. a massive giraffe”. so fucking funny

• stripping down pure imagination to its essence while willy sings it to noodle was a thousand percent the right decision. and the lyric changes for the situation are sooooooo clever

• as someone who grew up with the 71 movie and has been utterly enamored with its music her whole life, i’m not the world’s hugest fan of this version’s pure imagination orchestration; i get they felt they had to do something different, it just feels slightly too modern/disneyesque, but it had the vibe that they intended for the end of the movie

• anyway god i love this score

[mandatory-blog-stop-asking]

Weird thing, but I miss Alfred.

It's shaping up to be one of the longest "deaths" of a famous, legacy secondary character, at least in modern DC history. And in that way, it served the narrative pretty well, subverting the usual problems with death in comics. Sure, it was all over an ego trip some bad former Editor in Chief decided to have on a whim; King didn't really plan to kill off Alfred so nonchalantly and it wasn't meant to stick. People know that, it's well documented and they even had foreshadowing that he was Clayface being a part of the plan. So the fact that it sticks should be lauded, right? This is, after all, how death works.

And, sure, it made some characters grow. Bruce, specifically, moving to a brownstone and taking care of his son all by himself is a genuinely cool idea and I'm enjoying seeing him bond with Damian in ways he never bonded with the others. Dick as a billionaire philanthropist dedicating his newfound fortune to Alfred, his late sponsor, is a genuine stroke of genius. Actual change and progress in comic books, holy shit. A feast Spider-Man fans don't even remember how it tastes!

Yet it sometimes feels like you're reading a Batman book in an empty house, because Alfred is gone, and it was over nothing. An unplanned death that took him suddenly with no real gravitas or preparation. Not exactly the same -- okay, not the same by a wide margin, -- but it kinda reminds me of how Buffy fans reacted to The Body.

The character was here, and now they're not, and it genuinely feels empty and real in a way you're not really expecting popcorn media to feel. There's no power fantasy or melodrama or anything. Someone broke his neck and threw his body on the floor, and that's the end of Alfred Pennyworth.

And like, yeah, man, people obviously write stories about other versions that are alive and flashbacks. Nobody is literally gone from comics, things don't move forward *exclusively*, Alfred is a brand unto himself and will never be truly gone. It's the same reason why aging up Jon Kent isn't that big a deal; Super Sons will release as long as someone gets the approval, it's just going to be a flashback. It's fine. But to see the world having to move forward without him has been quite something, you know? People have had big personal moments that he's not there for.

Dick and Barbara got back together, Jason moved to the Hill, Tim got a boyfriend -- it's the kind of stuff these kids could rely on Alfred to talk about, or to help out with, or to simply Be There as a zealous figure for them, and he's just. Not. And the story moves on all the same, yet now it feels like there's a panel missing, somewhere.

Albeit they had like two or three individual times when the actual fucking ghost of Alfred Pennyworth came to say goodbye and peace out to Bruce, I still think it's a pretty solid guess that he'll come back before the end of the decade. The nature of comics means sometimes you need a back from the dead story to keep things fresh, and those can be done extremely well -- Resurrection of Magneto might be the best thing released in the Krakoa era, as far as fully realized minis go. But...

Shit, Alfred missed Damian going to school, you know? That's really sad. I miss Alfred. In a way I'll never miss Uncle Ben or the Wayne couple, I really miss opening a monthly and reading the latest wit out of Alfred's mouth at his silly son and his funny crusade. The nature of comic books being infinite until they're cancelled means this sort of relationship just doesn't get cut like this very often, and I can't recall the last time I *cared* when they tried cutting it.

It will be an awkward day when he comes back and it's back to normal business again, honestly. There's now an understanding of what Batman is without Alfred that I feel they don't have a great way of addressing. Don't really envy the writer who gets the job.

[enby-wrights]

(warning i do not understand how tumblr works i have been on here for like two months and gathered absolutely nothing so i apologize if i did something wrong with like tags and the like? also i think i kind of sound like a youth pastor towards the end of this but it’s okay i do what i want. anyways)

greetings marble hornets fanbase i just have some (long) thoughts to share on tim and alex :) i have some Mental Health Hot Takes that are not worded well because i wrote this at one in the morning but feel free to read anyways. also i know that the marble hornets mental illness allegory conversation has been done to death but please let me throw in my two cents i am just a little guy and i even said please

in all my six long years traversing the Deep Dark Depths of the marble hornets fanbase, i’ve never been all that interested in exploring any kind of close relationship between alex and tim within the story-- i think 2006 alex comes off as a bit desperate and overbearing, and i think that would have made 2006 tim a little too anxious to attempt to get close to him. it’s just interesting to think that they wouldn’t quite fit together at the only point in their lives where they would have had the chance.

their position in the overall story as narrative foils to one another, however........... now that’s a tasty character dynamic if i do say so myself :) although essentially all of season three revolves around the conflicts between people as they react to the mental illness metaphor operator in their own Fun And Unique ways, alex and tim are undoubtedly the poster children of this concept. both of them begin dealing with almost identical issues, and their reactions to these issues shape their individual narratives in completely opposite directions. i was thinking about it while listening to the podcast great, more tapes today (which if you haven’t listened to it i totally recommend it even though it has been dead for a year) and it’s kind of a really great allegory for the ways in which people’s reactions to experiences with mental illness can either make or break our recovery. as someone who has intentionally made my own recovery worse on multiple occasions out of general manic faux edginess, the parallels kind of hit me really hard

i’m gonna highlight the differences between alex and tim’s reactions to the mental illness metaphor operator using a bullet point list because i’m autistic and all of my thoughts occur in bullet point lists actually

during the filming of alex kralie’s marble hornets, as their symptoms are both beginning to set in, we see alex alone incredibly often. tim, on the other hand, is always seen surrounded by other people (this also comes down to the contexts in which they were filming but whatever it’s artistic framing or something idk)

tim seeks medical attention. duh. i think it’s probably pretty safe to assume that alex did not seek any sort of medical attention for his mental health issues leading up to all that murder, otherwise there maybe wouldn’t have been murder

aside from seeking medical help, we also see tim seeking help (or at least visibility) from his peers. entry #66 is just tim yelling at jay about how scared he is. and even if jay isn’t really much help, he can at least see where tim is coming from in the future and has the opportunity to act accordingly (he does not take this opportunity but hey at least it’s there. as alex’s condition worsens, all we see is him lying to his loved ones about what’s going on. which is bad.

alex constantly walks in anger and fear. tim doesn’t stifle his emotions (i.e. him beating the shit out of jay), but he also acts logically and doesn’t dwell on them for too long

by season three alex is just fucking living all alone in the woods (which if you didn’t know is the opposite of seeking help)!! not only is he running around in an echo chamber but he chose to bring a gun into the echo chamber with him which is a really great way to become more mentally ill. tim on the other hand has a job, and a life, and people in his life who at least care enough about him to call him and see if he’ll be at work on time. he keeps busy and he interacts with the world around him and even when he’s having to constantly check in with his doctor to make sure he stays okay he is out and about and being a person

and it’s a weird thing to think about because when i’m at my worst psychologically i tend to bring a (METAPHORICAL) gun into my own echo chamber and sulk around in there until i start to believe some pretty shitty things about the world around me

but on the few occasions where i do manage to reach for help and respect my feelings while still existing outside myself it’s a miraculous feeling. i get better. and then i get worse again, because mental illness is a bitch, but it gets easier and easier to reach out every time.

and i think that’s part of the reason why alex gets eaten up by the idea of the operator while tim doesn’t. tim has experience with getting help, and he’s clearly developed a skill for taking care of himself. he just got lucky that his first time dealing with a mental health crisis wasn’t as fucked up as alex’s.

anways tldr alex kralie is my new example for what not to do in my mental health recovery journey also he’s a bitch 

(ps i don’t understand how i got to the end of this rant without mentioning masky a single time but i promise he fits into the mental illness allegory somewhere probably maybe)

[gffa]

Saw you're posting the spoilers form this week's Batman so i'm guessing you've read it. My heart just broke reading it, i do wonder how the family is going to get out of this. Like this issue alone Bruce telling Jason he should kill him like my heart

I'm still really on the fence about what Gotham War is setting up, because I'm still so annoyed by how bad the arguments of the characters are, I'm annoyed by how it feels like cheap drama to break the Batfamily up again because they don't know how to do drama any other way, but also I can't lie, I don't find Bruce to be that out of character, because he's in a really bad place and the narrative isn't portraying him as morally correct. Everything with Jason really hurt, but Bruce can be cruel when his mental health is in the toilet (and this storyline is leaning hard on Bruce's mental illness being really, really bad right now) and I don't take it that he was serious at all, he had no intention of actually killing Jason, he was following up on Jason's argument--if it's okay that Selina's way got someone killed, if that death being an acceptable sacrifice was fine, then why wouldn't Jason's death be acceptable, to stop him from killing more people? And the thing is, Bruce doesn't believe that Roland Gardner's death was an acceptable loss, just as he doesn't believe that Jason's death would be acceptable, either. But Jason was deliberately goading him, Jason was being cruel when attacking him, and Bruce snapped at him, but I don't think for a second it was meant to be serious. It was an ugly fight between a father and a son who find themselves on the opposite sides of an argument that is dragging up a LOT of issues for them. For Bruce, I've made my case on this with the first Gotham War issue and I think it still holds true, that a lot of his biased reactions are coming from a place of feeling betrayed by his kids, the ones he took in because they were victims like him, ones who stood up and said, "I will never let this happen to anyone else." so hard that he couldn't stop them, could only have ever put a leash on them, and now suddenly they're saying, "I guess this can happen to some people." and that's a betrayal of the very foundation of why they do what they do, in his eyes. And that tracks for me with what he thinks when he's fighting the kids together:

I think this storyline has been an interesting look at Bruce, where they're touching on his class issues, but also the heart of the reason he does anything and the biases that he brings to the table and that his mental illnesses are having an absolute party in his brain right now, like he's literally hallucinating and he slumps down against the wall and thinks about how shaky his control feels, how he feels isolated from his family, like this isn't Bruce being perfectly right and correct, this is him in the middle of a bad spiral and I think that's a potentially interesting storyline. Because he's full of so much doubt--it's TWO ISSUES into this series and in BOTH OF THEM, Bruce has had a major moment of falling apart and wondering what the hell he's doing, and while the storyline is billed as "Who's the one in the right?" here, I don't think that's what it's actually shaping up to be. This is a story about a traumatized character reacting very badly to having his mental health tanking and feeling like he's losing everything, only playing out on the stage that is Gotham. (I'm less enthused about the other characters' reasons, like I'm not sure I believe Tim or Dick or Barbara or Cass would go along with Selina's way, even if crime is down, those kids are stubborn and they didn't just agree with Bruce because they were scared of him, Bruce couldn't tell those kids shit about what to do, they had their own opinions, and while I buy that they'd think he's going too far, and I agree they would try to stop him here, because they're trying to talk him down, not make an enemy of him. So, I can see everything pretty okay in this issue, I'm just not sure enough thought will be given to ALL the characters that have a part to play in this story, beyond just Bruce.)

[jailforwriter]

Today we're looking at...

Okay, so, there are about as many plotting devices as there are writers out there. We all have different bits and pieces of advice that work for us and our stories, and since storytelling is inherently versatile, I'm afraid that this is a "no one method serves all" kinda deal. So... thanks for stopping by, catch you next time! 😘

HA, GOTCHA. Sit back down, please. There's a "however" coming.

However, most outlining practices come down to the same few plot beats that narratives must usually hit to keep the pacing tight, the characters developed, and the audience from pulling out the pitchforks.

One such method is 3 Act Structure. Yes, the very one you've already heard all about – it is widely popular, and for good reason! It's an effective way of arranging our fake little people doing their fake little stuff, but like, satisfyingly. It's through outlining that we make sure we didn't just ramble on for 400 pages, boring the reader to tears. A lot of times, when we think of a novel as being "badly written" (or, as I once saw someone describe The Metamorphosis by Kafka: "wtf"), we don't just mean that the prose itself was bad, but that the actual core of the narrative (what happens, in what way, and because of whose fuckery) was... well, wtf.

Now, believe it or not, I'm a corny soul with a bleeding heart, so I wanna help you be a little less lost in the tumultuous waters of the plotting sea. The waves of pacing and development do not need to wreck your boat, mate. To this end, I shall attempt to impress upon you the specific configuration of 3 Act Structure methods that I, Tumblr user jailforwriter – who is NOT an authority on any topic, making this post NOT legally binding – think works best.

Without further ado, we're looking at how each Act is subdivided into six subcategories, starting with Stage 1 of Act 1.

Act 1

Firstly, let's look at an overview of what needs to happen in roughly the first 25% of your novel. This section is all about introductions and setup: of the main players, the world, the stakes, the obstacles, and the themes. Chances are you're already clear about what'll happen in this section, because we humans are generally pretty good at beginnings and ends and pretty bad at everything in-between (see: The Roman Empire).

One thing to note here is that, while a lot of exposition will naturally happen at this stage, we must valiantly fend off the Frank Herbert-shaped demon on our shoulder telling us to take up three pages describing hyperspace travel. And it's not that we can never describe it – it's that it needs to be relevant and not detract from the tension, which exists in a fine balance between worldbuilding and action upset by the merest suggestion of power converters. But don't worry, I know that doesn't actually tell you much, which is why I'll go into further detail in another post, the sneaky devil that I am.

With that out of the way, let's delve a bit deeper and look at Stage 1.

Stage 1: Living My Truth

Well, not my truth. Your character's truth. Let's play a little game: reach for a novel right now and read the very first page, if you would. Unless it's a dream sequence or a flashforward/back or something wacky like that, chances are your protagonist is just hanging out in their world, doing their thing. This is called the Status Quo.

Oftentimes, the story will begin at a particularly crummy day for your protagonist, and they may or may not know why, and may or may not be aware that their life is about to go places. Bad places, for the most part, but places.

Let's look at an example. (*SPOILERS* for the beginning of the The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins).

In The Hunger Games, we open on Reaping Day, which sucks unfathomably for a lot of reasons. But Katniss knows about it, and that will affect the flow of information from her to us. What she does not know, however, is that her sister is about to be handpicked for a deathmatch, meaning that she doesn't know her life is about to change, which puts a crafty little asterisk in the way she's been conveying information to us so far and shakes everything up deliciously.

In this case, it's the author's job to get us up to speed on all the information relevant to understanding Katniss' situation without overwhelming us. Now, nothing exists in a vacuum, so it's worth noting that the audience will likely come with some preinstalled notion of what a dystopia is, so it's alright to leave certain details up to interpretation if it means not bombarding us with exposition.

Let's now look at a different example. (*SPOILERS* for the beginning of The Poppy War by R.F. Kuang).

In The Poppy War, the story opens with Rin having no clue that she's about to be sold off to be married, and the events from that point onward unfold as a direct result of her deciding that she ain't about that life, actually, and that she intends to do something about it.

In this case, we're as clueless as Rin walking into this situation, and while it's still the author's job to ensure we're not completely lost, there's a bit more leniency in how to go about it, since Rin is stumbling through the scene alongside us. She's learning the stakes, too, and the stakes suck so bad we instantly understand her urge to get the hell outta dodge.

Finally, if you permit, I'm afraid that I must be cringe and use an example from my own WIP, not because I think it's better than a published novel or really even close to it, but because my brain is fried from working on it and it's an easy-made example for what I want to discuss.

In The Paradox of Nonchoice, Nahia is well aware that she's about to walk into an exam, and that her future (and her family's, to an extent) depends on how well she performs in it. The focus of this scene is in getting across what the audience needs to know in terms of worldbuilding and stakes, which, in this case, are most important for understanding what's happening and why we should, y' know, care.

In this case, the tension is directly impacted by the protagonist's actions. The dynamic, along with the flow of information, is much more one-sided here, as there is no mystery being revealed to Nahia, or to us. In such instances – where we as authors control the narrative more closely – it's crucial that we ensure the stakes are clear and the consequences sucky.

Okay, so what can we get out of these examples, then? Well, for one, that there's a handful of things that Stage 1 of Act 1 needs to cover if we want things to flow naturally. Let's list them so we can refer back to these whenever we need:

Introduce the main character: the more, well, character that you can imprint upon the page in the first couple scenes, the better. The audience will be more likely to want to follow them if they find them interesting, or think that they stand out, somehow.

Introduce the world: and what's most immediately relevant for the audience to understand in order to follow along. We can reveal little morsels of worldbuilding throughout the rest of Act 1, so don't feel pressured to stick everything into Stage 1.

Background: some background details may be important for the audience to know as the first few scenes unfold and they get to know the characters and setting. For instance, it's okay to let us know that your protagonist hates makeovers if they're suddenly thrust into Queer Eye as their new mystery contestant.

Tone and atmosphere: this is crucial. The first few scenes should reflect the tone of the rest of the book (i.e. don't make the first scene hilarious if the rest of the novel is going to be an abject tragedy. The reader will feel scammed, I promise). Same goes for establishing atmosphere, with the caveat that you can sometimes play with it to subvert expectations or otherwise get a point across. I wouldn't recommend doing it right off the bat, though.

Themes: I cannot stress this enough: your themes will make your story! There is an absolute encyclopedia to be written about themes, and I will go into it with the fine-toothed comb it deserves in the future, but just know that your first scene needs to get across your themes. That's the core of your story! It matters!

Foreshadowing: listen, there's a reason they say you should write your first scene last. You need to be foreshadowing the events of the climax from the very beginning – this is part of the "setup" stuff we've discussed for Stage 1. Again, I'll be going into detail regarding foreshadowing as part of the Symbolism series, so please hang on tight if you're not sure how to go about it!

Finally, it's worth noting that there are cryptids who fly by with their galaxy brains and insane improv abilities as their only guide, having never once needed a word of plot structure advice yet still making it work, somehow. We'll delve into this "discovery writing" stuff later, to cover all our bases, but I just want to say, if you are a discovery writer reading this... how does it feel to know that you're God's favorite? Do you think She looks upon you with pride, and us disdain? Food for thought.

Anyway, that's it for now, thanks for sticking around for the long post!

Happy writing!

[annoyangle]

@saltysciencesixer continuing from here

Bill remains hovering, arms crossed over chest. Occasionally as Ford speaks Bill seems to be correlating what he says because little images flash across his wide eye; an image of a galaxy breaking and stuttering, images of an angry, cold-eyed Stanley, and so on. He sighs after the explanation ends. "OKAY. SO YOU MANAGED TO HORK UP 53... 54 NOW, WHOOPSIE! THERE WENT ANOTHER ONE! WOW. AND YOU THINK I'M THE UNIVERSE'S WORST CRIMINAL JUST BECAUSE I TRIED TO STITCH ONE DIMENSION TO YOUR PLANET'S WEAK SPOT." Huh. Come to think of it, the time cops might be offering a reward for... no, Bill, shut up, that's a dumb idea and it wouldn't even end the narrative anyway since they'd BOTH just get locked up. Deal with it.

Bill extends his arms, links his fingers together, cracks his knuckles. "WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT TIME COPS FOR THE MOMENT. THE OL' HEX HERE CAN KEEP US AHEAD OF THAT. BUT THIS SPIRALING DAMAGE YOU MADE SURE NEEDS STITCHING UP QUICK. THE FASTER THAT DAMAGE GETS THREADED, THE EASIER IT'LL BE TO PINPOINT YOUR MISSING FAMILY." He can't believe he's doing this. "GONNA RIP A PAGE OUT OF C-137'S BOOK AND TRAP YOUR MISTAKES INTO A CENTRAL FINITE CURVE." Bill touches his hands to the sides of his apex for a few moments, eye grimacing into a scowl of concentration. Occasionally, he pulses, glitches; for a second the Hex turns completely upside down around him; a tornado of strange disconnected items spiral through the air including a small white mouse and some kinda ... badger??... in a yellow ship, a talking fish, a weirdo on a bicycle, and a series of clocks spinning at mismatched times. Then... ding! A bell like the sound of an oven notifying that it's done cooking. Bill drops his hands, and floats up a bit, summoning up a large floating chalkboard and chalk. The Hex around them remains inverted, but Bill doesn't seem to care and Ford's bubble keeps him up and aligned with the same direction Bill's facing. "OKAY, BRAINIAC. I'VE ISOLATED THE PROBLEM. WHOO! THAT SURE BURNED UP A FEW MILLION SOULS I'VE KEPT AROUND IN THE OL' SHELL! THEY DIED AS THEY LIVED: SCREAMING FOR MERCY. C'EST LA VIE."

He starts sketching out a very rough map of the 'little universe' he made, and adds to the diagram as he speaks. "SHOOTING STAR GOT SHIFTED TO MAB-3L, A DUMPING GROUND SPECIFICALLY CREATED TO CATCH DISPLACED MABELS FROM LOST OR MALFUNCTIONING TIMELINES." He taps the board again. "IT LOOKS LIKE PINE TREE'S JUST POUTING IN AN EARLIER VERSION OF YOUR HOUSE BEFORE IT TURNED INTO THE SHACK. EASY FIX." Finally, Bill draws a cloud of the holy mackerel symbol on the board. "NOW THIS GUY.... YOUR MEDDLING SPLIT YOUR BROTHER INTO A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT PIECES. THEY'RE ALL IN PRETTY BAD SHAPE BUT HERE'S THE GOOD NEWS FOR US - ALL BUT ONE OF THEM JUST KEEL OVER AT SOME POINT OR ANOTHER! EITHER FROM AN OD OR GETTING SHOT BY GANGSTERS IN COLOMBIA, GETTING LYNCHED BY PEOPLE HE RIPPED OFF, OR STARVING TO DEATH IN THE MIDDLE OF NEVADA WHEN HIS CAR RUNS OUT OF GAS!! SO AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED WE CAN LEAVE THE LOSERS BE AND LET NATURE TAKE ITS COURSE THERE." Bill's eye narrows. "IT LOOKS LIKE THE ONE THAT GIVES YOU THE MOST TROUBLE... IS ALSO ONE THAT MADE A DEAL WITH ANOTHER ME. AND THAT'S HOW HE'S BEEN KEEPING UP WITH YOU, KEEPING GOING ON HIS LITTLE SIXER HUNT, AND GENERALLY MAKING A PAIN IN THE ASS OUT OF HIMSELF. HMM." Bill hums in thought, and falls silent, perhaps letting Sixer absorb his words.

[archivalofsins]

Okay, with that out of the way. I'm at the halfway point of Caligula Effect 2 and as a filthy Caligula Effect player I will not take this slander anymore- Firstly, this game think it's fucking funny- HUH?!

Yamanaka think he's fucking funny pulling this shit directly after how dirty he narratively did Eiji Biwasaka- Forgiveness moving forward from the past letting people grow! Oh, we do that now?! What about that final destination death my guy? What about that? That karma shit everybody in the first go home club was talking all that good crap about.

Okay, fine pressing that hard to the side. That's not important anymore.

I mostly came here to say that it really seems like a lot of what good people are trying to find in the Milgram characters is like just legitimately the Caligula Effect 2 cast. To the point that it's like it can't be that because it's quite literally a character he's written before. The cop thing with Kazui um Shota is right fucking there. Shidou cool Docktor is right fucking there and I may be jumping the gun on that since I haven't finished his area. Yet, I feel super comfortable saying that anyhow.

It's just quite funny that many of the best interpretations of the characters the audience has had- The most benefit of the doubt filled interpretations or guesses about the reason behind their actions are legit just a description of a character from two. The most on the nose example of this being Mahiru and QP. Something that I don't even need to describe in writing one could just listen to this and get what I'm saying.

"This right here is how I truly am." "See look. I'll keep pursuing my paradise now. Oh, the pain- Pain. Damage: HIGH." - "I pretended to be a good girl, but really, I don't want to say "I'm ok"." "Tell me, oh tell me why, won’t you just accept me?"

Sure it's perfectly normal to create a favortie shape and love it. It's fine to create ones own personal interpretation of these characters and grow attached to them but- But! Will anyone try to even look past their own ego, their own desires for how they want these characters to be and just look at what's there before this ends. There's millions of possibilities so why just grow attached to the same old thing?

Because it's comfortable? Because it feels good? Because it's simple? This isn't meant to be simple. This is Milgram. if anyone wanted a simple truth something that could be wrapped up nice and neat it's right over there. Trying to force things into one mold for personal convenience isn't only harmful to others but oneself because people get it stuck in their head if this one thing can't be what they want then nothing can. When that simply isn't true.

Just because Milgram may not be that doesn't mean that thing doesn't exist out there somewhere. What happens when the character one has done this to no longer fits that mold? Would a person rather break themselves into bits trying to fit in or risk being broken standing out from being exactly who they are. What's a satisfying characterization? What makes a good character?

Is the way we an audienc can project on them? Relate to them? Is it how the story for them ends. Or is it that character being fully and unabashedly themselves? For all the good and bad that may cause. It's all subjective anyway. What makes a good character to one person will make a bad character to someone else.

This is what to me makes it super funny that a lot of the best assumptions people can give to the Milgram cast are so close to the stories of characters that came before them. By funny I mean super sad. Like how bad does a character need to be for the kindest interpretations of them to be in the shadow of characters the writer has made before.

That's so not interesting. What sort of writer wants to tell the same story over and over again? Wouldn't it be nice if everything could end up well. If all the milgram characters could learn, grow, and become better? Wouldn't it be nice if everyone could get along? Those sorts of questions. Those sorts of desires.

If that's a want one has then they may just enjoy Caligula Effect 2 more than they do Milgram. Because that just seems to be 2. From the looks of it Milgram isn't shaping up to be that sort of story. Though it definitely has a lot of Yamanaka's signature all over it and it's really great because through playing the games and looking at Milgram one has this nice experience of seeing a persons writing evolve over time.

Something that gives Milgram this rather unpredicatable feel that makes it even more entertaining. Also as it stands now I do still prefer Milgram to two in a lot of ways. Two is definitely not for everyone but the characters are still all pretty amazing (even though they're all grating as hell in their own ways). If I wasn't so sick to death of doing a shit ton of emotional labor I'd be enjoying it more. That was an issue I had with one as well.

So, I'll probably end up enjoying the experience more in hindsight like with that too. Definitely a difficult play though.

[paperlovesadness]

Ah... I feel a bit strange doing this. Might just stay in the drafts forever. We'll see. But my hands itch to do it every single time I listen to the song so... So here's a lyric analysis of "Star Treatment" and how... it might?... be? A song... About... Miles Kane?? Maybe??? 🫣 (no executions please. I'm really not trying to push this narrative. These things just kind of jumped out at me & I felt an urge to write it down somewhere. And perhaps see if anyone agrees? Comments encouraged! If anyone ever stumbles upon this silly thing) This will get long... Cause that's who I am. And also it references other songs.

Disclaimer 1: I did see someone attempt this on reddit. It was a bit out there though... And maybe ironic? I do share a thought or two with them though.

Disclaimer 2, an Important one: this does rely on an implication that there was something more between the two sometime around/ between 2015-2017ish? I don't want to put any labels and try to stay away from any too specific guesses. But well, I suppose I do kind of personally believe there was something there. If you're not a fan of theories about private lives of real people... I'm sorry. This one's not for you. I really do try to do it as respectfully as possible though. At the end of the day - it's just a theory. And not a mean one. I understand it's all just something that fits together in my head and may be very far from any truth. Disclaimer 3: I know this album is a concept album centered around characters. But I'm analyzing the second, potential autobiogrophical hidden layer beneath the obvious first meaning

Okay, let us have a whack at it now:

I just wanted to be one of The Strokes Now look at the mess you made me make Hitchhiking with a monogrammed suitcase Miles away from any half-useful imaginary highway

This one is very on the nose. But quite literally sneaking in his name in the lyrics -- maybe? we know Alex loves playing with many meanings/hidden messages & double entendres. + the being away from any half-useful imaginary highway makes me think of when he spoke about the fact that he couldn't write any more love-related matarial after EYCTE. And someone encouraged him to just go a different route. That's how TBHC was born. But also implies some trouble in the love-related ascpects of his life around the time. Could've just been trouble around Taylor - who he broke up with soon after the album's release. There's theories about how that happened [current girlfriend invloved] - but maybe there was even more confusion & heartbreak in the mix (ending a tour with someone with whom the lovey-dovey jokes may have gone a bit too far/serious?)

I'm a big name in deep space, ask your mates But golden boy's in bad shape

this is just implying any sort of broken-heartedness.

I found out the hard way that Here ain't no place for dolls like you and me Everybody's on a barge Floating down the endless stream of great TV 1984, 2019

dolls = puppets. And how the industry / society isn't a good place for relationships like this. (People wouldn't understand the type of bond they share?)

Maybe I was a little too wild in the '70s Rocket-ship grease down the cracks of my knuckles Karate bandana, warp speed chic Hair down to there, impressive moustache

Miles and Alex have spoken many times about how their first album was heavily 60s inspired - Scott Walker, The Beatles, 60s Morricone.

What may be less obvious and spoken about is how EYCTE was sort of meant to take their work into the 70s. He spoke about it in an interview when asked about the album cover. It's a 1969 photo of Tina Turner - which Alex commented on by saying: "The idea was to move the artwork on from the ’60s feel of the first Last Shadow Puppets album artwork, so here is Tina on the very cusp of the 1970s" (They also chose to sing covers like Moonage Daydream and Is This What You Wanted during that tour. Both 70s songs from artists that defined the era). So this could be him reflecting on the EYCTE era and how things may have gotten a bit too far during the time. Going in to deep, crossing some boundries and definitions?

Love came in a bottle with a twist-off cap Let's all have a swig and do a hot lap

alcohol? pills? alcohol & or drugs clouding some judgement/helping loosen up and causing the crossing of certain [friendship] boundries?

So who you gonna call? The Martini Police Baby, that isn't how they look tonight, oh no It took the light forever to get to your eyes

It's not a particularly meaningful line in terms of this narrative - but I wanted to talk about it because I find it so beautiful but also so fuck*ng sad. Like - one of he saddest lines I've read. It just hit me in the heart straight away when I heard it. I feel like my personal interpretation is dead wrong. But still choose to see it that way. I also know of the story of how it's inspired by Alex's dad telling him about how we see the light of the stars the way it was in the past bc of how long it takes to reach us. The way I hear this line though is: seeing the bottomless sadness in the eyes of someone who had their heart broken. Someone whose eyes used to be full of happiness - and now it takes forever for any touch of happiness to show up in their gaze. Now a possible interpratation for a second meaning to this whole section could be: calling the martini police = grabbing a drink to help with hearbreak, when there's no other solutions left. Miles has sang in his breakup album Coup de Grace about how he drowned the sadness after hearbreak in alcohol and pills. Mixing stuff together like a mad scientist etc. (Also if you ever saw the interview he did with [the one and only] Martin on his CDG album... Oof... Yeah. There was no light in that man's eyes. Even Martin saw that pain and commented on it. It's a tough one to watch)

I just wanted to be one of those ghosts You thought that you could forget And then I haunt you via the rear view mirror On a long drive from the back seat

This is one of these sections that hits me the most. Cause to me it can be seens as: Alex being aware of how much pain he caused - all he could wish is that he was just another lover whom the hearbroken person [Miles?] could forget. But alas - he still haunts him. Here it gets interesting (or batshit crazy. Cause I might be). Beacause the use of "ghost" just absolutely sends me to Miles' song "Shavambacu" - where he describes the eyes/thoughts of an ex lover still being focused on him after the breakup (this song though could have a whole seperate post of it's own) While "haunting via a rear view mirror" made me jump up and recall lyrics from Miles' song "Dont let it get you down". I saw your reflection, in The backseat of a Chevrolet from Hollywood to East LA NOW - don't shout at me. I know timelines are important. Because Shavambacu and Star Treatment came out around a similar time period. But Shavambacu came out a little bit later. While DLIGYD came out completely after all of hits - this year. So first off - I'm considering the fact that Miles and Alex are clearly still friends and in contact. So could have shown each other songs earlier. But more plausible theory: if these songs are perhaps maybe inspired by one another - they clearly are gonna recall events and/or inside lingo and jokes they both used. Possible situation: post Miles-Alex hearbreak Miles stumbled upon Alex going somewhere in a car. They spotted each other. this also makes me recall the whole:

Swear I saw you smile You try to hide it well 3:15 on the wrong side Columbia Street line from "Killing the Joke". Which many think references the area that Alex lives in. They lived a few minutes away from each other around 2016-2017. So would obviously run into one another often. Even if they were going through something and taking a break/trying not to.

But it's alright, 'cause you love me And you recognise that it ain't how it should be Your eyes are heavy and the weather's getting ugly

This one is also way to sad if you place it in a relationshippy context. There's a few ways I see it: 1) it's alright - no matter what happens, because A. knows M. loves him and will understand why things ended like they did. It shouldn't be this way - but it has to be, because there's things standing in the way. He believes he'll understand despite the grief. 2) dramatic, sad version - the "it ain't how it should be" actually references the "love me part". So M. should understand that things ended because they shouldn't love each other this way. It's just now how it should be and A. believes M. recognises that.

So pull over, I know the place Don't you know an apparition is a cheap date? What exactly is it you've been drinking these days?

once again referencing bumping into each other randomly? And going with it - going some place; talking. Maybe about how Miles' is doing, the heartbreak, how he deals with it - the alcohol (once again - just referencing what he himself sang about in lyrics on his breakup album)

Jukebox in the corner, "Long Hot Summer" They've got a film up on the wall and it's dark enough to dance

"Long Hot Summer" - by The Style Council is actually a song Alex cited to be one of the main references/inspirations used when working on the EYCTE album. So is definitely a nostalgic/meaninful song between the two. They go to a place after bumping into one another - there's a jukebox with a nostalgic song. They can dance together - because it's an incognito, dark place.

What do you mean you've never seen Blade Runner?

Now the Blade Runner line is so clearly Taylor Bagley (the woman is a huge, huge fan of it, apparently) it did have me stumped for a while. But then - maybe it's a clarifying line? Like - if this were about Taylor he would definitely not say that to her. It's obvious she's seen it a million times. Maybe this is here to sort of clarify this?

Oh, maybe I was a little too wild in the '70s Back down to earth with a lounge singer shimmer Elevator down to my make-believe residency From the honeymoon suite Two shows a day, four nights a week Easy money

70s again - EYCTE era But after the tour ended it was time to go back to earth, back to being non-TLSP Alex. Running away from reality into writing music - writing about a make-believe residency (Tranquility Base) Time to leave the honeymoon era = the tour and shows TLSP had together. (also AM may be easy money? Their reputation [very well deserved] makes it so that it's easy - bc anything they come out with will be bought)

So who you gonna call? The Martini Police So who you gonna call? The Martini Police Oh, baby, that isn't how they look tonight It took the light absolutely forever to get to your eyes

...

And as we gaze skyward, ain't it dark early?It's the star treatment Yeah, and as we gaze skyward, ain't it dark early? It's the star treatment It's the star treatment The star treatment

a sad ending. It got dark. A bit too early. It's sad that it all ended. But that's how it has to be - in show buisness, in the industry. They're well known people and it could hurt their careers - also it would just get out easily, so there's no room for self-discovery and just trying it out. That's the star treatment. (This is also a theme I am seeing in Mr. Schwartz lyrics. But that's for another time) Am I crazy? Probably! Is this just accidental elaborate fan fiction? Maybe! But still...I don't know. Song theories are fun. I get that morally it's a gray / or maybe even red area - talking out loud, publicly about theories invloving specific names and relationships. But like... Sue me! Let's call it a guilty pleasure. If anyone ever reads through this wall of text... Hi! Thanks and sorry. And please share some thoughts! (Eh. May just delete this soon anyway) Peace and love